1 Corinthians | Chapter 11 – Scripture Supply

1 Corinthians 11:2-6

“From Hats to Pants”

I. Intro

Throughout the last three chapters, Paul spoke much about liberties or personal freedoms and how to exercise those in a way that ensures continued spiritual growth for oneself and others. In chapter 11, Paul moves to the logical outcome within a church when those freedoms are not balanced by the guidelines he had just given. Freedoms not dominated by love of God and love of people will quickly become demands! In chapter 11, Paul addresses two of these demands that had reached a point of disruption within the body of Christ when they met together. Interestingly enough, these are always the fruit when freedom becomes a demand at the expense of love:

Disorder: The freedom and equality women had in Christ had become a cause of disorder within the church service as well as at home. Disorder is always the outcome when love is sacrificed for personal liberty. Personal liberty jammed in, demanded, and insisted upon will always displace the order of life, making the freedom insisted upon no longer beneficial.
Self-worship: The freedom to meet and enjoy each other, celebrating the work of Jesus on their behalf, called the “love feast,” became instead the “self-love feast,” displacing the worship of Jesus seen in their love for one another. Liberty elevated at the cost of love is nothing more than self-love, and the casualty will always be “true worship!”

To handle these abuses of freedoms, Paul could have issued apostolic demands but instead spoke of the principles by the truths that he had taught from the Word of God. Where had this freedom and equality for women come from? Remember, the role of women in this time frame in society was that they were not even second-class citizens. The Jews had a prayer thanking God that they were not born a woman. So when Paul expounded upon the scriptures concerning how the Lord saw women, it was liberating. He proclaimed to the Galatians in 3:28 that “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Did you notice that there is an escalating set of equality in those words?

First, in Christ, there is, as far as spiritual position before the throne of God, no difference between Jew and Gentile. No prior religious benefit!
Second, in Christ, before the throne of God, there is no difference between those who are free in society and those who were slaves. No prior economic benefit!
Lastly, the equality in Christ even reached through the division of the sexes and established no difference before the throne of God between male and female. No prior gender benefit!

Peter as well spoke of this same equality in 1 Peter 3:7, saying that women were fellow “heirs together of the grace of life,” therefore the husband needed to “dwell with them with understanding, giving honor to the wife.” Yet with this newfound freedom came an abuse of liberty as they carried it too far. Someone has well said, “A new movement always suffers more from its followers than from its enemies!” Some of the women flaunted their freedom in the church service by refusing to place themselves under the authority of their husbands, which was seen by not wearing a veil.

II. Vs. 2-6 Who’s in Charge?

Vs. 2 Paul started off dealing with the issues that were adversely affecting the church in Corinth by praising them for two things:

“That you remember me in all things”: They generally appreciated Paul’s ministry and looked to him as an authority in difficult spiritual questions. In fact, that had been their reason for writing. They recognized Paul as an authority on church practice, and this revealed that they generally desired to practice it.
“And keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you”: The word “traditions” literally means “that which was passed along by teaching.” What Paul praises is that which he passed on to them, and they put into practice.

Why does Paul start with such a verse? Well, he is simply praising the Lord for their teachable hearts as seen in their willingness to listen as well as their established application of truth! As a teacher of God’s Word, I cannot hope for anything more than a willingness to listen and a proven track record of applying that which Christ has given me for you. In fact, if you don’t have both of these qualities, you are simply not teachable, which is your prerogative, but it will also seal your fate!

Vs. 3 Paul jumps right in on the subject of order within the church service, but he does so by defining what headship is. This verse contains a threefold illustration of order as it is divinely established. Two of the three examples are generally accepted and greatly appreciated. It is only in the area of “the head of woman is man” that there is a problem. This verse is the key to understanding biblical submission and how it is to work in the church as well as at home:

Head: First, notice the word “head,” which is repeated three times in this verse and 11 times in 14 verses. It is important in understanding headship or submission that we understand what Paul meant when he used this word. The head refers to the ruling part of the body; it is our head that runs our body—it has priority when it comes to the function of the rest of the body. So when Paul uses this word, he is using it in the sense of being the control center. Now pay attention: all this word does is speak of function—it in no way describes how this control operates, which brings us to the next thing.
Love: Separate for a moment the controversial “the head of woman is man” and ask yourself “how” does submission operate based on “the head of every man is Christ…and the head of Christ is God.” Authority and order are carried out based on love, not compulsion. Jesus’ authority over you and I is based on His love for us and our response of love back. Jesus was not compelled to humble Himself, become a man, and die on the cross for our sins. No, we are told in Hebrews that Jesus responded by saying; “Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me. In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure. Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come; in the volume of the book it is written of Me; to do Your will, O God” (Heb. 10:5-7). Biblical submission is always based on our love of the one we are submitting to.
Equality: Finally, in the example of “the head of Christ is God,” we learn that submission to God’s order is not based on the inferiority of one compared to the superiority of another. How do we know this? We are told in Philippians 2:5-8, “Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.” Equal in nature, yet He lovingly placed himself in subjection to the Father.

So what have we understood so far:

There is a priority when it comes to function that God has ordained.
This priority of function is based on loving submission, not compulsion.
This priority of function is not necessarily based on inferiority. Of course, when it comes to Christ being the head of man, we are clearly inferior.

Now we can move into how this ought to operate within a marriage or the church.

“The head of every man is Christ”: Men, I believe this verse is for us to understand and apply towards our wives. To be the head of our house, to be the control center, the person of authority, all we need to do is operate in the same manner that Jesus has towards us! So just how has Jesus demonstrated His authority over us? Well, let’s see: He started out by laying down His life for us while we were still sinners. Then His continual operation towards us is always for our benefit. In John 13:1, we are told concerning Jesus that “having loved His own who were in the world, He loved them to the end.” In other words, He has never ceased to exercise His headship over us and will continue to do so through our eternity. So fellows, all we are called to do is just treat our wives as Jesus treats us, no problem, right? I might add that I don’t think our wives would mind this kind of authority over them at all!
“The head of Christ is God”: I’ve deliberately taken this out of order as I believe that Jesus again is the example to show women the proper function of submission. Okay, ladies, you need to ask, “In what way did Jesus model submission to the Father’s authority?” As we have already seen in Philippians 2, Jesus was equal in His nature to the Father. Both are all-powerful, both are all-knowing, both are everywhere present at once. Col. 1:15-19 tells us that “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn (chief) over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell”. Yet in His humanity He said “I always do those things which please My Father” and “My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to finish His work.” What this shows is that Jesus voluntarily consented to a lower position in order to work together. So from this example we see that submitting to authority means a “voluntary commitment to carry out the will of another out of a conviction that God knows what is best to achieve His purpose and has established this order to do so!”
“The head of woman is man”: Those two illustrations, I believe, frame the meaning of man being the head of woman. Being the head means: “Surrender of self for the continual betterment of another.” And being under the head of another means: “Surrender of self in support of living together as one in Christ.” This submission is not based on “personal worth, abilities, intellect, or spirituality.” Submission is for the purpose, as Genesis says, of a helper comparable to him, or one that would complement him.

Paul places these illustrations in such a way as to suggest that the rejection of one is the rejection of all. In other words, you cannot reject the divine order of men being the head over women without rejecting Jesus being the head over the Church and the Father being the head of Christ. Yes, men ought to exercise their authority like Christ in love for the betterment of the person they are over, but that does not end the woman’s role any more than the woman not submitting to the husband’s role ends his responsibility.

Vs. 4-6 Paul now brings the definition of order and submission back within the walls of the church. The first thing I want you to notice is the phrases “praying or prophesying” and “prays or prophesies.” What is clear here is that both men and women had these gifts and both had the right to do so within the church—the only issue was how these two things were to be done within the church, and that is what Paul will explain in these verses. But just what is praying and prophesying?

Praying: This is talking to God and is vertical—person to God.
Prophesying: This is talking to people about God and is horizontal.

So both men and women were free to exercise those ministries within the church, but Paul is going to explain that they needed to do so differently. Is this just a cultural thing? Well, Paul’s examples are not cultural, as in verse 8 he gives the reason for the differing ways these gifts are to be exercised as stemming from God, who placed an order in the way in which He created us.

Here is where what Paul has to say becomes a little tricky. There was an established principle of headship and submission to authority that was clearly seen in society at that time, and it was a head covering. Not a veil, as some versions translate this word, but a shawl that women wore over their heads. It was the custom of the culture at that time. In fact, we know that only three different types of women went without shawls, interestingly enough most of them had very short hair or shaved heads: prostitutes, lesbians, and women caught in the act of adultery. Those who were prostitutes and lesbians did so in defiance of authority; those caught in the act of adultery were punished by uncovering their heads.

Vs. 4 The first thing that Paul establishes is that a man ought not speak to God for man or to man for God with his head covered as this dishonors God. Is this saying that men ought not to wear hats? Well, the word used for “head covered” is the same used for what women wore, and that was a shawl. So what Paul is objecting to is not covering the head as much as the changing of gender roles of authority!

It is interesting today if you go to Israel, they wear a yarmulke, which covers the head. But apparently, in Paul’s time, they did not do so; in fact, it was a shame to do so. The practice came into being around the 4th century, and it was over a misinterpretation of Exodus 34:33-35 concerning the appearance of Moses’ face after having been exposed to God’s glory. They understood wrongly that Moses veiled his face in the presence of the Lord, but the truth is that Moses veiled his face in the presence of people and unveiled his head while in the presence of the Lord.

Vs. 5-6 Clearly the idea here was that of some of the Corinthian believing women pushing their freedom of equality to a point of rejecting God’s design of biblical order for His creation. They manifested this liberty by taking off their shawls, which dishonored their head. The word “head” here is used both of herself and of her husband. She was usurping God’s order, and seeing that she spoke to God for men and to men for God, it was out of place. Again, all women except those three I mentioned wore shawls, so she was saying that she was aligned with one of them. You get the picture? It was not that she was speaking to God for men or speaking to men for God, it was that she did so in a manner outside of God’s authority. The women who were doing this were rebelling, and this rebellion was against God, not just the church or their husbands. Does that mean that all you gals need to buy shawls? No, we will cover that next week. What Paul is saying is that women need to remember their God-given role in the church and not seek to go around it in the name of freedom. It is the order of how God created and the proper distinction between gender roles that he is addressing, and by taking off her shawl, she was demonstrating rejection of God’s ordained order. It is not gifting or ability that was the problem, just the way in which ministry was taking place.

1 Corinthians 11:7-16

“Attractive Glory”

I. Intro

I pray several issues on headship (authority) and submission to that authority were laid to rest last week. Here is what Paul pointed out concerning God’s order in the church and home:

There is a priority when it comes to function that God has ordained.
This priority of function is based on loving submission, not compulsion.
This priority of function when relating to men and women is not based on inferiority.

Paul then, in one verse (Vs. 3), defined both what headship and submission are using the same person as the example (Jesus):

Headship or authority: Is an authority that is completely devoted to self-sacrificing love for the betterment of another. Any single man that does not have that as the standard ought to remain single. This is not the ideal; it is rather the standard by which all male authority is to be judged—it is just how the Lord continues to treat us, and it is not conditional upon a woman’s submission. It is for this reason that Paul spoke to the Ephesians, saying, “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself.”
Submission: Is also demonstrated by Jesus, where He has a oneness of character, service, purpose, and life with the Father, yet He voluntarily offered Himself in submission to the Father. Therefore, submission is not for lack of oneness—it is rather out of oneness. It is as well not conditional upon a husband’s biblical application of authority.

Can you imagine the complete cooperation in the home where the husband’s greatest interest, apart from his own walk with Jesus, was to see his wife more in love with the Lord? And a wife where her greatest desire was to live in complete oneness with her husband? This week we conclude the subject of biblical authority and the church as seen in men’s and women’s roles.

II. Vs. 7-10 God Established Order

Vs. 7 The main issue here is to be found in the word “glory” as Paul is speaking about covering the head and not covering the head as it relates to reflecting His glory. But just what is glory? Well, it is best understood by going back to man’s creation in Genesis 1, where He made man and declared that what he created was “very good,” whereas everything else that He created was only good. God delighted in His creation of man in His likeness, and according to Paul here, man was created to reflect that delight. But the question remains: just how does man differ from woman in that regard? The only difference is in authority, as it was man in whom the authority was vested and in Adam as he gave dominion over all of creation. Both men and women are called upon to reflect the glory of God, but they do so uniquely:

Men reflect God’s authority seen in selfless devotion for the betterment of another. Man reflects God’s delight as it relates to His ruling order, which, as we have seen, is always manifested in His “complete devotion to self-sacrificing love for the betterment of others.”
Women reflect God’s desire for intimate fellowship, where man can only find companionship through one that is completely devoted to oneness. So woman reflects God’s delight in a completely different way, which comes from her creation from man. She was taken from the side of Adam—not from the head so she would dominate him, not from the feet so that he could trample upon her. No, from the side, close to his heart so that she could be his companion, his comfort, his love!

Do you see how each represents an aspect of God’s nature that shows His delight? When we look at how God intended authority, we see how His power is only and always for the betterment of another. When we see submission, we see Him completely devoted to companionship. To me, these are perfectly united in the Person of Jesus, as He is both Lord and Savior.

Vs. 8-9 To further illustrate the principle of God delighting in the way in which He created as it specifically relates to women’s reflecting His glory, Paul reveals two things about woman’s creation:

Vs. 8 Origin: “Man is not from woman, but woman from man.” Priority, as we shall see, does not imply inferiority—just order. Paul will further bring this point in verses 11-12, where we see that partnership is part of order as well as headship and submission. It is important to realize here that though her origin may be different, she nonetheless shares the same nature, which is created in the image of God. Responsibility for woman was given to Adam; it was further implied in Genesis when in 2:24 we are told that “a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Again, the headship is seen in the man setting the tone in the relationship as the separation from the primary relationship being parental to that of oneness with his wife.
Vs. 9 Purpose: “Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man.” She was necessary for him as a helper—he was her protector; she was his caretaker. God has so designed woman as to be the only companion suitable for him. You will recall that God in His wisdom brought all the animals that He had created to Adam to name according to their attributes, and out of all of them, Adam found none that was suitable to be his counterpart.

Vs. 10 Now Paul brings this back to the order in the church and says that it is on account of God’s original purpose and glory that a woman needs to reflect God’s delight in the way she conducts herself. The words “symbol of authority” is all one word in the Greek and has to do with God’s covering authority or order and her being submissive to that order.

Paul also reminds his readers of the angelic order in worship as well. The angels, we are told, in an act of submission, cover their faces as they worship before the throne. The reason is that they only want to reflect His glory and not be an object of it on their own. The angels covering their faces is placed next to women having a covering of authority as a sign of glory only being towards the Lord. Any time we seek to change God’s design, we become engaged in self-worship and not His worship. That is what Paul is pointing out concerning women’s freedoms and the lack of understanding of God’s design. Again, this had to do with public ministry, going before God for men and going before men for God—she needed to make sure that she did so in understanding of her role as being under authority.

III. Vs. 11-16 Equal Yet Different

Vs. 11 The key to understanding this verse is to be found in the words, “in the Lord.” Paul is speaking of spiritual equality, and he does not want to throw out equality in placing order back in the church. Both are to be subordinate to the Lord, as he tells us in Ephesians 5:21 that both men and women ought to be “submitting to one another in the fear of God.” Man’s authority is not his—it has been delegated to him by the Lord, and as such, he has no right to exercise it in any other manner than the manner in which the Lord designed it. Male chauvinism is no more biblical or ordained by God than is a woman who refuses to submit to her husband. Both misrepresent God’s design and the glory that He created.

Vs. 12 As woman originally was formed out of man, even so, man now is born of the woman. Paul offers this not to speak of equality of the sexes but rather of their mutual dependence in the kingdom of God. These relationships, which are based on spiritual equality and importance but different in function, are nonetheless from God. They are designed to complement each other, but they are dependent upon both submitting to the Lord’s order, as we are told “all things are from God.” We may be different, but we are not independent; instead, we are dependent upon each other, both submitting to the Lord’s design. The truth be told, biblical order in the sexes does not weaken the partnership—it strengthens it. Just as two partners in a dance need one to lead in love and the other to follow in love for the dance to be ordered, so too the relationship between men and women. So Paul relates to his readers equality of persons and distinctive roles.

Vs. 13-15 Now on to the hair issue. Paul, looking at the culture where the only women who went around with their heads outside of a shawl in public were either prostitutes, lesbians, or being punished for adultery, appeals to that culture by asking what is proper. “Is this the kind of message you want your freedom to say?” asks Paul?

Next, he tackles the hair issue in men and women, and he does so based on nature. There is a natural factor involved in the length of hair between men and women. Hair develops in three stages: formation, growth, and fall out. The male hormone speeds up the cycle, while the female hormone slows down or stops the cycle. That is why women very rarely go bald, and all men will experience hair loss based on the depletion of testosterone levels. Paul’s argument is that God has naturally given men and women a symbol in their hair growth of His order. Now, of course, the length of hair has been a cultural distinction throughout history and culture, but universally men’s hair has remained shorter than women’s hair. Length of hair then has been a symbol of roles in society through our time, and that is Paul’s point. To some degree, the length of hair defines their roles in society, and Paul points to this as a sign of natural order. Women have a natural sense of desiring their hair to look good—it is an extension of their appearance, whereas men are less concerned with their hair.

Here is how I see this: “Dress and hair length ought to represent God-given roles and not be rebellious towards them.” Yet with that said, they fluctuate in cultures throughout history—in the 60’s men had very long hair, and there was a flap about it from many a conservative church. Some would not let men in their services if they had long hair. Paul does not say that long hair on men is a sin, only that it is “shame,” and those who have less hair on their heads probably agree as they are trying to comb their hair—that it is a shame they don’t have much any more.

Vs. 16 Finally, Paul says that if someone disagrees with the God-given roles for men and women, then don’t bother arguing with them. If they are ignoring the Word of God, society in general, and the culture that would see them as prostitutes, lesbians, or adulterers, then they have clearly demonstrated that they have a far bigger problem than praying to God or speaking the Word of God outside of their authority—they have a heart issue before the Lord.

Let me take this moment to say to all of us that we need to place ourselves in obedience to the Word of God as it relates to biblical headship and submission. Honestly, any struggle in this area is always a problem of submission, and in both men’s and women’s cases, it is a problem of submitting to the Lord!

1 Corinthians 11:17-34

“Coming Together Over Jesus”

I. Intro

Paul now takes up yet another concern that disrupted the Church, and that is the way the Corinthian believers practiced communion. You will recall that the context of this passage was dealing with freedoms that were not checked by love. Over the last two weeks, we took up the issue of “headship & submission” and discovered that “disorder is always the outcome when love is sacrificed for our personal liberty.” Now we concern ourselves with the second of these, which deals with “liberty being vaulted at the cost of love, becoming nothing more than self-love, and the casualty being ‘true worship!’”

As we look at the Lord’s Supper, it is important for us not to miss the reason for Paul writing about it in the first place. He is writing to correct hearts that, although participating in communion, did so with the wrong heart. Jesus only instituted two ordinances, “baptism & communion,” and His Church has been disagreeing about the way they should be practiced ever since. What we will find in this section is that the Lord is far more concerned with the heart that partakes than how often and what the elements are!

II. Vs. 17-22 Loveless Feasts

Vs. 17 Notice how different Paul’s words are when addressing the errors they had concerning communion compared to his correcting their lack of understanding concerning headship & submission. In verse 2, Paul wrote, “Now I praise you, brethren,” and here we read Paul saying, “I do not praise you.” Why the difference? Well, we are told in verse 23 that they had already received the truths concerning communion and were still “coming together for the worse.” The term “worse” comes from a root word that means “moral evil.” These believers were coming together in the Lord’s name to celebrate and were indulging in an evil. Disorder is the outcome when love is sacrificed for liberty, but if this heart problem continues unchecked, “self-worship” is what will transpire, and that is what Paul has to deal with. The words “In giving these instructions” lose a bit when compared to the Greek as it literally means a “command passed along to another.” The phrase is a military one, as when an officer passes along a command to his subordinates. Simply put, Paul wanted them to understand that what he was going to say concerning communion was not mere advice—it was a command they needed to follow to the letter.

The early church practiced a feast that was followed by communion, called the agape feast or “love feast.” The first picture of it is found in the gospels as the disciples met in the upper room with Jesus to celebrate the Passover feast, and it was this time that the Lord chose to institute the Lord’s Supper. In Luke 24, where two of the disciples were traveling on the road to Emmaus when the Lord met up with them, they were kept from recognizing him. It was not until they sat down to have a meal with Him and He took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them that their eyes were opened and they knew Him. In Acts 2:42, 46 we are told that this became a regular part of the Church’s time together as they “continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers.” This apparently was done “daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart.” Paul states two problems that had come into the “love feast” that were anything but loving:

Vs. 18-19 Cliques: Paul says that when they came together for this common meal, there were “divisions” among them. The word here is where we get our word schisms from, and to make matters worse, Paul said that these schisms had come during the assembly of believers. In chapter one, Paul had spoken of these schisms in terms of identification with certain teachers; now we are told that the schisms were also along social prejudices. Some of the Corinthian believers were practicing “class distinction” against their fellow brothers and sisters who they felt did not measure up. Paul makes sure that he says that this is what he has heard and, in part, believes, as he had not witnessed it personally. We have come to expect these things from the world, but when carnality and worldliness creep into the Church, it reveals a spiritual sickness. These schisms had developed into “factions” or parties in which people had taken sides. The natural tendency when the flesh manifests itself is division, and division left unrepented of leads to separation. Yet as horrible as that is within the Church, Paul says it exposed those who were unfaithful as well as those who are faithful. Oftentimes, these things lead to personal as well as corporate spiritual growth for all parties. MacArthur has an interesting statement on this as he says, “Those that are approved are made manifest during adversity & hardship & it is only those so tried & tested that should be entrusted to lead the Church.” Though the Lord does use these factions, it is also important to remember Paul’s words to a young pastor named Titus when he admonished him, “Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition, knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self-condemned.” In other words, if these factions are left undealt with, they will move from mere disruptions to the total destruction of the Lord’s Church.
Vs. 20-22 Self-centeredness: The word supper is a word used for the evening meal, but with it being called the Lord’s, it took on a greater meaning and importance as it was to symbolize unity and love for one another that was derived from His love for us. The practice became one in which those who had far less brought what they could, and all were to participate equally. For some, this was the only real meal of the week, and as such, was an act of charity on the behalf of those who had plenty. But the Corinthian believers had turned it into a class war, as the wealthy would not share what they had brought with those who had little. Instead, they chose to eat with only those who were of the same social class as they were; some were even getting drunk. The purpose of coming together was unity and harmony of believers, where the truth that Jesus has “broken down the middle wall of separation” (Eph. 2:14) and now “there is neither slave nor free” (Gal 3:28) ought to be freely seen and practiced. Paul says it would have been better for those who had much to stay at home and eat by themselves than to come to Church and act the way they had towards their fellow believers. Not only were they offensive towards their fellow less fortunate brothers and sisters, they were offensive to the Lord in whom they were there to celebrate.

III. Vs. 23-26 Three Views of Communion

Vs. 23 This becomes a very important verse even outside of the context dealing with communion, as we believe that this epistle was written prior to any of the gospels. Paul says here that he “received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you.” Paul makes sure that the Corinthian believers understood what apparently he had told them before, that the teaching concerning communion was not merely his opinion, or some truth that had been passed along from person to person. No, what he had told them had come from the Lord Himself. Paul said something similar to the Galatians in 1:12 where he says that he “neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.”

There is a practical sense that all that study the Word of God and then have the responsibility and privilege to communicate that to others “receive from the Lord that which they also deliver to others.” It would do us teachers well to have this verse visible while we study and teach! In fact, I dare say nothing that any teacher of God’s Word will ever have to say will have any effect upon any human heart unless it has come from His heart to our heart! God’s Word is always a “heart to heart” transfer, all the more important that the teacher of His Word stay out of the way!

Paul now reveals three views of communion that he received from the Lord. But first notice the timing of the event itself, “that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread.” This is the historical setting in which the Lord instituted communion. Yeah, so? Well, think about this, won’t you?

In the midst of Satan’s greatest effort to destroy God’s work
At the time when all the world was set against Christ and it seemed inevitable that He would be defeated
Jesus instituted a celebration!

What does that tell you? Well, I see two things:

The Lord is extremely confident of His victory in as much as at the very time He is being betrayed, He throws a party to communicate His victory! Doesn’t that just excite you? Especially as it relates to our walk and warfare as Christians. In Paul’s 2nd letter to the Corinthians, he reminded them that “the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.” (10:4-5)
The timing of this doesn’t escape my attention. God always seems to wait to do His best work at the time when Satan and the world are doing their worst! Look out through scripture and see if it isn’t so. Time and again you will see this pattern established by the Lord. So why does He do so? Well, I think it is so personally we who follow Him will understand that we are “in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us.” (Rom 8:37)

1. Past: Vs. 23-24 “The Lord Jesus…took bread; and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” It is important to realize the historical setting in which the Lord chose to institute a new celebration and how that relates to us. The feast that they gathered together to celebrate was a memorial feast—Passover. It is here that the Jews celebrate their deliverance from 400 years of slavery to Egypt by the direct intervention of God. Why this night and this feast? Well, Egypt in scripture is a symbol of the world, and here Jesus took His disciples and showed on the same night of God’s intervention of deliverance from slavery to the world how God was going to do an even greater work in delivering all who believe on Him from bondage to the world. Think of this a moment, won’t you? When someone dies and you have a memorial on their behalf, do you remember their death or their life? Why, you recall their life, don’t you? Well, here Jesus wants us to look back upon His death at our regular memorial times on His behalf. Why? Because He was offering His body (all that He is) for us! The word “broken” would better be translated “given,” as we know that not a bone of Jesus’ body was broken. At communion, you and I are to look back at His death as our substitute, paying the debt we owed but could never pay. Jesus willingly gave Himself to die upon the cross for our sins. For years people have been arguing over who killed Jesus. Some say, well, the Jews killed Jesus, then there are those that say that the Romans killed Jesus, but the truth of the matter is, as we are told in 2 Cor. 5:21, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” Do you get it? It was not the Jews or the Romans that killed our Lord; no, it was your sin and mine! His body was given “for you”—go ahead and put your name right there in your Bibles—that is who is responsible. So at communion, we look back at our Deliverer, who at the cost of His life, forever has freed us from bondage to the world!

2. Present: “In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” There were four cups offered during Passover:

The cup of sanctification: It is here that they thanked the Lord for bringing them out from under the yoke of the Egyptians. And Exodus 6:1 was read, “Now you will see what I will do,” as the Lord revealed His plan by which He would redeem Israel.
The cup of plagues: Here they would read Exodus 6:6, “I will free you from being slaves.” They recall that God had warned Moses that Pharaoh would not heed the message that God had given him and it would take His own hand of deliverance.
The cup of redemption: This was offered after the Passover supper with the words of Exodus 6:6, “I will redeem you with an outstretched arm.” It is this cup that they are to remember the blood of the Passover lamb that was sprinkled upon the doorposts, and of which meat they had just eaten. It is here that Jesus said, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you.” It is only through His outstretched arms that we have redemption—it is His blood as the Lamb of God that has freed us from the rightful penalty of our sin.
The cup of praise: Finally, this cup is offered with Exodus 6:7, “I will take you as my own people & I will be your God.” Then they read each line of Psalm 136, which has the repeated stanza “His love endures forever!”

It was the third cup of the Passover that became our communion cup, our New Covenant in His blood. Thus we look at His life poured out as our Lamb in order that we may have new life! We look at our present life in Him and the reality that our old life has passed away on the cross. Notice that we are to continually be reminded of this new life, new power to live out of bondage to the world! We have a present-day reality because of His blood—we are in the Beloved, seated in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.

3. Future: “For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.” The final view of communion is offered to us here as we are reminded to do so “till He comes.” Here, then, we look forward to the day that Jesus spoke of in Luke 22:18, “I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” That will be the cup of praise where we will all proclaim “His love endures forever.” We eagerly await that day that we are told about in Rev. 19:9 called the “marriage supper of the Lamb.” What hope we have that John spoke of in 1 John 3:2, “Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.”

IV. Vs. 27-34 Looking at Yourself Before You Look at Others

Finally, Paul covers two things we ought to do before we take part in communion:

Vs. 27-32 Examine your heart: The key to understanding this is in the words “unworthy manner.” Clearly, none of us are “worthy” to partake of communion based upon merit, but that is not what the words mean. The words mean “not genuine,” thus irreverently, as the Corinthians were doing. When people trample or burn the flag, they do so to the dishonor of those whose blood was shed for their freedom to do so! That is only a minor glimpse of what Paul says they are doing when they partake of communion with the wrong heart. Furthermore, Paul says that those who have continued to partake of communion with the wrong heart have become weak, sick, and some have even died—not as punishment but rather in order that they would get their hearts right. So what should they do if they don’t have a right heart? Well, confess as much before the Lord—tell Him the truth and ask Him to change your heart. The judgment is not eternal damnation; rather, it is discipline. The remedy for unworthiness is to judge ourselves prior to partaking, and He will be faithful to forgive us our sins. Got a wrong heart? Well, ask the Lord to change it, then go ahead and partake of communion! Paul says even if we are disciplined in one of those three ways for partaking in communion in an irreverent manner, it is so that we would not be condemned with the world.
Vs. 33-34 Look at others differently: Simply put, the fruit of examining our own heart first ought to be manifested in the way we see our brothers and sisters. Paul wrote to the Philippians in 2:3-4 that we all ought to, “Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself. Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for the interests of others.”

So that is how we are to deal with our heart if it is not right as we approach the Lord’s table. Amen!