Preparing Context
Loading the book, timeline, map, and study notes.
Book
World Stage
Structure
Historical Setting
Opening Book
Loading the overview, historical setting, map, timeline, and chapter structure.
Book
World Stage
Structure
Historical Setting
Opening Chapter
Loading the chapter, structure, timeline, and Scripture reader.
Book
World Stage
Structure
Historical Setting
Opening Passage
Loading the passage, surrounding structure, questions, and study notes.
Book
World Stage
Structure
Historical Setting
1 Corinthians 11:17-22
He turns to their gatherings, withdraws praise, reports divisions and selfish eating, and confronts how this shames the community’s poorer members.
Meaning in context
He turns to their gatherings, withdraws praise, reports divisions and selfish eating, and confronts how this shames the community’s poorer members.
Section 4 of 6
Rebuke divisions at the shared meal
He turns to their gatherings, withdraws praise, reports divisions and selfish eating, and confronts how this shames the community’s poorer members.
Movement
The gospel in a divided city
Artifact
Urban church under pastoral correction
Biblical Timeline
Apostolic Age
1 Corinthians context: AD 33 - AD 100
Biblical Timeline
Apostolic Age
1 Corinthians context
Apostolic Age / AD 33 - AD 100
1 Corinthians context is set in the apostolic age, where The early church and the writing of the New Testament.
Scripture Text
Thesis
He turns to their gatherings, withdraws praise, reports divisions and selfish eating, and confronts how this shames the community’s poorer members.
Verse by Verse
A gathering that makes things worse Paul says he cannot praise them for this instruction, because when they “come together” it is not for improvement but for harm. He explains the reason: when they gather as a community, he hears there are divisions among them. He does not claim full certainty, but he says he partly believes the report.
Factions and the revealing of the “approved” Paul adds that “there must be” factions among them so that those who are “approved” may become evident. The statement connects the existence of competing groups with a sorting effect: conflict exposes who proves reliable or genuine in the situation.
Their practice contradicts the meal’s identity Paul concludes that when they assemble, it is not really possible to eat the Lord’s supper as such. His reason is practical and social: in eating, each person grabs “his own” supper ahead of others. The outcome is unequal: one person remains hungry while another becomes drunk.
Literary Context
This paragraph sits in a section where Paul addresses concrete problems in Corinth’s community life, especially what happens when they gather. Just before, he has been giving directions related to conduct in meetings (11:2–16), mixing affirmation with correction. Here the tone turns sharply negative: he refuses to commend them because their meeting practices damage the community. This rebuke introduces the longer instruction that follows about the meal and how to participate properly (11:23–34), so these verses function as the problem statement and moral diagnosis.
Historical Context
Corinth was a busy Roman city with sharp social differences, where status and public honor mattered. Local groups commonly met for meals, and meals could easily display rank: some had better food, earlier access, or more leisure. In that setting, a mixed community gathering across economic lines could be strained, especially if people brought their own food or arrived at different times. Paul’s complaint assumes that their meeting included an actual meal and that their practices were reinforcing inequality and public shame within the community’s gathering.
Theological Significance
Paul is addressing what happens when the church gathers. He contrasts meetings that build people up with meetings that do harm (vv. 17–18). The central problem is social: the shared meal meant to express unity instead displays division, inequality, and public shame.
Questions
Keep Studying
Sharp questions and a final refusal to commend Paul fires a series of questions: do they lack homes for eating and drinking? By acting this way, he says, they despise God’s assembly and shame those who have nothing. He ends where he began: he will not praise them for this.
The passage assumes a real, communal eating event connected to “the Lord’s supper” (vv. 20–21). Paul’s rebuke is not about food in general but about what their behavior is saying about the community and about God’s assembly (v. 22; assembly).
Explicitly, Paul says their pattern—some taking “their own supper” first, leading to hunger for some and drunkenness for others—makes it effectively not the Lord’s supper in substance, even if they call it that (vv. 20–21). He frames the outcome as despising God’s gathering and shaming those who have nothing (v. 22).
What does “there must be factions” mean (v. 19)? Some read this as Paul saying God uses conflict to expose who is reliable, without approving the conflict itself. Others read it as Paul describing an unavoidable reality in a flawed community (“this is bound to happen”), again without treating it as good.
Who are “the approved” (v. 19)? Some take “approved” to mean those whose character becomes evident as they respond rightly under pressure. Others think it may refer to those seen as “qualified” or “legitimate” in the community’s eyes, with Paul pointing out that conflict tends to sort people into recognized groups.
What exactly is the “Lord’s supper” here (vv. 20–21)? Many think it refers to a full shared meal that included a special remembrance component. Others think Paul is focusing on the core meaning of the communal rite, whether or not the gathering included a full meal every time. In either case, Paul’s point is that their practice contradicts what the meal is meant to be.
The passage is brief and uses compressed language. Phrases like “must be” and “approved” can describe either God’s larger purpose in exposing reality or a blunt recognition of what regularly happens. Also, “each takes his own supper” can be read as a timing issue (arriving and eating earlier) and/or an attitude issue (self-focused claiming of food). The text links both to the same end result: others go hungry and are shamed.
This paragraph supplies the problem diagnosis for the longer instructions that follow (11:23–34). It makes several explicit claims: (1) a church meeting can be spiritually damaging (v. 17); (2) divisions can show up most visibly at the table (v. 18); (3) conflict reveals who proves genuine in practice (v. 19); (4) a ritual name (“Lord’s supper”) can be emptied by conduct that contradicts it (v. 20); and (5) inequality at the meal—hunger for some, excess for others—publicly shames the poor and treats God’s gathering with contempt (vv. 21–22).
supper (deipnon)