Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Corinthians 10:17
For we [being] many are one bread, [and] one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
17. For we being many are one bread, and one body ] “As one loaf is made up of many grains, and one body is composed of many members, so the Church of Christ is joined together of many faithful ones, united in the bonds of charity.” Augustine. So Chrysostom and Theodoret, and our English bishops Andrewes and Hall. Cf. ch. 1Co 12:12; Gal 3:28; Eph 4:4; Col 3:15.
for we are all partakers of that one bread ] Literally, for we all partake of the one bread. See St Joh 6:35-58. As the bread passes into our bodies and becomes a part of each of us, so the Body of Christ, which the bread is the means of conveying, enters into and becomes part of each of us. Calvin reminds us that here St Paul is not dealing so much with our love towards and fellowship with one another, as with our spiritual union with Christ, in order to draw the inference that it is an unendurable sacrilege for Christians to be polluted by communion with idols.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
For we – We Christians. Being many. Greek The many ( hoi polloi). This idea is not, as our translation would seem to indicate, that Christians were numerous, but that all (for hoi polloi is here evidently used in the sense of pantes, all) were united, and constituted one society.
Are one bread – One loaf; one cake. That is, we are united, or are one. There is evident allusion here to the fact that the loaf or cake was composed of many separate grains of wheat, or portions of flour united in one; or, that as one loaf was broken and partaken by all, it was implied that they were all one. We are all one society; united as one, and for the same object. Our partaking of the same bread is an emblem of the fact that we are one. In almost all nations the act of eating together has been regarded as a symbol of unity or friendship.
And one body – One society; united together.
For we are all partakers … – And we thus show publicly that we are united, and belong to the same great family. The argument is, that if we partake of the feasts in honor of idols with their worshippers, we shall thus show that we are a part of their society.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 17. For we, being many, are one bread] The original would be better translated thus: Because there is one bread, or loaf; we, who are many, are one body. As only one loaf was used at the passover, and those who partook of it were considered to be one religious body; so we who partake of the eucharistical bread and wine, in commemoration of the sacrificial death of Christ, are one spiritual society, because we are all made partakers of that one Christ whose blood was shed for us to make an atonement for our sins; as the blood of the paschal lamb was shed and sprinkled in reference to this of which it was the type.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Believers, though many, yet are one body, and declare themselves to be one body mystical, by their fellowship together in the ordinance of the Lords supper; as the bread they there eat is one bread, though it be made up of many grains of corn, which come into the composition of that loaf or piece of bread which is so broken, distributed, and eaten; and the wine they drink is one cup, one body of wine, though it be made up of many particular grapes. And they declare themselves to be one body, by their joint partaking of that one bread. Some have from hence fetched an argument to prove the unlawfulness of communicating with scandalous sinners at the Lords table, because we declare ourselves one body with those that communicate: but whether it will (if examined) be cogent enough, I doubt; for one body signifieth no more than one church, and that not invisible, but visible. So as we only declare ourselves to be fellow members of the visible church with those with whom we partake in that ordinance, and the visible church may consist of persons that are bad mixed with the good. So as though, undoubtedly, scandalously wicked persons ought to be excluded from the holy table, yea, and no unbeliever hath a right to it; yet it may reasonably be doubted, whether those that partake with unbelievers, do by it own themselves to be unbelievers; they only own themselves members of that church wherein there are some unbelievers. But the scope of the apostle is from hence to argue, that by a parity of reason, those that communicated with an idolatrous assembly in their sacrifices, declared themselves by that action to be one body with those idolaters.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
17. one breadrather, “loaf.”One loaf alone seems to have been used in each celebration.
and onebodyOmit “and”; “one loaf [that is], one body.””We, the many (namely, believers assembled; so theGreek), are one bread (by our partaking of the same loaf,which becomes assimilated to the substance of all our bodies; and sowe become), one body” (with Christ, and so with one another).
we . . . allGreek,“the whole of us.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For we being many, are one bread and one body,…. The several members of the church of Christ; particular believers are indeed many, considered in themselves, in their own persons; yet by virtue of their union to Christ, which is manifested by their communion with him, they are one bread with him, the bread of life, and one body with his, signified by the bread; they are of one and the same mass and lump, they are incorporated together, they are flesh of his flesh, and one spirit with him: or they are one bread and body among themselves; as bread consists of many grains of corn which have been ground and kneaded together, and make up one loaf; and as the members of an human body are many, and make up one body; so believers, though they are many, yet are one body, of which Christ is the head; one in union with him and one another, and one in their communion together at the Lord’s table; and so the Syriac, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions read, “as therefore the bread is one, so we all are one body”; having communion with Christ and one another:
for we are all partakers of that one bread; in the supper, which is all of the same nature and kind, and is a symbol of the body of Christ, and our fellowship with him and each other. The application designed is this, that as believers, by partaking of the same bread, appear to be the same body, and of the same mass and lump with one another; so such as eat things sacrificed unto idols, appear to be of the same mass and lump with Heathen idolaters: Dr. Lightfoot has very pertinently produced some passages out of Maimonides, concerning mixing, associating, or communion of neighbours in courts on sabbath eves, that so they may enter into each other’s houses on the sabbath day, for the illustration of this passage; of which mixing the Jews have a whole treatise in their Misna and Talmud, which they call Erubin; and of which they say h
“but how is this mixture or association? it is thus, they mix together, , “in one food”, which they prepare on the eve of the sabbath; and it is as if they should say, for we are all mixed together, and have all one food; nor does anyone of us divide the right from his neighbour–they do not mix in courts, but “with a whole loaf” only; though the mass or lump baked may be the quantity of a “seah”, yet if it is broken, they do not associate with it; but if it is whole, though it be but the value of a farthing, they mix with it–how do they mix or associate together in the courts? they collect
, “one whole cake”, out of every house, and put all in one vessel, in one of the houses of the court–and the whole association being gathered together, blesses the Lord–and eats:”
upon which the above learned writer observes, that if it were customary among the Israelites, to join together in one political or economical body, by the eating of many loaves collected from this, and that, and the other man; we are much more associated together into one body, by eating one and the same bread, appointed us by our Saviour.
h Maimon. Hilch. Erubin, c. 1. sect. 6, 8, 16.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
One bread ( ). One loaf.
Who are many ( ). The many.
We all ( ). We the all, the whole number, being in apposition with the subject
we ( unexpressed).
Partake (). Have a part with or in, share in. See on 1Cor 9:12; Heb 2:14; Heb 5:13 (partaking of milk).
Of the one bread ( ). Of the one loaf, the article referring to one loaf already mentioned.
One body ( ). Here the mystical spiritual body of Christ as in 12:12f., the spiritual kingdom or church of which Christ is head (Col 1:18; Eph 5:23).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
For [] . Better, seeing that. It begins a new sentence which is dependent on the following proposition : Seeing that there is one bread, we who are many are one body. Paul is deducing the mutual communion of believers from the fact of their communion with their common Lord. By each and all receiving a piece of the one loaf, which represents Christ ‘s body, they signify that they are all bound in one spiritual body, united to Christ and therefore to each other. So Rev., in margin. Ignatius says : “Take care to keep one eucharistic feast only; for there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup unto unity of His blood;” i e., that all may be one by partaking of His blood (Philadelphia, 4.).
Body. Passing from the literal sense, the Lord ‘s body (ver. 16), to the figurative sense, the body of believers, the Church.
Partake of [ ] . Or partake from. That which all eat is taken from [] the one loaf, and they eat of it mutually, in common, sharing it among them [] . So Ignatius : “That ye come together ena arton klwntev breaking one loaf” (Ephesians, 20.).
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “For we being many are one bread. (hoti eis artos hoi pollei esmen) “Because as we, the many, are one bread.” The we of the many exist as one bread, bearing and sharing the bread of life to others. Each congregation is to bear and symbolize it, Ecc 11:1-6.
2) “And one body.” (en soma) land) one body.” The one body here refers to one kind of body, the church body, Eph 1:20-21.
3) “For we are partakers of that one bread.” (hoi gar pantes ek tou enos; artou metechomen) “For we all partake out of the one bread.” Of the true Bread of Life, the sinless Christ, we live. Of the Bread of the Lord’s supper we memorialize that broken body. It was to the church as an institution, and each congregation, the ordinance, of the Lord’s Supper was given. It is to be kept by members of each local congregation, by all members after serious self-examination. 1Co 11:23-28.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
17. For we are one bread. I have already stated above, that it was not Paul’s particular design here to exhort us to love, but he mentions this by the way, that the Corinthians may understand that we must, even by external profession, maintain that unity which subsists between us and Christ, inasmuch as we all assemble together to receive the symbol of that sacred unity. In this second part of the statement, he makes mention only of the one part of the Sacrament, and it is the manner of Scripture to describe by Synecdoche (577) the entire Supper by the breaking of bread It is necessary to warn my readers, in passing, as to this, lest any less experienced person should be put off his guard by the foolish cavil that is brought forward by certain sycophants — as if Paul, by mentioning merely the bread, had it in view to deprive the people of the one half of the Sacrament.
(577) A figure of speech in which a part is put for the whole. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(17) For we being many are one bread.Better, For it is one bread, and we, the many, are one body, for we all take a portion of that one bread. This verse explains how the breaking of the bread was the significant act which expressed sacramentally the communion of the body of Christ. There is one bread, it is broken into many pieces, and as we all (though each receives only a fragment) partake of the one bread which unbroken consisted of these pieces, we though many individuals are one body, even the Body of Christ with whom, as well as with each other, we have communion in that act.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
17. One bread The bread is one, not by being a single loaf, as some suppose, but by being one species or substance, and so one emblem. We are one bread, as all the particles of the bread are one composite whole.
One body Being members of an organic whole, which is Christ’s body.
Partakers Note on 1Co 10:16.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Co 10:17. For we, being many, &c. This verse is still a further proof that the cup of blessing, &c. is not, as some would urge, merely a commemoration of a deceased benefactor; but a commemoration of Christ’s death and passion. In this verse the Apostle alludes to the Jewish custom of having but one loaf at the passover, which was not divided, till broken in order to be distributed, he says, therefore, that the partaking of one bread, made the receivers of many to become one body:A just inference, according to the idea that we have affixed to this rite; for then the communion of the body and blood of Christ helps to unite the spiritual and sincere receivers into one body, by an equal distribution of one common benefit; or, in the elegant words of the liturgy of the church of England, “Then we spiritually eat the flesh of Christ, and drink his blood; then we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us; we are one with Christ, and Christ with us.”
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Co 10:17 confirms the statement that the bread is a communion of the body of Christ. For it is one bread; one body are we, the many , i.e. for through one bread being eaten in the Supper, we Christians, although as individuals we are many, form together one (ethical) body . This union into one body through participation in the one bread could not take place unless this bread were of the body of Christ, which is just that which produces the one body that which constitutes the many into this unity. The proof advances ab effectu (which participating in the one bread in and of itself could not have) ad causam (which can only lie in this, that this bread is the communion of Christ’s body). The argument [1665] does not imply a logical conversion (as Rodatz objects); but either the effect or the cause might be posited from the Christian consciousness as premiss , according as the case required. See a similar process of reasoning ab effectu ad causam in 1Co 12:12 . Comp also Luk 7:47 . According to this, is just the since, because ( for ), so common in argument, and there is no need whatever to substitute for it (Hofmann’s objection); is to be supplied after ; and the two clauses are placed side by side asyndetically so as to make the passage “alacrior et nervosior” (Dissen, a [1667] Pind. Exc. II. p. 276), and, in particular, to bring out with more emphasis the idea of unity ( ) (comp Act 25:12 ). The . . [1669] which follows leaves us no room to doubt how the asyndeton should logically be filled up ( and therefore also ); for this last clause of the verse excludes the possibility of our assuming a mere relation of comparison ( as there is one bread, so are we one body; comp Heydenreich, de Wette, Osiander, Neander, al [1671] ). The , too, forbids our supplying after (Zwingli, Piscator, Mosheim, Stolz, Schrader, comp Ewald); for these words indicate the presence of another conception, inasmuch as, repeating the idea conveyed in , they thereby show that that was said of literal bread. This holds against Olshausen also, who discovers here the church as being “ the bread of life for the world !” Other expositors take (comp 1Co 12:15 f.; Gal 4:6 ) as introducing a protasis, and . . . [1674] as being the apodosis: “ because it is one bread, therefore are we, the many, one body ” (Flatt, Rckert, Kahnis, Maier, Hofmann, following the Vulgate, Castalio, Calvin, Beza, Bengel, al [1675] [1676] ). In that case either we should have a further exposition about the bread (Hofmann), no sign of which, however, follows; or else this whole thought would be purely parenthetical, a practical conclusion being drawn in passing from what had just been stated. But how remote from the connection would such a side-thought be! And would not Paul have required to interpose an , or some such word, after the , in order to avoid misunderstanding? Interpreters would not have betaken themselves to a device so foreign to the scope of the passage, had they not too hastily assumed that 1Co 10:17 contained no explanation at all of what preceded it (Rckert). Rodatz agrees with the rest in rendering: “because there is one bread, therefore are we, the many, one body,” but makes this not a subordinate thought brought in by the way, but an essentially new point in the argument; he does this, however, by supplying after , “ with Christ the Head ” (comp also van Hengel, Annot. p. 167 f.), and finding the progress of the thought in the words supplied. But in this way the very point on which all turned would be left to be filled in, which is quite unwarrantable; Paul would have needed to write , or something to that effect, in order to be understood.
] correlative to the (comp 1Co 10:15 ; 1Co 10:19 ): the many , who are fellow-participants in the Lord’s Supper, the Christian multitude . The very same, viewed, however, in the aspect of their collective aggregate , not, as here, of their multitudinousness, are , the whole ; comp Rom 5:15 ; Rom 5:18 . The unity of bread is not to be understood numerically (Grotius, who, from that point of view, lays stress upon its size), but qualitatively , as one and the same bread of the Supper . The thought of the bread having become a unity out of many separate grains of corn is foreign to the connection, although insisted on by many expositors, such as Chrysostom, Augustine, Erasmus, Calovius, al [1680]
. is interpreted by some as if there were no : “since we are all partakers of one bread” (Luther). This is contrary to the linguistic usage, for is joined with the genitive (1Co 10:21 ; 1Co 9:12 ) or accusative (Bernhardy, p. 149), but never with ; and the assumption that Paul, in using , was thinking of the verb (1Co 11:28 ), is altogether arbitrary. The linguistically correct rendering is: for we all have a share from the one bread , so that in analysing the passage we have to supply, according to a well-known usage (Buttmann, neut. Gr. p. 138 [E. T. 158]), the indefinite indication of a part, or , before . Hofmann, too, gives the correct partitive sense to the expression. The article before points back to what has been already said.
[1665] Comp. Bengel: “Probat poculum et panem esse communionem . Nam panis per se non facit, ut vescentes sint unum corpus, sed panis id facit quatenus est communio ,” etc.
[1667] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
[1669] . . . .
[1671] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.
[1674] . . . .
[1675] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.
[1676] Rckert, however, has since assented ( Abendm. p. 229 ff.) to the modifications proposed by Rodatz, of which mention is presently to be made.
[1680] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
Ver. 17. And one body ] By the force of faith and love. Son 6:9 ; “My dove is but one; the daughters saw her, and blessed her.” No such oneness, entireness, anywhere as among the saints. Other societies are but as the clay in the toes of Nebuchadnezzar’s image, they may cleave together, but not incorporate one into another.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
17. ] Because we, the (assembled) many, are one bread (by the assimilation of that one bread partaken: not ‘one loaf’), one Body (by the of the Body of Christ, of which that bread is the vehicle); for the whole of us partake of that one bread . Meyer and De Wette and many other Commentators take alone, ‘ there is one bread ;’ and impugn the interpretation given above by saying that it is evidently not so, because the following clause uses in its literal sense. But it is for that very reason , that I adhere to the interpretation given. By partaking of that bread, we become, not figuratively but literally, one bread : it passes into the substance of our bodies, and there is in every one who partakes, a portion of himself which is that bread . The bread which was before , is now . But that loaf, broken and blessed, is the medium of of the Body of Christ; we then, being that one bread, are one Body; for we all partake of that one bread. So that there is no logical inversion, and no arguing (Meyer) from the effect to the cause . The argument is a very simple and direct one; the bread is the Body of Christ; we partake of the bread: therefore we partake of the Body of Christ. Of these propositions, the conclusion is implied in the form of a question in 1Co 10:16 ; the minor stated in the latter clause of 1Co 10:17 ; its connexion with the major producing the conclusion given in the former clause . The major itself, , is suppressed, as axiomatic. The above remarks shew also the untenableness of the rendering of Calv., Beza, Bengel, al., “ because there is one bread (antecedent), we being many are one body ” (consequent): for this would parenthesize 1Co 10:17 , and take it altogether out of the argument, giving it a sense which, as occurring here, would be vapid “obiter hoc dicit, ut intelligant Corinthii, externa quoque professione colendam esse illam unitatem qu nobis est cum Christo,” Calv. Meyer objects to rendering , we partake of that one bread : saying rightly that is always found with a gen. or an acc., never with . He would render, for we all, by means of that one bread, partake (viz. in the one Body: so . is absol. 1Co 10:30 ). This is exceedingly harsh, besides as it seems to me (see above) confusing the whole argument: and we may safely say would not have been thus expressed by the Apostle, leaving the most important words to be supplied from the context, but would have been . The usage of , too, would, though perhaps barely allowable , be very harsh, especially when it is remembered that the is not (by the hypothesis) the ultimate, but only the mediate object of participation. None of the examples given in Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 230, which Meyer quotes for his sense of , seem to justify it. They apply mostly to the subjective source, , or the circumstances originating, , not to the medial instrument, which it appears to me would require . (In a subsequent edn. Meyer seems to have slightly modified his view, rendering, for from the one bread we all receive a portion .)
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Co 10:17 unfolds the assertion virtually contained in the question just asked: “Seeing that ( ) there is one bread, we, the many, are one body”; so Vg [1511] , “Quoniam unus panis, unum corpus multi sumus,” Cv [1512] , Bz [1513] , Bg [1514] , Hf [1515] , Bt [1516] , Hn [1517] , Gd [1518] , El [1519] , R.V. marg.; cf. the mutually supporting unities of Eph 4:4 ff. The saying is aphoristic: One bread makes one body (Hn [1520] ) a maxim of hospitality (equally true of “the cup”) that applies to all associations cemented by a common feast. “The bread” suggests the further, kindred idea of a common nourishment sustaining an identical life, the loaf on the table symbolising the of Joh 6 , which feeds the Church in every limb (1Co 12:13 ). “For ( of explanation) we all partake from (partitive , cf. 1Co 9:7 ) the one bread”; eating from the common loaf attests and seals the union of the participants in Christ.
[1511] Latin Vulgate Translation.
[1512] Calvin’s In Nov. Testamentum Commentarii .
[1513] Beza’s Nov. Testamentum: Interpretatio et Annotationes (Cantab., 1642).
[1514] Bengel’s Gnomon Novi Testamenti.
[1515]
[1516] J. A. Beet’s St. Paul’s Epp. to the Corinthians (1882).
[1517] C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklrung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or 1 Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetisches Kommentar (1896).
[1518] F. Godet’s Commentaire sur la prem. p. aux Corinthiens (Eng. Trans.).
[1519] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians .
[1520] C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklrung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or 1 Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetisches Kommentar (1896).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
1Co 10:17 is parenthetical, but no interpolation as Sm [1521] thinks; it is necessary to develop the idea of in 1Co 10:16 , showing how vital to the Church is the fellowship of the Lord’s Table, that was being violated by attendance at idolfeasts. The elliptical is often construed as a continued dependent clause under the regimen of : either ( a ) “Since we, who are many, are one bread (loaf), one body” (A.V., R.V. txt., with several ancient Verss., Est., Al [1522] , Sm [1523] ); or ( b ) “Since there (is) one bread, (and) we, the many, are one body” (D.W [1524] , Mr [1525] ) these renderings making the two statements a double reason for the of 1Co 10:16 , instead of seeing in the an evidence of the . But ( a ) confuses two distinct figures, and identifies unsuitably “the bread” with the Church itself, ( b ) escapes this error by reading into the first clause the required to match in the second; but the copulative “and” is artificially supplied; moreover, Mr [1526] ’s interpretation reverses the contextual relation of the and , making the latter the ground of the former, whereas Paul argues that the bread assures the oneness of the body; through loaf and cup we realise our communion in Christ.
[1521] P. Schmiedel, in Handcommentar zum N.T. (1893).
[1522] Alford’s Greek Testament .
[1523] P. Schmiedel, in Handcommentar zum N.T. (1893).
[1524].W. De Wette’s Handbuch z. N. T.
[1525]
[1526] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
For, &c. Literally Because there is one loaf, we the many are one body. Compare 1Co 12:12.
bread. Greek. artos. Always translated “loaf” when the number is specified. See Mat 14:17. Mar 8:14, &c.
are . . . partakers. = partake. Greek. metecho. See 1Co 9:10.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
17.] Because we, the (assembled) many, are one bread (by the assimilation of that one bread partaken: not one loaf), one Body (by the of the Body of Christ, of which that bread is the vehicle); for the whole of us partake of that one bread. Meyer and De Wette and many other Commentators take alone, there is one bread; and impugn the interpretation given above by saying that it is evidently not so, because the following clause uses in its literal sense. But it is for that very reason, that I adhere to the interpretation given. By partaking of that bread, we become, not figuratively but literally, one bread: it passes into the substance of our bodies, and there is in every one who partakes, a portion of himself which is that bread. The bread which was before, is now . But that loaf, broken and blessed, is the medium of of the Body of Christ; we then, being that one bread, are one Body; for we all partake of that one bread. So that there is no logical inversion, and no arguing (Meyer) from the effect to the cause. The argument is a very simple and direct one;-the bread is the Body of Christ; we partake of the bread: therefore we partake of the Body of Christ. Of these propositions, the conclusion is implied in the form of a question in 1Co 10:16; the minor stated in the latter clause of 1Co 10:17; its connexion with the major producing the conclusion given in the former clause . The major itself, , is suppressed, as axiomatic. The above remarks shew also the untenableness of the rendering of Calv., Beza, Bengel, al.,-because there is one bread (antecedent), we being many are one body (consequent): for this would parenthesize 1Co 10:17, and take it altogether out of the argument, giving it a sense which, as occurring here, would be vapid-obiter hoc dicit, ut intelligant Corinthii, externa quoque professione colendam esse illam unitatem qu nobis est cum Christo, Calv. Meyer objects to rendering , we partake of that one bread: saying rightly that is always found with a gen. or an acc., never with . He would render, for we all, by means of that one bread, partake (viz. in the one Body: so . is absol. 1Co 10:30). This is exceedingly harsh, besides as it seems to me (see above) confusing the whole argument: and we may safely say would not have been thus expressed by the Apostle, leaving the most important words to be supplied from the context,-but would have been . The usage of , too, would, though perhaps barely allowable, be very harsh, especially when it is remembered that the is not (by the hypothesis) the ultimate, but only the mediate object of participation. None of the examples given in Bernhardy, Syntax, p. 230, which Meyer quotes for his sense of , seem to justify it. They apply mostly to the subjective source, , or the circumstances originating, ,-not to the medial instrument, which it appears to me would require . (In a subsequent edn. Meyer seems to have slightly modified his view, rendering, for from the one bread we all receive a portion.)
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Co 10:17. , since) He proves, that the cup and the bread are the communion; for the bread by itself does not make them that eat it, become one body; but the bread does so, in so far as it is communion, etc.- (one bread), viz. there is [and indeed it is such bread as is broken, and carries with it (implies in the participation of it) the communion of the body of Christ.-V. g.]- , the many) believers [Eng. Vers. is different, We being many are one bread and one body].- , of the one bread) and therefore also of the one cup.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Co 10:17
1Co 10:17
Seeing that we, who are many, are one bread, one body: for we all partake of the one bread.-[This is in confirmation of the preceding statement that in the Lords Supper there is a fellowship with the body and blood of Christ-with his death.] We who partake are members individually, but we constitute one body of Christ, because we all draw our life from the blood and partake of one bread, the body of Christ. So we are one body in Christ.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
we being: 1Co 12:12, 1Co 12:27, Rom 12:5, Gal 3:26-28, Eph 1:22, Eph 1:23, Eph 2:15, Eph 2:16, Eph 3:6, Eph 4:12, Eph 4:13, Eph 4:25, Col 2:19, Col 3:11, Col 3:15
that: 1Co 10:3, 1Co 10:4, 1Co 10:21, 1Co 11:26-28
Reciprocal: Mat 26:26 – and brake Mar 14:22 – as Joh 6:48 – General Act 2:42 – in breaking 1Co 5:7 – ye may 1Co 11:24 – this Eph 4:4 – one body Heb 3:1 – partakers Heb 3:14 – we are Heb 13:10 – an altar
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Co 10:17. One bread means that Christians have only one use for bread as a religious act, and that is to represent the body of Christ that was given for the salvation of man. When it is partaken of for that purpose, all who do so are acting as sharers of the same blessing of salvation through Christ.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Co 10:17. seeing that we, who are many, are one bread, one body: for we all partake of the one bread. In all ancient times friends were made one over a common meal; much more is this oneness manifested when, on some festal occasion, great principles are represented and celebrated by those whose principles they are; and they become thereby afresh welded together, impledged to each other, and stimulated to common action in prosecution of those principles. How much more when Christians, as one body, eat of that bread in which their Lord would have them see His body broken for them, and drink of that cup in which they were to see His blood of the new covenant shed for them, Thus was their common oneness with Him, in the first instance, and in virtue of this, their oneness among themselves, visibly set forth and palpably expressed.
Now comes the conclusion to be drawn from this in relation to idolatrous feaststhat, on the same principle, all who partake of idol feasts partake of the idolatries themselves, and have fellowship with the idol-deities there represented.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
The apostles argument lies thus: As Christians, though many, yet by virtue of their society in the same worship, are compacted together as it were into one loaf or lump, that is, into one mystical body, in that they partake of one and the same sacramental bread; so those that communicate with idolaters, in eating things offered unto idols, are compacted together as it were into one body, forasmuch as they communicate in one and the same sacrifice: as many grains of corn moulded together make one loaf, and the juice of many grapes make one cup; so Christians, though many, yet are one visible church, one mystical body, and declare themselves so to be by their fellowship together at the Lord’s table.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
seeing that we, who are many, are one bread, one body: for we all partake of the one bread. [Paul here points out the nature of the Lord’s Supper, showing how it unites us with each other and with the Lord. We all partake of the loaf and thereby become qualitatively, as it were, a part of it, as it of us; and even thus we all become members of Christ’s one body which it represents and Christ becomes part of us. Such is the unity of the church: Paul had no conception of a divided church. Though there may be more than one loaf at the communion, yet the bread is one in substance, and is one emblem.]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
1Co 10:17. Confirmation of 1Co 10:16 b, from the oneness of the church, by an argument from effect to cause. A similar argument would support 1Co 10:16 a. But to develop one side is sufficient: and the bread is a closer analogy to 1Co 10:18.
We, the many, are one body: an admitted and glorious truth, a forerunner of 1Co 12:12 ff.
Because there is etc.; declares that of this one body the one sacramental bread is a cause.
For we all etc.: connecting link between the one bread and the one body. If to partake the eucharistic bread be a condition of receiving spiritual life of the church, which is its very essence, is in the same sense a result of all the members of the church partaking the one symbolic bread.
Consequently, the church of Christ, consisting of many members of various nations and all ranks but living the same spiritual life and embodying it before the eyes of men, and drinking this life from the same source, viz. the death and life of Christ, on the condition that all its members partake the same material and symbolic food-the one church proves by its very existence the importance of the Lord’s Supper and the spiritual reality which underlies it. These words also suggest the direct uniting influence of this one simple rite. Wherever a Christian went among Christians he found them eating and drinking the same bread and wine in memory of the same bruised body and shed blood; and was thus made to feel, in the most effective way conceivable, the oneness of the whole church. Paul may therefore say that the wonderful fact that the many and various members of the church are visibly united into one community, in which each member lives the same spiritual life, is a result of the fact that upon a table in their various assemblies the same bread lies; and may explain his words by reminding us that of this one bread all the members of all the churches partake.
Fuente: Beet’s Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament
When Christians take communion we all eat from one bread symbolic of the physical body of Christ. In the early church believers seem to have used one loaf, the literal meaning of the word translated "bread" in this verse (artos). Paul stressed that many people eating from one loaf symbolized the solidarity of our relationship as a redeemed community in Christ. (He developed the idea of the unity of the body more fully in 1Co 12:14-27 in his explanation of the diversity that exists within the unity of the spiritual body of Christ, the church.) The emphasis here is on the solidarity of believers that forbids all other unions.