*11:1 Well now, how many of us would have the nerve to say that to someone? It is a good goal to aim for.
†11:6 This does not make for very popular teaching nowadays, but there it is. But is it “shameful” before God, or before men? If only before men, it is not sin.
‡11:7 Paul would appear to be saying that the male represents the image of God in a way that the female does not.
§11:7 If woman is the glory of man, how is man the glory of God? Might it have something to do with the Bride?
*11:9 The Creator's purpose in making the woman was to give the man an appropriate helper, which means that it is the man who is supposed to have a project, to which his wife is supposed to contribute.
†11:10 I believe verse ten constitutes an aside that derives from verse nine, not from verses five and six. The general practice in the versions of adding ‘symbol of’ before ‘authority’ is unwarranted, and does damage to the Text. The woman was created for the man, but since there are no female angels, the angels are very fascinated by the female of our species (remember Genesis 6). For this reason women need the protection of male authority. (Those feminists who peremptorily reject any semblance of male authority are just asking for a demon, and what little demon is going to object?)
‡11:12 That is to say, every man since Adam receives birth through a woman.
§11:16 Back in verse 2 above Paul mentions ‘traditions’, and traditions are not the same as commandments. To disobey God's commands is sin, but what of disobeying a tradition? The impression I gain is that disobeying a tradition is not sin, although it does have consequences.
*11:19 I take it that Paul is using a bit of irony here, but maybe not—to have levels of society in a congregation there must be criteria to define such levels. But does God want levels of society in a congregation?
†11:21 Compare verses 33-34 below.
‡11:24 The eclectic Greek text currently in vogue omits ‘take, eat’ (following 8.3% of the Greek manuscripts) and ‘broken’ (following some 2% of the manuscripts); and so NIV, NASB, LB, TEV, etc. do the same.
§11:26 The bread and the cup have to do with the physical body that died on the cross, not with the Church.
*11:27 About 1.5% of the Greek manuscripts, of objectively inferior quality, omit “unworthily”, to be followed by NIV, NASB, TEV, etc.
†11:29 The eclectic Greek text currently in vogue omits ‘Lord's’ (following just 2% of the Greek manuscripts, of objectively inferior quality, to be followed in turn by such versions as NASB and LB). Here in Brazil there are many who claim, based on this variant, that ‘the body’ here is the church, not Jesus' physical body. So they walk around, trading bread and wine with each other, laughing, talking, slapping each other on the back, having a general good time [their way of distinguishing the church]. Surely the appropriate way to ‘remember the Lord's death’ is to be in an attitude of penitent thanksgiving, confessing any sin, renewing one's commitment—this is something you do alone with God. Those who party instead of examine may well discover that they were partaking unworthily.
‡11:30 Ever since the Flood the Creator has imposed and exacted the death penalty for those who shed innocent blood (Genesis 9:5-6). There are dozens of passages in the Old Testament that deal with the theme of blood guiltiness. Here are a few: Genesis 21:12, “shall surely be put to death”; Exodus 21:14, a murderer was even to be dragged away from the altar and killed; Numbers 35:31, “you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer, …he shall surely be put to death”; 2 Kings 24:4, “he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, which the Lord would not pardon”. Here in verses 27 and 30 Paul says that God had killed ‘a good many’ because they were ‘guilty of the blood of the Lord’. Romans 1:32, written decades after Pentecost, affirms that murderers are still deserving of death. We all need the shed blood of God's Lamb for cleansing from sin, but please do not take it lightly!
§11:32 Remember Hebrews 12:6.