Charles Ellicott Commentary 1 Corinthians 10

Moreover, brethren,...—Better, For I would not, brethren, that you should be ignorant. From the strong statement of personal self-distrust with which the previous chapter concludes, the Apostle now passes on to show that Jewish history contains solemn examples of the falling away of those who seemed to stand strong in divine favor and privilege.

The same kind of dangers still beset God’s people, but they will never be greater than the strength which God will give to bear them. These thoughts are then applied to the immediate subject in hand, namely, partaking of meat which had been used in the heathen temples.

The subject is, as it were, taken up from 1 Corinthians 8:13, where an expression of personal willingness to forgo a right led the writer aside to the subject which occupies 1 Corinthians 9. Uniting 1 Corinthians 11:1 with the last verse of this chapter, the general outline of the argument is as follows:—

1. 1 Corinthians 10:1–11: The history of the Jewish Church contains examples which ought to be warnings against self-confidence.
2. 1 Corinthians 10:12–14: These thoughts should make the Christians distrustful of themselves, but not hopeless.
3. 1 Corinthians 10:15–17: The unity of the Christian body with Christ, as expressed and realized in the Holy Communion, renders impossible a communion of the same body with the objects of idolatrous worship.
4. 1 Corinthians 10:18–22: Any partaking of idolatrous feasts would involve union to such extent as would compromise, just as Israel’s partaking of sacrificial offerings involved union with the altar of Jehovah.
5. 1 Corinthians 10:23 – 1 Corinthians 11:1: An enunciation of the principles deduced from the foregoing considerations which should guide the Corinthian Christians in their partaking of meat which might have been offered to idols.

That you should be ignorant.—The thought here is not that his readers were at all likely to be ignorant of the mere historical fact which he now recalls, and with which they were doubtless quite familiar, but that they were probably unmindful of the spiritual lessons which are to be learnt from such a grouping of the facts as the Apostle now gives, and of the striking contrast between the enjoyment of great privileges by all (five times emphatically repeated) and the apostasy of the greater part of them.

The Apostle assumes their familiarity with the facts referred to, and does not feel it needful to mention that of the “all,” literally only two (Joshua and Caleb) gained the ultimate approval of Jehovah.

Our fathers.—These words need not limit the reference of this teaching to the Jewish Christians only. It would include all Christians by right of spiritual descent.

Were all baptized unto Moses.—The weight of evidence favors the middle voice for the verb used here, which signifies that they all voluntarily had themselves baptized to Moses. Moses was God’s representative under the Law, and so they were baptized to him in their voluntarily joining with that “Church” of God which marched beneath the shadow of the cloud and passed through the waters of the sea—just as Christians are baptized to Jesus Christ, He being (in a higher sense, both in kind and in degree) God’s representative in the New Dispensation.

The “cloud” and the “sea” refer to the cloud that overshadowed the Israelites (Exodus 13:21, and see Numbers 14:14), and the passage through the Red Sea (Exodus 13:22; Numbers 35:8).

Spiritual meat.—The manna (Exodus 16:13) was not natural food, for it was not produced in the natural way, but it was supplied by the Spirit and power of God. Bread from earth would be natural bread, but this was bread from heaven (John 6:31). Our Lord (John 6:50) had already made the Christian Church familiar with the true bread, of which that food had been the type.

That spiritual Rock that followed them.—There was a Jewish tradition that the Rock—that is, a fragment broken off from the rock struck by Moses—followed the Israelites through their journey. Saint Paul, for the purpose of illustration, adopts that account instead of the statement in Numbers 20:11. The emphatic repetition of the word “spiritual” before “drink” and “rock” reminds the reader that it is the spiritual, and not the historical aspect of the fact, which was foremost in Saint Paul’s mind. The traditional account of the Rock was a more complete illustration of the abiding presence of God, which was the point the Apostle here wishes to emphasize.

And that Rock was Christ.—As Christ was God manifest in the flesh in the New Dispensation, so God manifest in the Rock (the source of sustaining life) was the Christ of the Old Dispensation. The Jews had become familiar with the thought of God as a Rock (See 1 Samuel 2:2; Psalms 91:12; Isaiah 32:2). Though the Jews may have recognized the Rock poetically as God, they did not know that it was, as a manifestation of God’s presence, typical of the manifestation that was yet to be given in the Incarnation. This seems to be the significance of the statement and of the word “But,” which emphatically introduces it. But though they thought it only a Rock, or applied the word poetically to Jehovah, that Rock was Christ.

But with many of them.—Better, Nevertheless not with the greater part of them was God pleased. This introduces the point from which the Apostle seeks to draw the great lesson of self-distrust.

All had all these privileges—privileges of a baptism and a spiritual meat and drink which correspond with the sacramental ordinances which are proofs and pledges of all the privileges of us Christians. Yet with the greater part—in fact, with all except two—of that vast multitude God was not pleased, as is proved by the fact that all except Caleb and Joshua perished in the wilderness (Numbers 14:16).