TRV
Translation
King James Version
The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
Complete Jewish Bible
The “cup of blessing” over which we make the b’rakhah — isn’t it a sharing in the bloody sacrificial death of the Messiah? The bread we break, isn’t it a sharing in the body of the Messiah?
Berean Standard Bible
Is not the cup of blessing that we bless a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?
American Standard Version
The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a communion of the body of Christ?
World English Bible Messianic
The cup of blessing which we bless, isn’t it a sharing of the blood of Messiah? The bread which we break, isn’t it a sharing of the body of Messiah?
Geneva Bible (1599)
The cup of blessing which we blesse, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we breake, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
Young's Literal Translation
The cup of the blessing that we bless--is it not the fellowship of the blood of the Christ? the bread that we break--is it not the fellowship of the body of the Christ?
See also
See on the biblical-era map
In the KJVVerse 28,584 of 31,102
Study This Verse
Commentary on 1 Corinthians 10 verses 15–22
15 ¶ I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.
16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?
19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?
20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.
21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.
22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?
In this passage the apostle urges the general caution against idolatry, in the particular case of eating the heathen sacrifices as such, and out of any religious respect to the idol to whom they were sacrificed.
I. He prefaces his argument with an appeal to their own reason and judgment: "I speak to wise men, judge you what I say, Co1 10:15. You are great pretenders to wisdom, to close reasoning and argument; I can leave it with your own reason and conscience whether I do not argue justly." Note, It is no dishonour to an inspired teacher, nor disadvantage to his argument, to appeal for the truth of it to the reason and consciences of his hearers. It comes upon them with the greater force when it comes with this conviction. Paul, an inspired apostle, would yet, in some cases, leave it with the Corinthians to judge whether what he taught was not conformable to their own light and sense.
II. He lays down his argument from the Lord's supper: The cup which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? Is not this sacred rite an instrument of communion with God? Do we not therein profess to be in friendship, and to have fellowship, with him? Is it not a token whereby we professedly hold communion with Christ, whose body was broken, and blood shed, to procure remission of our sins, and the favour of God? And can we be in alliance with Christ, or friendship with God, without being devoted to him? In short, the Lord's supper is a feast on the sacrificed body and blood of our Lord, epulum ex oblatis. And to eat of the feast is to partake of the sacrifice, and so to be his guests to whom the sacrifice was offered, and this in token of friendship with him. Thus to partake of the Lord's table is to profess ourselves his guests and covenant people. This is the very purpose and intention of this symbolical eating and drinking; it is holding communion with God, and partaking of those privileges, and professing ourselves under those obligations, which result from the death and sacrifice of Christ; and this in conjunction with all true Christians, with whom we have communion also in this ordinance. Because the bread is one, we, being many, are one body, for we are made partakers of one bread, or loaf (Co1 10:17), which I think is thus more truly rendered: "By partaking of one broken loaf, the emblem of our Saviour's broken body, who is the only true bread that came down from heaven, we coalesce into one body, become members of him and one another." Those who truly partake by faith have this communion with Christ, and one another; and those who eat the outward elements make profession of having this communion, of belonging to God and the blessed fraternity of his people and worshippers. This is the true meaning of this holy rite.
III. He confirms this from the Jewish worship and customs: Behold Israel after the flesh: are not those who eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar, that is, of the sacrifice offered upon it? Those who were admitted to eat of the offerings were reckoned to partake of the sacrifice itself, as made for them, and to be sanctified thereby; and therefore surely to worship God, and be in alliance or covenant with him, even the God of Israel, to whom the sacrifice was made: this was a symbol or token of holding communion with him.
IV. He applies this to the argument against feasting with idolaters on their sacrifices, and to prove those that do so idolaters. This he does, 1. By following the principle on which they would argue it to be lawful, namely, that an idol was nothing. Many of them were nothing at all, none of them had any divinity in them. What was sacrificed to idols was nothing, no way changed from what it was before, but was every whit as fit for food, considered in itself. They indeed seem to argue that, because an idol was nothing, what was offered was no sacrifice, but common and ordinary food, of which they might therefore eat with as little scruple. Now the apostle allows that the food was not changed as to its nature, was as fit to be eaten as common food, where it was set before any who knew not of its having been offered to an idol. But, 2. He proves that the eating of it as a part of a heathen sacrifice was, (1.) A partaking with them in their idolatry. It was having fellowship with devils, because what the Gentiles sacrificed they sacrificed to devils; and to feast with them upon these sacrifices was to partake in the sacrifice, and therefore to worship the god to whom it was made, and have fellowship or communion with him just as he who eats the Lord's supper is supposed to partake in the Christian sacrifice; or as those who ate the Jewish sacrifices partook of what was offered on their altar. But heathens sacrificed to devils: "Therefore do not feast on their sacrifices. Doing it is a token of your having fellowship with the demons to whom they are offered. I would not have you be in communion with devils." (2.) It was a virtual renouncing of Christianity: You cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: you cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and the table of devils, Co1 10:21. To partake of this Christian feast was to have communion with Christ: to partake of the feasts made in honour of the heathen idols, and made of things sacrificed to them, was to have communion with devils. Now this was to compound contraries; it was by no means consistent. Communion with Christ, and communion with devils, could never be had at once. One must be renounced, if the other was maintained. He who held communion with Christ must renounce that with devils; he who held communion with devils must by that very deed renounce communion with Christ. And what a manifest self-contradiction must that man's conduct be that would partake of the Lord's table, and yet partake of the table of demons! God and mammon can never be served together, nor fellowship be at once had with Christ and Satan. Those who communicate with devils must virtually renounce Christ. This may also intimate that such as indulge themselves in gluttony or drunkenness, and by so doing make their own table the table of devils, or keep up fellowship with Satan by a course of known and wilful wickedness, cannot partake truly of the cup and table of the Lord. They may use the sign, but do not the thing signified thereby. For a man can never be at once in communication with Christ and his church and yet in fellowship with Satan. Note, How much reason have we to look to it that every sin and idol be renounced by us, when we eat and drink at the Lord's table.
V. He warns them, upon the whole, against such idolatry, by signifying to them that God is a jealous God (Co1 10:22): Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he? It is very probable that many among the Corinthians made light of being at these heathen feasts, and thought there was no harm in it. But the apostle bids them beware. The reason with which the second commandment is enforced is, I am a jealous God. God cannot endure a rival in matter of worship; nor give his glory, nor suffer it to be given, to another. Those who have fellowship with other gods provoke him to jealousy, Deu 32:16. And, before this be done, persons should consider whether they are stronger than he. It is a dangerous thing to provoke God's anger, unless we could withstand his power. But who can stand before him when he is angry? Nah 1:6. This should be considered by all who continue in the love and liking of sin, and in league with it, while yet they profess to keep up communion with Christ. Is not this the way to provoke his jealousy and indignation? Note, Attention to the greatness of God's power should restrain us from provoking his jealousy, from doing any thing to displease him. Shall we rouse almighty wrath? And how shall we withstand it? Are we a match for God? Can we resist his power, or control it? And, if not, shall we arm it against us, by provoking him to jealousy? No, let us fear his power, and let this restrain us from all provocation.
Matthew Henry (1662–1714) — Commentary on the Whole Bible. This section covers verses 15–22. Public domain.
Copy as
Tatian the AssyrianAD 180
What injury do we inflict upon you, O Greeks? Why do you hate those who follow the word of God, as if they were the vilest of mankind? It is not we who eat human flesh
IrenaeusAD 202
Against Heresies Book V
And adds, "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? ".
But if this indeed do not attain salvation, then neither did the Lord redeem us with His blood, nor is the cup of the Eucharist the communion of His blood, nor the bread which we break the communion of His body.
John ChrysostomAD 407
Homily on 1 Corinthians 24
"The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the Blood of Christ?"
What sayest thou, O blessed Paul? When thou wouldest appeal to the hearer's reverence, when thou art making mention of awful mysteries, dost thou give the title of "cup of blessing" to that fearful and most tremendous cup? "Yea," saith he; "and no mean title is that which was spoken. For when I call it 'blessing,' I mean thanksgiving, and when I call it thanksgiving I unfold all the treasure of God's goodness, and call to mind those mighty gifts." Since we too, recounting over the cup the unspeakable mercies of God and all that we have been made partakers of, so draw near to Him, and communicate; giving Him thanks that He hath delivered from error the whole race of mankind; that being afar off, He made them nigh; that when they had no hope and were without God in the world, He constituted them His own brethren and fellow-heirs. For these and all such things, giving thanks, thus we approach. "How then are not your doings inconsistent," saith he, "O ye Corinthians; blessing God for delivering you from idols, yet running again to their tables?"
"The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the Blood of Christ?" Very persuasively spake he, and awfully. For what he says is this: "This which is in the cup is that which flowed from His side, and of that do we partake." But he called it a cup of blessing, because holding it in our hands, we so exalt Him in our hymn, wondering, astonished at His unspeakable gift, blessing Him, among other things, for the pouring out of this self-same draught that we might not abide in error: and not only for the pouring it out, but also for the imparting thereof to us all. "Wherefore if thou desire blood," saith He, "redden not the altar of idols with the slaughter of brute beasts, but My altar with My blood." Tell me, What can be more tremendous than this? What more tenderly kind? This also lovers do. When they see those whom they love desiring what belongs to strangers and despising their own, they give what belongs to themselves, and so persuade them to withdraw themselves from the gifts of those others. Lovers, however, display this liberality in goods and money and garments, but in blood none ever did so. Whereas Christ even herein exhibited His care and fervent love for us. And in the old covenant, because they were in an imperfect state, the blood which they used to offer to idols He Himself submitted to receive, that He might separate them from those idols; which very thing again was a proof of His unspeakable affection: but here He transferred the service to that which is far more awful and glorious, changing the very sacrifice itself, and instead of the slaughter of irrational creatures, commanding to offer up Himself.
"The bread which we break, is it not a communion of the Body of Christ?" Wherefore said he not, the participation? Because he intended to express something more and to point out how close was the union: in that we communicate not only by participating and partaking, but also by being united. For as that body is united to Christ, so also are we united to him by this bread.
But why adds he also, "which we break?" For although in the Eucharist one may see this done, yet on the cross not so, but the very contrary. For, "A bone of Him," saith one, "shall not be broken." But that which He suffered not on the cross, this He suffers in the oblation for thy sake, and submits to be broken, that he may fill all men.
Further, because he said, "a communion of the Body," and that which communicates is another thing from that whereof it communicates; even this which seemeth to be but a small difference, he took away. For having said, "a communion of the Body," he sought again to express something nearer.
Augustine of HippoAD 430
EASTER SERMON 227
That chalice, or rather, what the chalice holds, consecrated by the word of God, is the blood of Christ. Through those elements the Lord wished to entrust to us his body and the blood which he poured out for the remission of sins. If you have received worthily, you are what you have received.
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as
Continue studying 1 Corinthians 10:16 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
SUMMARY
First Corinthians 10:16 is a profound rhetorical question posed by the Apostle Paul, designed to underscore the deep spiritual reality of the Lord's Supper. It asserts that partaking in the consecrated cup and bread is not merely a symbolic remembrance but a genuine, intimate participation in the redemptive sacrifice of Jesus Christ, connecting believers directly to His body and blood. This verse lays the theological groundwork for understanding the sacred nature of Christian communion and its implications for believers' conduct and worship.
CONTEXT
EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Key Word Analysis
Verse Breakdown
Literary Devices
Paul masterfully employs Rhetorical Questions in this verse, asking questions not to elicit information but to make a forceful, undeniable assertion. By framing these statements as questions ("is it not...?"), he compels the Corinthians to affirm the profound spiritual reality of the Lord's Supper, making the truth more impactful than a simple declarative statement. The verse also utilizes Parallelism, presenting two structurally similar clauses concerning the cup and the bread. This parallel structure highlights the unified nature of Christ's sacrifice—His blood and His body—and the unified participation of believers in both aspects. Furthermore, there is profound Symbolism at play: the cup symbolizes Christ's shed blood, representing the new covenant and atonement, while the bread symbolizes His broken body, representing His suffering and sacrifice. These physical elements serve as tangible representations of spiritual realities, drawing the participants into a deeper understanding and experience of Christ's work.
THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
1 Corinthians 10:16 profoundly articulates the nature of the Lord's Supper as a real, spiritual participation in Christ's atoning work, rather than a mere commemorative act. This understanding is foundational to Christian theology, emphasizing the intimate union believers share with Christ through His sacrifice. It underscores the concept of the New Covenant established by Christ's blood, offering forgiveness of sins and reconciliation with God. The shared meal also signifies the profound unity of believers as the body of Christ, bound together by their common participation in Him. This theological depth calls for a reverent and discerning approach to the ordinance, recognizing its sacred significance and the implications for one's walk with God and fellow believers.
REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
First Corinthians 10:16 compels believers to approach the Lord's Supper with profound reverence and understanding, moving beyond a mere ritualistic observance to a deep spiritual encounter. It calls us to remember that when we partake of the bread and the cup, we are not simply recalling a historical event; we are actively participating in the ongoing reality of Christ's sacrifice and its benefits. This participation should lead to a renewed sense of gratitude for the immense cost of our redemption and a deeper commitment to living a life worthy of such a gift. It also serves as a powerful reminder of our unity with fellow believers, as we all partake of the same Christ, fostering reconciliation, love, and mutual care within the body. Furthermore, the verse implicitly challenges us to examine our lives for any form of spiritual compromise or divided loyalties, ensuring that our communion with Christ is exclusive and unadulterated, free from the "table of devils" that Paul warns against.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Does 1 Corinthians 10:16 teach that the bread and wine literally become the body and blood of Christ?
Answer: While the verse emphasizes a profound spiritual reality and participation, it does not explicitly define the precise nature of Christ's presence in the elements, leading to various interpretations throughout church history. The Greek word koinonia (communion/participation) suggests a deep spiritual union and sharing in the benefits and reality of Christ's sacrifice, rather than a physical transformation of the elements themselves. Different theological traditions (e.g., Transubstantiation, Consubstantiation, Spiritual Presence, Memorialism) interpret the "is" in "is it not the communion" differently. Paul's primary intent here is to highlight the sacredness and spiritual efficacy of the Supper, contrasting it with pagan practices, and underscoring that partaking in it means a genuine connection to Christ's atoning work, whether through literal presence or profound spiritual union. The emphasis is on the reality of the participation in Christ's body and blood, not necessarily on a change in the physical substance of the elements.
CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
First Corinthians 10:16 finds its ultimate fulfillment in the person and work of Jesus Christ, who is the Lamb of God whose body was broken and blood was shed for the sins of the world. The "cup of blessing" and "bread which we break" point directly to the historical reality of Christ's crucifixion, the ultimate act of self-giving love and atonement. Jesus Himself instituted this meal on the night He was betrayed, declaring the bread to be His body and the cup to be His blood of the new covenant (Matthew 26:26-28; Luke 22:19-20). This communion is not merely a memorial of a past event but a present participation in the benefits of His finished work, allowing believers to partake in His righteousness, forgiveness, and eternal life. Through this sacred meal, believers are united with the resurrected Christ, who is now seated at the right hand of God (Romans 8:34), and are spiritually nourished by Him. It foreshadows the ultimate communion believers will share with Christ in the heavenly banquet, the marriage supper of the Lamb (Revelation 19:9), where the full reality of our union with Him will be perfectly realized.