Sermon Tone Analysis

*1 Corinthians 11:17-19… *But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you, because you come together not for the better but for the worse.

18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and in part, I believe it.

19 For there must also be factions among you, in order that those who are approved may have become evident among you.

*Commentary*

            Whereas Paul praised the Corinthians in 11:2 for their keeping of the traditions that he had passed onto them, in the instructions he is about to give in vv.

17-34 concerning the Communion table, he “does not praise [them].”

He is angry about their abuse of the solemn sacrament of the Lord’s Supper (Communion) which he will expound upon further in vv.

20-22.

Paul begins in v. 17 with another sharp rebuke – “I do not praise you.”

His tone is one of angry frustration concerning a group of professed Christians who were acting like pagans.

His anger is justified as a leader in the Christian church because the people he led to Christ were misrepresenting Christ to the world around them.

They were coming together “not for the better but for the worse.”

“Coming together” signified their regular corporate gatherings when they ate together to commemorate the Lord’s death through the breaking of bread (representing Christ’s body) and the drinking of wine (representing Christ’s blood).

The gathering itself was to be one of worship, and it was intended to bring about an intense fellowship among Christians.

But the opposite was occurring, for while coming together to remember the death of Christ they were bringing death upon themselves (see v. 30) through their conduct – “for the worse.”

In v. 18 the phrase “in the first place” is better translated as “chiefly.”

The chief problem was that they were coming together as a church to observe the Lord’s Supper with “divisions” (Gr.

/skismata/) among themselves.

(The word for “church” in the Greek text is “ekklesia.”

It’s always used in reference to a gathering of believers, never a church building).

Of course this is not new in the study of the Corinthian church, for the members had already drawn the battle lines over which preacher they preferred, and there were many divisions as a result (cf. 1 Cor.

1:10-17; 3:1-3).

The divisions that Paul had heard about he also believed, at least “in part.”

Possibly he was giving them the benefit of the doubt by only believing part of the report he had heard.

In reference to the report concerning the divisions in the church in v. 19 Paul adds an interesting tidbit, saying that there must be “factions” (Gr.

/heresy/) in the church.

This word is a reference to “separate groups” which are “necessary” in order that those who are “approved” (genuine; honored) might distinguish themselves from everyone else.

The necessity for this is so that God’s true and mature servants will rise to the top and be evident to all in the church.

Therefore, divisions among people in the church are as inevitable as they are essential so that the genuine believers – and leaders among the believers – will rise up and show themselves to be the mature Christians they are in the midst of the immature and divisive ones.

*Food for Thought*

            Churches haven’t changed much over time.

They’re still filled with divisions and power-struggles; still not too good at unity unfortunately.

We fight about songs, Bible versions, dress codes, and whether or not it’s wrong to drink alcohol, play cards for a quarter, or give candy out at Halloween.

However, divisions and factions are given to us for a reason: so that the mature will rise up and show themselves approved.

How do you measure up to that?

Are you part of the problem of divisions in the church, or are you a part of the solution?

It’s the immature and divisive ones who speak out and gripe about non-essentials.

But it’s the “approved” Christians who deal with the immature ones and distinguish themselves as God’s faithful.

Let that be you.

*1 Corinthians 11:20-22… *Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper, for in your eating each one takes his own supper first; and one is hungry and another is drunk.

What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and drink?

Or do you despise the church of God, and shame those who have nothing?

What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you?

In this I will not praise you.

*Commentary*

            In the early church the members were accustomed to sharing in the Love Feast.

They gathered together regularly and shared a meal.

In the first century church, as today, there were various classes of people.

There were the rich, the poor, the slave, and the free.

There were men, women, and there were children.

And when they came together to commemorate the Lord’s death at Calvary through this Supper they were classless and sexless – they were one people united for a common purpose.

True to their nature, however, the Corinthian Christians had corrupted this meal.

They were once again in error, and Paul addresses the issue in vv.

20-22.

The “Lord’s Supper” in v. 20 refers to a meal Christians ate together.

In that day most people ate light breakfasts consisting of bread and wine.

At lunchtime most would eat informally in the square or in the streets.

The only sit-down meal most people enjoyed was the evening meal, in Greek called the “/deipnon/,” and it was the main meal of the day.

It was the one meal that was not inhibited by time, and consequently folks could linger over that meal and enjoy the company of their families – whether Christian or immediate.

When they met with their church gatherings for the /deipnon/, what was supposed to be a common meal for all to enjoy had instead become an eating frenzy for the rich.

For it was the rich who provided most of the food.

The poor, who could bring only a little if any, and many others, were being segregated while a certain few would gorge themselves before everyone else arrived.

They brought their own food, and instead of waiting for the less fortunate to arrive so as to share, they would eat it up and drink it up.

While one person was hungry, another was drunk; while one person starved, another was stuffed, and the first word in v. 22 conveys Paul’s opinion of this: “What!”

Though not in the Greek text as such, this is clearly his attitude reflecting his rage over such behavior.

Verse 22 asks the rhetorical question along the line of “Don’t you have houses in which to eat and drink?”

The underlying point of Paul’s question is “Stuff yourselves at home, and stop showing your contempt for Christ’s people (the church) by depriving them of your food!”

By depriving the poor of food at the Love Feast the perpetrators were showing their hatred for God and His people, for they were “shaming those who had nothing.”

And as such, although these Corinthian Christians were hoping to receive praise from their spiritual Father, he says, “Shall I praise you?

No!” And why should he?

They were cliquing up and drawing distinctions between race and class in the church /where there are no distinctions/.

All are one in Christ.

*Food for Thought*

            A church were social class distinctions are made is no church at all.

Whether black, white, male, female, educated, or uneducated, we are one in Christ Jesus (Gal.

3:28).

This doesn’t mean that all cultures MUST worship together, but it does mean that no culture is better or worse than another.

Our styles may differ, but our God is the same.

He sees no distinctions.

The church ought also to come together regularly as a group of believers to commemorate the Lord’s supper – a time where we share all things in common; a time where no one hurries off to be somewhere else.

A time when God’s children fellowship and enjoy each other.

God’s people are never more united when we come together to commemorate His death and his future return.

*1 Corinthians 11:23-26… *For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it, and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me." 25 In the same way He took the cup also, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes.

*Commentary*

            What Paul “received” in v. 23 concerning the night of Christ’s death he “received” from the Lord Jesus.

He told Paul about his death, his betrayal, and about the “bread” and the “cup.”

On the night Jesus died he “took bread,” gave it to the disciples to eat, and he “took the cup also” to give to them to drink.

This was the common practice while observing the Passover meal which commemorated the night the Israelites made their exodus from Egypt in 1446 BC under Moses.

The Passover celebration was observed by all Jews once per year.

It began with a blessing from the host accompanied by a cup of wine that was passed to each one present.

The first cup was passed while bitter herbs were eaten.

One person would give the message of the Passover at that time.

They also sang Psalms 113-118 (Hallel Psalms).

The second cup followed, and unleavened bread was eaten.

Then the main meal was served which consisted of a roasted lamb.

The third cup of wine was then passed while singing ensued, and then the fourth cup was consumed which celebrated God’s coming kingdom as the ceremony closed.

It was the third cup of wine, the “cup of blessing,” that Jesus blessed and which became the cup of Communion in Luke 22:20… “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.”

Verse 24 says that Jesus gave “thanks” for the food, from the Greek /eucharisto/ from whence we get the “Eucharist.”

Now just as the bread represented the Exodus it now came to represent the body of Jesus Christ, for he says, “This is my body which is for you.”

In the same way the “cup” which symbolized the blood of the lamb that had been smeared on the doorposts the night of the exodus from Egypt, it now represented the blood of Christ.

In the same way that blood had always ratified covenants in the Old Testament (old covenant), now the NEW covenant would also be ratified in blood.

Except that this blood of Jesus Christ was blood shed “once for all” (Hebrews 9:28), and it didn’t just set free Jews from Egypt, it set all peoples and nations free from the curse of the Old Covenant as found in the Law of Moses.

That covenant could not be fulfilled by mankind, so Jesus did it for us.

Consequently, partaking of the Lord’s Supper is now done “in remembrance” of Christ’s death on the cross.