Grace Team UniversityStudy to shew thyself approved unto God2 Timothy 2:15
SCRIBE’S TREASURECHRISTIAN LIBRARYTHY WORD IS TRUTHKJV BIBLE WITH GREEKPRAISE YE THE LORDWORSHIP MUSIC

1 Corinthians 10

Tap any word to open its Greek or Hebrew word and Strong’s lexicon entry right here, and any name to open its Bible Dictionary entry. Read this chapter with JFB commentary · Search the Bible

Holy Bible seal — the reading lion in a graduation cap over the open Bible: Jesus Christ Is Lord; My Words Shall Not Pass Away
THY WORD IS TRUTH

The Law

History

Poetry & Wisdom

The Prophets

The Gospels & Acts

The Letters

Prophecy

✕ 🔍

“Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.” — John 5:39

12345678910111213141516
1 Corinthians 10
Warnings from Israel's History

1Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
CHAPTER 10

1Co 10:1-33. Danger of Fellowship with Idolatry Illustrated in the History of Israel: Such Fellowship Incompatible with Fellowship in the Lord's Supper. Even Lawful Things Are to Be Forborne, so as Not to Hurt Weak Brethren.

1. Moreover--The oldest manuscripts read "for." Thus the connection with the foregoing chapter is expressed. Ye need to exercise self-denying watchfulness notwithstanding all your privileges, lest ye be castaways. For the Israelites with all their privileges were most of them castaways through want of it.

ignorant--with all your boasted "knowledge."

our fathers--The Jewish Church stands in the relation of parent to the Christian Church.

all--Arrange as the Greek, "Our fathers were all under the cloud"; giving the "all" its proper emphasis. Not so much as one of so great a multitude was detained by force or disease (Psa 105:37) [Bengel]. Five times the "all" is repeated, in the enumeration of the five favors which God bestowed on Israel (1Co 10:1-4). Five times, correspondingly, they sinned (1Co 10:6-10). In contrast to the "all" stands "many (rather, 'the most') of them" (1Co 10:5). All of them had great privileges, yet most of them were castaways through lust. Beware you, having greater privileges, of sharing the same doom through a similar sin. Continuing the reasoning (1Co 9:24), "They which run in a race, run all, but one receiveth the prize."

under the cloud--were continually under the defense of the pillar of cloud, the symbol of the divine presence (Ex 13:21, 22; Psa 105:39; compare Is 4:5).

passed through the sea--by God's miraculous interposition for them (Ex 14:29).
The Pulpit Commentary
Warnings against over confidence in relation to idolatry and other temptations.

Moreover; rather, for. He has just shown them, by his own example, the necessity for strenuous watchfulness and effort. In continuance of the same lesson, he teaches them historically that the possession of great privileges is no safeguard, and that the seductions, even of idolatry, must not be carelessly despised. Although the connection of the various paragraphs is not stated with logical precision, we see that they all bear on the one truth which he wants to inculcate, namely, that it is both wise and kind to limit our personal freedom out of sympathy with others. The reading "but" (δὲ, morever) is probably a correction of the true reading (γὰρ, for), due to the failure to understand the whole train of thought. I would not that ye should be ignorant. This is a favourite phrase of St. Paul's (1Co_12:1; 2Co_1:8; Rom_1:13; Rom_11:25; 1Th_4:13). The ignorance to which he refers is not ignorance of the facts, but of the meaning of the facts. All our fathers. He repeats the "all" five times, because he wishes to show that, though "all" partook of spiritual blessings, most (1Co_10:5) fell in spite of them. He says, "our fathers," not only because he was himself a Jew, but also because the patriarchs and the Israelites were spiritually the fathers of the Christian Church. Were under the cloud. The compressed Greek phrase implies that they went under it, and remained under its shadow. The "cloud" is the "pillar of cloud" (Exo_13:21), of which David says, "He spread a cloud for a covering" (Psa_105:39). The Book of Wisdom (1Co_10:17) calls it "a cover unto them by day," and (19:7) "a cloud shadowing the camp." All passed through the sea (Exo_14:22).

2And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
2. And--"And so" [Bengel].

baptized unto Moses--the servant of God and representative of the Old Testament covenant of the law: as Jesus, the Son of God, is of the Gospel covenant (Joh 1:17; He 3:5, 6). The people were led to believe in Moses as God's servant by the miracle of the cloud protecting them, and by their being conducted under him safely through the Red Sea; therefore they are said to be "baptized unto" him (Ex 14:31). "Baptized" is here equivalent to "initiated": it is used in accommodation to Paul's argument to the Corinthians; they, it is true, have been "baptized," but so also virtually were the Israelites of old; if the virtual baptism of the latter availed not to save them from the doom of lust, neither will the actual baptism of the former save them. There is a resemblance between the symbols also: for the cloud and sea consist of water, and as these took the Israelites out of sight, and then restored them again to view, so the water does to the baptized [Bengel]. Olshausen understands "the cloud" and "the sea" as symbolizing the Spirit and water respectively (Joh 3:5; Ac 10:44-47). Christ is the pillar cloud that screens us from the heat of God's wrath. Christ as "the light of the world" is our "pillar of fire" to guide us in the darkness of the world. As the rock when smitten sent forth the waters, so Christ, having been once for all smitten, sends forth the waters of the Spirit. As the manna bruised in mills fed Israel, so Christ, when "it pleased the Lord to bruise Him," has become our spiritual food. A strong proof of inspiration is given in this fact, that the historical parts of Scripture, without the consciousness even of the authors, are covert prophecies of the future.
The Pulpit Commentary
Were all baptized. This reading, though well supported, may, perhaps, be a correction for the middle, "they baptized themselves," i.e. accepted baptism. The passing under the cloud (Exo_14:19) and through the sea, constituting as it did their deliverance from bondage into freedom, their death to Egypt, and their birth to a new covenant, was a general type or dim shadow of Christian baptism (compare our collect, "figuring thereby thy holy baptism''). But the typology is quite incidental; it is the moral lesson which is paramount. Unto Moses; rather, into. By this "baptism" they accepted Moses as their Heaven-seat guide and teacher.

3And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
3. same spiritual meat--As the Israelites had the water from the rock, which answered to baptism, so they had the manna which corresponded to the other of the two Christian sacraments, the Lord's Supper. Paul plainly implies the importance which was attached to these two sacraments by all Christians in those days: "an inspired protest against those who lower their dignity, or deny their necessity" [Alford]. Still he guards against the other extreme of thinking the mere external possession of such privileges will ensure salvation. Moreover, had there been seven sacraments, as Rome teaches, Paul would have alluded to them, whereas he refers to only the two. He does not mean by "the same" that the Israelites and we Christians have the "same" sacrament; but that believing and unbelieving Israelites alike had "the same" spiritual privilege of the manna (compare 1Co 10:17). It was "spiritual meat" or food; because given by the power of God's spirit, not by human labor [Grotius and Alford] Ga 4:29, "born after the Spirit," that is, supernaturally. Psa 78:24, "corn of heaven" (Psa 105:40). Rather, "spiritual" in its typical signification, Christ, the true Bread of heaven, being signified (Joh 6:32). Not that the Israelites clearly understood the signification; but believers among them would feel that in the type something more was meant; and their implicit and reverent, though indistinct, faith was counted to them for justification, of which the manna was a kind of sacramental seal. "They are not to be heard which feign that the old fathers did look only for transitory promises" [Article VII, Church of England], as appears from this passage (compare He 4:2).
The Pulpit Commentary
And did all eat the same spiritual meat. As the cloud and the Red Sea symbolized the waters of baptism, so the manna and the water of the rock symbolized the elements of the other Christian sacrament, the Lord's Supper. The manna might be called "a spiritual food," both because it was "angels' food" (Psa_78:25; Wis. 16:20) and "bread from heaven" (Psa_78:24; Joh_6:31), and also because it was a type of "God's good Spirit," which he "gave to instruct them" (Neh_9:20). St. Paul only knows of two sacraments.

4And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
4. drink--(Ex 17:6). In Nu 20:8, "the beasts" also are mentioned as having drunk. The literal water typified "spiritual drink," and is therefore so called.

spiritual Rock that followed them--rather, "accompanied them." Not the literal rock (or its water) "followed" them, as Alford explains, as if Paul sanctioned the Jews' tradition (Rabbi Solomon on Nu 20:2) that the rock itself, or at least the stream from it, followed the Israelites from place to place (compare De 9:21). But Christ, the "Spiritual Rock" (Psa 78:20, 35; De 32:4, 15, 18, 30, 31, 37; Is 28:16; 1Pe 2:6), accompanied them (Ex 33:15). "Followed" implies His attending on them to minister to them; thus, though mostly going before them, He, when occasion required it, followed "behind" (Ex 14:19). He satisfied all alike as to their bodily thirst whenever they needed it; as on three occasions is expressly recorded (Ex 15:24, 25; 17:6; Nu 20:8); and this drink for the body symbolized the spiritual drink from the Spiritual Rock (compare Joh 4:13, 14; see on 1Co 10:3).
The Pulpit Commentary
The same spiritual drink. The water from the smitten rock might (Exo_17:6; Num_20:11) be called a "spiritual" drink, both as being a miraculous gift (comp. Gal_4:29, where Isaac is said to be "born after the spirit"), and as being a type of that "living water" which "springs up into everlasting life" (Joh_4:14; Joh_7:37), and of the blood of Christ in the Eucharist (Joh_6:55). These "waters in the wilderness'' and "rivers in the desert" were a natural symbol of the grace of God (Isa_43:23; Isa_55:1), especially as bestowed in the sacrament through material signs. They drank; literally, they were drinking, implying a continuous gift. Of that spiritual Rock that followed them; rather, literally, of a spiritual following Rock. This is explained

(1) as a mere figure of speech, in which the natural rock which Moses smote is left out of sight altogether; and

(2) as meaning that not the rock, but the water from the rock, followed after them in their wanderings (Deu_9:21). There can, however, be little or no doubt that St. Paul refers to the common Jewish Hagadah, that the actual material rock did follow the Israelites in their wanderings. The rabbis said that it was round, and rolled itself up like a swarm of bees, and that, when the tabernacle was pitched, this rock came and settled in its vestibule, and began to flow when the princes came to it and sang, "Spring up, O well; sing ye unto it" (Num_21:17). It does not, of course, follow from this allusion that St. Paul, or even the rabbis, believed their Hagadah in other than a metaphorical sense. The Jewish Hagadoth—legends and illustrations and inferences of an imaginative Oriental people—are not to be taken au pied de la lettre. St. Paul obviates the laying of any stress on the mere legend by the qualifying word, "a spiritual Rock." And that Rock was Christ. The writings of Philo, and the Alexandrian school of thought in general, had familiarized all Jewish readers with language of this kind. They were accustomed to see types of God, or of the Word (Logos), in almost every incident of the deliverance from Egypt and the wanderings in the wilderness. Thus in Wis. 10:15 and 11:4 it is Wisdom—another form of the Loges—who leads and supports the Israelites. The frequent comparison, of God to a Rock in the Old Testament (Deu_32:1-52., passim; 1Sa_2:2; Psa_91:12, etc.) would render the symbolism more easy, especially as in Exo_17:6 we find, "Behold, I [Jehovah] will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb."

5But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
5. But--though they had so many tokens of God's presence.

many of them--rather, "the majority of them"; "the whole part." All except Joshua and Caleb of the first generation.

not--in the Greek emphatically standing in the beginning of the sentence: "Not," as one might have naturally expected, "with the more part of them was," &c.

God--whose judgment alone is valid.

for--the event showed, they had not pleased God.

overthrown--literally, "strewn in heaps."

in the wilderness--far from the land of promise.
The Pulpit Commentary
With many of them; rather, with most of them. They were overthrown in the wilderness. A quotation from the LXX. of Num_14:16. All but Caleb and Joshua perished (Num_26:64, Num_26:65; comp. Jud_1:5). In Heb_3:17 the word used is "they fell."

6Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
6. were--Greek, "came to pass as."

our examples--samples to us of what will befall us, if we also with all our privileges walk carelessly.

lust--the fountain of all the four other offenses enumerated, and therefore put first (Jas 1:14, 15; compare Psa 106:14). A particular case of lust was that after flesh, when they pined for the fish, leeks, &c., of Egypt, which they had left (Nu 11:4, 33, 34). These are included in the "evil things," not that they are so in themselves, but they became so to the Israelites when they lusted after what God withheld, and were discontented with what God provided.
The Pulpit Commentary
These things were our examples. If this rendering be adopted, perhaps "examples" is the best equivalent of the original tupoi, as in Php_3:17, "Walk so as ye have us for an example (tupelō)." It may, however, mean "types," i.e. foreshadowing symbols, as in Rom_5:14, where Adam is the "figure" (tupos) of Christ. But, in spite of Alford's decisive rejection of it, the rendering, "Now in these things they proved to be figures of us," is at least equally probable. To the intent. Of course, the events had their own immediate instruction, but the example which they involved was the ulterior purpose of their being so ordained by the providence of God. As they also lusted. (For quails, Num_11:4, Num_11:33; and see Psa_95:7-11.)

7Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
7. idolaters--A case in point. As the Israelites sat down (a deliberate act), ate, and drank at the idol feast to the calves in Horeb, so the Corinthians were in danger of idolatry by a like act, though not professedly worshipping an idol as the Israelites (1Co 8:10, 11; 10:14, 20, 21; Ex 32:6). He passes here from the first to the second person, as they alone (not he also) were in danger of idolatry, &c. He resumes the first person appropriately at 1Co 10:16.

some--The multitude follow the lead of some bad men.

play--with lascivious dancing, singing, and drumming round the calf (compare "rejoiced," Ac 7:41).
The Pulpit Commentary
As were some of them. As in the case of the golden calf, the worship of Moloch, Remphan, Baal-peor, etc. In the prominent instance of the calf worship, they (like the Corinthians) would have put forth sophistical pleas in their own favour, saying that they were not worshipping idols, but only paying honour to cherubic emblems of Jehovah. To play. The word is, perhaps, used euphemistically for the worst concomitants of a sensual nature worship (Exo_32:3-6), which resembled the depraved and orgiastic worship of Aphrodite Pandemos at Corinth.

8Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
8. fornication--literally, Fornication was generally, as in this case (Nu 25:1-18), associated at the idol feasts with spiritual fornication, that is, idolatry. This all applied to the Corinthians (1Co 5:1, 9; 6:9, 15, 18; 1Co 8:10). Balaam tempted Israel to both sins with Midian (Re 2:14). Compare 1Co 8:7, 9, "stumbling-block," "eat ... thing offered unto ... idol."

three and twenty thousand--in Nu 25:9 "twenty and four thousand." If this were a real discrepancy, it would militate rather against inspiration of the subject matter and thought, than against verbal inspiration. The solution is: Moses in Numbers includes all who died "in the plague"; Paul, all who died "in one day"; one thousand more may have fallen the next day [Kitto, Biblical Cyclopædia]. Or, the real number may have been between twenty-three thousand and twenty-four thousand, say twenty-three thousand five hundred, or twenty-three thousand six hundred; when writing generally where the exact figures were not needed, one writer might quite veraciously give one of the two round numbers near the exact one, and the other writer the other [Bengel]. Whichever be the true way of reconciling the seeming discrepant statements, at least the ways given above prove they are not really irreconcilable.
The Pulpit Commentary
Commit fornication. This sin was not only an ordinary accompaniment of idolatry, but often a consecrated part of it, as in the case of the thousand hierodouloi, or female attendants, in the temple of Aphrodite on Acro-Corinthus. Three and twenty thousand. The number given in Num_25:9 is twenty-four thousand. We cannot give any account of the discrepancy, which is, however, quite unimportant.

9Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
9. tempt Christ--So the oldest versions, Irenæus (264), and good manuscripts read. Some of the oldest manuscripts read "Lord"; and one manuscript only "God." If "Lord" be read, it will mean Christ. As "Christ" was referred to in one of the five privileges of Israel (1Co 10:4), so it is natural that He should be mentioned here in one of the five corresponding sins of that people. In Nu 21:5 it is "spake against God" (whence probably arose the alteration in the one manuscript, 1Co 10:9, "God," to harmonize it with Nu 21:5). As either "Christ" or "Lord" is the genuine reading, "Christ" must be "God." Compare "Why do ye tempt the Lord?" (Ex 17:2, 7. Compare Ro 14:11, with Is 45:22, 23). Israel's discontented complainings were temptings of Christ especially, the "Angel" of the covenant (Ex 23:20, 21; 32:34; Is 63:9). Though they drank of "that Rock ... Christ" (1Co 10:4), they yet complained for want of water (Ex 17:2, 7). Though also eating the same spiritual meat (Christ, "the true manna," "the bread of life"), they yet murmured, "Our soul loatheth this light bread." In this case, being punished by the fiery serpents, they were saved by the brazen serpent, the emblem of Christ (compare Joh 8:56; He 11:26). The Greek for "tempt" means, tempt or try, so as to wear out the long-suffering of Christ (compare Psa 95:8, 9; Nu 14:22). The Corinthians were in danger of provoking God's long-suffering by walking on the verge of idolatry, through overweening confidence in their knowledge.
The Pulpit Commentary
Tempt Christ (see the note on 1Co_10:4). Christ is here identified with the angel which went before the Israelites, whom they were specially warned not "to provoke," because "my Name is in him" (Exo_23:1-33. 20, 21). Another reading is "the Lord." "Christ" may have come in from a marginal gloss. On the other hand, since "Christ" is the more difficult reading, it was, perhaps, the more likely to be altered by copyists. The word for "tempt" means "tempt utterly," "tempt beyond endurance." As some of them (Exo_17:2, Exo_17:7; Num_14:22; Num_21:5, Num_21:6). Of serpents; rather, perished by the serpents, viz. the "fiery serpents" of the wilderness (Num_21:6).

10Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
10. some of them ... murmured--upon the death of Korah and his company, who themselves were murmurers (Nu 16:41, 49). Their murmurs against Moses and Aaron were virtually murmurs against God (compare Ex 16:8, 10). Paul herein glances at the Corinthian murmurs against himself, the apostle of Christ.

destroyed--fourteen thousand seven hundred perished.

the destroyer--THE same destroying angel sent by God as in Ex 12:23, and 2Sa 24:16.
The Pulpit Commentary
Neither murmur ye (Num_14:2, Num_14:29; Num_16:41, Num_16:49). The Corinthians were at this time murmuring against their teacher and apostle. Of the destroyer. All plagues and similar great catastrophes, as well as all individual deaths, were believed by the Jews to be the work of an angel whom they called Sammael (see Exo_12:23; 2Sa_24:16; Job_33:22; 2 Macc. 15:22). In the retribution narrated in Num_16:41, etc., fourteen thousand seven hundred perished.

11Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
11. Now ... these things ... ensamples--resuming the thread of 1Co 10:6. The oldest manuscripts read, "by way of example."

the ends of the world--literally, "of the ages"; the New Testament dispensation in its successive phases (plural, "ends") being the winding up of all former "ages." No new dispensation shall appear till Christ comes as Avenger and Judge; till then the "ends," being many, include various successive periods (compare He 9:26). As we live in the last dispensation, which is the consummation of all that went before, our responsibilities are the greater; and the greater is the guilt, Paul implies, to the Corinthians, which they incur if they fall short of their privileges.
The Pulpit Commentary
For ensamples; literally, by way of figure; typically. The rabbis said, "Whatever happened to the fathers is a sign to their children." The thought is the same as in Rom_15:4, "Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning." The example in this instance would come home more forcibly from the sickness and mortality then prevalent among the Corinthian Christians (1Co_11:30). The ends of the world; rather, of the egos. The expression is in accordance with the view which regarded the then epoch as "the close or consummation of the ages" (Mat_13:39; 1Pe_4:7, "The end of all things is at hand;" 1Jn_2:18, "It is the last time;" Heb_9:26; Mat_13:39).

12Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
12. thinketh he standeth--stands and thinks that he stands [Bengel]; that is, stands "by faith ... well pleasing" to God; in contrast to 1Co 10:5, "with many of them God was not well pleased" (Ro 11:20).

fall--from his place in the Church of God (compare 1Co 10:8, "fell"). Both temporally and spiritually (Ro 14:4). Our security, so far as relates to God, consists in faith; so far as relates to ourselves, it consists in fear.
The Pulpit Commentary
Take heed lest he fall. The Corinthians, thinking that they stood, asserting that they all had knowledge, proud of the insight which led them to declare that "an idol is nothing in the world," were not only liable to underrate the amount of forbearance due to weaker consciences, but were also in personal danger of falling away. To them, as to the Romans, St. Paul means to say, "Be not highminded, but fear" (Rom_11:20).

13There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
13. Consolation to them, under their temptation; it is none but such as is "common to man," or "such as man can bear," "adapted to man's powers of endurance" [Wahl].

faithful--(Psa 125:3; Is 27:3, 8; Re 3:10). "God is faithful" to the covenant which He made with you in calling you (1Th 5:24). To be led into temptation is distinct from running into it, which would be "tempting God" (1Co 10:9; Mt 4:7).

way to escape--(Jr 29:11; 2Pe 2:9). The Greek is, "the way of escape"; the appropriate way of escape in each particular temptation; not an immediate escape, but one in due time, after patience has had her perfect work (Jas 1:2-4, 12). He "makes" the way of escape simultaneously with the temptation which His providence permissively arranges for His people.

to bear it--Greek, "to bear up under it," or "against it." Not, He will take it away (2Co 12:7-9).
The Pulpit Commentary
But such as is common to man; rather, except such as is human; i.e. such as man can bear. The last verse was a warning; this is an encouragement. Having just heard what efforts even St. Paul had to make to run in the Christian race, and how terribly their fathers in the wilderness had failed to meet the requirements of God, they might be inclined to throw up every effort in despair. St. Paul, therefore, reminds them that these temptations were not superhuman, but were such as men had resisted, and such as they could resist. God is faithful He had called them (1Co_1:9), and since he knew "how to deliver the godly out of temptations" (2Pe_2:9), he would surely perform his side of the covenant, and, if they did their parts, would stablish and keep them from evil (2Th_3:3). Also. The mode of deliverance shall be ready simultaneously with the temptation. Away to escape; rather, the way to escape. The way to escape is different in different temptations, but for each temptation God would provide the special means of escaping it.
Flee from Idolatry

14Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
14. Resuming the argument, 1Co 10:7; 1Co 8:9, 10.

flee--Do not tamper with it by doubtful acts, such as eating idol meats on the plea of Christian liberty. The only safety is in wholly shunning whatever borders on idolatry (2Co 6:16, 17). The Holy Spirit herein also presciently warned the Church against the idolatry, subsequently transferred from the idol feast to the Lord's Supper itself, in the figment of transubstantiation.
The Pulpit Commentary
Wherefore. As a result of the whole reasoning, which has been meant to inspire the weak with a more liberalizing knowledge, and the strong with a more fraternal sympathy. Dearly beloved. The word "dearly" should be omitted. Flee from idolatry. The original implies that they were to turn their backs on idolatry, and so fly from it.

15I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
15. Appeal to their own powers of judgment to weigh the force of the argument that follows: namely, that as the partaking of the Lord's Supper involves a partaking of the Lord Himself, and the partaking of the Jewish sacrificial meats involved a partaking of the altar of God, and, as the heathens sacrifice to devils, to partake of an idol feast is to have fellowship with devils. We cannot divest ourselves of the responsibility of "judging" for ourselves. The weakness of private judgment is not an argument against its use, but its abuse. We should the more take pains in searching the infallible word, with every aid within our reach, and above all with humble prayer for the Spirit's teaching (Ac 17:11). If Paul, an inspired apostle, not only permits, but urges, men to judge his sayings by Scripture, much more should the fallible ministers of the present visible Church do so.

To wise men--refers with a mixture of irony to the Corinthian boast of "wisdom" (1Co 4:10; 2Co 11:19). Here you have an opportunity of exercising your "wisdom" in judging "what I say."
The Pulpit Commentary
The inherent disgracefulness of any tampering with idolatry.

I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. An appeal to their own reason to confirm his argument, perhaps with a touch of irony in the first clause (1Co_4:10; 2Co_11:19). The word for "I say" is φημι, I affirm.

16The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
16. The cup of blessing--answering to the Jewish "cup of blessing," over which thanks were offered in the Passover. It was in doing so that Christ instituted this part of the Lord's Supper (Mt 26:27; Lu 22:17, 20).

we bless--"we," not merely ministers, but also the congregation. The minister "blesses" (that is, consecrates with blessing) the cup, not by any priestly transmitted authority of his own, but as representative of the congregation, who virtually through him bless the cup. The consecration is the corporate act of the whole Church. The act of joint blessing by him and them (not "the cup" itself, which, as also "the bread," in the Greek is in the accusative), and the consequent drinking of it together, constitute the communion, that is, the joint participation "of the blood of Christ." Compare 1Co 10:18, "They who eat ... are partakers" (joint communicants). "Is" in both cases in this verse is literal, not represents. He who with faith partakes of the cup and the bread, partakes really but spiritually of the blood and body of Christ (Ep 5:30, 32), and of the benefits of His sacrifice on the cross (compare 1Co 10:18). In contrast to this is to have "fellowship with devils" (1Co 10:20). Alford explains, "The cup ... is the [joint] participation (that is, that whereby the act of participation takes place) of the blood," &c. It is the seal of our living union with, and a means of our partaking of, Christ as our Saviour (Joh 6:53-57). It is not said, "The cup ... is the blood," or "the bread ... is the body," but "is the communion [joint-participation] of the blood ... body." If the bread be changed into the literal body of Christ, where is the sign of the sacrament? Romanists eat Christ "in remembrance of Himself." To drink literal blood would have been an abomination to Jews, which the first Christians were (Le 17:11, 12). Breaking the bread was part of the act of consecrating it, for thus was represented the crucifixion of Christ's body (1Co 11:24). The distinct specification of the bread and the wine disproves the Romish doctrine of concomitancy, and exclusion of the laity from the cup.
The Pulpit Commentary
The cup of blessing. A translation of the name cos haberachah (comp. Psa_116:13), over which a blessing was invoked by the head of the family after the Passover. The name is here transferred to the chalice in the Eucharist, over which Christ "gave thanks" (1Co_11:24; Mat_26:27). There seems to be a close connection between the idea of "blessing" and "giving thanks" (eucharistesas, Luk_22:19), and here, as always, St. Paul and St. Luke resemble each other in their expressions. The communion of; literally, a participation in. By means of the cup we realize our share in the benefits wrought by Christ's precious blood shedding. The cup is at once a symbol and a medium. The blood of Christ; of which the wine is the sacramental symbol. By rightly drinking the wine, we spiritually partake of the blood of Christ, we become sharers in his Divine life. The bread; perhaps rather, the loaf, which was apparently passed from hand to hand, that each might break off a piece. Is it not the communion of the body of Christ? The best comment on the verse is Joh_6:41-59, in which our Lord taught that there could be no true spiritual life without the closest union with him and incorporation into his life.

17For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
17. one bread--rather, "loaf." One loaf alone seems to have been used in each celebration.

and one body--Omit "and"; "one loaf [that is], one body." "We, the many (namely, believers assembled; so the Greek), are one bread (by our partaking of the same loaf, which becomes assimilated to the substance of all our bodies; and so we become), one body" (with Christ, and so with one another).

we ... all--Greek, "the whole of us."
The Pulpit Commentary
We being many are one bread, and one body. It is easy to see how we are "one body," of which Christ is the Head, and we are the members. This is the metaphor used in 1Co_12:12, 1Co_12:13 and Rom_12:5. The more difficult expression, "we are one bread," is explained in the next clause. The meaning seems to be—We all partake of the loaf, and thereby become qualitatively, as it were, a part of it, as it of us, even as we all become members of Christ's one body, which that loaf sacramentally represents Some commentators, disliking the harshness of the expression, render it, "Because there is one bread, we being many are one body;" or, "For there is one bread. We being many are one body." But the language and context support the rendering of our version; and the supposed "physiology" is not so modern as to be at all surprising.

18Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
18. Israel after the flesh--the literal, as distinguished from the spiritual, Israel (Ro 2:29; 4:1; 9:3; Ga 4:29).

partakers of the altar--and so of God, whose is the altar; they have fellowship in God and His worship, of which the altar is the symbol.
The Pulpit Commentary
Partakers of the altar. It is better to render it "Have they not communion with the altar?" for the word is different from that in the last verse. The meaning is that, by sharing in the sacrifices, the Jews stood in direct association with the altar, the victims, and all that they symbolized (Deu_12:27). And St. Paul implied that the same thing is true of those who sympathetically partook of idol offerings.

19What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
19-20. What say I then?--The inference might be drawn from the analogies of the Lord's Supper and Jewish sacrifices, that an idol is really what the heathen thought it to be, a god, and that in eating idol-meats they had fellowship with the god. This verse guards against such an inference: "What would I say then? that a thing sacrificed to an idol is any real thing (in the sense that the heathen regard it), or that an idol is any real thing?" (The oldest manuscripts read the words in this order. Supply "Nay") "But [I say] that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils (demons)." Paul here introduces a new fact. It is true that, as I said, an idol has no reality in the sense that the heathen regard it, but it has a reality in another sense; heathendom being under Satan's dominion as "prince of this world," he and his demons are in fact the powers worshipped by the heathen, whether they are or are not conscious of it (De 32:17; Le 17:7; 2Ch 11:15; Psa 106:37; Re 9:20). "Devil" is in the Greek restricted to Satan; "demons" is the term applied to his subordinate evil spirits. Fear, rather than love, is the motive of heathen worship (compare the English word "panic," from Pan, whose human form with horns and cloven hoofs gave rise to the vulgar representations of Satan which prevail now); just as fear is the spirit of Satan and his demons (Jas 2:19).
The Pulpit Commentary
What say I then? What is it, then, which I am maintaining (φημι)? That the idol is anything. St. Paul repudiates an inference which he had already denied (1Co_8:4). Is anything. Has any intrinsic value, meaning, or importance. In itself, the idol offering is a mere dead, indifferent thing. Of itself, the idol is an eidolon—a shadowy, unreal thing, one of the elilim; but in another aspect it was "really something," and so alone could the rabbis account for phenomena which seemed to imply the reality of infernal miracles ('Avoda Zarah,' fol. 54, 2; 55, 1; and see note in 'Life of St. Paul,' 2.74).

20But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.

The Pulpit Commentary
But. The word rejects the former hypothesis. "[No I do not admit that], but what I say is that," etc. They sacrifice to devils, and not to God. The word "demons" should be used, not" devils" (Deu_32:17). The argument is that, though the idol is nothing—a mere stock or stone—it is yet the material symbol of a demon (see Psa_96:5; Psa_106:37; Baruch 4:7). So Milton -

"And devils to adore for deities;

Then were they known to men by various names,

And various idols through the heathen world,…

The chief were those who, from the pit of hell,

Roaming to seek their prey on earth, durst fix

Their seats long after next the seat of God,

Their altars by his altar, gods adored

Among the nations round."

('Paradise Lost,' 1.)

St. Paul uses a word which, while it would not be needlessly offensive to Gentiles, conveyed his meaning. The Greeks themselves called their deities daimonia, and St. Paul adopts the word; but to Jewish ears it meant, not "deities" or "demigods," but "demons."

21Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
21. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord--really and spiritually; though ye may outwardly (1Ki 18:21).

cup of devils--in contrast to the cup of the Lord. At idol feasts libations were usually made from the cup to the idol first, and then the guests drank; so that in drinking they had fellowship with the idol.

the Lord's table--The Lord's Supper is a feast on a table, not a sacrifice on an altar. Our only altar is the cross, our only sacrifice that of Christ once for all. The Lord's Supper stands, however, in the same relation, analogically, to Christ's sacrifice, as the Jews' sacrificial feasts did to their sacrifices (compare Mal 1:7, "altar ... table of the Lord"), and the heathen idol feasts to their idolatrous sacrifices (Is 65:11). The heathen sacrifices were offered to idol nonentities, behind which Satan lurked. The Jews' sacrifice was but a shadow of the substance which was to come. Our one sacrifice of Christ is the only substantial reality; therefore, while the partaker of the Jew's sacrificial feast partook rather "of the altar" (1Co 10:18) than of God manifested fully, and the heathen idol-feaster had fellowship really with demons, the communicant in the Lord's Supper has in it a real communion of, or fellowship in, the body of Christ once sacrificed, and now exalted as the Head of redeemed humanity.
The Pulpit Commentary
Ye cannot. It is a moral impossibility that you should. The Lord's table. This is the first instance in which this expression is used, and it has originated the name. The table of devils (see Deu_32:37). In the fine legend of Persephone, she might have been altogether liberated from the nether world if she had eaten nothing since her sojourn there; but unhappily she had eaten something, though it was only the few grains of a pomegranate; and hence she must leave the upper air, and become the Queen of Hades.

22Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
22. Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy?--by dividing our fellowship between Him and idols (Eze 20:39). Is it our wish to provoke Him to assert His power? De 32:21 is before the apostle's mind [Alford], (Ex 20:5).

are we stronger?--that we can risk a contest with Him.
The Pulpit Commentary
Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? (Deu_32:21," They have moved me to jealousy by that which is not God"). The expression, "a jealous God," is used in the second commandment with express reference to idolatry, as in Exo_34:14, Exo_34:15. Are we stronger than he? Can we, therefore, with impunity, kindle his anger against us? "He is… mighty in strength: who hath hardened himself against him, and hath prospered?" (Job_9:4).

Verse 23—1Co 11:1.—Directions about eating idol offerings, founded on these principles.
Do All to the Glory of God

23All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
23. All things are lawful for me, &c.--Recurring to the Corinthian plea (1Co 6:12), he repeats his qualification of it. The oldest manuscripts omit both times "for me."

edify not--tend not to build up the spiritual temple, the Church, in faith and love. Paul does not appeal to the apostolic decision (Ac 15:1-29), which seems to have been not so much regarded outside of Palestine, but rather to the broad principle of true Christian freedom, which does not allow us to be governed by external things, as though, because we can use them, we must use them (1Co 6:12). Their use or non-use is to be regulated by regard to edification.
The Pulpit Commentary
All things are lawful for me (see 1Co_6:12). The "for me" is not found in א, A, B, C, D. St. Paul repeats the assertion and its limitations, because he has now proved their force. He has shown that Christian liberty must be modified by considerations of expediency and edification in accordance with the feelings of sympathy and charity.

24Let no man seek his own, but every man another’s wealth.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
24. (1Co 10:33; 1Co 13:5; Ro 15:1, 2).
The Pulpit Commentary
But every man another's wealth. The addition of the word "wealth" is very infelicitous. Rather, as in the Revised Version, but each his neighbour's good.

25Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake:

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
25. shambles--butchers' stalls; the flesh market.

asking no question--whether it has been offered to an idol or not.

for conscience' sake--If on asking you should hear it had been offered to idols, a scruple would arise in your conscience which was needless, and never would have arisen had you asked no questions.
The Pulpit Commentary
Whatsoever is sold. By this practical rule of common sense he protects the weak Christian from being daily worried by over scrupulosity. If a Christian merely bought his meat in the open market, no one could suspect him of meaning thereby to connive at or show favour to idolatry. It would, therefore, be needless for him to entertain fantastic scruples about a matter purely indifferent. The fact of its forming part of an idol offering made no intrinsic difference in the food. Shambles; rather food market. Asking no question for conscience sake. Do not trouble your conscience by scruples arising from needless investigation (ἀνακρίνων) about the food.

26For the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
26. The ground on which such eating without questioning is justified is, the earth and all its contents ("the fulness thereof," Psa 20:1; 50:12), including all meats, belong to the Lord, and are appointed for our use; and where conscience suggests no scruple, all are to be eaten (Ro 14:14, 20; 1Ti 4:4, 5; compare Ac 10:15).
The Pulpit Commentary
For the earth is the Lord's (Psa_24:1). Consequently, "Every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving" (1Ti_4:4). The text formed the ordinary Jewish "grace before meat." The fulness thereof. The plenitude of its created furniture—plants, animals, etc.

27If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
27. ye be disposed to go--tacitly implying, they would be as well not to go, but yet not forbidding them to go (1Co 10:9) [Grotius]. The feast is not an idol feast, but a general entertainment, at which, however, there might be meat that had been offered to an idol.

for conscience' sake--(See on 1Co 10:25).
The Pulpit Commentary
Bid you to a feast. It is assumed that the feast is to take place in a private house, not an idol temple (1Co_8:10). Ye be disposed to go; rather, ye wish to go, with an emphasis on the "wish," which, as Grotius says, perhaps implies that the wish is not particularly commendable, although the apostle, in his large-hearted tolerance, does not actually blame it. The rabbis decided very differently. "If," said Rabbi Ishmael, "an idolater makes a feast in honour of his son, and invites all the Jews of his town, they eat of the sacrifices of the dead, even though they eat and drink of their own" ('Avodah Zarah,' fol. 18, 1). There are many passages of the Talmud which raise the suspicion that the rabbis are purposely running counter to the teaching of the New Testament.

28But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof:

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
28. if any man--a weak Christian at table, wishing to warn his brother.

offered in sacrifice unto idols--The oldest manuscripts omit "unto idols." At a heathen's table the expression, offensive to him, would naturally be avoided.

for conscience' sake--not to cause a stumbling-block to the conscience of thy weak brother (1Co 8:10-12).

for the earth is the Lord's, &c.--not in the oldest manuscripts.
The Pulpit Commentary
But if any man say unto you. Who is the "any man" is left undefined. Perhaps some "weak" Christian is meant, who happens to be a fellow guest. This is offered in sacrifice unto idols. The true reading is probably, hierothuton, sacred sacrifice, not eidolothuton, idol sacrifice. Perhaps there is a touch of delicate reserve in the word, implying that the remark is made at the table of heathens, who would be insulted by the word eidolothuton, sacrificed to idols. Whoever the interlocutor is supposed to be—heathen host or Christian guest—the mere fact of attention being drawn to the food as forming part of a heathen sacrifice is enough to make it your duty to give no overt sanction to idolatry. In that case, therefore, you ought to refuse it. It will be seen how gross was the calumny which asserted that St. Paul taught men to be indifferent about eating things offered to idols. He only taught indifference in cases where idolatry could not be directly involved in the question. He only repudiates the idle superstition that the food became inherently tainted by such a consecration when the eater was unaware of it. In later times, when the eating of such offerings was deliberately erected into a test of apostasy, he would have used language as strong against every semblance of compliance as any which was used by St. John himself or by Justin Martyr. Difference of time and circumstances necessarily involves a difference in the mode of viewing matters which in themselves are unimportant. For the earth is the Lord's. It is doubtful whether the repetition of this clause is genuine. It is omitted by all the best uncials.

29Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man’s conscience?

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
29. Conscience ... of the other--the weak brother introduced in 1Co 10:28.

for why is my liberty judged off another man's conscience?--Paul passes to the first person, to teach his converts by putting himself as it were in their position. The Greek terms for "the other" and "another" are distinct. "The other" is the one with whom Paul's and his Corinthian converts' concern is; "another" is any other with whom he and they have no concern. If a guest know the meat to be idol meat while I know it not, I have "liberty" to eat without being condemned by his "conscience" [Grotius]. Thus the "for," &c., is an argument for 1Co 10:27, "Eat, asking no questions." Or, Why should I give occasion by the rash use of my liberty that another should condemn it [Estius], or that my liberty should cause the destruction of my weak brother?" [Menochius]. Or, the words are those of the Corinthian objector (perhaps used in their letter, and so quoted by Paul), "Why is my liberty judged by another's conscience?" Why should not I be judged only by my own, and have liberty to do whatever it sanctions? Paul replies in 1Co 10:31, Your doing so ought always to be limited by regard to what most tends "to the glory of God" [Vatablus, Conybeare and Howson]. The first explanation is simplest; the "for," &c., in it refers to "not thine own" (that is, "not my own," in Paul's change to the first person); I am to abstain only in the case of liability to offend another's conscience; in cases where my own has no scruple, I am not bound, in God's judgment, by any other conscience than my own.
The Pulpit Commentary
Conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other. You may be well aware that you intend no sanction of idolatry, but if the other supposes that you do, you wound his conscience, which you have no right to do. Your own conscience has already decided for itself. For why is my liberty judged of another man's conscience? These words explain why he said "conscience not thine own." The mere fact that another person thinks that we are doing wrong does not furnish the smallest proof that we are doing wrong. We stand or fall only to our own Master, and our consciences are free to form their own independent conclusion. Perhaps in this clause and the next verse we have an echo of the arguments used by the Corinthian "liberals," who objected to sacrifice themselves to the scruples of the weak. The independence of conscience is powerfully maintained in Rom_14:2-5.

30For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
30. For--The oldest manuscripts omit "For."

by grace--rather, "thankfully" [Alford].

I ... be partaker--I partake of the food set before me.

evil spoken of--by him who does not use his liberty, but will eat nothing without scrupulosity and questioning whence the meat comes.

give thanks--which consecrates all the Christian's acts (Ro 14:6; 1Ti 4:3, 4).
The Pulpit Commentary
For if I. The "for" should be omitted. There is no copula in the best manuscripts. By grace. The word may also mean "with thankfulness" (comp. Rom_14:6. "He that eateth, to the Lord he eateth, for he giveth God thanks;" 1Ti_4:3, "Meats which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving;" compare our phrase," saying grace"). Another view of these clauses interprets them to mean "You should refrain because, by net doing so, you give occasion to others to judge you"—a rule which has been compared with Rom_14:16, "Let not your good be evil spoken of." Whichever view be taken, it is clear that theoretically St. Paul sided with the views of the "strong," but sympathetically with those of the "weak." He pleaded for some concession to the scrupulosity of ever morbid consciences, he disapproved of a defiant, ostentatious, insulting liberalism. On the other hand, he discouraged the miserable micrology of a purblind and bigoted superstition, which exaggerated the importance of things external and indifferent. He desiderated more considerateness and self denial on the one side; and on the other, a more robust and instructed faith, he would always tolerate the scruples of the weak, but would not suffer either weakness or strength to develop itself into a vexatious tyranny.

31Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
31. Contrast Zec 7:6; the picture of worldly men. The godly may "eat and drink," and it shall be well with him (Jr 22:15, 16).

to the glory of God--(Col 3:17; 1Pe 4:11)--which involves our having regard to the edification of our neighbor.
The Pulpit Commentary
All. There is much grandeur in the sweeping universality of the rule which implies that all life, and every act of life, may be consecrated by holy motives. To the glory of God. Not to the glorification either of your own breadth of mind or your over-scrupulosity of conscience, but "that God in all things may be glorified" (1Pe_4:11).

32Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
32. Give none offence--in things indifferent (1Co 8:13; Ro 14:13; 2Co 6:3); for in all essential things affecting Christian doctrine and practice, even in the smallest detail, we must not swerve from principle, whatever offense may be the result (1Co 1:23). Giving offense is unnecessary, if our own spirit cause it; necessary, if it be caused by the truth.
The Pulpit Commentary
Give none offence. Of course St. Paul means "give no offence in unimportant, indifferent matters" (comp. Rom_14:13). "Offence" means "occasion of stumbling." The word only occurs in Act_24:16; Php_1:16. Nor to the Gentiles; rather, nor to the Greeks.

33Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown
33. I please--I try to please (1Co 9:19, 22; Ro 15:2).

not seeking mine own--(1Co 10:24).

many--rather as Greek, "THE many."
The Pulpit Commentary
That they may be saved. All the sympathy, tolerance, forbearance, which I try to practise has this one supreme object.
← 1 Corinthians 9 1 Corinthians 11 →