1 Corinthians 11

 The following expository is a bit hard for western Christianity, however, this is how I see it. Bible verses in bold, and my commentary under each. You are free to disagree with anything I say, however, please check the Greek for yourself, and study prayerfully what Paul was saying, determine within yourself if you are actually disagreeing with me or with Paul, or the word of God. If you are disagreeing with me, let's discuss, you might be right and I might be wrong. If you are disagreeing with the words of God through Paul, I don't know quite how to discuss that with you, other than helping you to discuss it with God himself if needed. 

1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Paul is saying here to follow him while he follows Christ. So in essence, Paul is not so much leading, as in placing himself as the top of the chain of command, as much as he is following God closely, and urging others to follow him after God. This natural organic leadership style has a benefit in the way that a new leader can emerge for a new time as a new person gets closer to God. In the chain of command structure, a leader can stay too long, and hold onto power, when in God’s family, it’s never about power. 

2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. Paul commends the church for the way they are remembering him and his visit, and they are keeping the ordinances, or another word would be, traditions, that he taught them.

3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. However, Paul continues, it is important to know that Christ is the head of every man. It is important to know that the man is the head of the woman and the head of Christ is God. Note, that the word head, literally means head when checked in Greek. It does not mean ruler, or boss. So, what is a head? Well, in the case of the grave, the coffin is underground, sheltered from the winds, and rains, and storms. What do we call the thing that marks the grave, the thing that is exposed to all those things? The headstone. In the case of the soldier, when he is hiding in the trenches, and he is looking for a way out, a way of retreat from the enemy, or he is plotting a way to victory, to advance, he is using his eyes, ears, and brain, so the part of the body where his eyes, ears, and brain are, what do we call it? The head. So, a head is a protector, a servant, when a head actually commands, it should be driven from a place of or motive of protecting, otherwise it is a boss, and a head is not a boss. So, Paul says, the Head is God over Christ, Christ over man, man over woman. This is headship protection, sort of like a guard dog who watches over and protects sheep, not a herding dog, who drives sheep from place to place. 

4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. If a man values his head, which is Christ, then, the best way to honor Christ while praying or prophesying is to not wear any cap, or clothing of any sort on his head. In the intellectual west we always want to know why. Well, the why is not given to us here, but, God is right, and this truth is one of the few truths we can have blind faith in. So, this is right. So, pray and prophesy with a bare head, if you are a man who wants to honor your head. For some reason, western Christianity has almost no issue with this. Why is that interesting? Look at verse 5, and now we see where the shoe pinches...

5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. Woman here in Greek could mean wife, or woman, so there could be some dispute on whether or not single women should wear a head covering. However, as it is written: In the same way that men honor by uncovering the head while praying or prophesying, a woman honors by covering while praying and prophesying. It is also clear that women are allowed to pray and prophesy, but their head is the man. Do they want to honor him? The question is not whether or not he deserves it, the question is, does the woman want to honor the man he is in Christ as a head for her (see verse 3). Or does the woman not want to honor that man? After all, if her man is a Christian, his old man is dead, the works of the flesh that are unpleasant are not his true identity in Christ. (Galatians 2:20)  If her man is not a Christian, she may still want to honor that ideal, that he could be, when he says yes to Christ, and no to his current God. Why? Again, just like for the men, the why is not given us here, but, again, GOD. IS. RIGHT. In either case, there is nothing here to indicate God would love you less or revoke your salvation if you wish to dishonor, but, if you do wish to dishonor, just know this, you are now doing it your way, and all the consequences wrapped up in this decision are yours as well. Paul expresses the view that an uncovered woman praying and prophesying is just as bad as a shaved woman doing that. 

6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. Paul is pretty blunt here, if a woman doesn’t want to cover, she should shave her head, if she doesn’t want to shave her head, let her cover. 

7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. A man is the image of God, like a mini me, he should not cover, he should mirror God. However, a woman is the glory of man, she is more beautiful. 

8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. Looking back to creation, the woman was created as the more beautiful counterpart to the man, the man was created first, and then a more beautiful creature was formed from his rib.

9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. Since the man was created first, he was not created for the woman, but rather, the woman was created for the man, she completes him, and so this is probably why he is to head her. (Verse 3)

10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. I am not certain on what Paul means by power because of angels but studying the context this verse is in, and studying the Greek word for power, which translates to strength, authority, privilege or freedom, it looks to me like when a woman covers her head, it visually shows the angels, that she is speaking to God the Father and Christ the Son, directly, and not to her closest head which is the man. This commentary is my opinion at the present and may evolve over the course of time, learning, and revelation. 

11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. Here it looks like Paul is emphasizing after all his talk on headship that men and women are still the same in terms of being human, in the image of God, in importance, and as part of the family of God etc. 

12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God. In some way, a woman is always connected to man, for she comes from him at creation. However, in the way that man needed a woman, for he was alone, a man is almost always by a woman or drawn to a woman in some way, and this is a thing of God, he wants it this way. 

13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Here Paul is basically asking of the church, think about it, is it proper for a woman to pray, to talk to God without some sort of covering? 

14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? Paul asks, doesn’t it naturally seem that it is undignified and shameful for a man to have long hair? 

15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. However, when a woman has long hair, not only is it dignified, it is glorious, her hair is given to her for a covering, it brings glory to her. So, how does this jibe with what Paul wrote in 5 and 6? When a woman prays or prophesies to God, she should cover her covering, so she no longer brings glory to herself, but rather brings glory to God, if she does not cover her covering, then she might as well be shaven, because either way, it’s not glorying God. Again, this does not have anything to do with salvation, or God’s love for the woman, it has to do with honor, and respecting one’s place in the headship. 

16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God. It looks like Paul is saying, this is how it is, if someone disagrees, or seems quarrelsome about it then, we don’t have a different custom. This is how things are.

17 Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. Paul says I don’t praise you for coming together, because it isn’t for betterment, your coming together is for worse, or for bad. It seems that a church shouldn’t gather for the sake of gathering alone, but to care and improve each other, to make the bride stronger in a given region. If the church doesn’t do that, then they shouldn’t bother gathering at all apparently. In this case, Paul is not praising them, because gathering is making things worse. 

18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. When they got together, they fought, split into factions, and had harmful disputes, or at least that’s what Paul heard, and he at least partially believed it.

19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. It looks like the translation of heresy here is actually division. So, there are different factions in this church, and the approved doctrines, and or practices are taught, demonstrated, or performed in the various ranks. It isn’t clear how it all looked, but it was a very destructive, divisive culture based around multiple differing beliefs instead of one shared love for Christ. 

20 When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. When they come together, they don’t come to eat for the sake of eating for nutrition, that is not what the Lord’s supper is for. 

21 For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. However, people were eating and partying too much, one man might get drunk, while another one is still hungry because he didn’t get to the food in time. 

22 What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. So, Paul wonders, don’t you have houses for eating and drinking? Do you despise the sacredness of the church coming together? Do you want to embarrass those who don’t have enough to eat? What to do with you? He is not impressed. 

23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: Paul wants to reset the real meaning of communion, or the Lord’s supper. In those days, it is thought by some, including me, that churches gathered for the Lord’s supper, whereas today, we tend to gather for teaching. 

24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. Paul reminds them that Jesus asked his disciples to eat in his memory, not for nutritional value. 

25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. Paul reminds them that Christ asked them to drink in his memory, not to quench thirst or horrors, get drunk. 

26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. So, shew means, proclaim, teach, or preach. Whenever we commune, we proclaim, teach, and preach the death of Christ until He comes back. So, I think we are missing out by gathering for teaching instead of communion. I wish we could proclaim this at least weekly. 

27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. It looks like “unworthily” translates to “irreverently” as well, so, to commune irreverently, to take it lightly, to not surrender one’s self to God at communion means you sin against Him. 

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. So, one should self evaluate, am I surrendered to God, am I coming to Him in reverence and worship, if so, I partake. This weekly surrender, I feel like we are really missing badly today, no wonder our churches are full of un-surrendered thinkers, doers, and feelers, who think, do, and feel the right things on their own strength and then wonder why life is not abundant like God promised. 

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. The reason I speak of surrender is, worthiness, that is how we are worthy, we receive his life, and are a new creature in him, our old sinful self is dead. When an un-surrendered i.e. unworthy person partakes, they judge themselves, find themselves guilty and generally it seems, punish themselves. 

30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. This is why I spoke of this thing of self punishment; it seems Paul said this is why so many of the Corinthian church has health problems, and sleep could mean death according to translation. None of what we mentioned speaks against the salvation of a person, it more looks like they ate and drank their own punishment for not fully surrendering, (for whom the Lord loveth, he chasteneth) and never does it look to be a church administration’s responsibility to police the communion and make it pure. It looks like the communion itself did the “policing” so to speak. In fact there is no administrative leadership ever mentioned here. 

31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. Ourselves here might translate to each other as well, it looks like Paul is saying, if we could judge ourselves, we shouldn’t be judged as in, we wouldn’t need it. Or, if we judged ourselves, we might not find ourselves guilty, as in we wouldn’t give ourselves a fair trial. Again, this seems to speak against modern church practices of policing or having closed communions. I might need other scriptures to provide context before entirely concluding that closed communion is wrong, or at least a bad idea.

32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. When God judges us, and chastens or disciplines us, he is loving us, he doesn’t want us to be condemned with the world. 

33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. When you come together to eat, as brothers and sisters in Christ, wait for each other, be kind. 

34 And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come. If your hungry, eat at home, before you come, so you don’t come together in a wrong way, I think Paul is wanting to avoid the frivolous feasting, and the greed, and all kinds of bad manners at communion. Paul wants people to be sober enough to ponder deeply, their life, their worthiness, i.e. surrender before they partake. There is more he wants to address, but it didn’t need to be included here, he wanted to address it in person.