In my previous post, I provided a summary of 1 Corinthians 1-10. A basic review of these chapters reveal a recurring theme in Paul’s letter. This theme is centered on unity: the understanding that believers are united as a single entity, “a whole” belonging to Christ and God.
Thus, the letter stresses the importance of focusing on the collective rather than individual parts to “build up” God’s kingdom. Consequently, internal divisions were not to exist among them, contrasting with those whose actions are guided only by a natural understanding instead of the mind of Christ (a.k.a, those who are without the Spirit vs. those who have the Spirit).
Now, let’s examine 1 Corinthians 10, verses 23-31, the passage directly preceding our key text in chapter 11.
Translation
1 Corinthians 10, verses 23-31 read as follows:
23 “I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”—but not everything is constructive. 24 No one should seek their own good, but the good of others.
25 Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, 26 for, “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it.”[f]
27 If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience. 28 But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, both for the sake of the one who told you and for the sake of conscience. 29 I am referring to the other person’s conscience, not yours. For why is my freedom being judged by another’s conscience? 30 If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for?
31 So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. — 1 Cor. 10:23-31 NIV
Below is my own translation of the passage.
He allows everything for my sake, but not everything brings together. He allows everything for my sake, but not everything builds up. No one separate is to pursue that which is for the sake of himself, but that which is for the sake of the other.
Everything being sold in the market you all are to consume, (with) no one inquiring because of the knowledge—because from the Lord is the land and that which fills it.
And if anyone of the faithless/disobedient summons you all, and you all are willing to go, everything (that is) set before you, consume, (with) no one scrutinizing because of the knowledge.
But if anyone might say to you all, “This is a thing sacrificed to idols,” you all shall not consume it on account of that one—the informer— and the knowledge.
Now, I say ‘knowledge’—indeed not the one of yourselves, but the one of the other there. Because why? Should my freedom be decided by the knowledge of another?
But, if I delightfully take part, why then do I speak against myself concerning that which I agree with? Therefore, whether you all eat, whether you drink, or anything you do, do everything for the honor of God.
No Fellowship with Demons Allowed
It’s hard to make sense of all of that, but the gist of it seems to be this: Paul has just finished condemning idolatry and explaining that those who consume food offered to idols are participating in the offering itself, even if they aren’t the ones performing the ritual.
He then states that pagans’ offerings are directed toward demons (daimons)—other gods or spiritual entities—and he wishes to prevent the Corinthians from associating with these divinities, asserting that they cannot partake in both the Lord’s cup and the cup of demons, nor share in both the Lord’s table and the table of demons. What could this mean and how is it significant?
Cups and Tables: Their Significance
Paul’s mention of cups and tables may refer to the high-ranking position of a cup-bearer, who served a ruler in ancient times. A cup-bearer’s duties involved serving drinks and, importantly, drinking from the ruler’s cup and tasting his food, to ensure they weren’t poisoned. Due to the nature of the job, a close personal bond is thought to have formed between the cup-bearer and the ruler.
This close personal relationship is illustrated in the account of Nehemiah (Nehemiah 1:11-2:9), and in Joseph’s interaction with the imprisoned cup-bearer and baker (Gen. 40). In Joseph’s account, the cup-bearer was restored to his post while the baker was put to death. It was even the cup-bearer who, (though after two years) brought up Joseph to Pharaoh, ultimately leading to Joseph’s rise in Egypt.
Therefore, the role of a cup-bearer, or the act of drinking from a ruler’s cup, represented an intimate connection, signifying participation in their life, including both the good and bad, blessings and sufferings. It was a role that demanded self-sacrifice, particularly if the cup bearer died from a poisoned drink meant for the ruler.
Jesus, for example, was the cup-bearer for the Heavenly Father (Matt. 26:39). Metaphorically, he drank from the cup that contained the poison that sought to ultimately destroy God’s kingdom on earth —sin. The sin killed Jesus, but by sacrificing himself, as would a cup bearer, the Kingdom of God was preserved and will be completely eradicated of sin, and revealed in its fullness, in the Father’s timing.
Additionally, Jesus told his disciples that they would drink of his cup which we see played out in Scripture (Matt. 20:22-23). Thus, metaphorically, drinking from one’s cup, and sharing in their table, would likely have symbolized close fellowship and servitude. This is why idolatry, or “drinking from the cup of demons” was forbidden.
Moreover, it is not merely a moral transgression, but it is impossible to commit to both physically and spiritually as one ultimately brings blessings while the other brings destruction. Since these paths diverge and lead to separate endpoints, an individual must select one course of action, as sharing in both is not an option.
“I Have the Right to Do Anything?”
Moving on, Paul next addresses what many interpret as a hypothetical argument potentially raised by the Corinthians: “I have the right to do anything.” Possibly, this was meant to express a believer’s “freedom in Christ.” However, Paul shuts this down by stating that not all actions “gather” or “bring together” and not all actions strengthen or build.
One thing I wish to point out, is that neither we nor any unbeliever has the right to do anything in life that we choose to do. God certainly does not permit believers to do everything. Therefore, Paul is not agreeing with the idea that a believer has the right to do anything they want; because that is simply not true.
What is true, however, is that the Lord allows anything that is for our well-being. In keeping with the context of the passage, the focus of this permission is on eating which is highly beneficial to human life and thus contributes to the well-being of any person. To narrow it down even further, Paul is speaking of eating sacrificial food.
Although eating sacrificial food is allowed for one’s benefit— whether for survival or pleasure, in some cases it can be harmful. In some situations it does not “bring together”, “gather” or “collect” because it does not “harmonize” with the teachings of God or help build up the church and kingdom of God.
Therefore, one must be mindful of their surroundings and situation, and be ready and willing to make sacrifices in some instances in order to do what is best for others and not simply seek to do what is best for themselves.
Don’t Ask About the Meat—-Just Eat!
He then gives examples. If one is in the market, eat anything sold there without examining it or scrutinizing it. Although you may suspect that it was previously sacrificed to idols or gods, (as much of the meat and products in the markets in those times probably were), do not become Inspector Gadget and set off on a quest to figure out if it was in fact sacrificed to idols and don’t go around disputing with people about it. Don’t ask questions about the meat—just eat.
This is because you know there is only one God and one Lord from whom all things come. The earth is from the Lord and everything that is in it. It is through him that you live, move, and have your being (Acts 17:28). So, it doesn’t really matter if it was sacrificed to an idol since an idol to you, is nothing. Your conscience should be at peace knowing this.
Also, if someone among the “faithless” or “disobedient” summons you, again, don’t ask questions about the food that is placed before you based on the fact that you know it’s quite possible it was sacrificed to idols—just eat. However, if you are directly informed that any of it was offered to idols, you should not eat it for the sake of the person who told you and because of the knowledge.
In this instance, Paul clarifies and says that now he was not talking about their own shared knowledge between them, but about the knowledge and understanding of the other person. Perhaps this was a member of their group whose understanding was not yet strong. Or maybe, it could have been a pagan who didn’t trust in God. In either case, how can someone who lacks understanding control another person’s freedom?
Why is My Freedom Decided By Another?
It is likely that the other person was still entangled in ideas of idolatry. In eating sacrificial food, they believed they were honoring a god (1 Cor. 8:7). Therefore, those with understanding were not to partake, as consciously participating would join them together in fellowship with demons—at least that’s how it would seem to the other there. They, themselves were well aware that there is only one God and all things come from him, but they were not to participate because of the understanding of the other person.
“Why is this?” Paul asks as he begins to hypothetically wrestle with this internal conflict, obviously intended to represent what the Corinthians may have been thinking at this time. Why is my freedom to speak and act conditioned upon another person’s knowledge? Why should I have to suffer and sacrifice on account of them when they’re the ones who are confused and lacking in understanding? It’s not fair.
But on the other hand, if I delightfully partake in the sacrificial food, having this awareness that it was sacrificed to idols, then I eat in agreement and convey the idea that I’m okay with it and ultimately that this practice is okay. Why then do I speak against myself?
Why do I speak so strongly against idolatry when I obviously agree with it? At least that’s how it would look. How then, will this reconcile the idolaters to God? How will it promote unity and agreement among believers? In what way will it build up the church? (1 Cor. 10:23) Additionally, why risk having someone challenge my message or cause a dispute based on these actions? Such behavior does not unite people with the Lord, or build up his kingdom.
Certainly, we are not obligated to sacrifice our liberties on a continuous basis, or hide a particular lifestyle for the sake of others. However, the church, specifically when acting collectively, ought to function in complete unity, avoiding divisions over debatable topics (ex., whether Christians should go to the movies, music preferences, men wearing long vs. short pants, etc.) that frequently result in pointless disputes (Rom. 14:1).
This appears to be Paul’s intention, rather than aiming to stop someone from causing another to sin due to their “weak conscience.” Furthermore, what God defines as sin is indeed sin, and in areas where he has not specified something as sin, we are free, regardless of our personal views and convictions. It is important to remember, however, that where freedom resides, wisdom should dwell in close proximity, since our freedom should be exercised with wisdom. Paul, consequently, urges them to do everything, whether eating, drinking, or anything else (as these were mere examples), for God’s glory.
Key Takeaways
Paul previously mentioned that not everyone was aware of the one God (1 Cor. 8:7); these people might be sincere yet ignorant of the truth, similar to the audience he spoke to in Athens (Acts 17:22-31). They could potentially think it’s fine to sacrifice to all deities, perhaps even incorporating the one true God into their diverse array of gods, and honoring him as they do pagan idols. I believe it could also refer to someone who only worships and sacrifices to the God of Abraham, despite believing in other gods.
Consequently, Paul says if you, claiming to worship and represent the God of Abraham and Jesus Christ, are seen participating in sacrifices to idols and other gods, those lacking in knowledge will conclude that such behavior is acceptable, thus continuing in their idolatry and remaining separated from God. A division within the church might also result from those with weaker understandings accusing those with more mature understandings, of sinning, which could result in unnecessary insults and arguments.
Additionally, as Paul observed, knowledge can lead to arrogance (1 Cor. 8:1), making one self-absorbed and less mindful of the needs and development of others. This commonly leads to disputes. as well. Therefore, he reminds them that some actions, such as eating food sacrificed to idols, although generally permissible, do not reconcile people to God or build up the church in some circumstances. All things do not create harmony.
Thus, being the more mature sibling in a sense, it is your responsibility to be mature and understanding enough about the overall picture to take one for the team. Therefore, Paul tells them to do everything for the purpose of honoring God. This means, acting with consideration for God’s will, his people, his purpose, and reputation, rather than solely for oneself.
So, once again, we see a focus on unity. Paul encourages the Corinthians to consider the whole unit when making decisions, which includes the church, God, and Christ. Ultimately, the best action to take is the one that reconciles people with God, builds up the church, and glorifies the Lord to the fullest extent possible. In the next post, we’ll take a closer look at 1 Corinthians 10:32 – 11:1.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In