1 Corinthians 10
OGC**Butler’s Comments
Chapter Ten THE PROBLEM OF PRESUMPTUOUSNESS
IDEAS TO INVESTIGATE:**
Why would Paul bring up the failure of the Israelites right here?
Why are idolatry and immorality usually coincidental?
When is the end of the ages?
Are all temptations common to all men?
In what way is the cup which we bless a participation in the blood of Christ?
Was it possible for the Corinthians to be partners with demons?
Are all things really lawful for a Christian?
APPLICATIONS:
God gave great privileges to the Israelites he did not give to othersthey defaulted. What about Christian’s privileges?
Since the Old Testament events are warnings to us, should we not study them more frequently?
What responsibilities are incurred by the privileges of freedom?
What idols are you tempted to worship?
Unbelief is immorality.
We must make constant, deliberate and overt expressions of thankfulness, because ingratitude is the most heinous of all sins.
Do not be lead astraythe church age is the last age there will be.
God makes a way to avoid every temptation to sin known to man. The question is, Do we believe God?
Taking the Lord’s Supper is more than participating in a ritual. It is a weekly oath or testimony by the Christian that he is like-minded and of the same purpose as Christ.
To be insensitive to another person’s moral reservations or scruples is a sin for the Christian.
To implicate another person with guilt by questioning or belittling another person’s scruples is wrong.
Every Christian who desires to glorify God must agree that his liberty is to be determined by the scruples of others!
The Christian must be willing to give up anything, or to do anything short of apostasy and immorality to win men to Christ.
APPREHENSIONS:
Why does Paul give a short review of Israelite history?
What kind of privileges did God give Israel in the wilderness?
What kind of responsibilities are demanded as a response to such privileges?
What is the risk of freedom?
How were the experiences of the Israelites types of all human experiences toward God?
Why is idolatry almost always associated with illicit sexual behavior?
What is putting the Lord to the test? Do Christians today do that? How?
Why are Christians warned against grumbling?
When did the end of the ages come? Why is it significant that we understand this? Why do so many people today insist the end of the ages is yet to come?
Are there any temptations unique to just you?
Are there any temptations for which there are no escapes? Why, then, do men fall into temptations?
Can a Christian eat food sacrificed to an idol without participating in the worship of demons?
Are all things lawful to a Christian? What does Paul mean by his statement?
How careful must the Christian be about criticizing and ridiculing another person’s scruples?
Should a Christian condescend to behaving according to a weaker brother’s more rigid scruples?
What is the purpose in allowing another person’s scruples determine one’s liberty?
Should we do anything, short of apostasy and immorality, to win others to Christ? Give up anything which is merely a matter of opinion?
**Applebury’s Comments
CHAPTER TEN**
Analysis
A.
Paul wanted the brethren to know that the remark he had just made about being rejected was illustrated by the experience of the fathers (1 Corinthians 10:1-13).
He reminds them of the things of that experience which illustrated the possibility of successfully running the race (1 Corinthians 10:1-4).
a)
Things that were related to the beginning of the race.
(1)
All were under the cloud.
(2)
All passed through the sea (thus escaping from Egypt.)
(3)
All were baptized unto Moses (submitting to his divinely appointed leadership) in the cloud and in the sea.
b)
Things that were related to the running of the race.
(1)
All ate the same spiritual food.
(2)
All drank the same spiritual drink.
(3)
That is, they kept drinking from a spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.
He reminds them also of their tragic failure in the wilderness journey (1 Corinthians 10:5).
a)
With most of them (all but two) God was not well pleased.
b)
They were overthrown in the wilderness (because they lost sight of their goal, the promised land).
He points out that these things were examples for the Christians (1 Corinthians 10:6-11).
a)
They were examples to keep the Christians from the longing desire for things that were evil (1 Corinthians 10:6-10).
(1)
Idolatry and its attendant sins (1 Corinthians 10:7).
(2)
Fornication that some committed which resulted in the fall of 23,000 of them.
(3)
Making trial of the Lord that caused them to perish by the plague of serpents.
(4)
Murmuring (grumbling against God’s program for them) that caused them to perish by the destroyer.
b)
These were examples written to admonish the Christians upon whom the ends of the ages are come (1 Corinthians 10:11).
In the light of this, he presents a solemn exhortation (1 Corinthians 10:12-13).
a)
He indicates that what happened to Israel can happen to the Christian for he says, Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.
b)
He shows, however, that one need not fall if he observes these principles:
(1)
Temptations are on the human level.
(2)
God is faithful and will not let you be tempted beyond your ability to withstand trial.
(3)
He will make the way of escape that you may be able to endure it (God does His part; you must do yours).
B.
Paul presents a strong plea for his beloved fellow-Christians to flee from idolatry (1 Corinthians 10:14-22).
He appeals to them as men who are capable of thinking to decide for themselves the merits of what he is saying (1 Corinthians 10:14-18).
a)
He points out the significance of the cup and the bread.
(1)
As to the cup which he calls a cup of blessing and which we bless, he asks, It is a sharing in the blood of Christ, is it not?
(2)
As to the bread which we break, he asks, It is a sharing in the body of Christ, is it not?
(a)
This means that we are many are one body as represented by the one loaf.
(b)
That this is true is indicated by the fact that we all partake of the loaf.
b)
He cites the example of Israel and asks, The one eating the sacrifices are sharers in the altar, are they not?
He shows what is implied by this reasoning (1 Corinthians 10:19-22).
a)
He asks, Is the thing sacrificed to the idol anything, or is the idol anything?
b)
He answers by showing what is wrong with this practice:
(1)
Pagans do sacrifice to demons and not to God.
(2)
He does not want his brethren to become sharers with demons.
c)
He proceeds to point out the impossibility of a Christian sharing in two completely opposite forms of worship.
(1)
You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and of demons.
(2)
You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.
(3)
By two questions, he shows the folly of attempting to do so.
(a)
Are we provoking the Lord to jealousy (by such conduct)?
(b)
We are not stronger than He, are we?
C.
Paul cites the law of expediency to indicate the rule of conduct for one who might be involved in eating meat sacrificed to idols (1 Corinthians 10:23-33).
The principle involved in the law of expediency (1 Corinthians 10:22-24).
a)
What is lawful should also build up the body of Christ: All things are lawful; but not all things build up.
b)
What is lawful should also benefit one’s neighbor: Let no man seek his own, but his neighbor’s good.
The principle applied to food sold in the markets (1 Corinthians 10:25-30).
a)
Where no investigation is necessary:
(1)
No need to investigate it’s source for the sake of conscience.
(2)
Why this is so: The earth is the Lord’s and the fulness thereof.
b)
Where there is no reason to refuse an invitation to dine with one who is not a believer:
(1)
If you are invited and you are so disposed, go.
(2)
No need to investigate the source of food set before you for the sake of conscience.
c)
Where it might be necessary to forgo eating in the event it is pointed out that the food had been used in idol worship.
(1)
The reason why this might apply:
(a)
For the sake of the one who reveals the source of the food.
(b)
For the sake of conscience.
(2)
Paul explains the matter of conscience in such a case:
(a)
It is not the conscience of the believer who understands about idolatry.
(b)
But it is for the sake of the other’s conscience who does not understand.
(3)
He explains how the principle of limitation of liberty applies to such cases:
(a)
Forgo eating, for why is my liberty judged (condemned) by another’s consciencethat is of one who does not understand about idols?
(b)
He gives thanks for the food, and asks, Why am I evil spoken of when I eat? This too can be avoided by forgoing the right to eat.
His concluding statement of principles governing the matter of eating meats sacrificed to idols (1 Corinthians 10:31-33).
a)
In eating and drinking, Do all things to the glory of God.
b)
Give no occasion of stumbling to Jews, Greeks, or to the church of God.
c)
Do not act selfishly, but for the good of the many just as Paul does.
d)
The goal to keep in mind: That they may be saved.
Questions
What is the connection between the thought of chapter ten and the closing thought of chapter nine?
Why did Paul use the word brethren in this chapter?
What was Paul’s purpose in using the word ignorant?
How can we express the thought and spirit of the apostle on this matter?
How could Paul effectively use the examples of the Old Testament in discussing the problems of Gentile Christians?
How could he speak of the ancient Israelites as our fathers when writing to the Gentiles?
What are some of the things God provided for the fathers as they left Egypt?
How does their failure to enter the promised land illustrate the necessity of exercising self-control?
What is the history of the cloud that appeared to Israel during their journey from Egypt to the promised land?
What was the situation of the Israelites as they came to the Red Sea?
How did God protect them?
What blessings are represented by the cloud?
What has been said in an attempt to discredit Moses-’ account of the crossing of the Red Sea?
What did Moses say about it?
What evidence is there to support his account?
What relation does the crossing of the Red Sea have to baptism?
What is meant by saying that they were baptized unto Moses?
What is the history of the manna?
What is the history of God’s providing water for Israel on their journey through the wilderness?
What was the attitude of the fathers toward the manna?
How did the people in Jesus-’ time regard it?
Why does Paul say that they ate spiritual food and drank spiritual drink?
What is meant by the statement that a spiritual rock followed them?
What is meant by the statement that the rock was Christ?
How does God provide spiritual food for His people?
How did the Holy Spirit provide the life-giving stream of truth for sinful men on the Day of Pentecost?
Why did Paul say that God was not well pleased with the fathers?
What is the history of the refusal of the fathers to enter the promised land?
In what way were the failures of the fathers examples for us?
What is the meaning of lust?
What is the history of the idolatry which the fathers practiced at Sinai?
What is meant by the statement rose up to play
How did the fathers make trial of the Lord ?
What use did Jesus make of the incident of the fiery serpents?
What bearing did this have on the situation in the church at Corinth?
What are some of the occasions of murmuring of the children of Israel?
How did the complaints of the fathers explain the problem which was present at Corinth?
Why were the failures of the fathers written in the Old Testament?
What position in history does the church occupy?
What may be the most dangerous position for a Christian to occupy?
What evidence have we that God expects His people to be victorious over temptation?
What provision did He make for their victory?
Why did Paul say, Flee from idolatry?
What is the difference between the references to wise men in 1 Corinthians 10:15 and 1 Corinthians 1:26?
What did Paul want the Corinthians as wise men to do?
Why is the cup called the cup of blessing?
What does communion mean?
What is the significance of the one bread?
How did the experience of Israel as they brought the sacrifices to God reveal to the Corinthians the evil of idolatry?
What was the reality back of the idol which the pagans worshiped?
Why did the enemies of Jesus attempt to show that He cast out demons by Beelzebub?
What are some of the impossible things for the Christian?
What did Paul mean by the question, Do we provoke the Lord?
What did he mean by the question, Are we stronger than he?
How does the law of expediency apply to the matter of meats sacrificed to idols?
What other rule did Paul give for this situation?
What did he mean by ask no questions?
Was it ever right for the Christian to be found in a pagan temple partaking of the idolatrous feast?
Under what circumstances did Paul say a Christian might eat meat that had been sacrificed to an idol without investigating its source?
What should he do in the event some one called attention to the fact that the food had been used as a sacrifice to idols?
Whose conscience is to be considered in exercising one’s liberty?
What is the place of thanksgiving in relation to eating food?
What is the meaning of Paul’s question, If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced?
How could such a criticism be avoided?
What should be the purpose of the Christian in all his activity?
For Discussion
What bearing does the faithfulness of the Christian in partaking of the Lord’s supper have on a victorious life?
What are some things that your group could do to increase its effectiveness in winning some to Christ?
1 Corinthians 10:1-5
**Butler’s Comments
SECTION 1
Illustration **(1 Corinthians 10:1-5)
10 I want you to know, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea. 2and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3and all ate the same supernatural food 4and all drank the same supernatural drink. For they drank from the supernatural Rock which followed them, and the Rock was Christ. 5Nevertheless with most of them God was not pleased; for they were overthrown in the wilderness.
1 Corinthians 10:1-4 Privileges: The Corinthians are given a short review in Israelite presumptuousness. The descendants of Jacob (Israel) were delivered from Egyptian bondage under the privilege of great, supernatural works. They were immersed (Gr. ebaptisanto) or surrounded by water in the cloud and the sea to protect them from the Egyptians. God gave them miraculous guidance in the unknown wilderness by a cloud and a pillar of fire. He sustained them by supernatural food and drink (cf. Exodus 13:1-22; Exodus 14:1-31; Exodus 15:1-27; Exodus 16:1-36; Exodus 17:1-16). God chose them for a messianic destiny. Since the Messiah was in their loins, God gave them the privileges of the Messiah’s supernatural sustenance. It was the Anointed One of the Father who actually gave them the miraculous water in the wilderness. Jesus later made it plain that it was not Moses who gave them the bread from heaven, but God himself (John 6:32-33), and man’s life is perpetuated not by physical bread but by the supernatural breadthe Word of God, even Jesus.
The ancient Israelites presumed these initial privileges meant God would surely continue to give them security without any need for an exercise of faith and holiness of life on their part. Hebrews 3:7-19 tells us why they became overconfident and presumptuouspride and the deceitfulness of sin. Later Jews were so smug as to believe that as long as they had the Temple in their midst, God would not punish them for blatant sin (Jeremiah 7:4-11).
The Greek word pneumatikon is usually translated spiritual, but is correctly translated here supernatural (see comments on 1 Corinthians 2:14-16). The emphasis of the context is the supernatural sustenance the Israelites were privileged to enjoy. The food and water they consumed was real and physical enough, but its origin was supernatural. The supernatural Spirit of God and Christ was with the Israelites through their journey to the promised land (see Isaiah 59:21; Isaiah 63:11-13). But God’s Spirit was with them there in an even more important way. He provided the Israelites with spiritual bread and drink through Moses-’ teachings about the Messiah (see Deuteronomy 8:3; Deuteronomy 18:15). That supernatural Rock (the Christ) followed them in deed and word wherever they went in the wilderness. They were being sustained physically and spiritually by every word that proceeded out of the mouth of God (through Moses).
1 Corinthians 10:5 Perfidy: This is the point Paul wishes to illustrate. Divine privileges obligated the recipients to respond in holiness and love. The Israelites were privileged, by God’s grace, to receive supernatural and spiritual fellowship with the Creator above and beyond all other people. But they were unwilling to exercise self-control, holiness and love for their Benefactor. They sat down to eat and drink and rose up to dance.
Those who are Christians (including apostles) have privileges and liberties beyond anything the Israelites ever enjoyed. Most of the Israelites (all of responsible age except Joshua and Caleb) God destroyed in the wilderness. They never went into the promised land! They failed because they used the freedom from bondage God gave them for occasion to indulge their own fleshly desires. They would not control themselves and sacrifice the flesh for the greater messianic goal set before them in the teaching of Moses.
The Christians at Corinth had been baptized into Christ, set free, protected and sustained. They had heard Paul and other Christian teachers emphasize their freedom in Christ. They had been taught, and now believed, that an idol was nothing. They had been taught that all of God’s creation was good and everything belonged to them (1 Corinthians 3:21-22). Paul evidently felt the Corinthians (especially the strong brethren) were dangerously close to becoming as presumptuous as the fleshly-minded Israelites were after their release from bondage.
There is a risk in freedom. When people are made free they are, by the nature of freedom itself, made vulnerable to options. Free people are autonomous (self-ruled) and may no longer be controlled by outside force. The only thing forced by freedom is responsibility. There is always the risk with freedom that people will use their freedom as a pretext for evil (1 Peter 2:16). While there is risk in freedom, the alternative, trying to produce righteousness and morality by force of law, is unacceptable. Righteousness cannot be wrought by force; it can only be produced in a matrix of freedom to choose motivated through the compulsion of faith and love.
Of course, God must reveal to man precisely what kind of thinking and acting constitutes righteousness, goodness and morality. God has, by the redemptive work of Christ, made right thinking and acting possible. But God cannot, and will not, make man’s choice for him. That is the risk God takes when he sets us free in Christ. The risk itself is not bad. Man could never grow into the potential for which he was created if the freedom to choose was not there. When man becomes proud and presumptuous, disaster is certain. That is when man rejects God’s revelation (which is all wise and all powerful) directing him to true righteousness and goodness.
Often God reveals to man what righteousness is by revealing and warning against unrighteousness. That is what the apostle Paul does in this dissertation. He warned that overconfidence (which is really a lack of faith in God) makes man vulnerable to the temptations of immorality, idolatry and insensitiveness.
1 Corinthians 10:1-13
Applebury’s Comments
Text
1 Corinthians 10:1-13. For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2 and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3 and did all eat the same spiritual food; 4 and did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ. 5 Howbeit with most of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness. 6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted. 7 Neither 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. 8 Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand. 9 Neither let us make trial of the Lord, as some of them made trial, and perished by the serpents. 10 Neither murmur ye, as some of them murmured) and perished by the destroyer. 11 Now these things happened unto them by way of example; and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages are come. 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. 13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as man can bear: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation make also the way of escape, that ye may be able to endure it.
Lesson From the Experience of the Fathers (1-13)
*Commentary
For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant.*The closing thought of chapter nine about being rejected is continued in this chapter as the word for indicates. It is well to watch for these connecting terms in order to keep in mind the progress of the apostle’s thinking. Too often we neglect these little words, especially when we come to the chapter division and as a result neglect to see the close connection between the Chapter s.
Paul is fond of the use of the term brethren because of his deep love and concern for all the members of the family of God. This word gives him an opportunity to show his concern particularly when he must rebuke them for failures or solemnly warn them of the perils that beset their way. The word translated ignorant just as our own word simply means without knowledge. But our word seems to be harsher than the term Paul used. This may be the result of the way we use it or what we imply by it. Paul certainly was not chiding them when he said, I would not have you ignorant. We are accustomed to a positive expression of this thought. We would prefer to sayand in doing so, more nearly express Paul’s thought and spiritI do not want you to be without knowledge, or better, I want you to know. He was concerned that they know the lessons taught by the experience of their fathers in the faith.
*our fathers.*How could Paul take an example from the Old Testament Scriptures and use it with reference to a Gentile congregation? How could he speak of the ancient Jews as their fathers? We are aware of the fact that the church at Corinth was made up of Gentiles, perhaps for the most part, but there were Jews in it also. The Jew with his background of Old Testament history could be expected to understand such an illustration. Gentiles also could appreciate these Old Testament backgrounds just as we do today. God’s kingdom is made up of believers in Christ whose spiritual heritage goes back to the faithful Abraham and to the nation that owes its origin to him. Paul argues in Romans that Abraham was the father of us all, not just the Jews who believed but the believing Gentiles also (Romans 4:11; Romans 4:16-17). This is the reason, then, for calling their attention to the fathers. The church recognizes no such distinctions Jews or Gentiles (Galatians 3:28).
Paul used the experience of Israel as they escaped from Egypt to show that the mere possession of rights, liberties, and blessings did not in itself guarantee victory. The Israelites had freedom, adequate leadership, and divinely provided sustenance but failed to enter the promised land. Their failure illustrates in a negative way what Paul had presented in a positive form in his illustration of the one who wins the race because he exercises self-control in all things.
*all under the cloud.*God guided Israel through the trackless wilderness and protected them from the burning heat by day and gave them light by night (Exodus 13:21-22).
Panic struck the fleeing Israelites as they came to the Red Sea. Pharaoh and the Egyptian armies closed in on them as they camped by the sea. There was no possible way to go around the sea. There was no way to retreat. They murmured in their fright and wished they had died in Egypt. But Moses said unto the people, Fear ye not, stand still and see the salvation of Jehovah (Exodus 14:13). They could see the Egyptians in close pursuit, but Moses said they were to see them no more. The angel of God who went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them: and it came between the camp of Egypt and the camp of Israel (Exodus 14:19-20). As the children of Israel went through the sea on dry land, the Lord looked forth from the pillar of fire and of cloud and caused the Egyptians to be thrown into confusion as they saw that their chariots were becoming hard to move. Then Moses, at the command of the Lord, stretched forth his staff over the sea and the Egyptian armies drowned in the same sea through which the Israelites had passed in safety to the other shore (Exodus 14:15-31).
The cloud, then, represents the blessing of guidance and protection. Paul wanted the Christians to remember this as he urged them to follow the rules of self-control so that they would not be disqualified in the race for the crown of life.
*all passed through the sea.*Various attempts have been made to discredit this statement. But the evidence of history as given in Exodus is sufficient to justify Paul in saying that they all passed through the sea. The assumption that they went through some shallow water to the north will not fit the description of the event as presented by Moses. To those who believe in God and His power, there is no problem in accepting what Moses said about it. God who made the universe and called the nation of Israel into existence was able to roll back the waters of the sea and let His people pass through on dry land.
*were all baptized.*We have no clearer example showing that in baptism the sinner is separated from his sins. Israel was separated from the enemy in the Red Sea where the Egyptian army drowned. The Corinthians were to remember that they had been baptized, sanctified, and justified through the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. They were to enjoy the blessing of separation from sin by following the rules of life’s race that led to the crown of life.
This incident also shows the action of baptism. There was a wall of water on either side of the people as they passed through the seas and the cloud was over them. They were baptized in the cloud and in the sea, not just the sea. It took both to complete the figure. The Egyptians were, of course, drowned in the sea, but this was not the figure of baptism, for baptism represents the way of escape from the bondage in sin.
*unto Moses.*The preposition translated unto indicates progress toward some goal. It is motion whether in space or thought realm, It can be translated into or for or even in according to some scholars. The latter is evidently true in the later development of the language. But direction toward a goal or entrance into something or purpose seems to fit most of the cases in which it is used in the New Testament. Their baptism did bring them into the state of submission to his leadership. It was for the purpose of separation from Egypt and coming into the relationship that recognized Moses and their leader that they were baptized.
Baptism for the Christian means separation from sin and acceptance of the leadership of Christ who has all authority in heaven and on earth. He is both Lord and Christ. He saves, but He also requires the Christian to acknowledge His authority. How else can the Christian hope to run successfully the race and win the crown of life?
*did all eat the same spiritual food.*Israel, cut off from all source of supply, was fed by the manna that God provided as they journeyed from Sinai to the promised land. The manna ceased on the day after the Israelites encamped at Gilgal where from that time on they were to eat the fruit of the land. See Joshua 5:10-12. Long before that time, however, Israel grew sick of the food that came from heaven. They said, Our soul loatheth this light bread (Numbers 21:5). But many generations later, the group that ate the loaves and fish that Jesus miraculously supplied for them suggested that Moses had done a superior thing in giving their fathers the manna. Jesus had to remind them that it was God, not Moses, who gave the manna in the wilderness (John 6:31-32).
The manna represents the blessing of sustenance enjoyed by Israel. Thus it reminds the church at Corinth that they were being sustained by the blessings that came from Christ.
*did all drink the same spiritual drink.*According to the record, water flowed from the rock only twice to quench the thirst of the children of Israel. The first time was at Rephedim where the thirsty people cried to Moses to give them water to drink. They murmured against the Lord and charged Him with bringing them into the wilderness to die of thirst. God said to Moses that He would stand before him upon the rock in Horeb. Moses was told to strike the rock. Water gushed out when he did it. See Exodus 17:1-7.
The second time was at Kadesh in the wilderness of Zin where Miriam died. The people were again without water and again the grumbling complaint arose when they said. Would that we had died when our brethren died before Jehovah (Numbers 20:3). They neither remembered the time when God gave them water from the rock nor were they aware of the privileges that they were enjoying of drinking from the spiritual rock that accompanied them. But once again, the Lord told Moses to take the rod and assemble the people and speak to the rock and bring forth to them water from the rock, Moses said, Hear now, ye rebels, shall we bring forth water out of this rock (Numbers 20:11)? He struck the rock twice and water came flowing from it to give the congregation and their cattle a drink. But Moses failed to give glory to God for the water. The Lord said to him, Because ye believed not in me, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this assembly into the land which I have given them (Numbers 20:12).
The expression all did eat considers the whole experience of Israel during the time that the manna was supplied. In the same way, the expression all did drink takes into consideration the whole time during which the Lord provided water for their wilderness journey. Twice on the journey, they drank from the water that came from the rock, and they also drank from the streams and pools to which the Lord led them.
*spiritual.*Why does Paul describe the food and drink of the Israelites as spiritual? Some suggest that it was because God gave the food from heaven and the water from the rock. But Paul says that they continued to drink of the spiritual rock that accompanied them. A possible solution the problem is suggested by his remarks about the spiritual things he shared with the Corinthians in contrast to the material things which he had a right to expect them to share with him. That spiritual thing was the word of the cross that brought spiritual life to them. He says that Israel continued to drink of a spiritual rock that accompanied them and that rock was Christ, This is not to say that the literal rock from which the water flowed was a type of Christ, but that there was a spiritual rock from which a life-giving stream flowed and that was Christ. A suggestion as to the spiritual food they enjoyed in the wilderness is given in Moses-’ words just before they went over into the promised land: Man doth not live by bread alone, but by everything that proceedeth out of the mouth of Jehovah doth man live (Deuteronomy 8:3). Did Christ provide through Moses some spiritual food and drink for the children of Israel? His teaching did point to Christ (Deuteronomy 18:15). Jesus said that Moses wrote about Him (John 5:46). The real significance of the manna is pointed out by Jesus in His discourse on the bread of life which He delivered just after the miracle of feeding the five thousand (John 6:31-35). It is possible that Paul is saying that Christ was present with His people all along the wilderness journey and that He was sustaining them spiritually by every word that proceeded out of His mouth for their direction, protection, and encouragement. For the New Testament teaching about water as a symbol of Christ, the source of eternal life, John 4:14; John 7:37-39. The Holy Spirit was given to the apostles who believed on Christ and from them He sent forth the message of eternal life that was like a flood of life-giving water. On the Day of Pentecost, men received this message of life and repented of their sins and were baptized for the remission of their sins (Acts 2:38).
*with most of them God was not well pleased.*This is the point in the illustration: Paul had certain rights and liberties as a Christian and as an apostle, but he was willing to forgo his rights in order to make sure of winning the crown of life and not be disqualified in the race. The fathers had blessings, but were not willing to exercise self-control in all things. Therefore they were overthrown in the wilderness. They failed because they forgot their goal, the promised land.
Paul says that with most of them God was not well pleased. In fact, this included all of them of responsible age except Joshua and Caleb. The spies who had been sent in to the land came back with glowing reports of a land flowing with milk and honey, but they also said that there were giants in the land. The people were filled with fear and wanted to return to Egypt. Joshua and Caleb urged them to go up and possess the land. They said, If Jehovah delight in us then will he bring us into this land and give it unto us (Numbers 14:8). Because they would not listen to the plea of these who had confidence in God, the Lord said to them, As I live, saith Jehovah, surely as ye have spoken in my ears, so will I do to you: your dead bodies shall fall in this wilderness; and all that were numbered of you, according to your whole number, from twenty years old and upward, that have murmured against me, surely ye shall not come into the land, concerning which I sware that I would make you dwell therein, save Caleb the son of Jephuneh, and Joshua the son of Nun (Numbers 14:28-30).
This tragic failure, the details of which are given in the specific cases that follow, is a solemn warning to the church at Corinth not to follow their example. They were, however, well on their way to do so as Paul plainly indicates.
*these things were our examples.*We are indebted to the fathers for so many things. The priesthood of the Old Testament time helps us to appreciate our relation to Christ as high priest. The writer of Hebrews helps us to see this as well as the lesson of the system of worship in connection with the tabernacle. But in practical living, the example of the Israelites from the time of their escape from Egypt until they finally were located in the promised land is one filled with both warnings and encouragements for the faithful follower of Christ.
*we should not lust after evil things.*The word translated lust simply means strong desire. That desire may be for what is good. In that case it may be rendered desire. For example, Jesus said that the prophets desired to see the things which His disciples were permitted to see (Matthew 13:17). The word is found again in its intensified form in Jesus’s statement about His desire to eat the passover before His suffering (Luke 22:15). But when John speaks of the strong desire for the things of evil, we translate this word as the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the vain glory of life (1 John 2:16). For an example of the use of the term in both the good and bad sense, see Galatians 5:17.
Paul’s evident purpose in his strong admonition in this chapter is to have the Corinthians have their hearts set on the things of Christ rather than on the things of evil.
*Neither be ye idolaters.*The experience of the fathers had a particular application to the problem of idolatry in Corinth. Just as Israel pretended to worship God while partaking of idolatrous feasts so some of the Corinthians were attempting to worship Christ and at the same time participate in pagan worship. The incident to which Paul refers is the sin of Israel at Sinai when they made the golden calf and proclaimed a feast and said that these are the gods that led us out of Egypt. See Exodus 32:7-8.
*rose up to play.*This word was used to describe the activity of children at play; but it was also used to describe the actions of the children of Israel in their worship of the idols. It is even used to describe David’s expression of joy when the ark was brought up to Jerusalem (2 Samuel 6:14). It is sometimes translated dance but with no reference to the modern dance which may often be described more accurately as works of the flesh. See Galatians 5:19-21.
*Neither let us commit fornication.*See comment on chapter five and six for the situation that existed in the church at Corinth. Paul was not dealing in mere hypothetical situations; he was facing the problem that actually existed at Corinth. The incident in the experience of the fathers to which he referred was their immoral conduct with the daughters of Moab. See Numbers 25:1-18. Balaam had attempted to pronounce a curse on Israel but had been unable to do so. They involved themselves, however, in a curse by their immoral conduct that brought death to twenty-three thousand of them.
*Neither let us make trial of the Lord.*This incident is described in Numbers 21:4-9. The people complained about the things the Lord was doing for them. They were tired of the manna; they wanted to go back to Egypt. The Lord sent fiery serpents among them to punish them. Finally they acknowledged their sin and begged for relief. Moses was instructed to make the bronze serpent and lift it up so that those who were bitten could look at it and live. For further history of this bronze serpent see 2 Kings 18:4. Recall also Jesus-’ words to Nicodemus based on this incident of lifting up the serpent (John 3:14-15).
This incident had a definite bearing on the situation at Corinth. In their eagerness to exalt men to the place of leadership in the church, they had forgotten that the church was the temple of God and that their bodies were temples of the Holy Spirit which were not to be used for immoral purposes. See chapter six.
*Neither murmur ye.*The word murmur suggests the gutteral sound one makes when he grumbles about things that cause displeasure. It describes the complaint of the fathers against the leadership of Moses and Aaron. Actually their complaint was against the Lord for He had appointed these men to serve the people. The grumblers perished when the earth opened up and destroyed them. See Numbers 16:3; Numbers 16:31-35.
But Paul had in mind the complainers at Corinth. Some of them had contended that he was not an apostle. The whole issue of apostolic preaching became the subject of criticism of envious men who wanted to have authority over the church. See chapter nine for his defense of his apostleship and his rights as an apostle and as a Christian.
*for our admonition.*Will the admonition go unheeded in the church today? The modern church faces virtually every problem that the church at Corinth faced. There is a serious question whether or not it will accept the admonition of the Lord through His apostle. If it fails, destruction is as inevitable now as it was then.
*upon whom the ends of the ages are come.*The context seems to indicate that this is a reference to the climax of the history of the fathers with its lessons for those in the Christian age. We can reap the benefit of the examples of their failures as well as their successes.
him that thinketh he standeth.Were there some in Corinth who believed that they could not sin? The most dangerous position one can possibly occupy is the place of the self-satisfied one who assumes that he cannot be overcome by Satan in this life. The whole history of the fathers points out the folly of this assumption. Peter also boasted that he of all the apostles would never forsake Jesus. He said that he was willing to go to prison and to death with Him. Apparently, he was sincere about it; but he failed to reckon with the situation in which was soon to find himself that led him to deny that he had ever known such a person as Jesus.
*no temptation but such as man can bear.*To those who would complain that the experiences of the fathers were different and couldn-’t possibly have a bearing on the trials through which they were going, the apostle had this reminder: the trials of the Christian were only human trials, that is, exactly as they were in the days of the fathers. God does not permit them to suffer trials that would be for angels or others above the human level. See the story of Job for the limit God placed on the activity of Satan as he tested the faith of God’s servant.
John points out that there are just three things that make up all that is in the world of evil: the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the reckless disregard for God in this life. All three of them were present in the temptation of man in Eden. We can easily identify them in the Wilderness temptation of Our Lord. Adam fell in the Garden, but Jesus endured all of Satan’s efforts to cause Him to sin, yet without sin. Moreover, He showed that it was not necessary for any man to be overcome by the factors of Satanic temptation, for He used the Word of God to defeat the tempter. That same Word is available to man for the same purpose. Let no one say that He defeated Satan as the Son of God. He was the Son of God, but He was also man. James says that God cannot be tempted (James 1:13). Jesus-’ temptations were all on the human level just as ours are. We have the whole armor of God with which to withstand the devil. The shield of faith is sufficient to quench all the fiery darts of the evil one. See Ephesians 6:16. It certainly behooves the Christian to know God’s Word and to trust Him, and to be on guard against the attacks of Satan at all times.
1 Corinthians 10:6-13
**Butler’s Comments
SECTION 2
Immorality** (1 Corinthians 10:6-13)
6 Now these things are warnings for us, not to desire evil as they did. 7Do not be idolaters as some of them were; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to dance. 8We must not indulge in immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day.9 We must not put the Lord to the test, as some of them did and were destroyed by serpents; 10nor grumble, as some of them did and were destroyed by the Destroyer. 11Now these things happened to them as a warning, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come. 12Therefore let any one who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall. 13No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.
1 Corinthians 10:6 Imperative Instruction: The actual, historical experiences and divine judgments upon Israel in the wilderness became (Gr. egenethesan, aorist verb) warnings for us, not to ardently desire (Gr. epithemetas) evil as they did. The word warning is tupos in Greek. It is the word from which we get the English word type. A type is the imprint left when a die or other instrument is struck. John’s gospel uses the word tupos when reporting Thomas-’ statement that he would not believe in the resurrection of Jesus unless he saw the print of the nail in Jesus-’ hand. Paul is saying that God recorded the history of Israel’s forfeiture of its privileges and its fall in the wilderness to strike an indelible tupos (imprint or image) of the consequences of presumptuousness and overconfidence. The lesson is historicalnot mythological, or allegorical, or theoretical.
Israel’s divine judgment in the wilderness is separated from us by more than three thousand years. Israel’s circumstances, technologically and culturally, differed from ours today like light and darkness. Our privileges, both spiritual and physical, surpass theirs. However, human nature and the human predicament are exactly the same. Man still cannot come to virtue and goodness without the grace of his Creator. Man still is tempted to be presumptuous, overconfident and independent of his Creator. So, man still refusing to learn from history, dooms himself to repeat it.
1 Corinthians 10:7 Idolatry: Idolatry is immoral. Moral means, that which is right and immoral means, that which is wrong. It is wrong and immoral to worship other gods. The first commandment of the Decalogue is, Thou shalt have no other gods before me (Exodus 20:3; Exodus 20:23; Deuteronomy 5:7). No object, thing, creature, human being, angel or spirit (except the Holy Spirit of God) is to be revered, worshiped, adored, exalted, prayed to, trusted in, or looked to for eternal life. To do so is idolatry. That which a man trusts and serves or puts first or gives the essence of his life to is his god. Jesus stated an unequivocal truth: No man can serve two masters. No man can obey contradictory orders from two masters. No man can continue that way; sooner or later a man’s motives and goals force him to choose which master he wishes to please. Then he will despise the other for interfering. The issue is: Man is so created that he takes on the nature of that which he worships (see Hosea 9:10; Psalms 115:3-8; Romans 1:18-32).
1 Corinthians 10:8 Illicit Intercourse: The Greek word porneuomen is translated immorality (RSV) and fornication (KJV) and is the word from which we get the English word pornography. It probably refers to illicit sexual intercourse. The Israelites apparently indulged in fornication and adultery as they worshiped the golden calf (see Exodus 32:1-35 and Deuteronomy 9:1-29); Paul may be referring to their fornication at the time of Balaam and Balak (see Numbers 24:1-25; Numbers 25:1-18).
We have already learned from this letter (ch. 5-7) that all forms of illicit sex were commonplace in Corinth, and that the Christians had a difficult time overcoming what was so socially acceptable by their heathen contemporaries. The seven churches of Asia Minor were also beset with this temptation to sexual perversion (cf. Revelation 2:14-15; Revelation 2:20-23). The Roman empire is characterized or symbolized in the early centuries (100-500 A.D.) as the great harlot (Rev. ch. 17-18). The Gnostic cult within the first and second century church taught that since all matter or all that is physical is evil, and all that is mental or spiritual is holy, so long as you did not think evil you should never be concerned about misusing your body. One could only sin with the mind, according to the Gnostics, not with the body. Gnostics said as long as you know or think what is right you are righteous no matter what you do with your body. Ancient Gnosticism has crept into the twentieth century Christian church under the guise called situation ethics. Situation ethics says whenever a person does the most loving thing in any situation he has acted morally. Classic illustrations of this principle have pictured sailors, having been deprived of sexual release for months at sea, being loved by prostitutes because they have done a good thing in satisfying the sailor’s sublimated sexual urges when he has come ashore on liberty. Some Christians have rationalized illicit sexual relations with persons other than their spouses by declaring they are helping their illicit partners find love and tenderness and relief from frustration for the first time in their lives.
Sexual intercourse with a person outside the bonds of matrimony, or with a person other than one’s singular spouse, is immoral in any circumstance. It is immoral because God has declared it to be so in his Word. No amount of human reasoning or feeling can change or temper that divine edict!
1 Corinthians 10:9 Incredulity: Unbelief is immoral. Paul warns, Do not put the Lord to the test. The Greek word translated test is ekpeiradzomen, which is literally, overtest, or, test beyond what is acceptable. God does want us to put the promises he has revealed to us in his Word to the test. At least as far as reason and propriety will allow. He does want us to test his Word to confirm its historicity and accuracy.
But to keep asking God to prove himself and his promises beyond the Word is to put him to the test! The Israelites did this when they asked for more proof than the Lord had already given of his presence among them (cf. Exodus 17:7; Deuteronomy 6:16; Numbers 21:4-6; Hebrews 3:7-19).
This same unbelief appears to have been a problem with the Corinthians. It is demonstrated by their clamoring for the continuance of miraculous gifts which were given exclusively to create belief and were to pass away (see I Cor. ch. 12-14). At the same time the Corinthians shunned the gifts designed to edify and which were to abide. When the evidence is sufficient, demanding more from the Lord is to put him to the test and is immoral. Jesus warned the Jewish rulers who kept asking him for more signs that they were committing the unpardonable sin.
The Israelites in the wilderness had every opportunity and privilege God could offer to create faith and commitment in their hearts. But they asked for more. The Corinthians had every opportunity and privilege Christ could offer to give them liberty and freedom. They seemed to be demanding more. Paul warns them they are putting the Lord to the test. The New Testament is Christ’s final and complete Bill of Rights for the church. Any Christian who presumes to demand more is putting the Lord to the test.
1 Corinthians 10:10 Ingratitude: Christians are not to grumble. The Greek word is egongusan (Eng. gong) and is an onomatopoeic word, i.e., a word which represents the significance by the sound of the word, like the English word murmur. In the papyri the word is used of the impudent complaining of a gang of workmen. The word is almost always used with the connotation of private or nearly inarticulate complaining. The Israelites were inveterate complainers (Numbers 14:1-3; Numbers 14:27; Numbers 16:41; Numbers 17:5; Numbers 17:10; Numbers 20:2-13; see also Matthew 20:11; Luke 5:30; John 6:41; John 6:43; John 6:61; John 7:32; Acts 6:1; Philippians 2:14; 1 Peter 4:9). It often appears that those most blessed and privileged are the most presumptuous and complaining. Ingratitude is the mother of all manner of wickedness (see Romans 1:21 ff.). Moses warned the Israelites against ungrateful presumption (Deuteronomy 8:11-20). Paul is here warning all Christians about presuming upon the Lord’s grace by complaining. Grumbling is immoral!
1 Corinthians 10:11-13 Indolence: Paul repeats his use of the Greek word tupos, type or imprint, in reference to God’s historical dealings with the presumptuous Israelites. The RSV translates tupos with the word warning because the Christian age was the ultimate purpose for God’s dealing with Israel as he did. The judgments and redemptions God worked upon Israel were recorded ultimately for the Bride of Christthe New Testament church. Paul says they were written (Gr. egraphe, Eng. graph, engraved, graphically) for our instruction (Gr. nouthesian, combined word from nous, mind, and tithemi, to put; literally, a putting in mind). Our instruction is to be more than teaching, it is indoctrinationwe are to have it put into our minds so that it becomes a part of our mentality or way of thinking.
The next phrase is, in Greek, eis hous ta tele ton aionon katenteken, or in English, upon whom the end of the ages has come. It is an extremely significant phrase because it is so decisive in stating apostolic eschatology in one declaration! It clearly declares the Christian age as the goal of all past ages. The Greek word katenteken is a perfect tense verb and may be translated, has come down in the past with a continuing result. The decisive word in the whole phrase, however, is the Greek word tele, translated, end. It is the word from which we get the English prefix, tele, or telo, meaning, end, perfect, final, complete. The Greek word teleios means having reached its end, finished, completed, perfected or final. The Christian age, begun on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17 ff.), is the final age. There will be no more ages or eras or dispensations. The only great event in the framework of time yet to come is the end of time, at which point Jesus will come again visibly to deliver the faithful living and dead to glory and to judge and deliver the unfaithful living and dead to Hell. The church age is the kingdom age. There is no kingdom dispensation yet to come. Paul’s use of the perfect tense verb katenteken and his use of the noun tele settles the issue of Christian eschatology once for all. All the previous dispensations or ages of history were pointing toward the Christian age as their goal. The coming of the Christian age means that the goal has been reached, that the last phase of redemption has begun. So Paul is urging the Corinthians that self-discipline is now imperative. God has no other plan of redemption than the one in the New Testament. God has no other revelation than that written down in the New Testament. God has no other time or age in which he will work with mankind than this age. Behold, now (in the Christian age) is the acceptable time; behold, now is the day (or age) of salvation (2 Corinthians 6:1-2). To wait for or hold out to others any hope of another time-frame (or dispensation) after this age in which God will offer salvation to any group of people is presumptuous. This phrase has behind it inspired, apostolic authority. It is in complete harmony with all the rest of the Bible in teaching that the Christian age (the church age) is the last age of time. There is no millennium (in the sense of a latter dispensation) yet to come. If there is any millennium at all in the framework of time, we are now in it.
Paul’s purpose in making his unequivocal statement about the Christian dispensation being the last of God’s dispensations in time is to prove his argument about the necessity for Christian resistance to temptation in this earthly phase of life. There is no other probationary or proving phase of life. We are becoming what we shall be. Therefore, let any one who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall. Let anyone who thinks privilege secures his standing before God, take heed lest he be indolent toward the responsibilities involved. To be indolent is to be lazy, to deliberately avoid responsibility or exertion; indolence is slothfulness. The Corinthians were prone to be slothful in exercising Christian charity and brotherhood toward weaker brethren. They were arrogant in their liberty supposing such privileges secured their spiritual superiority. They presumed they stood while the weaker had fallen.
Some Corinthians had clearly rationalized their arrogant disregard for weaker brethren by claiming they were participating in things they just could not quit. They probably argued that their old habit of eating at the feasts honoring idols was just too ingrained to be given up. They plead, our temptation is uniqueno one knows how strong this temptation is. Besides, they knew an idol was no god so they were free to participate. Let the weaker brother look out for himself. He should get rid of his scruples and grow up to our level of spirituality, they probably argued. Paul’s answer was that any temptation may be resisted; any test endured.
The Greek word eilephen, translated overtaken you, is third person, singular, perfect tense, indicative mood, active voice. It means Paul is indicating these Corinthians had already been taken in the temptation of presumptuous arrogance and it was continuing in their lives. The apostolic revelation is that every temptation is common to mankind. The Greek phrase ei me anthropinos is translated that is not common to man. Anthropinos literally means is human. Now the devil may use different tools or agents in different cultural milieu or in different historical times, but his temptations to rebel against God generally fall into three or four general categories (the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, 1 John 2:16). Jesus was tempted in the wilderness (Matthew 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13) essentially in these three categories; Eve and Adam were tempted in the Garden of Eden in these three categories (Genesis 3:1-7). The Corinthians could not excuse their weaknesses by claiming their temptations were unique. No man can!
On the positive side, every human being who wishes may have the help of God for every temptation he faces. God will not permit any man to be tempted beyond the availability of help. Notice that the Bible does not promise any man (especially Christians) that they will have no temptation. As a matter of fact, temptation is one of God’s ways of disciplining his children. God does not want his children to do evil, nor does he push them in that direction (James 1:13-15). But he does want them to develop spiritual maturity and strength and this can only be done as his children wrestle with and conquer temptation (see Hebrews 10:32-39; Hebrews 12:1-17; James 1:2-11; 2 Corinthians 1:3-11; 2 Corinthians 12:1-10). Jesus, fully human as he was fully divine, proved in the flesh that all temptation is common to mankind and that every temptation may be overcome if human beings will avail themselves, by total faith, of the help of God. Jesus never used his divinity nor his miraculous power to extricate himself from a temptation. He always relied on the word of God in total commitment to God’s faithfulness (see Matthew 4:1-11, et al.).
With every temptation God allows he makes available an attendant way of escape. The Greek text has the definite article ten before the noun ekbasin. In other words, Paul says, … with* the* temptation will also provide the way of escape. It is not a way of escape, but the way of escape. Every temptation has its own way of escape. The temptation and the way of escape come in pairs. God sees to it that one does not occur without the other. No man can plead not guilty by saying the way of escape was not made available because Paul says God sends with every temptation the escape that you may be able to endure. If a Christian sins it is not because he did not have the way to escape it; it is because he did not avail himself of the way of escape. Sin cannot overpower a person unless the person allows it. God expects all men to resist temptation (Proverbs 1:10; Proverbs 4:14; Romans 6:13; Ephesians 6:13; 2 Peter 3:17). God encourages all men to seek his help (Hebrews 2:18; 2 Peter 2:9; Hebrews 4:14-16, etc.). Great men of faith have resisted (Abraham, Genesis 14:23; Joseph, Genesis 39:1-9; Job, Job 2:9-10; the Rechabites, Jeremiah 35:5-6; Daniel, Daniel 1:8; Christ, Matthew 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13; Peter, Acts 8:20). Spiritual indolence is inexcusable!
1 Corinthians 10:14-22
**Butler’s Comments
SECTION 3
Indulgence **(1 Corinthians 10:14-22)
14 Therefore, my beloved, shun the worship of idols. 15I speak as to sensible men; judge for yourselves what I say. 16The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. 18Consider the people of Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices partners in the altar? 19What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons. 21You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. 22Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?
1 Corinthians 10:14-18 Gregariousness: Paul is not teaching a lesson on Christian communion or the Lord’s Supper here. He is using Christian communion as an analogy or an illustration of the principle of fellowship. It should be logically apparent to any thinking individual that the congeniality of dining and drinking with someone indicates the diners are like-minded, agreed in aims and purposes. This was certainly true in ancient cultures more than in modern American culture. People do not participate, continually, at meal-tables with their enemies; at least they are not that congenial with enemies by their own free choice. For example, when Christians eat and drink with Christ at his Supper they are testifying to all they are in fellowship with Christ. They demonstrate they have freely chosen to participate in what he is, in what he is for and against, and in what his aims and purposes are. As Paul will show, the Corinthians, by attending the pagan feasts dedicated to idols were testifying to all they were in fellowship with that for which the idol stood.
This passage in no way teaches the idea that the emblems of the Lord’s Supper become the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ. Neither does it teach that should we miss participation in the emblems due to circumstances beyond our control we lose contact with the blood of Christ. The death of Christ becomes efficacious to us through obedient faith, to be sure, but a person might have perfect attendance at the Lord’s Supper and still lose contact with the blood of Christ if he is trusting in the ritual to make him meritoriously fit for salvation. The Pharisees never missed a tithe, never missed a fast, never missed a regulated time of prayer, but they were trusting in their own self-righteousness for approval before God rather than in God’s mercy. The real issue here is not the observance of the Lord’s Supper, per se, but that of divided loyalty. A man cannot participate with Christ and participate (or indulge) with the devil at the same time. A man cannot serve two masters. A man cannot serve God and mammon.
Another illustration is presented. The priests of the old covenant gave testimony to the fellowship they had with God when they participated in the ritual of offerings upon the altar of God. They did not partake, literally, of the altarthe altar itself was emblematic of the spiritual fellowship they had by faith. This meaning must be applied to all physical acts of New Testament Christianity. There is nothing supernatural or miraculous in the water in which a believer is immersed. The participation the believer has with the efficacious death of Christ is by faith. Immersion in water, in obedience to the command of Christ, symbolizes that faith. Refusal to be immersed, since that is the express act commanded in the New Testament for demonstrating initial faith, would symbolize unbelief. Partaking of immersion in water and the Lord’s Supper testifies to, demonstrates and symbolizes the spiritual (unseen) reality of the believer’s oneness with Christ. But the things themselves have no efficacy because things are amoral. Persons are moral. The efficaciousness of Christ’s death is appropriated through the exercise of a person’s faith. Proof that the altar itself contained no efficacy in which priests participated is clearly established by the prophets of the Old Testament who denounce the unbelieving priesthood of their day as enemies of God all the while they are performing the rituals at the altar.
1 Corinthians 10:19-22 Guilt: The preceding principle is exactly what Paul says he is trying to communicate to the Corinthians. Is the food, per se, offered to idols anything? No! Are the wooden or stone or metal images, in themselves, anything? No! A person is not defiled by touching an image or a piece of food sacrificed to an image. The issue is that what those pagans deliberately, willingly, and with personal, moral choice sacrifice to images is really (by their own understanding and choice) sacrifice to demons. These pagans know that the stone image is not a god in itself, but they are worshiping the personal being (an evil being) which it represents.
These strong Christians at Corinth had lost sight (from their misunderstanding of Christian liberty) of the fact that deliberately joining in the festivities and meals around the altar to an idol indicated they were willing to participate in the worship of the evil being represented by the image. They may have been strong enough not to have thought of their actions this way, but everyone else (including Christians more sensitively scrupulous) saw in it Christians willing to join in the worship of demons. An idol or image may be only a piece of wood or stone, but it is a ready tool for the devil and his demons by which to deceive and seduce men into unbelief. We repeatthings are amoral. But evil persons may use things to corrupt and condemn men. Although Christians may understand that a thing is neither right nor wrong in itself, when they participate in the wrong use of an object, they become partners with the evil person who is using that object to destroy goodness. This is not guilt by association, but guilt by participation. Can we buy, sell, attend, defend things and places devoted to sin and destruction of mind and body without sharing in the devil’s work?
All a person has to do to become a partner of the devil and his work is to refuse to become a partner with Christ and his work! Some people think they may be neutral, not an enemy of Christ, yet not a friend of the devilso they think. Wrong! Jesus said (Matthew 12:30-31) He that is not with me is against me; he that gathereth not with me, scattereth. Paul says it, You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. To refuse to surrender to the Lordship of Jesus is not neutralityit is the enthronement of self, The person who rejects Jesus as king, makes himself king. To worship man is idolatry and, actually, demonolatry (see Romans 1:22-25). Rejection of Christ is immoral because it is a rejection of absolute truth. To refuse to participate in the work of Christ is to join in the work of the demons of hell. There is no middle ground!
Applebury’s Comments
Text
1 Corinthians 10:14-22. Wherefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a communion of the body of Christ? 17 seeing that we, who are many, are one bread, one body: for we all partake of the one bread. 18 Behold Israel after the flesh: have not they that eat the sacrifices communion with the altar? 19 What say I then? that a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have communion with demons. 21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of demons: ye cannot partake of the table of the Lord, and of the table of demons. 22 Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?
Flee From Idolatry (14-22)
Commentary
All that the apostle has said on the subject of idolatry in answer to the question of the Corinthians is now brought to focus on his concluding exhortation. In itself, he has indicated, there is nothing to an idol. Therefore, meats used in idol worship are not affected as items of food. But the Christian has an obligation to his brother in Christ who may not possess this knowledge. Love builds up; Paul pleads the cause of love as he urges his beloved fellow-members of the body of Christ to flee from idolatry.
*Flee from idolatry.*Idolatry is like a plague; it is a fearful evil; in it lurks a hidden danger. If the fathers were overcome by the sins that accompanied idolatry, how could the church hope to escape a like fate except by fleeing from this evil?
*I speak as to wise men.*That is, to men who were able to think. This is not the same word translated wise in 1 Corinthians 1:26 where Paul says that there were not many among them who were wise according to human standards. Greeks were worshippers of wisdom, but theirs was a wisdom of the immature as opposed to the mature wisdom which Paul preached in the message of the cross.
But these brethren were capable of using the minds God had given them. Paul appeals to them to do so in this matter of idolatry. He gives them concrete cases dealing with the subject that will help them as thinking men to make the right decision.
*The cup of blessing which we bless.*Since he has discussed idolatry and its feasts, it is appropriate that he call their attention to the church and its worship of Christ in the Lord’s Supper.
When the supper was instituted, Jesus took the cup and said, This is the new covenant in my blood, even that which is poured out for you (Luke 22:20). In so doing He set it aside for a holy, purpose, that is, blessed it by pointing out it’s meaning. Matthew says that He took bread, and blessed, and brake it; and He gave to the disciples, and said, Take eat; this is my body (Matthew 26:26). The act of blessing was in the consecration of the cup to serve as the reminder of the blessing which Christ brought to His followers through His death.
The cup was not only blessed, it also contained the symbol of-’ the blessing of remission of sins which Christ provided for us through His blood.
Christ also gave thanks for the bread and the cup (Luke 22:17; 2 Corinthians 11:24). So we also give thanks for the cup, and, in doing so, we should remember that it was set aside for the holy purpose of reminding us of the blessing of remission of sins through the blood of Christ. Thus, we both give thanks and bless (consecrate) the cup in the Lord’s supper.
*is it not a communion of the blood of Christ?*This is said to show the thinking men among them that they cannot be idolaters and at the same time partake of the Lord’s table. Communion means fellowship, or participation in a thing. Its root is a close synonym of the word partake which is found in verses 17 and 21. To say that the cup is a communion in the blood of Christ is to say that it is a means by which the Christian has a share in the blessing that comes from the pouring out of the blood of Christ, that is, remission of sins.
*is it not a communion of the body of Christ?*What is true about the share we have in the cup is equally true of the bread. The bread is a symbol of the body of Christ. In His discourse on the Bread of Life, Jesus explained His relation to His followers as the source life. As the fathers ate the mannathe only food available to them at the timeso the believers are to eat the living bread that came down out of heaven, that is, believe on Him to have life. He said, the bread which I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world (John 6:51). The bread of the Lord’s supper is a symbol of our participation or sharing in the blessing of eternal life. See John 6:40; John 6:51; John 6:53.
*one bread, one body.*Not only do we as Christians participate in the life that is given through Christ, but we also have a relation to each other which is suggested by the one body of which we are members. There is only one bread which represents the one body which is the church. There are many members, but only one body. This is an important lesson on the unity of the members of the church and particularly so for the Corinthians in view of their divisions. In this context, the lesson is clearly one that shows the impossibility of being members of the body of Christ and at the same time being members of the demon that was worshiped in idolatry. All of us share in the blessings that come from the one loaf, the symbol of the unity of the body of Christ.
One bread means one kind of bread, not just one piece of bread. The bread Jesus used in the institution of the Lord’s supper was the unleavened bread of the passover feast. It is altogether fitting that we should use only unleavened bread in the Lord’s supper. The very principle of excluding leaven from the feast of passover suggests the necessity of the church excluding sin from its life. See 1 Corinthians 5:6-7. To force this phrase to mean one piece of bread is to go beyond the requirements of the symbolism. There are congregations that are too large to be served by one piece of bread. But the one kind, unleavened bread, serves to remind them that they are one in Christ.
*Behold Israel after the flesh.*The church as the spiritual Israel of God is to take a lesson from the history of the fathers. They who had a share in the sacrifice offered on the altar were in fellowship (partnership) with God. The worshiper shares in the sacrifice and becomes a partner of the deity who is thus worshiped. That is true whether they worshiped God or some demon represented by an idol.
*to demons, not God.*The apostle has carefully laid the ground for the main thrust of his argument against Christians participating in idolatrous feasts. He did not say that the meat used in such feasts was thereby made unfit for food, nor did he say that an idol was anything in itself. But there is more to idolatry than appears in the external ceremony of worshiping it: Gentiles sacrifice to demons and not to God.
*communion with demons.*Christians should have fellowship or partnership with Christ, not demons. The enemies of Jesus attempted to discredit Him before the multitudes by saying that He was in league with Beelzebub, the prince of demons or Satan. See Matthew 12:24-30. Jesus easily refuted their charge by (1) showing that a kingdom divided against itself cannot stand, and (2) indicating that the pretended work of the Jewish exorcists was clearly counterfeit, and (3) presenting the illustration of the strong man’s house. But no doubt there were some who did believe the false charge in spite of His defense.
Paul had the same difficulty at Philippi (Acts 16:11-18). He had to reject the testimony of the soothsaying girl who followed him saying, These men are servants of the Most High God. This, of course, was true, but the apostle could not afford to have it said that he was an associate of demons.
This was the problem faced by the church at Corinth. If Satan could make some believe that the Christians were actually worshiping demons, then he would be able to discredit the church in the eyes of the pagans. Therefore, Paul said, I would not that ye should have communion with demons.
*Ye cannot.*There are some things that are impossible. To attempt to do two things that are absolutely opposite to each other such as drinking the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons simply results in demon worship. The worship of Christ is nullified. Jesus said, Ye cannot serve God and mammon (Matthew 6:24). God will not tolerate the worshiper who owns allegiance to demons.
*Or do we provoke the Lord?*The reference is to the history of Israel as suggested in Deuteronomy 32:21. Israel was continually going astray by worshiping idols. Like a husband who is made jealous because of an unfaithful wife, God is said to be jealous because Israel worshiped what was a no-god. This was an insult to God. Were the Corinthians trying to make Christ jealous by paying homage to demonsevil spirits under the control of Satan?
*are we stronger than he?*The quotation in Deuteronomy suggests that the Lord would provoke Israel that worshiped the no-god by giving consideration to those who were no peoplethat is, to those who had no standing in their eyes, the Gentiles. Did the Corinthians suppose that they could safely provoke the Lord by worshiping demons? Did they assume that they were strong enough to keep Him from rejecting them and turning to others who would be faithful to Him?
1 Corinthians 10:23-30
**Butler’s Comments
SECTION 4
Insensitiveness** (1 Corinthians 10:23-30)
23 All things are lawful, but not all things are helpful. All things are lawful, but not all things build up. 24Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor. 25Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 26For the earth is the Lord’S, and everything in it. 27If one of the unbelievers invites you to dinner and you are disposed to go eat whatever is set before you without raising any question on the ground of conscience. 28(But if some one says to you, This has been offered in sacrifice, then out of consideration for the man who informed you, and for conscience-’ sake29I mean his conscience, not yoursdo not eat it.) For why should my liberty be determined by another man’s scruples? 30If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks?
1 Corinthians 10:23-24 Carelessness: As mentioned earlier, with Christian liberty there is risk. There is always an ever present danger that the Christian will become selfishly concerned foremost about his liberty and unconcerned about the scruples of his brother. Thus Paul repeats the fundamental principle of Christian liberty, All things are lawful. qualifying it with, but not all things are helpful. The Greek word sumpherei is translated, helpful, but means literally, brought together. It is often translated by the English word expedient, and is more accurately understood by the word advantageous, or, profitable. Paul goes on to say, All things are lawful, but not all things build up. The Greek word oikodomei is a word from the construction trades, oikos, house, and, demo, to build. One might even translate the phrase, … not all things are constructive.
The liberty of the Christian is not for the sake of self-indulgence. Christ set men free to reach their highest potential. Their highest potential is in the service of othersto be helpful, to build people up to do constructive things for others, so they may be reborn in the image of Christ. He who would be greatest among you must be the slave of all (Mark 10:44).
Actually, Paul is not saying a Christian is free to do anything he wishes, participate in every human behavior, partake of any object on earth, or even think anything he wishes to think. Christian freedom is limited by the revealed (Biblical) word of God. When Paul says, All things are lawful the immediate context must be remembered. The context is the specific discussion of eating meat sacrificed to idols. Paul declared Christ had set all Christians free from the legal restrictions of the Mosaic law concerning foods. If the law of Moses had not been superceded, no Christian could eat meat which had been butchered by a pagan lest he be ceremonially unclean. But the Mosaic restrictions no longer applied. Such food was not contaminated. Paul is saying All foods formerly prohibited by the Mosaic law are lawful (see 1 Timothy 4:1-5). He was not saying, All actions are lawful. But while all foods were lawful, the Christian might sin partaking even of lawful food if he should wound the conscience of a weaker brother by doing so.
Life can never be at a standstill. If it is not growing or developing toward the higherif it is not being constructiveit is declining toward the lower. What is not used for growth will become atrophied and eventually destroy and be destroyed. Christian freedom that is careless and unconcerned about helpfulness and growth, inevitably contributes to destruction. Paul expressed this principle graphically in Romans 14:19 Let us then pursue what makes for peace and mutual up-building or in Romans 15:2, let each of us please his neighbor for his good, to edify him. And now to the Corinthians, the shocking words, so diametrically opposed to modern, worldly me-ism, Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbor. The Christian is not simply to help his neighbor if the opportunity to do so happens to present itself. The Christian is to seek good for his neighbor. The Greek verb zeteito is present, imperfect, active, meaning the Christian is to go on and on and on seeking good for his neighbor. That is the Christian’s job! It may be of significance that Paul does not limit his exhortation to the Christian here to seek the good of a brother. He literally wrote, No one the thing of himself let him go on and on seeking, but the thing of the other. The word other is the Greek word heterou which denotes generic distinction or difference in character. It is translated neighbor. Christians are to put to practice the limits of love on Christian liberty toward all men.
1 Corinthians 10:25-27 Complication: With the issue of Christian liberty and scrupulousness, comes the temptation upon the stronger to implicate the weaker in behavior contrary to the weaker one’s conscience. Paul states the principle by which the Christian conducts himself properly and then he illustrates it with an hypothetical situation. First, Eat whatever is sold in the meat market without raising any question on the ground of consciencefor the earth is the Lord’S, and everything in it. The Greek word makello translated meat market is found nowhere else in the New Testament. It is probably a word coined by the Greeks from the Latin word macellum which meant a bench or stall for marketing merchandise, especially, meats; it came to designate a slaughterhouse and since warfare usually turned a town into a slaughterhouse or a shambles that is how the word came to be translated shambles in archaic English. A drawing of archaeological discoveries in the ancient city of Pompeii shows both the slaughterhouse and the meat-shop next to the chapel of Caesar. This confirms the suggestions of our text that there was a very close connection between the meat-market and pagan idolatry. It would have been very difficult for any one, even a Christian, to buy meat in such a market without being immediately associated with worshiping at the temple of the idol.
So, writes Paul, the helpful or constructive (edifying) thing for a Christian to do, should any plate of meat be set before him, would be to refrain from questioning whether the meat came from the pagan meat-market or not. The Greek clause, meden anakrinontes (translated, discerned in 1 Corinthians 2:14-15), translated here do not question, means literally, do not carry on an investigation. It is a legal term. Paul is not, of course, forbiding all questioning of right and wrong. He is not discussing the conscience of the eater at allbut the conscience of the server. The instruction is that the guest is not to implicate the conscience of the host by asking questions about the meat set before them.
Out of pure worldly arrogance, a strong, more sophisticated person may be tempted to implicate a weaker (more scrupulous) person just to elevate his own image of wisdom or sophistication by exposing the scruples of the more conscientious person. Paul says this is not fitting Christian conduct. It is not right for a strong Christian to exploit the scruples of a weaker brother or a pagan intending to display his own knowledge or freedom by agitating for such a comparison. It is significant that Paul is setting forth proper ethical behavior of the Christian toward the unbeliever. There may be some Christians who think unbelievers do not deserve to be treated ethically. It is also interesting there is an assumption that the Christian would wait to be invited by the unbeliever to his home and would not push himself into the pagan’s fellowship uninvited. He says, kai thelete poreuesthai, and if you wish to go.. He does not command them to go, or even encourage them to gobut to go if they wished. And if they accept the invitation, Christian helpfulness, Christian purpose to edify, yes, Christian love, requires that no complicating implications be raised. To do so would be immoral!
Christians will not try to destroy weaker, even unbelieving, persons by irritating or ventilating consciences, without positive instruction in what is right and wrong so that edification will result. Conscience is a functioning characteristicnot a diagnosing or circumscribing characteristic. The conscience functions on the basis of what the mind diagnoses as right and wrong. The conscience does not tell a person what is right and wrong, its function is to judge the heart for having done either the right or the wrong. Information as to what is right and wrong comes from revelationfrom the word of God, the Bible. For the Christian to go into a home and begin to fuss and cross-examine an unbeliever as to how abominable it is to serve meat purchased in an idol-market, is to proceed to destroy the unbeliever. No Christian is to use his knowledge or his liberty to destroy another.
1 Corinthians 10:28-30 Callousness: The questions arise, What if a Christian conscientiously believes it is not wrong for him to eat meat from the pagan meat-markets and there is an unbeliever present who believes it is wrong for the Christian to do so? And, what if the unbeliever says to the Christian, -This has been offered in sacrifice-’? Is the Christian to reply, callously, If my eating offends you or bothers you, that is your problem, not mine. I know it is not wrong so I am going to eat it!? Paul says an emphatic, No! The Christian must sacrifice his liberty of conscience to the scruples of even an unbeliever. Out of consideration for the possible salvation of the unbeliever, and even for the sake of the unbeliever’s over-scrupulousness, the Christian is not to eat.
With all the freedom in Christ and with the liberated conscience of the believer comes the danger of callousness on the part of the person who knows an idol is not a god. It is often true that the non-Christian has a much stricter opinion of the proper behavior of a Christian than a fellow-Christian has. So the Christian must be willing to sacrifice his rights even when the unbeliever is excessively scrupulous. If a Christian is insensitive and disregards the scruples of an unbelieving friend, he almost inevitably damages his influence for Christ with that friend.
The final sentence of 1 Corinthians 10:29, For why should my liberty be determined by another man’s scruples? is not a cry of rebellion on the part of the stronger brother. 1 Corinthians 10:29 b and 1 Corinthians 10:30 are rhetorical questions from the apostle Paul, in anticipation of the answer in 1 Corinthians 10:31-33. The Greek expression, hinati gar he eleutheria mou krinetai. . is stronger than the most English translations present it. It might be translated, To what end or purpose is my liberty to be determined by another man’s scruples? J. B. Phillips has it correctly translated in The New Testament In Modern English, Now why should my freedom to eat be at the mercy of someone else’s conscience? Or why should any evil be said of me when I have eaten meat with thankfulness, and have thanked God for it? Because, whatever you do, eating or drinking or anything else, everything should be done to bring glory to God. Why should the strong Christian brother be willing to make such sacrifices as to surrender his freedom to someone else’s conscience? Or, conversely, if what the strong Christian eats is something for which he is able to thank God, and he is slandered for it, why is it proper that evil has been spoken of him? Because, any action that violates another man’s conscience does not bring glory to God; and that includes even an action for which a strong Christian may give thanks to God.
1 Corinthians 10:31-33 Conclusion: Paul is ready to move on to another problem that is plaguing the saints but before he does he wants to sum up what he has said about Christian liberty. The Greek verb poieite (English, do) is used twice in 1 Corinthians 10:31. In that Greek form it may be either present indicative or present imperative. It appears Paul uses it both ways in this verse. It might be paraphrased, So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you are continuing to do, I command you to do all to the glory of God. The application of the actions of a Christian is as wide as the total sphere of the Christian’s movement in society. The actions of a Christian will have influence on everyone who sees him, hears him, or makes contact with him in any other way (see Romans 14:7-9). And this is particularly true of the influence a Christian may have on unbelievers. In the Christian, the unbelieving world is seeing an attempt to live out in the flesh the personality or character of God and Christ. God is glorified when Christians live according to the principles of self-sacrifice and love enunciated by Paul in these Chapter s (8, 9, 10).
Strange as it may seem, there are Christians who, while being careful not to offend an unbeliever, are careless about offending a brother in Christ. That is somewhat like the behavior of certain persons toward their immediate family membersshowing deference and politeness to strangers while being rude and insensitive toward father, mother, brothers and sisters. So, Paul makes a point of saying, Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church (Gr. ekklesia, congregation) of God.
Paul never compromised on matters that were essential to one’s belief in Jesus. He never compromised on matters of moral behavior clearly delineated in the scriptures. He would not even compromise on a matter of indifference (circumcision) when the Jews insisted that it was a matter of covenant relationship to Christ. So, those areas are not in the scope of his statement, … just as I try to please all men in everything I do.. He did accommodate himself to the scruples of others in matters that were opinions and not essential to covenant terms with Christ. Paul did not curry the favor of men. His primary goal in life was to please God (Galatians 1:10; 1 Thessalonians 2:5-6). A better translation of the Greek word aresko would be seems proper. Paul is saying, … just as I try to behave as seems proper toward all men in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, that they may be saved. Paul would do anything, short of apostasy and immorality, to save a man. He would sacrifice any of his privileges or rights to win men to Christ. He imitated Christ. He commands (Gr. ginesthe, imperative mood, Be!) all Christians to be imitators of him as he is of Christ. 1 Corinthians 10:1 of chapter 11 should be considered the closing statement of the discussion of chapter 10. May God grant us the power and the motivation to do everything possible to win men to Christ!
1 Corinthians 10:23-33
Applebury’s Comments
Text
1 Corinthians 10:23-33. All things are lawful; but not all things are expedient. All things are lawful; but not all things edify. 24 Let no man seek his own, but each his neighbor’s good. 25 Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, eat, asking no question for conscience-’ sake; 26 for the earth is the Lord’S, and the fulness thereof. 27 If one of them that believe not biddeth you to a feast, and ye are disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience-’ sake. 28 But if any man say unto you, This hath been offered in sacrifice, eat not, for his sake that showed it, and for conscience-’ sake: 29 conscience, I say, not thine own, but the other’S; for why is my liberty judged by another conscience? 30 If I partake with thankfulness, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks? 31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. 32 Give no occasion of stumbling, either to Jews, or to Greeks, or to the church of God: 33 even as I also please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of the many, that they may be saved.
Limitations of Christian Liberty (23-33)
*Commentary
All things are lawful.*This principle was used in 1 Corinthians 6:12 with reference to the use of the body. It seems to mean that there is a lawful purpose for everything God created, but it certainly does not imply that anything evil is lawful. Perversion of God’s intended purpose results in evil. The principle is applied to meats that had been used in idolatrous worship. Such use did not harm them as food, but it might not be expedient to use them. Why? They might cause offense to the weak brother who did not understand this. In which case, it would be better to forgo the right (liberty) to eat. Selfishness leads one to insist on his right, but Christian consideration for others may often cause one to give up his right.
*Let no one seek his own.*This principle can apply to many other things than meats. The lowliness of mind that causes each to look to the things of others rather than of self would solve much of the difficulty that occurs between brethren in the church, and perhaps in all the world as well. See Philippians 2:1-5.
*asking no questions.*That is, do not conduct an investigation to discover the source of the food that may be set before you. Even if it had been used in pagan worship, it was still good for food. One need not let it bother his conscience for the earth is the Lord’s and all that fills it.
*if one of them that believe not.*It was wrong for a Christian to be found eating in a temple of an idol, for his example might cause some one who did not understand to be led into idolatry. But the apostle is now considering another situation. In the event of a Christian being invited to the home of one who is not a Christian it is all right to go if one is so disposed. He need not trouble his conscience over the food since he knows that even if it had been used in idol worship it was good for food.
*But if any man say unto you.*This was the thing to be concerned about. If one should say that the food had been used in the sacrifice to an idol, the Christian was to refrain from eating it.
*for conscience-’ sake.*That is, for the sake of the conscience of the one who revealed the source of the food. Do not allow your liberty to be condemned by the scruples of another. But how can this be prevented? By forgoing the right to eat the meat when the weak brother reveals that it has been used in an idol’s feast.
*If I partake with thankfulness.*The Old Testament gave certain regulations as to clean and unclean animals, but Paul, in his letter to Timothy, says, nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving: for it is sanctified through the word of God and prayer (1 Timothy 4:4-5). But the problem at Corinth was somewhat different. Would the fact that one thanked God for his food be sufficient to satisfy the conscience of the brother who believed that he was worshiping an idol if he ate food that had been sacrificed to the idol? Paul’s question is: If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced? Actually there was no reason why he should let this happen for he could forgo his right to eat the food and avoid the criticism. This is in accord with the principle of limitation of liberty which he has used as the solution of the problem throughout his discussion. No mere saying of thanks over food could change the mind of a weak brother who believed that eating the sacrifice would constitute worship of the demon. His sense of right and wrong is offended; for that reason one should refrain from eating even though he had given thanks for the food.
*do all to the glory of God.*This is another principle regulating the conduct of the Christian. This like the principle of limiting liberty requires one to forgo certain rights for the sake of others. Do not offend Jews, or Greeks, or the church of God:
*as I please all men.*See comment on 1 Corinthians 9:20-22. The apostle had set the example which he calls upon the Corinthians to follow. The goal he had in mind for himself and for them was the winning of some to Christ that they might be saved.
Summary
The closing remark of chapter nine, lest I myself be rejected, is explained in chapter ten. The abuse of rights can result in one being rejected. Take the case of Israel: they escaped from Egypt, but most of them did not reach the promised land for they perished in the wilderness. Among the many sins that caused them to fall was the sin of idolatry, the very thing about which Paul warned the Corinthians. Concern over being rejected is no idle thing. Israel fell, and the one who thinks he stands must take care lest he also fall. The experience of the fathers had many lessons for the brethren at Corinth. Their escape from Egypt through the cloud and through the sea was like baptism. The fathers were sustained by food and water that was miraculously given to them. Paul speaks of their spiritual food and drink, for they continued to drink from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ. But God was not pleased with most of them, for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Just so, Paul warns the Corinthians not to lust for the things of evil. He warned against the sin of idolatry, and cited the example of Israel’s worship of the golden calf at Sinai. Sin caused twenty-three thousand of them to fall in one day. Fiery serpents caused the complainers to perish. These things were written to admonish the Christians not to enter into such sinful practices. In view of this evidence, no one was to imagine that he could not But it is not necessary to be overcome in temptation, for God will not permit a trial to befall one which man cannot endure. God is faithful and will along with the temptation provide the way out that it may be endured. Summing up the whole argument about idolatry which began in chapter eight, Paul says, Flee from idolatry. Then he turns to the Lord’s supper to enforce his appeal. It is impossible to eat at the table of the Lord and at the table of demons also. Idolatry in reality is demon worship. The cup which we bless as we speak of its significance is a sharing of the blood of Christ. The bread which we break is a sharing of the body of Christ. Because there is one bread, we are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. Israel became partakers of the altar when they ate the sacrifice that was offered on it. This does not say that there is anything to idolatry, but it is mentioned to call attention to the fact that idolatry is actually demon worship. Paul did not want them to be partakers of the demons who were worshiped in idolatry. The Lord would not permit one who is an associate of de-demons to be a partner with Him by eating at His table. The closing word in answer to the question about meats sacrificed to idols brings up the law of expediency. There is a limit to the thing that is lawful, for not all things build up the body of Christ. Therefore, let no one seek his own welfare, but that of others.
As to the meats sold in the markets, eat them without inquiring into the source of supply for conscience-’ sake. The Lord created the earth and all that fills it. So, if some unbeliever invites you into his home, and you wish to go, eat the food set before you without asking about its source. But if one should say to you that it had been used in idol worship, don-’t eat it. You are to refrain for the sake of the conscience of him who called it to your attention. Why is liberty limited by the conscience of another? To keep him from stumbling, for Paul said, If meat causes my brother to stumble, I will eat no more meat (1 Corinthians 8:13). The Christian is to do all things for the glory of the Lord. Cause no one to stumble, neither Jew, nor Greek, nor the church of God. Be imitators of Paul as he imitated Christ and gave up his rights to win some to Christ that they might be saved.