John Calvin Commentary 1 Corinthians 10:3

"and did all eat the same spiritual food;" — 1 Corinthians 10:3 (ASV)

What he had previously taught by two illustrations, he now confirms by examples. The Corinthians grew arrogant and gloried, as if they had completed their service, or at least had finished their course, when they had barely left the starting point. He suppresses this empty boasting and confidence in this manner: “As I see that you are quietly taking your ease at the very outset of your course, I would not have you ignorant of what happened to the people of Israel as a consequence of this, so that their example may arouse you.”

However, when examples are brought forward, any point of difference can destroy the force of the comparison. Therefore, Paul first states that there is no such difference between us and the Israelites as to make our condition different from theirs. Intending to threaten the Corinthians with the same vengeance that had come upon the Israelites, he begins in this way: “Beware of glorying in any peculiar privilege, as if you were held in higher esteem than they were in the sight of God.”

For they were favored with the same benefits that we enjoy today; there was a Church of God among them, just as there is among us today. They had the same sacraments to be tokens for them of the grace of God; but when they abused their privileges, they did not escape the judgment of God. Be afraid, therefore, for the same thing is hanging over you. Jude makes use of the same argument in his Epistle (Jude 1:5).

1. All were under the cloud. The Apostle’s aim is to show that the Israelites were just as much the people of God as we are, so that we may know that we will not escape unpunished the hand of God, which punished them with such severity. For the main point is this: “If God did not spare them, neither will He spare you, for your condition is similar.”

He proves that similarity by this: they had been honored with the same tokens of God’s grace, for the sacraments are badges by which the Church of God is distinguished. He first discusses baptism, teaching that the cloud—which protected the Israelites in the desert from the sun's heat and directed their course—and also their passage through the sea, were like a baptism for them. He also says that in the manna and the water flowing from the rock, there was a sacrament that corresponded to the sacred Supper.

They were, he says, baptized in Moses, that is, under the ministry or guidance of Moses. For I take the particle εἰς to be used here instead of ἐν, consistent with the common usage of Scripture. This is because we are certainly baptized in the name of Christ, and not of any mere man, as Paul stated in 1 Corinthians 1:13, and that for two reasons.

These are, first, because by baptism we are initiated into the doctrine of Christ alone; and, secondly, because His name alone is invoked, since baptism is founded on His influence alone. They were, therefore, baptized in Moses—that is, under his guidance or ministry, as has already been stated. How? In the cloud and in the sea.

Someone will say, “Then they were baptized twice.” I answer that two signs are mentioned, yet they constitute but one baptism, corresponding to our baptism.

Here, however, a more difficult question arises. For it is certain that the advantage of those gifts Paul mentions was temporary. The cloud protected them from the sun's heat and showed them the way; these are external advantages of the present life. Similarly, their passage through the sea had this effect: they escaped Pharaoh’s cruelty and imminent danger of death. The advantage of our baptism, on the other hand, is spiritual.

Why then does Paul turn earthly benefits into sacraments and seek to find some spiritual mystery in them? I answer that Paul had good reason to seek something more in miracles of this nature than the mere external advantage for the body. For, though God designed to promote His people’s advantage regarding the present life, His main intention was to declare and manifest Himself to be their God; and under that, eternal salvation is included.

The cloud is, in various instances, called the symbol of His presence. Therefore, since He declared by means of it that He was present with them as His special and chosen people, there can be no doubt that, in addition to an earthly advantage, they also had in it a token of spiritual life.

Thus its use was twofold, as was the use of the passage through the sea. A way was opened for them through the middle of the sea so that they might escape from Pharaoh's hand. But to what was this due, if not to the fact that the Lord, having taken them under His guardianship and protection, was determined to defend them by every means? From this, they concluded that they were the objects of God’s care and that He was in charge of their salvation.

Thus, too, the Passover, which was instituted to celebrate the remembrance of their deliverance, was nonetheless, at the same time, a sacrament of Christ. How so? Because God, under a temporary benefit, had manifested Himself as a Savior. Anyone who attentively considers these things will find no absurdity in Paul’s words. Indeed, he will perceive a most striking correspondence in both the spiritual substance and the visible sign between the baptism of the Jews and ours.

However, it is again objected that we do not find a word of all this. I admit this, but there is no doubt that God by His Spirit supplied the lack of outward preaching, as we can see in the example of the bronze serpent. This serpent was, as Christ Himself testifies, a spiritual sacrament (John 3:14), and yet not a word about this has come down to us. But the Lord revealed the secret—which would otherwise have remained hidden—to believers of that age, in the manner He saw fit.

The same spiritual meat. He now mentions the other sacrament, which corresponds to the Lord’s Holy Supper. “The manna,” he says, “and the water that flowed from the rock, served not merely for the food of the body, but also for the spiritual nourishment of souls.” It is true that both were means of sustenance for the body, but this does not prevent them from also serving another purpose.

Therefore, while the Lord relieved the necessities of the body, He, at the same time, provided for the everlasting welfare of souls. These two things would be easily reconciled, if there were not a difficulty presented in Christ’s words (John 6:31), where He makes the manna the perishable food for the stomach, which He contrasts with the true food of the soul.

That statement seems to differ widely from what Paul says here. This difficulty, too, is easily resolved. It is the way of Scripture, when discussing sacraments or other things, sometimes to speak according to the hearers' capacity; and in that case, it refers not to the nature of the thing itself, but to the mistaken idea of the hearers.

Thus, Paul does not always speak of circumcision in the same way. When he considers God's appointment in it, he says that it was a seal of the righteousness of the faith (Romans 4:11). But when he is disputing with those who gloried in an outward and mere sign, and placed a mistaken confidence of salvation in it, he says that it is a token of condemnation, because by it men bind themselves to keep the whole law (Galatians 5:2–3). For he addresses merely the opinion that the false apostles had of it, because he is contending not against God's pure institution, but against their mistaken view.

In this way, as the carnal multitude preferred Moses to Christ because he had fed the people in the desert for forty years and looked for nothing in the manna but food for the stomach (as indeed they sought nothing else), Christ, in His reply, does not explain what was meant by the manna. Instead, passing over everything else, He adapts His discourse to the idea held by His hearers.

“Moses is held by you in the highest esteem, and even in admiration, as a most eminent Prophet because he filled the stomachs of your fathers in the desert. For this one thing you object against me: I am accounted as nothing by you because I do not supply you with food for the stomach. But if you consider perishable food so important, what ought you to think of the life-giving bread with which souls are nourished for eternal life?”

We see then that the Lord speaks there not according to the nature of the thing, but rather according to the understanding of His hearers. Paul, on the other hand, looks here not to God's ordinance, but to its abuse by the wicked.

Furthermore, when he says that the fathers ate the same spiritual meat, he shows, first, what is the power and efficacy of the Sacraments, and, secondly, he declares that the ancient Sacraments of the Law had the same power as ours have today. For, if the manna was spiritual food, it follows that it is not mere emblems that are presented to us in the Sacraments, but that the thing represented is at the same time truly given, for God is not a deceiver who feeds us with empty illusions.

A sign, it is true, is a sign and retains its essence. But just as Papists play a ridiculous role, dreaming of transformations (I know not of what kind), so we must not separate the reality from the emblem that God has joined. Papists confuse the reality and the sign; profane men, such as Schwenckfeld and others like him, separate the signs from the realities. Let us maintain a middle course. In other words, let us observe the connection appointed by the Lord, but still keep them distinct, so that we do not mistakenly transfer to the one what belongs to the other.

It remains for us to speak of the second point: the resemblance between the ancient signs and our signs. It is a well-known dogma of the Schoolmen that the Sacraments of the ancient law were emblems of grace, but ours confer it. This passage is admirably suited to refute that error, for it shows that the reality of the Sacrament was presented to the ancient people of God just as much as to us. It is therefore a baseless fancy of the Sorbonnists that the holy fathers under the law had the signs without the reality.

I grant, indeed, that the efficacy of the signs is supplied to us more clearly and more abundantly since the time of Christ’s manifestation in the flesh than it was possessed by the fathers. Thus, there is a difference between us and them only in degree, or (as they commonly say) of “more and less,” for we receive more fully what they received in a smaller measure. It is not as if they had mere emblems, while we enjoy the reality.

Some explain it to mean that they ate the same meat together among themselves, and do not want us to understand that there is a comparison between us and them. But these interpreters do not consider Paul’s aim. For what does he mean to say here, if not that the ancient people of God were honored with the same benefits as us, and were partakers of the same sacraments, so that we might not, by trusting in any special privilege, imagine that we would be exempt from the punishment they endured?

At the same time, I would not be prepared to argue the point with anyone; I merely state my own opinion. Meanwhile, I am well aware of the plausible reasoning advanced by those who adopt the opposite interpretation: that it best suits the illustration used immediately before—that all the Israelites had the same racecourse marked out for them, all started from the same point, all entered upon the same course, all were partakers of the same hope, but many were excluded from the reward.

However, when I consider everything attentively, I am not persuaded by these considerations to give up my opinion. For the Apostle had good reason to mention only two sacraments, and, more particularly, baptism. For what purpose was this, if not to contrast them with us?

Undoubtedly, if he had restricted his comparison to the body of that people, he would rather have brought forward circumcision and other sacraments that were better known and more prominent. But instead of this, he chose those that were more obscure, because they served better as a contrast between us and them. Nor would the application that he adds be otherwise so suitable: “All things that happened to them are examples to us, as we see in them the judgments of God that are hanging over us if we involve ourselves in the same sins.”