Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Corinthians 11:18
For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
18. For first of all ] Either (1) we must take this to apply to this and the next verse, find the second cause of blame to commence with 1Co 11:20, or (2) we must regard it as applying to the whole of this chapter, and then the next cause of blame will be the abuse of spiritual gifts, which is treated of in chapters 12 14. The latter is the more probable, for many of the commentators seem to have been misled by the technical theological sense which was attached to the words schism and heresy in later ages, a sense which seems to have been unknown to the Apostle. The divisions of which the Apostle speaks seem to have been social and personal rather than theological or ecclesiastical. See note on 1Co 11:21.
in the church ] Not the building, for there were no churches in the sense of buildings devoted to Christian worship then, but in the assembly.
divisions ] Margin, schisms. Wiclif and Tyndale better, dissencion. Dissidia, Calvin. Vulgate, scissuras. See note on ch. 1Co 1:10.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
For first of all – That is, I mention as the first thing to be reproved.
When ye come together in the church – When you come together in a religious assembly; when you convene for public worship. The word church here does not mean, as it frequently does with us, a building. No instance of such a use of the word occurs in the New Testament; but it means when they came together as a Christian assembly; when they convened for the worship of God. These divisions took place then; and from some cause which it seems then operated to produce alienations and strifes.
I hear – I have learned through some members of the family of Chloe; 1Co 1:11.
That there be divisions among you – Greek, as in the margin, Schisms. The word properly means a rent, such as is made in cloth Mat 9:16; Mar 2:21, and then a division, a split, a faction among people; Joh 7:43; Joh 9:10; Joh 10:19. It does not mean here that they had proceeded so far as to form separate churches, but that there was discord and division in the church itself; see the notes on 1Co 1:10-11.
And I partly believe it – I credit a part of the reports; I have reason to think, that, though the evil may have been exaggerated, yet that it is true at least in part. I believe that there are dissensions in the church that should be reproved.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 18. There be divisions among you] They had , schisms, among them: the old parties were kept up, even in the place where they assembled to eat the Lord’s Supper. The Paulians, the Kephites, and the Apollonians, continued to be distinct parties; and ate their meals separately, even in the same house.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
In the church, here, must signify the religious assembly; for at this time there were no temples built for Christians, but they met in private houses, as the iniquity of those times would bear: yet others think the place is here meant where the church was wont to meet, and say, that the Christians had a certain stated place, though in a private house, where they used to meet. But it is not very probable that they should, in the midst of heathens, be so quiet and secure as to meet either constantly, or ordinarily, in any one certain and stated place, so denominated. What schisms, or divisions, the apostle meaneth, he expoundeth in the following verses; either they quarrelled about meats, or drinks, or their order in sitting down, or the time when they should begin, or did not stay till they were all met.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
18. first of allIn the firstplace. The “divisions” (Greek, “schisms“)meant, are not merely those of opinion (1Co1:10), but in outward acts at the love-feasts (Agap),(1Co 11:21). He does notfollow up the expression, “in the first place,” by “inthe second place.” But though not expressed, a secondabuse was in his mind when he said, “In the first place,”namely, THE ABUSE OF SPIRITUALGIFTS, which also created disorder in their assemblies[ALFORD], (1Co 12:1;1Co 14:23; 1Co 14:26;1Co 14:33; 1Co 14:40).
in the churchnot theplace of worship; for ISIDORE OFPELUSIUM denies that therewere such places specially set apart for worship in the apostles’times [Epistle, 246.2]. But, “in the assembly” or”congregation”; in convocation for worship, whereespecially love, order, and harmony should prevail. The veryordinance instituted for uniting together believers in one body, wasmade an occasion of “divisions” (schisms).
partlyHe herebyexcepts the innocent. “I am unwilling to believe all Ihear, but some I cannot help believing” [ALFORD]:while my love is unaffected by it [BENGEL].
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For first of all, when ye come together in the church,…. The place where the church met together to perform divine service, called “one place”. 1Co 11:20 and is distinguished from their own “houses”, 1Co 11:22 and the first thing he took notice of as worthy of dispraise and reproof, in their religious assemblies, were their animosities and factions:
I hear that there be divisions among you: schisms and parties, either about their ministers, one being for Paul, another for Apollos, and another for Cephas; or in the celebration of the Lord’s supper, and that which went before it, they going into separate bodies, and partook by themselves, and each took his own supper before another, one ate, and another did not. This the apostle had heard from the house of Chloe:
and I partly believe it; meaning, either that this was the practice of a part of the church to do so, though not of them all; or that part of the report that had been made to him was true; though he hoped in that charity which hopeth all things, that it was not quite so bad as was feared or represented, since things are generally heightened and increased by fame; but yet he had it from such good hands, that he could not but believe there was something in it. So the Syriac version renders it, , “and something, something I believe”.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
First of all ( ). There is no antithesis ( , secondly, or , in the next place) expressed. This is the primary reason for Paul’s condemnation and the only one given.
When ye come together in the church ( ). Genitive absolute. Here has the literal meaning of assembly.
Divisions (). Accusative of general reference with the infinitive in indirect discourse. Old word for cleft, rent, from . Example in papyri for splinter of wood. See on 1:10. Not yet formal cleavages into two or more organizations, but partisan divisions that showed in the love-feasts and at the Lord’s Supper.
Partly ( ). Accusative of extent (to some part) like in 10:33. He could have said as in 13:9. The rumours of strife were so constant (I keep on hearing, ).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
In the church [ ] . See on Mt 16:18. Not the church edifice, a meaning which the word never has in the New Testament, and which appears first in patristic writings. The marginal rendering of the Rev. is better : in congregation.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “For first of all.” (proton men gar) “For indeed firstly.” The first in order of charges – The first in rank of wrong in connection with keeping the ordinances as he had delivered them was: 1Co 11:2.
2) “When ye come together in the church.” (sunerchomenon humon en ekklesia) “When you (all) come together in church (capacity).
3) “I hear that there are divisions among you.” (akouo schismata en humin huparchein) “I hear there exist divisions or schisms among you.” Apparently the reports of divisions and schisms in the Corinth church had reached Paul from numerous sources, in addition to that from the house of Cloe, 1Co 1:10-11.
4) “And I partly believe it.” (kai meros ti pisteuo) “And some part (partly) I believe it.” Paul does not accept all reports of activities of the Corinth members as creditable reports, but he does assert the “so much smoke, some fire” premise of necessary inference. Paul had also received from Stepanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus help and a report from the Corinth church, as a basis for this letter, 1Co 16:17.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
18. When ye come together in the Church, I hear there are divisions Some take the words divisions and heresies, as referring to that disorder ( ἀταξίαν) of which he speaks soon afterwards. I consider them as having a more extensive signification, and certainly it is not likely that he would employ terms so improper and unsuitable for the purpose of exposing that abuse. (647) For as to their alleging that he has expressed himself in more severe terms, with the view of exposing more fully the heinousness of the offense, I would readily grant this, if the meaning corresponded. It is, then, a reproof of a general kind — that they were not of one accord as becomes Christians, but every one was so much taken up with his own interests, that he was not prepared to accommodate himself to others. Hence arose that abuse, as to which we shall see in a little — hence sprung ambition and pride, so that every one exalted himself and despised others — hence sprung carelessness as to edification — hence sprung profanation of the gifts of God.
He says that he partly believes it, that they might not think that he charged them all with this heinous crime, and might accordingly complain, that they were groundlessly accused. In the meantime, however, he intimates that this had been brought to him not by mere vague rumor, but by credible information, such as he could not altogether discredit.
(647) “ Qu’il leur remonstrera qu’ils fout en la Cene;” — “Which he will show that they have fallen into as to the Supper.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(18) For first of all.We in vain look for the secondly, which, in a perfectly systematic treatise, should follow this first. Some writers maintain that 1Co. 11:18-19 form the first point, and 1Co. 11:20-34 the second. There is, however, no indication of a new subject being introduced with 1Co. 11:20, but the repetition of the words come together carries the mind back at once to the come together in 1Co. 11:18, and indicates the continuation of the subject there commenced, and from which the Apostle had, at the mention of the word divisions, for a moment parenthetically digressed.
It is better to consider the first point to be the abuse regarding the Lords Supper, which is more immediately treated of; and the second point, the abuse of spiritual gifts, commencing with 1Co. 12:1. They are two branches of the one general subject, viz., Irregularities in religious assemblies, and although the latter is not connected with the former by a definite secondly, there is a sufficient verbal indication that a second topic is entered upon. It is well to remember in this and similar cases that this is not a treatise, but a letter, and not only a letter, but an answer to a letter, and that if we had a copy of the epistle to which this is a reply, many points of sequence and arrangement, which at present present difficulties, would be as clear to us as they were to those who originally received this Epistle.
When ye come together in the church.The reference here is not to a locality, but to the character of the assembly, as we should say in church, or, in parliament. The spirit of faction, which has already, in the earlier part of this Epistle, been dealt with, as pervading Christian society, had invaded the Christian assemblies.
I partly believe it.These words are full of the courtesy and charity so characteristic of the Apostle; and they suggest to us all a lesson regarding our belief of evil reports, even when reaching us on the very best authority. The general practice is to believe a little more than we are told. St. Paul believed a part only of what he was told.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
18. First But what is the second to this first? Clearly, as Alford shows, the paragraph upon the Lord’s supper (17-34) is the first, and the entire subject of spiritual gifts, beginning at the next chapter, is the second to it. And Alford’s showing on this point shows, also, that declare takes in the commencing paragraph.
Divisions , schisms. In modern ecclesiastical phraseology schisms are secessions from the Church; and heresies (next verse) are doctrines contrary to the belief of the Church. Such is not the apostle’s use of the words. By schisms here he means the separations in feeling produced by the sets and cliques at the Lord’s supper.
Partly He believes some of the report, but cannot quite, in charity, believe the whole.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘For first of all, when you come together in the church, I hear (present – ‘am hearing continually’) that divisions exist (present infinitive – therefore ‘are constantly coming up’) among you, and I partly believe it.’
The first thing that disturbs him is that there are divisions among them which keep rearing their heads, and these divisions do not appear to be the doctrinal ones of the earlier chapters but divisions resulting from social status that take place when they ‘come together’ as the church of Christ. (The ‘first of all’ is not specifically followed by a ‘secondly’, but the assumption is that what follows chapter 11 may be seen as the ‘secondly’. Thus secondly might be seen as the divisions caused by the use of spiritual gifts).
‘I hear — and I partly believe it.’ He has been informed of the situation by witnesses, and yet it is so incomprehensible that he is loth to believe that it can be true. Yet the strength of the witness is such that he finds himself having to believe it, although unwillingly. He hopes that he will be proved wrong. Certainly he hopes that it will not be as bad as has been suggested.
‘When you come together in the church.’ The early Christians did not meet in a church building, but in any convenient place, especially in larger cities in the large houses and courtyards of wealthier members. ‘In the church’ therefore means ‘in the gathering of believers’ wherever they met. ‘When you come together’ is also referred to in 1Co 11:18; 1Co 11:20. The stress acts as background to the fact that in ‘coming together’ they actually accentuate their divisions. They come together to reveal their total disunity and lack of concern for each other.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Co 11:18. For first of all, &c. To understand this, we must observe, first, that they had meetings sometimes on purpose only for eating the Lord’s supper, 1Co 11:33. Secondly, That to those meetings they brought their own supper, 1Co 11:21. Thirdly, That though every one’s supper was brought into the common assembly, yet it was not to eat in common, but every one fell to his own supper apart, as soon as it was ready, without staying for the rest of the company, or communicating with them in eating, 1Co 11:21-23. In this St. Paul blames three things especially. First, That they ate their common food in the assembly, which was to be eaten at home in their houses, 1Co 11:22-34. Secondly, That though they ate in their common meeting-place, yet they ate separately, every one his own supper apart; so that the plenty and excess of some shamed the want and penury of others, 1Co 11:22. Hereby also the divisions among them were kept up, 1Co 11:18 they being as so many separated and divided societies, not as one united body of Christians, commemorating their common Head, as ought to have been the case in celebrating the Lord’s supper, ch. 1Co 10:16-17. Thirdly, That they mixed the Lord’s supper with their own, eating it as a part of their ordinary meal; where they made not that discrimination between it and their common food, which they ought to have done, 1Co 11:29.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Co 11:18-19 . ] The second point is found by most expositors in 1Co 11:20 (so Billroth, Rckert, Olshausen, de Wette, Ewald, Maier, Winer, p. 536 [E. T. 721]). In that case Paul first of all censures here generally the divisions which appeared in their assemblies, and then in 1Co 11:20 links on by the abuse of the Lord’s Supper as a consequence of those divisions. But this view has against it the fact that he follows up 1Co 11:18 neither by censure nor correction of what was amiss, which he would not have omitted to do, considering the importance of the matter in question, if he had regarded 1Co 11:18 as touching upon a distinct point from that in 1Co 11:20-21 . Moreover, in 1Co 11:22 , ; , which has reference to the of 1Co 11:17 , proves that in his mind 1Co 11:18-22 formed not two rebukes, but one. This serves, too, by way of reply to Hofmann, who insists on taking , in spite of the that follows it, not as firstly , but as before all things, above all . The true view, on the contrary, is (comp also Baur in the theol. Jahrbcher , 1852, p. 558; Rbiger, p. 135; Osiander), that in 1Co 11:20 does not introduce a second point of reprehension, but takes up again the first point, which had been begun in 1Co 11:18 and interrupted by . . [1815] (see on 1Co 8:4 ), an interpretation which is strongly supported by the repetition of the same words . . In using the term , [1816] Paul has already in his mind the separations at the love-feasts (not the party-divisions of 1Co 1:12 , Theodoret, and many others), but is kept for a time from explaining himself more fully by the digression which follows, and does so only in 1Co 11:20 . Still, however, the question remains: Where is the second point, which leads us to expect ? It commences in 1Co 12:1 . Paul censures two kinds of evils in connection with their assemblies (1) the degeneration of the Agapae (1Co 11:18-34 ), and (2) the misapplication of the gifts of the Spirit (1Co 12:1 ff.). The is left out of account while he pursues the first point, and instead of following it up with an , after completing his discussion, he passes on in 1Co 12:1 with the continuative to the second subject, making no further reference to that in 1Co 11:18 . How common it is in classic writers also to find the followed by no , or anything of the kind, but another turn given to the sentence, may be seen in Maetzner, a [1817] Antiph. p. 191; Bremi, a [1818] Lys. I. p. 31. Comp on Act 1:1 , and on Rom 1:8 ; Rom 3:2 .
.] in a church-meeting . This is conceived of as a local sphere (comp Bengel: “ vergit ad significationem loci ”), in which the takes place by the arrival of members; as we also say: “in einer Gesellschaft zusammenkommen.” Comp Winer, p. 386 [E. T. 515]. Although the apostle might have written (Lucian, Jov. Trag. 6), yet we must neither take in the sense of (Vulgate, Rckert, Schrader), nor impute to the word . the meaning: place of assembly (Grotius, Wolf, Heydenreich), nor understand it adverbially, as with abstract terms: congregationally (Hofmann).
There should be no comma after .; for . . . [1822] connects itself in meaning not with , but with . . [1823]
] in the sense of , denoting continuance. See Ast, a [1824] Plat. Leg. p. 9 f.; Bernhardy, p. 370; Khner, a [1825] Xen. Mem. iii. 5. 26.
] for a part , partly, Thuc. i. 23. 3, ii. 64. 2, iv. 30.1; Isocr. p. 426 D. He cannot bring himself to believe all that he has heard of the divisions at their assemblies. A delicate way of showing the better opinion that he still has of his readers, not a reference to the uncertainty of the source whence the news reached him (Hofmann).
] according to God’s decree. It is the “necessitas consequentiae” (Melanchthon); for the which follows indicates, according to the apostle’s teleological view (comp Mat 18:7 ), the end ordained by God, namely, that the tried , those, who have not suffered themselves to be carried away by party-agitation, should become manifest .
] It cannot be proved (although Rckert, Neander, Hofmann, and others hold) that is something worse [1827] than (and that must mean even ), as Pelagius, Estius, and Calovius would take it; for may be simply also (among other evils also ), and in Gal 5:20 where, moreover, does not come in at all
Paul does not intend to construct an exact climax, but merely to heap together kindred things. Now, seeing that our Epistle says nothing of absolute party- separations , but always shows us merely party- divisions subsisting along with outward unity, one cannot well make out wherein the worseness of the consisted; for to hold, with Rckert, that means to ensue , and points to the future (as Hofmann too maintains), is a perfectly groundless assumption. The were there , were not merely coming ; it will not do to confound with or (Mat 18:7 ; Luk 17:1 ), a mistake into which J. Mller also falls, l.c [1828] We must therefore, with Chrysostom, Grotius, Olshausen, al [1829] , regard as another form of designation for the same thing (the ). It does not mean heresies in the sense of false doctrine (2Pe 2:1 ), as Calvin, Calovius, and others maintain; neither does it refer simply to the separations in keeping the Agapae (Chrysostom, Oecumenius, Theophylact); but as is clear from the nature of the sentence as assigning a more general reason for what had been said to factious divisions in the church generally [1830] (according as there existed tendencies and views at variance with each other and destructive of harmony). Comp on Gal 5:20 .
[1815] . . . .
[1816] Chrysostom well remarks: , , , .
[1817] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
[1818] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
[1822] . . . .
[1823] . . . .
[1824] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
[1825] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.
[1827] So also J. Mller, v. d. Snde , I. p. 538, Exo 5 , holds that . denotes the inner disunion in the church, which shows itself in positive division and faction ( ). Wetstein, on the contrary, considered a “ mollius vocabulum” than .
[1828] .c. loco citato or laudato .
[1829] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.
[1830] It is arbitrary to ascribe the disturbance about the Lord’s Supper to one special party at Corinth, such as the Christ-party (Olshausen), or that of Apollos (Rbiger).
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
Ver. 18. There be divisions ] Gr. , schisms, rents, yea, and that about the sacrament of the Lord’s supper (that bond of love), through Satan’s malice. Now there can be no greater sin committed, saith Chrysostom, than to break the peace of the Church. Cyprian saith, It is an inexpiable blemish, such as cannot be washed off with the blood of martyrdom. a The error of it may be pardoned (saith Oecolampadius in his epistle to the Lutherans of Snevia) so there be faith in Christ Jesus; but the discord we cannot expiate though we should lay down our lives to do it.
a Hom. 11. ad Ephes.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
18. ] where is the second particular founda, nswering to this ? Ordinarily, it is assumed that the are the first abuse, the disorders in the Agap (beginning with 1Co 11:20 ), the second . But I am convinced, with Meyer, that this view is wrong. For (1) neither special blame, nor correction of abuse, is conveyed in 1Co 11:18-19 ; nor is it so much as intimated, on the ordinary hypothesis, what the character of these was. And (2) the words of 1Co 11:22 , ; , plainly refer back to 1Co 11:17 , and shew that the whole is continuous. Again (3) the of 1Co 11:20 , as so frequently, see ch. 1Co 8:4 , and Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 22, resumes the subject broken off by . . The before the Apostle’s mind are, specifically , those occurring at the Agap, but on the mention of them, he breaks off to shew that such divisions were to be no matters of surprise, but were ordained to test them, and in 1Co 11:20 he returns with the very words, , to the immediate matter in hand, and treats it at length. See more on 1Co 11:21 ff.
But the question still remains, where is the second point, answering to this ? Again with Meyer (and Macknight) I answer, at ch. 1Co 12:1 . The ABUSE OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS, which also created disorder in their assemblies , ch. 1Co 14:23 al., and concerning which he concludes, 1Co 14:40 , . , was the other point before his mind, when he wrote this . That he takes no notice in ch. 1Co 12:1 , by any or the like, of what has gone before, will be no objection to the above view to any one but the merest tiro in our Apostle’s style.
There is a trajection of the , which, in the sense, precedes ., &c.
.] in assembly; not local , as E. V., ‘ in the church ,’ but = , 1Co 11:20 . [In 1Co 11:16 , where the word is used of distinct bodies of Christians, it was not possible to keep the word assemblies , but it should be done whenever the sense admits it, and it suits the matter in hand].
] of what sort , is specified below; viz. that he does not here refer to the party dissensions of ch. 1Co 1:10 , nor could he say of them , but strictly to which took place at their meetings together , viz. that each takes before other his own supper, &c. So Chrys.: , , , , , , Hom. xxvii. p. 241; and Theophyl., c [50] , Est., Pise., Grot., which last remarks, ‘Accidebat jam illis temporibus, quod nostris multo magis evenit, ut res in stituta ad concorporandos fideles in vexillum schismatis verteretur.’
[50] cumenius of Tricca in Thrace, Cent y . XI.?
. .] Said in gentleness: q. d. “I am unwilling to believe all I hear concerning the point, but some (hardly ‘ much ,’ ‘ in great part,’ as Stanley: nor do his testimonies from Thucyd. i. 23; vii. 30, bear out this meaning. It might, of course, lie beneath the surface, but is not given by ) I cannot help believing.”
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Co 11:18 . The severe reproach, , is justified by 1Co 11:18-22 , which lead round to the intended . requires an , that is not forthcoming ( cf. Rom 1:8 ): the complement appears to lie in 12 14. viz., the abuse of spiritual gifts , a further and prominent ground of disapproval (Mr [1683] , Hn [1684] , El [1685] ). Bt [1686] and Ed [1687] find the antithesis in , 1Co 11:34 b . Hf [1688] renders “chiefly,” dispensing with any complement, but supposes a mental . 1Co 11:20 gives no contrasted ground of censure, it stands upon the same ground . (not ., in the Church ): “as often as you come together in assembly” ptp [1689] pr [1690] of repeated occurrence; the in Church meetings were chronic. For , see 1Co 1:10 f.; the pr [1691] “I am hearing” suggests (in contrast with above) continued information from various quarters ( cf. 1Co 5:1 , ): hence the qualifying (acc [1692] of definition ) , wanting in ch. i.; P. does not “believe” everything reported to him, but so much as is stated he does credit. (see parls.) implies not the bare fact, but a characteristic fact , a proprium of this Church “have their place (are there) amongst you”: cf. Act 28:18 .
[1683] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[1684] C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklrung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or 1 Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetisches Kommentar (1896).
[1685] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians .
[1686] J. A. Beet’s St. Paul’s Epp. to the Corinthians (1882).
[1687] T. C. Edwards’ Commentary on the First Ep. to the Corinthians . 2
[1688] J. C. K. von Hofmann’s Die heilige Schrift N.T. untersucht , ii. 2 (2te Auflage, 1874).
[1689] participle
[1690] present tense.
[1691] present tense.
[1692] accusative case.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
the. All the texts omit. “In church” means “in assembly”. No buildings were set apart for Christian worship so early as this.
be. Greek. huparcho. See Luk 9:48.
divisions. Greek. schisma. See 1Co 1:10.
among. App-104.
partly believe it = believe some part (of it), or believe it of some part of you.
believe. App-150.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
18.] -where is the second particular founda, nswering to this ? Ordinarily, it is assumed that the are the first abuse, the disorders in the Agap (beginning with 1Co 11:20), the second. But I am convinced, with Meyer, that this view is wrong. For (1) neither special blame, nor correction of abuse, is conveyed in 1Co 11:18-19; nor is it so much as intimated, on the ordinary hypothesis, what the character of these was. And (2) the words of 1Co 11:22, ; , plainly refer back to 1Co 11:17, and shew that the whole is continuous. Again (3) the of 1Co 11:20, as so frequently,-see ch. 1Co 8:4, and Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 22,-resumes the subject broken off by . . The before the Apostles mind are, specifically, those occurring at the Agap,-but on the mention of them, he breaks off to shew that such divisions were to be no matters of surprise, but were ordained to test them,-and in 1Co 11:20 he returns with the very words, ,-to the immediate matter in hand, and treats it at length. See more on 1Co 11:21 ff.
But the question still remains, where is the second point, answering to this ? Again with Meyer (and Macknight) I answer,-at ch. 1Co 12:1. The ABUSE OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS, which also created disorder in their assemblies, ch. 1Co 14:23 al., and concerning which he concludes, 1Co 14:40, . ,-was the other point before his mind, when he wrote this . That he takes no notice in ch. 1Co 12:1, by any or the like, of what has gone before, will be no objection to the above view to any one but the merest tiro in our Apostles style.
There is a trajection of the , which, in the sense, precedes ., &c.
.] in assembly; not local, as E. V., in the church, but = , 1Co 11:20. [In 1Co 11:16, where the word is used of distinct bodies of Christians, it was not possible to keep the word assemblies, but it should be done whenever the sense admits it, and it suits the matter in hand].
] of what sort, is specified below; viz. that he does not here refer to the party dissensions of ch. 1Co 1:10, nor could he say of them , but strictly to which took place at their meetings together, viz. that each takes before other his own supper, &c. So Chrys.: , , , , , , Hom. xxvii. p. 241; and Theophyl., c[50], Est., Pise., Grot., which last remarks, Accidebat jam illis temporibus, quod nostris multo magis evenit, ut res in stituta ad concorporandos fideles in vexillum schismatis verteretur.
[50] cumenius of Tricca in Thrace, Centy. XI.?
. .] Said in gentleness: q. d. I am unwilling to believe all I hear concerning the point, but some (hardly much, in great part, as Stanley: nor do his testimonies from Thucyd. i. 23; vii. 30, bear out this meaning. It might, of course, lie beneath the surface, but is not given by ) I cannot help believing.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Co 11:18-22. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lords supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.
These Corinthians fell into a great many errors. Everybody was a speaker, and said whatever he pleased; and they had no proper order or rule. Among other evils, when they met together to observe the Lords Supper, they brought their own food with them, thinking that eating thus together was keeping the sacred feast. So the richer ones feasted to the full, and the poor went almost without anything. One is hungry, and another is drunken, says the apostle, and he tells them that this was not the right way of observing the Lords Supper. Yet it is evident that the idea which was in their mind was that of feasting together. They had exaggerated it, and carried it to a grievous excess; but that was the idea they had concerning it. Certainly, there was no altar, or priest, or anything of the sort. Now the apostle tells them how the ordinance should be observed.
1Co 11:23-25. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. How wonderfully simple it all is! There is nothing here of the paraphernalia of a sacrament. It is a simple memorial festival, that is all.
1Co 11:26-27. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lords death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
He shall be guilty with respect to that body, not with respect to that bread, against which he cannot sin, but with respect to that body which is represented by the bread, and with respect to that blood which is represented by the cup. See with what holy solemnity this humble feast is fenced and invested. There is a divinity which doth hedge the simple ordinance of Christ lest men should trifle with it to their eternal ruin.
1Co 11:28-29. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lords body.
Judgment or condemnation is the word in the original, not damnation. That is not a fair translation, neither does it express the truth. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily condemns himself in so doing, he comes under judgment for that act. This is the kind of judgment that falls upon Christians if they come unworthily to the Lords table:
1Co 11:30-32. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
Believers, who are rendered sick, or who even die, because of their offence against the Lords ordinance, are not therefore condemned to hell. Far from it; it is that they may not be so condemned that God visits them. When we the people of God are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
1Co 11:33-34. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.
By due attention to the apostles injunctions, they would be able rightly to observe the ordinance; and we also may learn, from what Paul wrote, how we may worthily come to the table of our Lord.
This exposition consisted of readings from Mat 26:17-30; and 1Co 11:18-34.
Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible
1Co 11:18. , first) This word, when secondly does not follow, gives the discourse a degree of characteristic or feeling.[97] Their assembly, even in the use of the gifts, might be held by the Corinthians for the better, 14.- , in the church) The church here approaches to the signification of the place of meeting. , into one place, [where it is right, that all things should be arranged with a view to harmony.-V. g.]-) divisions, not only in your mental opinions, ch. 1Co 1:10, but also as to your outward meetings, 1Co 11:21.- , partly) He excepts the innocent, and uses a mild term.-, I believe) while his love was unaffected by it, ch. 1Co 13:7.
[97] Appendix on moratus Sermo.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Co 11:18
1Co 11:18
For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that divisions exist among you;-The parties, in following the different leaders, which had been reported to him by the house of Chloe, were accompanied by divisions when they met for worship.
and I partly believe it.-The facts had possibly been exaggerated by others, [but he was forced to believe enough to excite his strong disapproval.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
I hear: 1Co 1:10-12, 1Co 3:3, 1Co 5:1, 1Co 6:1
divisions: or, schisms, 1Co 1:10, 1Co 3:3
Reciprocal: Gen 37:2 – evil report Joh 10:19 – General Act 11:26 – with the church Act 14:27 – and had Rom 16:17 – cause 1Co 1:11 – it hath 1Co 13:5 – behave 1Co 14:23 – the whole 2Co 1:14 – in part 1Ti 6:4 – words Heb 10:25 – forsaking
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Verse 18. The divisions in the church were over several subjects, but Paul is writing of a particular one in the rest of this chapter; and one that is very important because it pertains to the Lord’s Supper. A report of the divisions in the church had come to Paul in some manner not stated. Partly believe it cannot apply to the degree of his belief, for a man either believes a report or he does not. The idea is that Paul believed the report to be true in regard to a part of the congregation, but that some of them dis approved of the divisions. The argument in the next verse justifies this conclusion.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Co 11:18. For first of all, when ye come together in the churchGr. in church, (to meeting, as we might say), for there is next to no authority for the Greek article before church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and I partly believe ita delicate way of saying what was unpleasant. For he is going to speak in no pleasant manner of their behaviour in relation to the Lords Supper.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Vv. 18, 19. For first of all, when ye come together in the Church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. 19. For there must even be sects among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.
The apostle now gives the reason for the severe words: I do not praise you. The: for first of all, announces a first rebuke in regard to the divisions in their assemblies (1Co 11:18-19), and leads us to expect a second to be indicated by a: then again; but this formula, corresponding to the first of all, is found nowhere in the sequel. Where does this second rebuke begin? Meyer, Osiander, heinrici think that it points to the abuses in the exercise of spiritual gifts treated in chaps. 12-14; that if there is not found at the beginning of chap. 12 the , then again, which should correspond to our of 1Co 11:18, this may arise from the fact that the long development of chap. 11 had made the apostle forget the form used at the beginning of the passage (1Co 11:18). Edwards prefers to place the expected secondly in 1Co 11:34, where, according to him, it is logically implied in the , the rest. Hofmann thinks that there is no secondly to be sought in the sequel, since signifies here, as often, not firstly, but principally; comp. Rom 3:2. This last assertion might be established if stood alone; with the it is less easily admissible. And how should the divisions be represented as the essential point in what follows? The meaning of Edwards can as little be admitted. The words: The rest will I set in order when I come, do not contain any threatening, any announcement of rebukes to be addressed to them. Meyer’s meaning falls to the ground for this reason: that the divisions, , mentioned 1Co 11:18-19, are not put by the apostle in any connection with the disorders in the Holy Supper, which are explained by a wholly different cause. Consequently the two subjects cannot have been combined in one by Paul, and both embraced in the of 1Co 11:18. We have therefore simply, with Olshausen, de Wette, Rckert, to place the understood then again at 1Co 11:20, where the rebukes begin relating to the celebration of the Supper. And such is the meaning to which we are led by the close study of the relation between the three terms , ye come together (1Co 11:17), , when ye come together (1Co 11:18), and , when therefore ye come together (1Co 11:20). Meyer thinks that the second (1Co 11:20) is the repetition of the (1Co 11:18). Hence it is he combines in one and the same rebuke the blame bearing on the divisions and that which applies to the profanation of the Supper. This is his error. The second is not the repetition of the first, but of the , ye come together, of 1Co 11:17 : You come together for the worse, and that chiefly because of your divisions (1Co 11:18-19), then again because of the way you celebrate the Supper. Here is the second rebuke, developed from 1Co 11:20 to 1Co 11:34. Meyer asks why, if it is so, the first rebuke is found so briefly treated? Quite simply, because this matter of divisions had already formed the subject of the whole first part, chaps. 1-4, and Paul needs only here to refer to it, while applying to their meetings for worship what he had said of the malign influence exercised by such divisions over the life of the Church in general.
The two are therefore parallel to one another, and both rest on the of 1Co 11:17. Only the first of these participles points to their assemblies merely in a passing way, while the second, referring as it does to the subject about which the apostle is now most seriously concerned, the profanation of the holy table, is emphasized by the , therefore; this particle shows that he is returning to the thought which had mainly suggested to him the , ye come together for the worse (1Co 11:17).
The first thing which Paul has to blame in their assemblies for worship, is the divisions which break out among them.
The before in the T. R. should be rejected. The meaning is not: in the church, but: in church: when you come together in a general assembly of the Church. The point in question is the manner, not the place; comp. 1Co 14:23. The form of the phrase seems incorrect; for it is not at the time when their divisions break out that the apostle hears of them. This finds its explanation the instant we refer the present participle , not to the time, but to the manner of meeting.
The news might have reached him either by the house of Chloe (1Co 1:11), or by the deputies of the Church (1Co 16:15).
The: and I partly believe it, is very delicate. Paul would admit that the state of things has been described to him in certain respects worse than it is. But when a Church is in the moral state in which that of Corinth is, it must inevitably become a theatre of discord. This necessity is of the same kind as that indicated by Jesus when He said: It must needs be that offences come (Mat 18:7), that is to say: given such a world as ours.
In the following verse the moral reason is explained which renders these discussions providentially necessary.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
For first of all [Paul was not careful as to his divisions, and so his “secondly” is not clearly stated. Olshausen, Ewald, Winer and others think it begins at 1Co 11:20; and thus the apostle first censures the factions, and next the evils which resulted from the factions. But as Paul includes both these in one rebuke, it is best with Meyer, Fausset and others to find the “secondly” beginning at 1Co 12:1; so that the first rebuke is directed at their misbehavior at the love-feast and the Lord’s Supper, and the second at their misapplication of the gifts of the Spirit], when ye come together in the church [i. e., in the congregation, for as yet they doubtless had no building (Act 18:7), and in this latter sense the word is nowhere used in the New Testament], I hear that divisions exist among you; and I partly believe it. [Evidently the divisions rebuked in chapter 1 manifested themselves in the meetings of the congregation, and the Pauline, Petrine and other parties gathered in separate groups. Paul was distressed to hear this, and Alford interprets him thus: “I am unwilling to believe all I hear, but some I can not help believing.”]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
THE LOVE FEAST AND THE EUCHARIST
We must remember that the Lords Supper was instituted by our Savior immediately after the last meal He ate with His apostles. During the apostolic age they perpetuated that custom of having a social, religious meal, and eating together in commemoration of the last Supper of our Lord and His apostles and exhibitory of their love to one another. For this reason, John Wesley revived the love feast. In connection with this love feast, which preceded the Eucharist, they had run into some irregularities which the apostle here endeavors to correct, stating to them that their coming together is not for the better, but for the worse.
18-19. For in the first place, indeed your coming together in the church, I hear there are schisms among you, and I partially believe it. For it behooveth that there be heresies among you in order that the approved among you may be made manifest. Darkness prepares us to appreciate the light of day. Adversity qualifies us for prosperity, and the world is made up of antitheses. Everything has its antithetical counterpart. Hence all things work together for good to them that love God (Rom 8:38); i. e., everything in the universe, in the wonderful redemption of Christ, is made a blessing to His true people. Even the schisms and heresies with which He sees fit to inflict the church become a great source of blessing to the truly humble, meek and lowly by way of profitable illustration and admonition. The prevailing worldliness and wickedness in the churches today are ousting the true hearts from the incantations of Satans oblivious lullabies, and stirring them out to wake up and appreciate the glorious gospel of entire sanctification.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 18
And I partly believe it. This disposition of the apostle to abate something from the evil of the reports which he heard against his brethren, is an example to us all. Instead of reluctantly admitting, such evidence, and believing only a part, men generally believe a little more than is told them.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
11:18 {15} For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
(15) To celebrate the Lord’s supper correctly, it is required that there is not only consent of doctrine, but also of affections, so that it is not profaned.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
"In the first place" evidently refers to all that follows in 1Co 11:18-34. Paul decided to wait to deal with other similar matters until he arrived in Corinth (1Co 11:34).
The context of the occasion in view was the assembling of the whole church family (cf. 1Co 14:23). When Paul later wrote his epistle to the Romans from Corinth, the Corinthian church was meeting in the home of Gaius (Rom 16:23). If there were several house-churches in Corinth at this time, probably all of them were guilty of this abuse.
The divisions (Gr. schismata) to which Paul referred here were social groupings within the church, not differences involving loyalty to leaders (1Co 1:12).
Evidently those who had reported this abuse in the Corinthian church to Paul had given him much detail about what was happening. Paul said he believed enough of this to conclude that there was a serious problem.