Finish Well
Be Faithful to the Faith of God
By quoting Exodus 32:6, Paul deftly identifies the “eating” of the temple food with the act of idolatry that brought God’s wrath upon Israel.
Be Faithful to the Fellowship of God
Our sacrifices are not occasions for drunken self-indulgence—such practices are abhorrent to God but for sobriety. At these sacrifices prayers for the welfare (sōtēria) of the community must take precedence of those for ourselves; for we are born for fellowship (koinōnia), and he who sets its claims above his private interests is specially acceptable (kecharismenos: “graced”) to God.
(Ap. 2. 196)
While denying the real existence of pagan gods, Paul affirms the existence of a world of spiritual powers hostile to God, who are associated with pagan cultic practice (cf. 1 Cor. 8:5). Those who participate in the temple meals are becoming “partners [koinōnoi] with demons” (1 Cor. 10:20b); that is what Paul is trying to prevent at all costs. The alternatives are starkly posed in verse 21: the Corinthians must choose between the table of the Lord and the table of demons. It is impossible to be a sharer in both.
There are two distinct dangers here: the idols have more power than we suppose to reshape us, and we are courting the judgment of God
Be Faithful to the Family of God
Point A: All our actions should glorify God by seeking the benefit of others rather than ourselves.
Point B: Within the framework of that principle, we are free to eat whatever we like with thankfulness.
First he rejects the original framework of the question and reframes the problem in terms of love rather than rights (8:1–13). Then he offers himself as an example of renouncing personal rights for the sake of making the gospel effective in the community—and along the way defends himself against criticisms of his refusal to accept patronage (9:1–27). Shifting ground, he narrates the Corinthian church into the world of Scripture and warns of the dangers of idolatry (10:1–22). Finally, in the last section (10:23–11:1), he dialectically balances freedom and servanthood and relocates the whole problem, in a final deft move, in relation to the imitation of Christ. By any standard this is a remarkable performance of pastoral theology.