1 Cor 11:27

[TomUK]

Could someone please help me with what verse 27 of 1 corinthians actually means. Different translations interpret this passage very differently. Here are two key examples
Therefore, whoever eats this bread of drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. (NKJ)
So that whosoever shall eat the bread, or drink the cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty in respect of the body and of the blood of the Lord. (Darby)
To me there seems to be a key difference. New King James appears to say that eating in an unworthy manner disrespects the Lords memory, whereas the Darby appears to be refering to a direct violation of the body and blood.
Any help with this passage? Thanks

 

[Serapha]

Could someone please help me with what verse 27 of 1 corinthians actually means. Different translations interpret this passage very differently. Here are two key examples
Therefore, whoever eats this bread of drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. (NKJ)
So that whosoever shall eat the bread, or drink the cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty in respect of the body and of the blood of the Lord. (Darby)
To me there seems to be a key difference. New King James appears to say that eating in an unworthy manner disrespects the Lords memory, whereas the Darby appears to be refering to a direct violation of the body and blood.
Any help with this passage? Thanks

Hi there!




It is a self-analysis. To be "in communion" with the Lord is to have nothing between you and God... all hearts clear, sins forgiven... etc.



[font=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament[/font] [font=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]Unworthily (anaxiwß). Old adverb, only here in N.T., not genuine in verse Matthew 29. Paul defines his meaning in verse Matthew 29. He does not say or imply that we ourselves must be "worthy" (axioi) to partake of the Lord's Supper. No one would ever partake on those terms. Many pious souls have abstained from observing the ordinance through false exegesis here. Shall be guilty (enocoß estai). Shall be held guilty as in Matthew 5:21 which see. Shall be guilty of a crime committed against the body and blood of the Lord by such sacrilege (cf. Hebrews 6:6; Hebrews 10:29). [/font]

 

[daveleau]

Anyone that is not a Christian and partakes of Communion is committing an egregious sin.

 

[christian-only]

The KJV says "unworthily," which is an adverb, note the -ly ending. Since most people miss the -ly ending and read "worthy" by mistake, the NKJV says "unworthy manner" to make sure that no one misses that it is an adverb. It describes how the person is observing the communion, not the state of the person's worth.

 

[tqpix]

From reading the context, I interpreted it as this: If anyone who goes ahead and eats/drinks without waiting for anyone else is eating unworthily.

 

[TomUK]

The reason i was asking was i've been doing a lot of thinking into transubstantiation (sp?) and consubstantiation, and was wondering if this verse backed up either of those theories. Two me it seemed like the Darby did back them up, but the NkJ didn't

 

[daveleau]

From reading the context, I interpreted it as this: If anyone who goes ahead and eats/drinks without waiting for anyone else is eating unworthily.

Where does it say in Scripture that His followers must all partake at the same time? Does this entend only to those in the local church, or does it apply to everyone in a given area, or even in the entire world? Does this mean that we should set specific times for Communion and not eat it until every Christian int he church, in the area or on earth that wants to partake has His cup and wafer in his hands and is ready to partake? The teachings of God through the Bible do not seem to make any importance regarding what others do. I haven't read any Scripture that tells us that we can be committing sin because we ate and drank communion before others did. Basically, this would mean, that in the Catholic's and Episcopalian's communion lines, everyone would be eating unworthily except for the last person in line.

 

[tttodd]

Where does it say in Scripture that His followers must all partake at the same time? Does this entend only to those in the local church, or does it apply to everyone in a given area, or even in the entire world? Does this mean that we should set specific times for Communion and not eat it until every Christian int he church, in the area or on earth that wants to partake has His cup and wafer in his hands and is ready to partake? The teachings of God through the Bible do not seem to make any importance regarding what others do. I haven't read any Scripture that tells us that we can be committing sin because we ate and drank communion before others did. Basically, this would mean, that in the Catholic's and Episcopalian's communion lines, everyone would be eating unworthily except for the last person in line.

"So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for each other." - 1 Corinthians 11:33

Which, when put into reference, is Paul directing the Corinthian church because they did not observe the Lord's Supper in an orderly manner (see 1 Corinthians 11:17-22). "God is a not a God of disorder but of peace." (1 Corinthians 14:33)

And no, the partaking of the Lord's Supper does not have to be done in a globally time synchronized manner. It is done when and where as each congregation gathers.

 

[christian-only]

The reason i was asking was i've been doing a lot of thinking into transubstantiation (sp?) and consubstantiation, and was wondering if this verse backed up either of those theories. Two me it seemed like the Darby did back them up, but the NkJ didn't

If you will compare all the accounts of the Lord's Supper you will find that Jesus makes 3 statements concerning what something IS:

(1) This IS My body, concerning the bread.
(2) This IS My blood, concerning the contents of the cup.
(3) This IS the New Testament, concerning the cup itself.

Now, transubstantiation and consubstantiation hold that a change or addition in substance takes place in the bread and contents of the cup, but not in the cup itself. The fact that those who hold these theories do not apply them to the cup is enough to disprove them. Whatever "IS" means here, it means the same thing for the bread, the contents of the cup and the cup itself. If the cup, the drinking vessel, does not literally change into the New Covenant, then the bread does not literally change into the body of Christ. However, IS could still mean either spiritual presence or sybolism, or both at the same time, which I would agree with.

 

[mark kennedy]

Check the context, now I am serious, look at the context that the verse appears in. Now think a minute on how they were treating one another. Now, if you decide to go into the 12th chapter,it is about the body of Christ and there is no mention of the Lord's supper. There is sometimes a lot of talk about how 'faith without works is dead' and the epistle of James says this in no uncertain terms (I don't have the chapter and verse handy, sorry). But the works he is describing is what he calls the, 'royal law', love your neighbor as yourself. Now if you really want to see what Paul is talking about in the 11th chapter of Corinthians try browseing through 11 and 12 and then take a good hard look at the 13th chapter then ask youself this question. Do you want to be with the sheep or the goats when Jesus says, 'In as much as you did it to the least of my brethren...' ?(again I apologise that I do not have all the chapter and verses available). Just trust me on this, keep reading through the 12th chapter and seriously look at the 13th and thats the answer you are looking for.

Now in the sacraments a Catholic is taught to confess their sin before partaking of the sacraments. This is a profoundly important thing to do before worshiping God irregardless of where or how you do it. Now as far as the bread actually becoming the body of Christ. Ask youself this question and I am not trying to make a joke, I really am serious. Did Jesus think himself a loaf of bread or was he talking about believing in him? Now try reading the reading the 6th chapter of John and don't take my word for it, you have God's Word right in front of you.

Grace and peace,
Mark