Paul praised the readers for remembering him in all things, and the fact that they were keeping (katechete) or holding fast the ordinances (paradoseis - plural) he delivered to them. The word translated "praise" is epaino, which is not the usual word for praise. This word means to commend (Luke 16:8) or laud (Romans 15:11); it can also mean to heap praise upon or to approve heartily. This passage is the only place where the word "ordinances" is translated from the word paradoseis. Ordinarily the word "ordinances" comes from the words diatage, dikaidma, dogma, or ktsis. What does the word paradoseis mean? It is translated twelve times tradition meaning something handed down. Before we discount the word with a bad or evil connotation, tradition can be good, it can be religious instruction from some source presumable authoritative. Traditions properly means "the transmission of history, teachings, etc., either orally or writing...(Gould, p. 93). It must be remembered that "the new churches possessed only the Old Testament. The Gospels did not yet exist (or at least they had not been circulated) (author's parenthesis). That made it necessary to keep most minutely the preaching, the traditions of the apostles. Those traditions constituted the Word of God. By using the word traditions the apostles indicate that they do not come in their own name but that they hand down what Christ commanded them to preach" (Groshiede, p. 249). In II Thessalonians 2:15 and 3:6, Paul writes, "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle ...Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly and not after the tradition which he received of us."
In verse 3 Paul comes to the subject of submission and subordination. God is the Head of Christ, Christ is the Head of every man and the man is head of the woman. The meaning of head is superior in authority and power expressed in the analogy of the human head over the members of the human body. Head is used figuratively; it means a governing or ruling organ. Of course, "Christ is the head of every man in a greater sense than the husband is head of his wife" (Yeager, Volume XIII, p. 3). That which follows in this chapter is in regard to how men and women should pray or prophesy in public. The concept of subordination of church members one for another in not the subject here; there is no hierarchy of authority in the church. In fact Christianity is the only religion which elevates womanhood; our ladies have Christ to thank for that principle. In the home and in the church, the Christian wife is to defer to the judgment of her husband (Ephesians 5:25 - 29). "Paul must have preached to the Corinthians also that in Christ Jesus the woman is made free. Unlike the Roman woman the Greek woman lived in the background. This resulted in wide spread prostitution" (Grosheide, p. 250).
4 - 6 In the church at Corinth Paul admonishes every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors (kataischunei) or disgraces his head. Prophesying is understood to be edifying, exhorting and comforting (I Corinthians 14:3, 4); it denotes inspired teaching in general. Originally, in the Old Testament, the word meant predicting the future as well as telling forth the gospel message. As a Jewish man prayed in the synagogues he had a veil hanging down from his face, "a tallith, a four-cornered shawl having fringes consisting of eight threads, each knotted five times" (Robertson, IV, p. 159); no Christian man needs not to practice this custom. The woman who prays or prophesies in the church should do so with head covered (akatakalupto) or unveiled or she will dishonor or disgrace her head. To do so with head uncovered is the same as having her head shorn (exuremene) or shaved. This word shorn or shaved is found three times in the New Testament - in this verse, in verse 6 and in Acts 21:24 where either Paul or Apollos had their heads shaven to show that a vow had been kept. If the woman prays or prophesies in church with head uncovered, she rejects the idea that she is subordinate to her husband and she is saying the same as if she had her head shorn. To have the head uncovered and shorn is the same thing. In the culture of the Corinthians in the first century the woman who had her head shorn of its long tresses advertized her profession as a prostitute or the sign of a harlot. "(Paul's) point is that a woman, who ordinarily has her head covered when appearing in public must also have it covered when she prays or prophesies, i.e., when she is in ecstasy...for it seems that the Corinthian women had laid aside their veils during their prayer. The reasoning behind such action was that if a woman like a man engages in praying and prophesying she also may wish to be in the manner in which she prays or prophesies. But in doing so a woman degrades herself" (Groshiede, p. 253). "The Justinian code prescribed shaving the head for an adulteress whom the husband refused to receive after two years. Paul does not tell Corinthian Christian women to put themselves on a level with courtesans" (Robertson, p. 160).
In verse 6 Paul writes that it is a shame for a woman to cut short her hair or shave the hair of her head; in the church let her remain covered with a veil. If she cuts her hair short or shaves her head, she will be recognized as a woman of the street. "The argument here is, that veiling and long hair on the one side, and unveiling and short hair on the other, are consistent with each other, belonging in the class together; and that, therefore, an unveiled woman is constructively the same as a woman with her hair cut" (Gould, p. 94). "Thus Paul orders her to avoid the appearance of evil (I Thessalonians 5:22) and wear her veil, thus to symbolize that as a Christian woman she was subject to her husband" (Yeager, p. 10).
7 - 10 Paul states here that a man should not cover his head when he prays or prophesies, because he is the image (eikon) or likeness of God and glory (doxa) or praise of God, but the woman is the glory or praise of the man. Image denotes likeness (moral, not bodily resemblance) to God in man's spiritual faculties. Verse 8 reads, "For the man is not of (from) the woman; but the woman of (from) the man." In Genesis 2:7 we are told that God formed the man out of the dust of the earth, and from Adam God created a woman (2:21), so Adam was not born of woman as all the rest of the human race. From Adam's rib God created a woman for an helpmeet for the man, thus, "Neither was the man created for (on account of) the woman; but the woman for (on account of) the man" (verse 9). Woman, being from man, naturally comes after him and from him, and not the reverse. "Thus Paul reinforces his argument about the priority of man over woman, a priority in the economy of God, to be symbolized at the Corinthian church service by a bareheaded man and a veiled woman" (Yeager, p. 13). Verse 10 reads, "For this cause ought the women to have power (exousian) or authority on her head because of the angels." What did a woman's power over her head have to do with angels? Angels are God's messengers who attend the saints (Matthew 18:10; Psalm 91:11, 12 Hebrews 1:13, 14). Could it be a reference to earthly messengers? Possibly Paul used aggelous (as it is used seven different times in the New Testament) to mean (earthly) messengers from other Christian congregations who are likely to visit in Corinth and who will note with benefit the behavior of the Corinthian women. Robertson says of this verse, "This startling phrase has caused all kinds of conjecture which may be dismissed. It is not preachers that Paul has in mind, nor evil angels who could be tempted...but angels present in worship...would be shocked at the conduct of the women since the angels themselves veil their faces before Jehovah (Isaiah 6:20) (p. 161).
11 - 16 Here (verse 11) Paul writes, "Nevertheless, neither is the man without (the) woman, neither the woman without (the) man, in the Lord." The genders are not independent of each other. Neither the woman or the man need feel discrimination nor either feel superiority with what Paul is writing here; each gender is incomplete without the other. "Although the woman is given a place below the man, verse 10 makes it abundantly clear that she is not the slave of the man...On the one side it was necessary to put the emancipated Corinthian ladies in their places, but on the other Paul seeks to prevent the woman from being considered inferior. There is a creation ordinance which must be maintained and if that is done the woman who is a creature of God, will have a position of honor, a position far better than that which Greek paganism was able to offer" (Grosheide, p. 258).
"For as the woman is of (from) the man, even so is the man also by (from, through) the woman: but all things of (from) God" (verse 12). Ever since creation man has come into existence by means of the woman. All these relations have a divine origin, and so are sacred. The natural order is the divine order, and so not to be set aside.
Verse 13 reads, "Judge in yourselves: is it comely (prepon), fitting or proper that a woman pray unto God uncovered?" "Paul has already made them see the unfitness of the unveiled head for woman, its immodesty and unwomanliness, and now, with that impression on their minds, he asks if it is proper to pray to God in such unseemly fashion" (Gould, p. 96).
"Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair (koma), it is a shame (atimia) or a disgrace unto him?" (Verse 14). For a man to wear long hair makes his appear effeminate. God intended for the genders to look separate and act separate. Nature demands that men look masculine and women look feminine. For a man to wear long hair makes him look like a "sissy." For a woman during Paul's time to shear or shave her head made her look "manly."
A woman's long hair is her glory, for her hair was given to her for a covering or mantle (R. S. V.) (verse 15). The word here for covering or mantle is peribolaiou which is a combination of peri - for, about + ballo - cast around, throw around = something to wrap around one's person. "Covering" is limited by the connection to a covering for the head, or a veil. In the Corinthian culture men should have been ashamed of long hair, while the women should have been ashamed without long hair. "Long hair is a glory to a woman and a disgrace to a man (as we still feel)" (Robertson, p. 162).
Paul closes out the discussion of long and short hair rather arbitrarily by writing, "But if any man seem, appears or thinks to be contentious (philoneikos) or controversial, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God."
First of all, Paul had heard that there were divisions (schismata) or schisms in the church; he partly believed it. Just how he heard of their divisions is not known, but the word akouo is present tense, active voice and indicative mood meaning that he had heard the subject repeatedly. If there were unconfessed or unforsaken sins in the lives of the Corinthians, it would be better for them not to observe the Supper. There were heresies (haireseis) or conflicting opinions among them and these should be made manifest (phaneroi) or made known. Some approved (dokimoi) or accepted sound doctrines, and some did not.
When the Corinthians meet together, probably in the love feast (Agape), some were eating without waiting for the others to join them; "...one is hungry (peina), and another is drunken (methuei) or intoxicated." Some of the Corinthians were not waiting for the congregation to gather before they began the love feast; some were gorging themselves and were becoming intoxicated. The practice seems to have been for the entire church to gather, the poor as well as the rich. Apparently the rich were not waiting for the poor to gather. "The fact was...that there was a lot of pushing and shoving as each one tried to get to the head of the line in order to eat his fill. The result of this undignified chaos was that some got nothing to eat and the others got drunk! It is scant wonder that these meetings were killing the spiritual life of the church!" (Yeager, p. 26).
Paul reprimands the Corinthians for their lack of social grace or unchristian conduct. He asks rhetorical questions expecting an affirmative answer, "What? Have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? Or despise (kataphroneite) or regard as insignificant ye the church of God, and shame (kataischenete) or dishonor them that have not (the poor)? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I praise you not" (verse 22). Paul indicates here that the rich folks ought to be ashamed for eating before the poor arrive thus humiliating them. If the rich are going to act that way they should eat at home and not embarrass the poor.
23 - 26 MacArthur says of these verses, "...(they are) like a diamond dropped in a muddy road. One of the most beautiful passages in all of Scripture is given in the middle of a strong rebuke of worldly, carnal, selfish, and insensitive attitudes and behavior. The rebuke, in fact, is of Christians who have perverted the very ceremony that these verses so movingly describe. As he often did when about to present an especially important or controversial truth, Paul makes it clear that what he is teaching is not his own opinion but God's revealed Word" (pp. 270, 271). While studying this passage the reader is asked to refer to companion scriptures found in Matthew 26:26 - 29; Mark 14:22 - 25; Luke 22:14 - 20 which will greatly help in the study of the Lord's Supper. Paul states that he "received (parelabon) of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you..." He is telling the Corinthians and his readers down through the ages what the Lord told him and what he is conveying to them. "That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed (paredideto) or delivered up took bread." "And when he had given thanks (eiucharistesas) he broke it and said, Take, eat: this is my body (soma), which is (broken (eklasen)) for you: this do in remembrance (anamnesin) of me." As Jesus and His disciples were eating at the Passover celebration and near to the conclusion of the Passover Supper, Jesus instituted what has come to be called the Lord's Supper. Three of the Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke state the formula in about the same words (Matthew and Mark are more alike; Luke and Paul are nearly alike). The bread pulled apart symbolized His body which would soon be nailed to the Old Rugged Cross; "the word 'broken' of the Textus Receptus (King James Version) is clearly not genuine...As a matter of fact, the body of Jesus was not broken (John 19:36)" (Robertson, p. 164). "Never did self-denial in sacrifice for others reach the heights that Jesus reached on the cross. This symbolic communion is enjoined upon the saints for the purpose of allowing its inherent character to always remind us of Christ on the cross. The boorish behavior of the Corinthians (verses 21, 22) spoke with compelling eloquence of their selfishness. Their observance was a complete negation of the spirit of love and self-denial, as expressed at Calvary, that the Communion was designed to recall and promote. As the rich crowded forward boisterously and gorged themselves on rich food and wine, the poor stood aside in deep humiliation. What a flagrant disregard for the very essence of Christianity! It is no great wonder that Paul told them that every time they met they made matters worse (verse 17)" (Yeager, p. 30).
"After the same manner also he took the cup (poterion), when he had supped (deipnesai) or eaten food, saying, This cup is the new testament (kaine diatheke) or new covenant in my blood; this do ye, as oft as (hosakis) ye drink it, in remembrance of me." After partaking of the bread, then Jesus took the single cup containing the juice of the grape; it symbolized His shed blood. A new covenant was about to begin; "the diatheke is the usual Greek word for 'last will and testament.' This is practically the only meaning it has in Greek writings generally, and it has it with great frequency. But in the Greek Old Testament the word is used regularly to translate the Hebrew for 'covenant' (277 times)...Jesus is referring to the 'new covenant' prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31f" (Morris, p. 161). The Lord's Supper was to be taken very seriously and solemnly and each time they observed it, they were to remember what Jesus had done on Calvary. They were to observe the Supper until the Second Coming; it was a backward look at Calvary and a forward look anticipating the Lord's Second Coming. The church was to remember that their salvation depended upon Christ's sacrifice for sin. It was a church ordinance to be observed only in church capacity. The Lord's people should know that we are pilgrims passing through this sin cursed world; we are as ambassadors in a foreign country; we look for a heavenly city whose builder and maker is God.
"For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew (kataggellete) or declare the Lord's death till he come." We can be assured of His coming; we just do not know when He will come. How often should the church observe the Lord's Supper? Neither the Gospel writers nor Paul say how often, but as often as she does, she is to remember her Redeemer. "The Lord's Supper is the great preacher (kataggellete) of the death of Christ till his Second Coming (Matthew 26:29)" (Robertson, p. 165). "In the church of the second half of the first century, believers celebrated Communion and then prayed Maranatha (Come, O Lord)" (Kistemaker, p. 398).
27 - 30 Paul now gives a warning about partaking of the Lord's Supper. Those who would do so "unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord." "This expression (guilty of the body and blood) has been understood as meaning that his blood would be on their heads, that they would be in a manner guilty of crucifying the Lord afresh" (Gould, pp. 100, 101). The word "unworthily" is sometimes misunderstood. The word is anazios which is an adverb; it means "in an unworthy manner." How is this done? One should not partake of the Supper if there is known and unconfessed sin in his life, nor should he partake if he has ought against his fellow church-member. "The result of participation in the Communion without a proper spiritual recognition of its great significance and consequent spiritual preparation, in terms of objective introspection, repentance, request for forgiveness and a new yielding to the Holy spirit is great" (Yeager, p. 34). Although Jesus was not talking about the Lord's Supper, the same principle may be involved in Matthew 5:23 where He taught, "Therefore, if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath anything against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come, and offer thy gift." Those who eat and drink unworthily can expect judgment or condemnation from God.
A participant should examine (dokimazeto), test or prove himself before partaking of the Lord's Supper. So there is an inward look; a look inside may reveal a flaw that needs to be corrected; a sin that needs to be confessed; a wrong that needs to be righted. He needs to scrutinize his own life style and if something needs correcting it should be corrected. Then and only then should the individual partake of the Lord's Supper. The word "Communion," which some use more frequently than the Lord's Supper, means that the individual must have unbroken communion with the Lord and unbroken communion with his fellow church-member. "Immersion in water symbolizes our union with Christ, and as we eat the bread and drink the wine at the Lord's table we symbolize communion with Him" (Yeager, p. 36).
If a individual eats and drinks unworthily, he eats and drinks damnation (krima), condemnation or judgment to himself, not discerning (diakrinon) ascertaining a difference in the Lord's body. Note the similarity between damnation (krima) and discerning (diakrimon) in this verse. "The Communion is a most blessed ordinance for the Christian who approaches the table worthily...It is a most dangerous ordinance for those who approach the table and ignore its significance" (Yeager, p. 37). Paul writes that because of eating and drinking unworthily many have become "weak (astheneis) or feeble and sickly (appostoi) or without strength among you, and many sleep (koimontai) the sleep of death." Sinning against the Holy Spirit Who dwells with the body of the saved (I Corinthians 3:16; 6:19, 20) is a dangerous action; the sin of physical death is sometimes visited upon the backslidder and the persistently rebellious Christian (Acts 5:1 - 11; I Corinthians 5:1 - 9). A backslidden Christian can do many things in the church without incurring God's wrath, but observance of the Lord's Supper in an unworthy manner is not one of them.
31 - 34 Paul writes if an individual judges himself, he will not be judged (ekrinometha) or called in question by the church or the Lord. The church judges those who are members of the church; the Lord judges those who are outside of the church. Jehovah God judges His own and chastens (paideuometha) or instructed so that they will not be condemned by the world. The word chasten is an interesting word; it comes from paida which means "child" and agogos which means "to lead." A child leader or tutor leads, guides and is a guardian over the boys in the Jewish culture. The Holy Spirit is the Christian's tutor; when the Christian disobeys, or gets out of line, the Holy Spirit chastens us. Jehovah God chastens only His children, and not the devil's. In fact, God's Word states if a person is without chastisement, that is a good sign that he does not belong to God (Hebrews 12:8). "The chastening of the believer is God's way of maintaining the distinction between the regenerate sinner and the sinner who is unregenerate" (Yeager, p. 39).
When the Corinthians came together as a body of Christ, they were to "tarry (ekdechesthe) or wait one for another, and if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation" (verses 33, 34a). When the church met together, all should wait until all have arrived and the poor has been served before they eat. If some are so hungry that they cannot wait until all are served, let them satisfy their hunger at home rather than make a fool and a glutton of themselves. The Lord's Supper was not to be observed as a church banquet. "By their indecent haste, each eating his own meal without waiting for the rest, they had turned the Supper from its memorial purposes into an ordinary and insignificant meal, a mere eating and drinking" (Gould, p. 102).
"...And the rest will I set in order when I come" (verse 34b), Paul writes. "We have no details on what Paul means with the phrase the rest of the things. We assume that the phrase refers to other irregularities in the Corinthian church...These can wait until he arrives...After visiting the churches in Macedonia, Paul hopes to come to Corinth and spend the winter there (16:5 - 8)" Kistemaker, p. 406).
* * * * * * * * * *
To understand the events surrounding the Lord's Supper we look at MacArthur's description of the Passover Supper. "The Passover meal began with the host's pronouncing a blessing over the first cup of red wine and passing it to the others present. Four cups of wine were passed around during the meal. After the first cup was drunk bitter herbs dipped in a fruit sauce were eaten and a message was given on the meaning of Passover. Then the first part of a hymn, the Hallel (which means 'praise' and is related to hallelujah, 'praise ye the Lord'), was sung. The Hallel is comprised of Psalms 113 - 118, and the first part sung was usually 113 or 113 and 114. After the second cup was passed, the host would break and pass around the unleavened bread. Then the meal proper, which consisted of the roasted sacrificial lamb, was eaten. The third cup, after prayer, was then passed and the rest of the Hallel was sung. The fourth cup, which celebrated the coming kingdom, was drunk immediately before leaving. It was the third cup that Jesus blessed and that became the cup of Communion. "And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying 'This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood' (Luke 22:20). After Jesus gave some brief words of warning, rebuke, and instruction (Luke 22: 21 - 38), the meal was concluded with the singing of a hymn (Matthew 26:30)" (pp. 271, 272).
| 1 Cor Intro | 1 Cor 1 | 1 Cor 2 | 1 Cor 3 | 1 Cor 4 | 1 Cor 5 |
| 1 Cor 6 | 1 Cor 7 | 1 Cor 8 | 1 Cor 9 | 1 Cor 10 | 1 Cor 11 |
| 1 Cor 12 | 1 Cor 13 | 1 Cor 14 | 1 Cor 15 | 1 Cor 16 | 1 Cor Bib |