1 Corinthians 6:13

1Co_6:13-16

Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats.

Christianity in relation to the body

The apostle here states, perhaps in answer to a question on the subject, that there is a limitation to Christian liberty. As the liberty which the Corinthians seemed to covet was to gratify the bodily appetites, he takes occasion to state certain things in relation to the body. Christianity recognises--

I. Attention to the natural needs of the body as proper (1Co_6:13).

1. The body has appetites, and there are provisions intended to satisfy them. To act thus is in harmony with the constitution of nature. All animal existences act in this way. Christianity, instead of requiring you to starve the body by lastings, and to exhaust its energies by pilgrimages and self-mortifications, says, Eat and be satisfied and strong; take care of your bodies.

2. Feeding the body, however, Christianity regards as temporary; both the food and the body must perish. They are not like spiritual existences, and spiritual supplies that have regard to an unmeasured hereafter. All flesh is grass.

II. Indulgence in the gratifications of the body as wrong. Now the body is not for fornication, &c. This is not a necessity of the body, like eating and drinking, but an immoral indulgence of its propensities. Man should attend to his bodily propensities, as reliefs, not as gratifications. Hence intemperance, whether in eating or drinking, is a moral outrage. The crime and curse of men in all ages have been seeking happiness out of the gastric, the sexual, and other propensities of their physical being.

III. That the proper treatment of the body is to identify it with Christ.

1. It is the property of Christ. It is not ours; we are its trustees, not its proprietors. We hold it for the Lord, and we should use it according to His directions. It is to let in God to the soul, and to reveal God to our race.

2. It is a member of Christ (1Co_6:15). The Christians body has a vital connection with Him. He had a human body which now raised to heaven is the model into which our bodies shall be changed. This being so, sensual indulgence is an outrage on the body (1Co_6:15-17).

3. It is a temple of the Holy Ghost (1Co_6:19-20) in which He is to dwell, be revealed and worshipped. (D. Thomas, D. D.)

The permanent element in our bodily organism

The apostle distinguishes two opposite elements in our bodily organism: the organs of nutrition, which serve for the support of the body, and to which, by a Divinely established correlation, there correspond external meats. The morally indifferent character of this domain appears from the fact of its approaching destruction; God will abolish those functions in the day of the redemption of our bodies. But it is not so with our bodies, strictly so called, which Paul identifies with our personality. This is the permanent element in our earthly organism, that which forms the link between our present and our future body. Now this element is that which is involved in the vice of impurity. And hence the profound difference between impurity and the natural functions of physical life. There exists between our body and Christ a moral relation analogous to the temporary relation which exists between the stomach and meats. The body is for Christ, to belong to Him and serve Him, and Christ is for the body to inhabit and glorify it. In consequence of this sublime relation, the body will not perish. As God raised up Christ, He will also raise the body which has become here below the property and the sanctified organ of Christ. The apostle says, Will raise us also; he thus expressly identifies our personality with the body which is to be its eternal organ. As the Church in its totality is the body of Christ, the organism which He animates with His Spirit, and by which He carries out His wishes on the earth, so every Christian is a member of this body, and consequently an organ of Christ Himself. Hence the practical conclusion: This organ of Christ must not be taken from Him and given to a harlot. Therein is a double crime: on the one hand a revolt, an odious abduction; on the other an act of ignoble self-abasement and the acceptance of a shameful dependence. And hence the apostles cry of indignation, Let it not be so! (Prof. Godet.)

Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord.--

Fornication is

I. Inexcusable. On the ground of--

1. Christian liberty (1Co_6:12).

2. Necessity.

II. Morally evil. It is--

1. To prostitute the property of God.

2. To incur a fearful penalty in the resurrection.

III. Degrading.

1. To all.

2. Especially Christian professors, who dishonour Christ, themselves, and their bodies.

IV. Sacrilegious.

1. The body designed as the temple of the Holy Ghost.

2. Redeemed by Christ.

3. Consecrated to God. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

Fornication

1. In remonstrating with the Corinthians for their litigiousness, Paul was forcibly reminded how imperfectly they understood the moral requirements of the kingdom of God, and that they were quoting some of his own sayings in defence of immoral practices. If all things were lawful to them, then this commonest of Greek indulgences was lawful; if abstaining from the meat which had been killed in a heathen temple was a matter of moral indifference, then this other common accompaniment of idolatry was also a matter of indifference.

2. St. Paul there-fore lays down two principles. First he insists that the question of duty is not answered by simply ascertaining what is lawful; we must also ask, Is it expedient? The Christian is a law to himself; he has an internal guide that sets him above external rules. Very true; but that guide teaches him to consider, not how much indulgence he may enjoy without transgressing the letter of the law, but how he can best forward what is highest in himself and in others. Again, all things are lawful for me; all things are in my power. Yes, and therefore I will not be brought under the power of any. I am free from the law; I will not on that account become the slave of indulgence. There are several practices and habits which no one would call sinful, but which enslave a man quite as much as worse habits. And it is the very lawfulness of these indulgences which has ensnared him. He alone attains the true dignity and freedom of the Christian man who can say, with Paul, I know both how to be full and to be hungry, &c. All things are in my power, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

3. Paul then proceeds to apply these principles. The Corinthians argued that if meats were morally indifferent, so also a man was neither better nor worse for fornication. To expose this error Paul draws a distinction between the organs of nutrition and that body which is part of our permanent individuality, and which is to flower into an everlasting body. These two differ from one another; and if you are to argue from the one to the other, you must keep in view the distinction as stated in 1Co_6:13-14. The organs of nutrition have a present use; they are made for meats, and have a natural correspondence with meats. Any meat, therefore, which the digestive organs approve is allowable. Besides, these organs form no part of the future spiritual body. They pass away with the meats for which they were made. They serve a temporary purpose, like the houses we live in and the clothes we wear; and as we are not morally better because we live in a stone house, and not in a brick one, or because we wear woollens, and not cotton--so long as we do what is best to keep us in life--so neither is there any moral difference in meats. But the body as a whole--for what is it made? For the Lord. He finds in it His needed instrument; without it He cannot accomplish His will. And the Lord is for the body. Without Him the body cannot develop into all it is intended to be. Our adoption as Gods children is incomplete until the body also is redeemed and has fought its way through sickness and death, into likeness to the glorified body of Christ. But this cannot be believed, far less accomplished, save by faith in the fact that God has raised up the Lord Jesus, and will with Him raise us also. And the Spirit of Christ within us inclines us while in the body, and by means of it to sow to the Spirit and thus to reap life everlasting. The only future of the body we dare to look at without a shudder is the future it has in the Lord. The Lord is for the body, and as well might we try to sustain the body now without food as to have an endurable future for it without the Lord. But if the body is thus closely united to Christ, then the inference is self-evident that it must be carefully guarded from such uses and impurities as involve rupture with Christ (1Co_6:15). And if any frivolous Corinthian still objected that such acts went no deeper than the eating of food ceremonially unclean, that they belonged to the body that was to be destroyed, Paul says, It is not so; these acts are full of the deepest moral significance (1Co_6:18), i.e., fornication is the only sin which by its very nature alienates the body from Christ, its proper Partner. Other sins indirectly involve separation from Christ; this explicitly and directly transfers allegiance, and sunders our union with Him.

4. These weighty reasonings are concluded by the statement of a twofold truth which is of much wider application than to the matter in hand (1Co_6:19-20). We are not our own; we belong to Him who has loved us most; and His love will be satisfied when we suffer Him to dwell in us, so that we shall be His temples, and shall glorify Him. And it is the consciousness that we are Gods temples which constantly incites us to live worthily of Him. In nothing can God reveal Himself as He can in man. It is not a building of stone which forms a fit temple for God; nor even the heaven of heavens. In material nature only a small part of God can be seen and known. But through us God can express and reveal what is best in Himself. Our love is sustained by His, and reveals His. Our approval of what is pure and hatred of impurity has its source in His holiness. But if so, what a profanation is it when we take this body, which is built to be His temple, and put it to uses which it were blasphemous to associate with God! (M. Dods, D. D.)

Fornication is an awful crime

1. It robs God of His property.

2. Dishonours the members of Christs body.

3. Makes a man one flesh with the harlot.

4. Degrades a mans own body.

5. Profanes the temple of God.

6. Sins against the sacrifice of Christ.

7. Devotes body and soul, which are Gods, to the devil. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

And God hath both raised up the Lord.

The resurrection of the body

I. Is possible. Christ is risen.

II. Certain.

1. God has revealed it.

2. Is able to effect it.

III. Is a powerful argument for the right use of the body. If God honours it, shall man dishonour it? (1Co_6:13, &c.). (J. Lyth, D. D.)

Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ?--

Christ and the body

I. His right over it.

1. Not only by creation and redemption.

2. But by our union with Him.

II. The consequent obligation.

1. To care for it.

2. To keep it pure.

3. To use it for His service. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The thought of the love of Jesus for us the remedy for sins of the body

I. The word made flesh, changed by that act the whole relation of the creature to the Creator. Before they were distinct. God chose man to knit both together. Could there be envy in heaven, surely the angels must have envied our race; nay, it has been believed that Satan fell through envy at the incarnation revealed beforehand. Nothing so illustrates the self-forgetting love of those blessed spirits, as that they should joy to be passed over, and to see us the fallen preferred to themselves. True! the purpose of God is to unite both under and in one head (Eph_1:10). Their ranks, it is a pious opinion, broken by the fall of the apostate angels, will be filled by redeemed men. But even this equality has not been enough. God has willed to give us a closeness of union with Himself, which He gave not to the Seraphim. And this for all eternity,

II. This constitutes the claim of Jesus on our love.

1. This is more than compensation for the fall of Adam. Jesus, in this special way, is ours; He is our near Kinsman, and more than brother. Jesus must love me with a special love, for He has not the nature of angels, but this of mine.

2. And how did He love us? What did He withhold from us, for love of us? His glory! He emptied Himself (Php_2:7). He who was and is one with the Father, entered this mortal life. He began it an outcast, and ended it by giving Himself to be numbered with the transgressors. In those dread hours on the Cross, what part of His sacred body did He reserve from suffering for us? (Psa_22:14). And His Fathers face was hid from His human soul. And what doth He now? He is in that unspeakable glory, upholding all things by the word of His power; governing also the Church and sanctifying her by His presence. But as something nearer to ourselves individually, He ever liveth to make intercession for us. Calvary lives on in heaven, and pleads for us still. And all this has been, is, shall continue to be done for us through the body. By taking our whole human nature, soul and body, God the Son gave us, in His own person, that special prerogative of nearness to Himself.

III. With what sacredness does this invest our bodies.

1. Limb by limb, they are the same bodies as that which God the Son took, which for us was crucified, which now is in glory at the right hand of God. All sin is misery, but sins of the flesh have yet this special misery, that they degrade that body which Jesus took. To sin as to the flesh is to insult Christ.

2. Trials you have or will have. But trials which are only of Gods allowing injure neither body nor soul. He will give the victory who allows them (2Co_12:9). But now, if thou art liable to temptation, from which thou mightest have been blessedly free, or over which thou mightest have had, by Gods grace, an easy victory--

(1) Observe well, whence mostly it begins now; from imagination? or from the eye? or from past memories? or from over-fulness of food? For there the entrance of thy battle lies.

(2) In the trial itself. I know but of one effectual remedy--to clasp the hands together, and pray earnestly to God for help. And when thou so prayest, think how Jesus hallowed this poor body; think how He suffered in this body for love of us. Look well at that holy frame, racked on that hard bed of the Cross. But above all, look at that thorn-crowned head, and that yet open, mild, forgiving eye, which won the blaspheming robber to sue for pardon from his Lord. Does it not say to thee, Poor wanderer, this have I endured for love of thee; I loved thee and gave Myself for thee. Love Me at least now? Wilt thou not look up to Him and say, By Thy grace henceforth I will love Thee; let me rather die than again profane the body, which Thou didst so redeem, and wound Thy love? Or look up and gaze on that glorious form at the right hand of God. All else is spirit. One body is there, above all, adored by all. There, with a special lustre of their own, stream forth the rays of Divine light and love from those two pierced hands, those once wounded feet, that opened side and heart. There, at that moment, the moment of thy temptation, they intercede for thee. There is that human eye resting still in love upon thee. Christ is not ashamed to wear in heaven the tokens of His humiliation; be not thou ashamed of Him and His service. Remember that He willeth to fashion this our now vile body, that it may be made like unto His glorious body, and resolve by His grace to degrade no more the body which He so longs to glorify with Himself. (E. B. Pusey, D. D.)

Fornication

I. Destroys all pretence to Christianity.

1. The body belongs to Christ.

2. Should be employed in His service.

3. To give it to another is to deny Him--and court destruction, which God forbid!

II. Degrades the man.

1. The harlot is the refuse of humanity.

2. To be joined to her is to be one with her--by a natural law.

III. Is impossible while we are joined to Christ--we are one spirit with Him. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

6:13-14 “Food was made for the stomach, and the stomach for food”: This statement was apparently used by some Corinthian Christians to rationalize their sexual immorality on the analogy that “the body was made for sex, and sex for the body.” It is a false analogy, because our bodies . . . were made for the Lord, and sexual immorality does not glorify him. In light of his concern for our bodies and the coming resurrection from the dead, our bodies must be used for holy purposes in God’s service.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

1Co 6:13. Τὰ βρώματα, meats) viz. ἐστὶ. The conclusion drawn from the lawfulness of meats to that of lust has no weight.—καὶ ταὑτην καὶ ταῦτα, both it and them) Demonstrative, twice used concerning the present time; the it precedes, inasmuch as food is for [on account of] the belly.—καταργήσει) shall destroy; and that too, not merely in the same way as the body is destroyed at death;[49] from the antithesis of the belly and the body, it may be inferred, that there will be a difference of sexes even in the state similar to that of the angels.[50] Those things which shall be destroyed, considered in themselves, have their use unrestricted [free], Col 2:20, etc., Mar 7:18, [whatsoever thing from without entereth a man] cannot [defile him]. Now [δἐ, whereas] is here and in the following verse elegantly put instead of for; for a severer denunciation [“God shall destroy both it,” etc.] is subjoined to the concession [“meats for the belly,” etc.]; a joyful declaration [God will raise up us also, etc.], to the prohibition [the body is not for fornication]. He will raise up, directly corresponds from the antithetic side to, He will destroy.—τὸ δὲ σῶμα, now [but] the body) The body here is not opposed to the belly [alvo], but to meats.[51]—ΠΟΡΝΕΊᾼ, for fornication) an abstract noun.—τῷ Κυρίῳ, for the Lord) Christ. The body is His due, for He Himself assumed the body, and hath thereby sanctified us; and we are joined to Him by the resurrection of the body.—τῷ σώματι, for the body) How great honour!

[49] The destruction of meats and the belly will be a permanent destruction.—ED.

[50] For though the belly is to be for ever destroyed, not so the body.—ED.

[51] The Germ. Vers., however, thinks that the body is opposed to the belly [ventri], and it has on the margin these words: The body is much more noble than the belly.—E. B.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_6:13. Τῇ κοιλίᾳ] sc[962] ἔστι, belong to, inasmuch, that is to say, as they are destined to be received and digested by the belly (the ὑποδοχῆ τῶν σιτίων, Photius in Oecumenius). Comp Mat_15:17.

ΤΟῖς ΒΡΏΜΑΣΙΝ] inasmuch as it is destined to receive and digest the food.

This reciprocal destination according to nature is the first element, which, in its relation to the second half of the verse, is intended to call attention to the fact, that the case of fornication is totally different from that of the use of food,that the latter, being in accordance with its destination, belongs to the category of the adiaphora; while fornication, on the other hand, which is anti-Christian, is contrary to the relation of the body to Christ. The second element (which, however, is very closely connected with the first), by which this is made manifest, consists in what God will hereafter do on the one hand with the κοιλίᾳ and the ΒΡΏΜΑΣΙ, and on the other hand (1Co_6:14) in respect of the bodys relation as pertaining to Christ, which latter relation is imperishable, in contrast to the perishable nature of the things first mentioned.

Ὁ ΔῈ ΘΕῸς … ΚΑΤΑΡΓ.] i.e. God, however, will (at the Parousia) cause such a change to take place in the bodily constitution of man and in the world of sense generally, that neither the organs of digestion as such, nor the meats as such, will then be existent. To such passing away is this relation destined by God! With respect to the glorifying of the body here indicated, comp Mat_22:30; 1Co_15:44; 1Co_15:51. Melanchthon aptly says: Cibl et venter … sunt res periturae; … ideo sunt adiaphora; and Bengel: quae destruentur, per se liberum habent usum, Col_2:20 ff. Comp Castalio, and among more modern expositors, Schulz, Krause, Billroth, Rückert, Schrader, Olshausen, de Wette, Osiander, Ewald, Maier, Neander, Hofmann.[966] Pott, Flatt, and Heydenreich (and see still earlier writers in Wolf) approximate to this view, but take ΤᾺ ΒΡΏΜΑΤΑ … ΚΑΤΑΡΓ. as words of an opponent, the premisses of a conclusion as to the allowableness of fornication, which conclusion is impugned by Paul in the τὸ δὲ σῶμα Κ.Τ.Λ[967] which follows. But the apostle has not given the slightest hint of this passage being a dialogue; moreover, had it been so, he would have begun his reply in 1Co_6:13 with ἀλλά again (as in 1Co_6:12, according to this dialogistic view). Other interpreters, following Chrysostom and Theophylact, make the design of ὁ δὲ Θεὸς κ.τ.λ[968] to be a warning against excess. Comp Calvin, Grotius, Calovius, al[970] But this, although in harmony with the ἈΛΛΆ in 1Co_6:12, would stand in no logical relation to the Ὁ ΔῈ ΘΕῸς Κ.Τ.Λ[971] of 1Co_6:14, and thereby the inner connection of the whole address (see above) would be broken up.

καὶ ταύτην καὶ ταῦτα] Regarding the use of the double οὗτος for ἐκεῖνος … οὗτος, which is not common, see Bernhardy, p. 277. Comp Jos_8:22; 1Ma_7:46; 1Ma_9:17.

τὸ δὲ σῶμα] Paul cannot name again here a single organ; the whole body is the organ of fleshly intercourse;[973] see 1Co_6:16.

τῇ πορνείᾳ] for fornication (conceived of as a personal power), for its disposal and use.

τῷ Κυρίῳ] inasmuch as the body is a member of Christ. See 1Co_6:15.

τῷ σώματι] inasmuch, namely, as Christ is destined (has it as His function) to rule and use the body as His member. Quanta dignatio! Bengel. It is a mistake to make the phrase refer to the raising up and glorifying of the body, which it is the part of Christ to effect (Ambrosiaster, Anselm Thomas, Grotius); for this would destroy the unity of mutual reference in the two clauses (comp above, τὰ βρώματα κ.τ.λ[975]], and, besides, the resurrection is brought forward afterwards as something separate from the preceding, and that, too, as the work to God (parallel to the ὁ δὲ Θεὸς Κ.Τ.Λ[976] in 1Co_6:13).

[962] c. scilicet.

[966] Several of them, however, fall into the mistake of making the date of the καταργ. to be at death, which καὶ ταῦτα alone shows to be inadmissible.

[967] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[968] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[970] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

[971] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[973] Neither our text nor Luk_20:35 gives any support to the assumption that those partaking in the resurrection will be without sexual distinction. The doing away of the κοιλία refers simply to the cessation of the earthly process of nutrition; it does not affect the identity of the body, which Delitzsch (Psychol. p. 459), without warrant from Scripture, pronounces to be independent of the external continuance of distinction between the sexes. Such assertions lead to fantastic theories ὑπὲρ ὃ γέγραπται.

[975] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[976] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co 6:13 . The maxim “All things are lawful to me” has been guarded within its province; now it must be limited to its province : “Foods (are) for the belly, and the belly for its foods”. τὰ βρώματα , the different kinds of food about which Jewish law, ascetic practice (Rom 14:1 ff.), and the supposed defilement of the idolothyta (8., 1Co 10:25 ff.) caused many embarrassments. The Ap., adopting the profound principle of Jesus (Mar 7:15-23 ), cuts through these knotty questions at a stroke: the βρώματα axe morally indifferent; for they belong to the κοιλία , not the καρδία ( cf. Rom 14:17 ). Food and the stomach are appropriated to each other; the main question about the former is whether or no it suits the latter. A second reason for the moral indifference of matters of the table lies in their perishing nature ; κοιλία and βρώματα play a large and troublesome part in the existing order, “but God will abolish both this and these”. For the somewhat rare antithetic repetition of οὗτος , cf. 1Co 7:7 , also Jos 8:22 (LXX). The nutritive system forms no part of the permanent self; it belongs to the passing σχῆμα τ . κόσμου τούτου (1Co 7:31 ), to the constitution of “flesh and blood” (1Co 15:50 ) and the σῶμα ψυχικόν ; hence the indifference of foods (1Co 8:8 ): “quæ destruentur, per se liberum habent usum” (Bg [968] ; cf. Col 2:20 f.). “But the body” has relations more vital and influential than those concerned with its perishing sustenance it “is not for fornication, out for the Lord and the Lord for the body”: the same double dat [969] clause of mutual appropriation links τὸ σῶμα with ὁ Κύριος as τὰ βρώματα ; with ἡ κοιλία each is made for the other and requires the other. “The body” regarded as a whole, in contrast with its temporary apparatus is fashioned for the Lord’s use; to yield it to heretry is to traverse Christ’s rights in it anu disqualify oneself for a part in His resurrection (1Co 6:14 ). The Lord Jesus and πορνεία contested for the bodies of Christian men; loyal to Him they must renounce that , yielding to that they renounce Him. In Gr [970] philosophical ethics the distinction drawn in this ver. had no place; the two appetites concerned were treated on the same footing, as matters of physical function, the higher ethical considerations attaching to sexual passion being ignored. Hence the degradation of woman and the decay of family life, which brought Greek civilisation to a shameful end.

[968] Bengel’s Gnomon Novi Testamenti.

[969] dative case.

[970] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_6:13

Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body (is) not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.

Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats. The one is evidently adapted and designed for the other. It is a legitimate inference from this constitution that it is lawful to eat, and to eat every thing adapted for food. But this is a mere temporary arrangement. God will destroy both it and them. The time shall come when men shall no more be sustained by food, but shall be as the angels of God. The fact that the present constitution of the body is temporary, is a proof that meats belong to the class of things indifferent. They can have no influence on the eternal destiny of the body. This is not true with regard to fornication. The body was never designed for promiscuous concubinage. And such a use of it is inconsistent with the design of its creation and with its future destiny.

The body is for the Lord; and the Lord for the body. The one stands in an intimate relation to the other. The body is designed to be a member of Christ, and the dwelling-place of his Spirit. And he so regards it; redeeming it with his blood, uniting it to himself as a member of his mystical body, making it an instrument of righteousness unto holiness. With this design of the body the sin in question is absolutely incompatible, and destructive of the relation which the body sustains to the Lord.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Secondarily, because they counted many things for indifferent which were of themselves unlawful, as fornication, which they numbered amongst mere natural and lawful desires, as well as meat and drink: Therefore the Apostle showeth, that they are utterly unlike: for meats, saith he, were made for the necessary use of man’s life, which is not perpetual. For both meats, and all this manner of nourishing are quickly abolished. But we must not so think of the uncleanness of fornication, for which the body is not made, but on the contrary side is ordained to pureness, as appeareth by this, that is consecrated to Christ, even as Christ also is given us of his Father, to quicken our bodies with that virtue wherewith he also rose again.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

The argument drawn from the indifference of meats (Co1 8:8; Rom 14:14, Rom 14:17; compare Mar 7:18; Col 2:20-22) to that of fornication does not hold good. Meats doubtless are indifferent, since both they and the "belly" for which they are created are to be "destroyed" in the future state. But "the body is not (created) for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body" (as its Redeemer, who hath Himself assumed the body): "And God hath raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us" (that is our bodies): therefore the "body" is not, like the "belly," after having served a temporary use, to be destroyed: Now "he that committeth fornication, sinneth against his own body" (Co1 6:18). Therefore fornication is not indifferent, since it is a sin against one's own body, which, like the Lord for whom it is created, is not to be destroyed, but to be raised to eternal existence. Thus Paul gives here the germ of the three subjects handled in subsequent sections: (1) The relation between the sexes. (2) The question of meats offered to idols. (3) The resurrection of the body.

shall destroy--at the Lord's coming to change the natural bodies of believers into spiritual bodies (Co1 15:44, Co1 15:52). There is a real essence underlying the superficial phenomena of the present temporary organization of the body, and this essential germ, when all the particles are scattered, involves the future resurrection of the body incorruptible.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 13. Meats for the belly] I suppose that κοιλια means the animal appetite, or propensity to food, c., and we may conceive the apostle to reason thus: I acknowledge that God has provided different kinds of aliments for the appetite of man, and among others those which are generally offered to idols and he has adapted the appetite to these aliments, and the aliments to the appetite: but God shall destroy both it and them; none of these is eternal; all these lower appetites and sensations will be destroyed by death, and have no existence in the resurrection body; and the earth and its productions shall be burnt up.

Now the body is not for fornication] Though God made an appetite for food, and provided food for that appetite, yet he has not made the body for any uncleanness, nor indulgence in sensuality; but he has made it for Christ; and Christ was provided to be a sacrifice for this body as well as for the soul, by taking our nature upon him; so that now, as human beings, we have an intimate relationship to the Lord; and our bodies are made not only for his service, but to be his temples.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

13. Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats Here he shows what use ought to be made of outward things — for the necessity of the present life, which passes away quickly as a shadow, agreeably to what, he says afterwards. (1 Corinthians 7:29.) We must use this world so as not to abuse it And hence, too, we infer, how improper it is for a Christian man to contend for outward things. When a dispute, therefore, arises respecting corruptible things, a pious mind will not anxiously dwell upon these things; for liberty is one thing — the use of it is another. This statement accords with another — that

The kingdom of God is not meat and drink. (Romans 14:17.)

Now the body is not for fornication Having mentioned the exceptions, he now states still farther, that our liberty ought not by any means to be extended to fornication For it was an evil that was so prevalent at that time, that it seemed in a manner as though it had been permitted; as we may see also from the decree of the Apostles, (Acts 15:20,) where, in prohibiting the Gentiles from fornication, they place it among things indifferent; for there can be no doubt that this was done, because it was very generally looked upon as a lawful thing. Hence Paul says now, There is a difference between fornication and meats, for the Lord has not ordained the body for fornication, as he has the belly for meats And this he confirms from things contrary or opposite, inasmuch as it is consecrated to Christ, and it is impossible that Christ should be conjoined with fornication. What he adds — and the Lord for the body, is not without weight, for while God the Father has united us to his Son, what wickedness there would be in tearing away our body from that sacred connection, and giving it over to things unworthy of Christ.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(13) Meats for the belly.—The Apostle proceeds now to show that the question of eating meats offered to idols does come into that catalogue of indifferent things on which an exercise of Christian freedom is permissible, and that the question of fornication does not. Lawful matters are to be decided upon the highest principle of expediency; but fornication is an unlawful matter, and therefore the question of its expediency does not arise at all. The stomach is adapted to the digestion of food, and food is adapted to it. This is, however, only for this life; both shall be destroyed by death. But the person (“body” being equivalent to “us” in 1Co_6:14) of the man is enduring. No food which enters defiles the man. Fornication is not a mere transitory gratification; it affects the man. The use of the stomach is to receive and digest food, and only the animal organisation is affected by that. It cannot be said that the man is made for fornication. The person of each is made for the Lord; the whole Church is His body; each baptised person is a limb of that body; and the Lord is for the body. He came to earth and died for it, and for each member of it; therefore what affects that body, or any member of that body (i.e., any Christian), cannot be an indifferent matter. Neither shall the man perish, as meats and the belly shall; he is immortal. (See 1Co_15:51-52.) Such seems to be the argument by which St. Paul maintains liberty to be right regarding meats, and shows that the same principle does not apply to sensual indulgence. It may be put argumentatively thus:

1. Eating meats offered to idols is an “indifferent matter,” because—

(a) Meats only affect the particular organ designed for them;

(b) Meats and that organ shall perish together.

2. Fornication is not an “indifferent matter,” because—

(a) It affects the man, and he is not designed for the purpose of this indulgence,

(b) The man is immortal, and therefore the moral effect of the fornication on his nature does not perish at his death.

Conclusion.—Only indifferent matters are to be the subject of Christian liberty; and the decision must be according to the utility of each act. Fornication is not an indifferent matter; therefore it is not so to be decided upon.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

13. Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats] This is a matter of comparatively trifling importance. Meat is a necessity for our present undeveloped life; in the world where hunger and thirst will be no more it will no longer be so. And therefore both it, and the organs formed to digest it will be no longer wanted.

Now the body is not for fornication] St Paul is led, by the importance he attaches to this point, to treat it first. The abominable licentiousness of heathen cities in general, and of Corinth in particular (see Dean Stanley’s note on 1Co_6:12) had led to a general conviction that the body was for fornication. St Paul contradicts this, and most emphatically proclaims that what was always permitted among heathens, and even in some cases enjoined as a religious rite, was distinctly in itself an unlawful act, not excusable on the plea of necessity, which he had admitted in the case of meats, nor, like them, a question of “nicely calculated less or more,” but contrary to the laws laid down by God for man, and calculated to deprive men of the blessings of the Resurrection.

but for the Lord] i.e. Jesus Christ. The body is not formed to serve a purely material end, but is the instrument of the spirit, and its end the glory of God, through Christ.

and the Lord for the body] Because from our point of view Christ came that we might serve and honour Him in our bodies. This sentence answers to ‘meats for the belly, and the belly for meats,’ above.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats,.... All sort of food is appointed and provided to satisfy the appetite and stomach, to fill the belly, and nourish the body; and the belly, and all the parts through which the food passes, are purposely formed by God for the reception and digestion of the food, for its secretion, chylification, and nutrition by it, and the ejection of the excermentitious parts.

But God shall destroy both it and them: at death, and in the grave, when the one shall be consumed, and the other be needless and useless; and though that part of the body, with the rest, will be raised at the last day, since the body will be raised perfect, consisting of all its parts; yet there will be no appetite, no desire in the stomach after meats, no need of them to fill the belly, and so no use of these parts for such purposes as they now are; for the children of the resurrection will be like the angels, and stand in no need of eating and drinking.

Now the body is not for fornication. Though meats are appointed for the belly, and the belly for them, and this and the other sort of meats are of an indifferent kind, which may or may not be used; yet this cannot be said of fornication, which the Corinthians, and other Gentiles, took to be equally indifferent as meats; but the apostle shows there is not the same reason for the one as the other. The body was not originally made and appointed for fornication; this is quite besides the will of God, who has provided marriage as a remedy against it:

but for the Lord; for Jesus Christ, for whom a body was prepared in God's council and covenant; and for the sake of which, and after the exemplar of it in God's eternal mind, the body of man was first formed; and which was also made, as after the image, so for the glory of Christ, to be a member of his, to be redeemed by him, and to serve him in, in righteousness and holiness, and at last to be raised by him, and made like to his glorious body at the great day.

And the Lord for the body; he was preordained in the council of God, and provided in the covenant of grace, and sent in the fulness of time to be a Redeemer and Saviour of the body, as well as the soul; to be a sanctifier of it, and the raiser of it up from the dead in the resurrection; all which are so many arguments to dissuade from the sin of fornication.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

13 Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.

Ver. 13. God shall destroy] The belly shall be destroyed in the other world, not for the substance of it, but for the use of it. And the same may be said for the difference of sexes; the parts shall remain, the use cease. Cato said well, that he was an ill commonwealth’s man, qui inter guttur et inguen, cuncta sub ventris ditione posuisset, who between his neck and is privates he would be able to be under spread of his belly, that was a slave to his sensual appetite.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Meats for the belly ... - This has every appearance of being an adage or proverb. Its meaning is plain. “God has made us with appetites for food; and he has made food adapted to such appetites, and it is right, therefore, to indulge in luxurious living.” The word “belly” here κοιλία koilia denotes the “stomach;” and the argument is, that as God had created the natural appetite for food, and had created food, it was right to indulge in eating and drinking to any extent which the appetite demanded. The word “meats” here βρώματα brōmata does not denote animal food particularly, or flesh, but “any kind” of food. This was the sense of the English word formerly. Mat 3:4; Mat 6:25; Mat 9:10; Mat 10:10; Mat 14:9, etc.

But God shall destroy - This is the reply of Paul to the argument. This reply is, that as both are so soon to be destroyed, they were unworthy of the care which was bestowed on them, and that attention should be directed to better things. It is unworthy the immortal mind to spend its time and thought in making provision for the body which is soon to perish. And especially a man should be willing to abandon indulgences in these things when they tended to injure the mind, and to destroy the soul. It is unworthy a mind that is to live forever, thus to be anxious about that which is so soon to be destroyed in the grave We may observe here:

(1) This is the great rule of the mass of the world. The pampering of the appetites is the great purpose for which they live, and the only purpose.

(2) It is folly. The body will soon be in the grave; the soul in eternity. How low and grovelling is the passion which leads the immortal mind always to anxiety about what the body shall eat and drink!

(3) People should act from higher motives. They should be thankful for appetites for food; and that God provides for the needs of the body; and should eat to obtain strength to serve him, and to discharge the duties of life. Man often degrades himself below - far below - the brutes in this thing. they never pamper their appetites, or “create artificial” appetites. Man, in death, sinks to the same level; and all the record of his life is, that “he lived to eat and drink, and died as the brute dieth.” How low human nature has fallen! How sunken is the condition of man!

Now the body is not ... - “But δέ de the body is not designed for licentiousness, but to be devoted to the Lord.” The remainder of this chapter is occupied with an argument against indulgence in licentiousness - a crime to which the Corinthians were particularly exposed. See the Introduction to this Epistle. It cannot be supposed that any members of the church would indulge in this vice, or would vindicate it; but it was certain:

That it was the sin to which they were particularly exposed; That they were in the midst of a people who did both practice and vindicate it; compare Rev 2:14-15.

Hence, the apostle furnished them with arguments against it, as well to guard them from temptation, as to enable them to meet those who did defend it, and also to settle the morality of the question on an immovable foundation. The first argument is here stated, that the body of man was designed by its Maker to be devoted to him, and should be consecrated to the purposes of a pure and holy life. We are, therefore, bound to devote our animal as well as our rational powers to the service of the Lord alone.

And the Lord for the body - “The Lord is in an important sense for the body, that is, he acts, and plans, and provides for it. He sustains and keeps it; and he is making provision for its immortal purity and happiness in heaven. It is not right, therefore, to take the body, which is nourished by the kind and constant agency of a holy God, and to devote it to purposes of pollution.” That there is a reference in this phrase to the resurrection, is apparent from the following verse. And as God will exert his mighty power in raising up the body, and will make it glorious, it ought not to be prostituted to purposes of licentiousness.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Meat for the belly. That is, meat is necessary for the support of nature, though this or that kind of meat be indifferent: and we ought to reflect, that God in a short time will destroy both the meats, and the appetite of eating, and the body shall shortly die, but it shall rise again. --- Know you not that your bodies are the members of Christ....and the temple of the Holy Ghost. Man consists of soul and body; by baptism he is made a member of that same mystical body, the Church, of which Christ is the head: In baptism both the soul and body are consecrated to God: they are made the temple of the Holy Ghost, inasmuch as the spirit and grace of God inhabits in men, who are sanctified. Christ redeemed both our souls and bodies, both which he designs to sanctify, and to glorify hereafter in heaven; so that we must look upon both body and soul as belonging to Christ, and not as our own. --- Shall I, then, taking the members of Christ, make them the members of an harlot, by a shameful and unlawful commerce? --- Fly fornication. Such sins are chiefly to be avoided by flight, and by avoiding the occasions and temptations. Other sins are not committed by such an injury done to the body, but by an abuse of something else, that is different from the body, but by fornication and sins of uncleanness, the body itself is defiled and dishonoured, whereas the body ought to be considered as if it were not our own, being redeemed by our Saviour Christ, consecrated to him, with an expectation of a happy resurrection, and of being glorified in heaven. Endeavour, therefore, to glorify God in your body, by employing it in his service, and bear him in your body by being obedient to his will. (Witham) --- We know and we believe the we carry about Jesus Christ in our bodies, but it is the shame and condemnation of a Christian to live as if he neither knew or believed it. If fornication is a great crime in a pagan, in a Christian it is a species of sacrilege, accompanied with injustice and ingratitude. Whoever yields to impurity, converts his body into the temple of Satan, glorifies and carries him about, tearing away the members of Jesus Christ, to make them the members of a harlot.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

The beginning of this verse seemeth to give a great light to our true understanding of the former verse, and maketh it very probable that the apostle spake with reference to the free use of meats and drinks, when he said: All things are lawful for me. Though God hath ordained

meats for the filling of the belly, and hath made the belly for the receptacle of meats, for the nourishment of the body, so as the use of meats and drinks is lawful; yet when we see that the free use of them proveth inexpedient, as too much pampering the body, and disposing it to wantonness, so far as they do so they are to be avoided. Others make the connection thus: All your contests are but for things which concern the belly, for meats and drinks, for perishing things; now, in things of this nature, all things that are lawful are not expedient. Others say, that the apostle here answereth or obviateth what the Nicolaitanes or the Epicureans held, that all sorts of meats and drinks were lawful, yea, fornication itself. The apostle grants the first, but denieth the second, there being not a parity of reason for the lawfulness of meats and drinks, and of fornication. He tells them, God had ordained meats for the belly of man, and had created the stomach and belly for the reception of meats for the nourishment of man’s body, and the preservation of his life; yet they ought to use them lawfully, and to consider expedience in the use of them, and not too eagerly to contend for them, for

God shall destroy both the belly, and the use of meats as to the belly. In the resurrection, as men shall not marry, nor give in marriage, so they shall hunger and thirst no more. But God had not created

the body of a man for fornication, but for himself, that men by and with it might glorify his name, by doing his will. And

the Lord is for the body, as the Head of it, to guide and direct the use of the several members of it; and as the Saviour of it, to raise it up at the last day, as he further declareth in the next words. {see 1Co 6:14}

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

13. Meat… belly—An instance of the above mentioned correspondence or correlation between the internal appetite and the external object. Food and the stomach were made for each other.

God shall destroy—This correlation between appetite and supply, the stomach and the food, though divinely established, is transient. Death will demolish it; and in the reorganization at the resurrection it will be omitted from the glorified body.

Body… fornication—If there are correlations there are also repugnances. The stomach and the due food are rightly correlated; the body and the harlot are fearfully opposite and repugnant.

For the Lord—The true transcendent, spiritual, eternal correlation is between the sanctified body and the Lord.

Lord for the body—The correlation between the appetite and the food is earthly and transient; the correlation between our body and the Lord is heavenly and eternal, being, as shown in 1Co_6:14, carried up into the resurrection. It springs from the fact that our glorious Lord will glorify our bodies. Here, as in 1 Corinthians 15, Paul bases our hope of a future life, not distinctly on the immortality of the soul, but upon the resurrection through Christ.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Meats for the belly, etc. The argument of the Corinthians about the indifference of eating "meats" which were merely ceremonially unclean was quite tenable. Things Levitically unclean might be essentially pure, and both food and the body which lives thereby are things "which perish in the using". (Col_2:22) Shall destroy; shall bring to nought. This would occur when the physical body becomes a spiritual body, like that of the angels of God. (1Co_15:51, 1Co_15:52) How vile, then, is it to make a god of the belly only to sleep and feed! Both it and them. There shall be no need for the belly when men "shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more"; (Rev_7:16) and the meat alluded to is "meat which perisheth". (Luk_15:16) Now the body is net for fornication, but for the Lord. The argument, therefore, which would class this sin as a matter of indifference, as was the Levitical distinction between different kinds of food, at once fell to the ground. Food was a necessity, and the stomach was formed for its assimilation. Fornication is not a venial but "a deadly sin." It is not a natural necessity, but a consuming evil. The body was created for higher ends namely, to be a temple of God. "God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness". (1Th_4:7) And the Lord for the body. Therefore our members ought to be used "as instruments of righteousness unto God", (Rom_5:13) and our bodies presented as a living, holy, reasonable, acceptable sacrifice to him. (Rom_12:1) The end of our existence is "to serve God here and enjoy him forever hereafter.

Vers. 13-19.

Duties to the body.

Christianity concerns itself about man"s body as well as about man"s soul. Christianity is a religion for man for a whole man. When considering matters of religion, we are apt to leave the body too much out of account. Our remissness might be corrected if we remembered how large an influence the body has upon the mind and soul.

I CONSIDER WHAT CHRISTIANITY SAYS ABOUT THE BODY. It is:

1. For the Lord.

(1) For his service and glory. We may serve Christ with our body. We may glorify God with our body (ver. 20). With our whole being we should serve the Lord. Our body should be "set apart" for God. How much more useful many would be if they did but cultivate physical health! Their uncared for bodies become grievous burdens and woeful hindrances. Disorder in the body is contagious, and often spreads to mind and soul.

Athletics, rightly ordered, lie within the realm of religion. The man who, not neglecting other duties, seeks to make his body thoroughly strong and vigorous, is more pious, not less. With others, diseases the fruits of old sins, abide and greatly check them in active service for God.

(2) The body of the Christian is a member of Christ (ver. 15). Closely united to the great Head. He took our nature not only our spiritual and mental nature, but our bodily nature. We are one with him in our whole being.

(3) Purchased by Christ. When he redeemed man he redeemed man in his entirety. Our bodies have a part in "the great salvation." And at what a price was the purchase made!

1. A temple of the Holy Ghost. Solemn thought! How true yet how often forgotten! Whilst in the body, God dwells in us. The body is the outer framework of the sanctuary of the Divine Spirit. It is thus consecrated for a high, holy, and sacred purpose. It is God"s possession and dwelling place, like the temple of old. Thus:

2. It is not our own. Then we must not deaf with it as though it were. It has been bought by Christ, and should be freely and fully surrendered to him. When we give him our heart we should give him our body also. Many forget to do this.

3. Cared for by God. "The Lord is for the body." He preserves, feeds, clothes, shelters, guards it. How soon it would perish if uncared for by him!

4. To be raised. The resurrection of the body is a cardinal doctrine of Christianity, and insisted upon at great length by the apostle in the fifteenth chapter of this Epistle. We are but too apt to ignore this, and practically to conclude that at death we shall part with the body forever. We think it worthless, but God does not. He will raise it in a glorified form. Its present constitution will be greatly changed, as the apostle intimates in ver. 13. The time will come when the body will not be sustained, as it now is, by meats. It will be a "glorious body", (Php_3:21) a "spiritual body". (1Co_15:44)

II THESE TRUTHS RESPECTING THE BODY SHOULD:

1. Greatly ennoble it in our estimation. It is not to be thought lightly of or treated with contempt. Ancient philosophy taught hatred of the body, but

2. ancient philosophy is not Christianity. We must not despise the body; this is a dire mistake often perpetrated. The body has a great part to play both here and hereafter. It has been an occasion of sin often is a burden; but it is in the hands of God, and he will fully redeem and glorify it. It is his workmanship, thrown much out of gear by evil; but he shall rectify its defects, and make it "meet for the inheritance.

3. Lead us to use it most carefully. Being precious in God"s sight, purchased by Christ, tenanted by the Divine Spirit, shall we deal with it as though it were a common thing? There is one sin mentioned by the apostle which injures the body grievously, and utterly outrages the Divine intent concerning it. Let us guard carefully against this and kindred evils; terrible will be the punishment of those who defile the temple of the Holy Ghost, and who prostitute to base uses the "members of Christ. Pure body, pure mind, pure soul; may this trinity of blessings be ours! H.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

As if he had said, I speak this chiefly with regard to meats; (and would to God all Christians would consider it!) particularly with regard to those offered to idols, and those forbidden in the Mosaic law. These, I grant, are all indifferent, and have their use, though it is only for a time: then meats, and the organs which receive them, will together moulder into dust. But the case is quite otherwise with fornication. This is not indifferent, but at all times evil. For the body is for the Lord - Designed only for his service. And the Lord, in an important sense, for the body - Being the saviour of this, as well as of the soul; in proof of which God hath already raised him from the dead.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

From this verse to the end of the chapter our apostle labours, by sundry arguments, to convince the Corinthians of the exceeding sinfulness of the sin of fornication; partly, because they reckon it amongst the number of indifferent things, and also because the Corinthians before their conversion to Christianity, were so notoriously addicted to this sin, that they consecrated a temple to Venus, at which a multitude of virgins prostituted themselves; for which reason St. Paul makes use of a six-fold argument here, to prevent the Corinthians’ relapse into this sin of fornication after their conversion, which they had been so notoriously guilty of before conversion.

The first argument is in the words before us, Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.

As if he had said, "You put the body to a use for which it was never intended: the belly was made for meats, but the body was not made for fornication, but for the Lord, that is, for the Lord’s use and service; and the Lord is for the body, that is, for the good and salvation of the body."

Whence note, That such is the wonderful goodness of God towards us, his creatures, that look in whatsoever we are for him, he is for us; as our bodies are for the Lord’s service as well as our souls, so the Lord is for the good of our bodies as well as our souls, and therefore our bodies ought to be employed in his glory for every thing: this is the apostle’s first argument against fornication.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

NO PHYSICAL ORGANS IN THE GLORIFIED BODY

13. “Meats for the stomach, and the stomach for the meats: but God will destroy both this and them.” All the quibbles and controversies over meats and drinks, except from a merely hygienical standpoint, are utterly nugatory. We must abstain from tobacco, opium and intoxicating drinks, from the simple fact that they are narcotic poisons. We are to avoid gluttony, swine, and use the intelligence God has given us, living hygienically for the sake of health, mentality and spirituality. If I did not observe the laws of hygiene, I would be incompetent to perform the mental and spiritual work God has given me. I know not the taste of coffee, never use tea, from the simple fact that they, when participated in, in due time subjugate their patron and get him in such a fix that he can’t do without them. Like Paul, I will not be brought under the power of anything nor any person. I have no master but God. I do so much enjoy this wonderful freedom, in which I am dependent on nothing but God, and consequently always happy. “God will destroy both this,” i. e., the stomach, “and them,” i. e., the mortal food. We are hastening into a state of glory and immortality. There are two methods by which God glorifies the human body:

(a) Translation, which is really the primary, peculiar to the Edenic state, and will doubtless much prevail in the coming Millennium.

(b) The resurrection is the other method by which the body is glorified. I am on the daily outlook for my Lord to come and translate the living members of His Bridehood. Here we learn explicitly that the glorified body will have no digestive organs, neither will it partake of material nutriment, but subsist on celestial ambrosia and drink the sweet nectar among the angels, as finite beings will never cease to partake of nutriment in some way or other.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall bring to nought both it and them. But the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body :

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

13. Meats for the belly, etc. Self-indulgence was also excused, because food and the stomach were made for each other. But these are both perishable. Moreover, if “the belly was made for meats,” the body is not for fornication. It was not made for this, but for a nobler purpose—for the Lord. Hence, sensuality cannot be thus justified.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

13. τὰ βρώματα τῇ κοιλίᾳ καὶ ἡ κοιλία τοῖς βρώμασιν. Foods for the belly and the belly for foods. St Paul here points out that the view of these questions taken by himself is the very reverse of that taken by the Corinthians. To them fornication is a light matter, and the question of food offered to idols of supreme importance. To him fornication is a violation of the first principles of human society, the eating or refraining from certain kinds of food a thing in itself entirely indifferent.

ὁ δὲ θεὸς καὶ ταύτην καὶ ταῦτα καταργήσει. Both foods and that which digests them are perishable things. They therefore shall one day become useless, and therefore cease to be. For καταργήσει see notes on ch. 1Co 1:28, 1Co 13:8.

τό δὲ σῶμα οὐ τῇ πορνείᾳ. St Paul is led, by the importance he attaches to this point, to treat it first. The abominable licentiousness of heathen cities in general, and of Corinth in particular (see Dean Stanley’s note on 1Co 6:12) had led to a general conviction that the body was for fornication. St Paul contradicts this, and most emphatically proclaims that what was always permitted among heathens, and even in some cases enjoined as a religious rite, was distinctly in itself an unlawful act, not excusable on the plea of necessity, which he had admitted in the case of meats, nor, like them, a question of ‘nicely calculated less or more,’ but contrary to the laws laid down by God for man, and calculated to deprive men of the blessings of the Resurrection.

ἀλλὰ τῷ κυρίῳ. It is noteworthy that St Paul does not say that the body will be brought to nought. There is a sense in which it will, but (see ch. 15) another and more important sense in which it will not.

καὶ ὁ κύριος τῷ σώματι. It was to save the body originally designed for Him, that Christ came. See Rom 7:11; Eph 5:23; Php 3:21. Also 1Co 6:20, ch. 1Co 15:36-44, and the article in the Apostles’ Creed, ‘I believe in the Resurrection of the Body.’

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

13.] τῇ κοιλ., scil. ἐστιν. The belly is their appointed receptacle—they, its appointed pabulum. Of course even this part of the argument must be understood within the limits of οὐ πάντα συμφέρει.

ὁ δὲ θ.… καταργ.] viz. at the appearing of the Lord: when, ch. 15:51, 52, we shall be changed from a σῶμα ψυχικόν, to be a σῶμα πνευματικόν: not, at death.

τῇ πορν.] The body was not made for the practice of fornication. The reciprocal subserviency of the belly and meats is shewn by their coextensiveness in duration, and perishing together: but when πορνεία (and even that lawful use which is physically the same, but which is not here contemplated) shall have for ever passed away, the body shall be subserving its real use—that of being an instrument for the Lord’s work.

κ. ὁ κύρ. τῷ σώμ.] not, only for the body: but for the body; to sanctify our bodies by His Spirit, and finally to glorify them for Himself, see Rom 8:11. This final reference must not be excluded here, though it is not the principal thought:—rather, the redemption of the body from sin, and making it into a member of Himself by the Spirit.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

13. τὰ βρώματα … τοῖς βρώμασιν. It is quite possible that some of the Corinthians confused what the Apostle here so clearly distinguishes, the appetite for food and the craving for sensual indulgence. “We have traces of this gross moral confusion in the Apostolic Letter (Act 15:23-29), where things wholly diverse are combined, as directions about meats to be avoided and a prohibition of fornication” (Lightfoot). The Apostles, who framed these regulations, did not regard them as on the same plane, but the heathen, for whom they were framed, did. St Paul makes the distinction luminously clear. Not only are meats made for the belly, but the belly, which is essential to physical existence, is made for meats, and cannot exist without them. There is absolute correlation between the two, as long as earthly life lasts: but no longer, for both of them will eventually be done away. When the σῶμα ceases to be ψυχικόν and becomes πνευματικόν (15:44), neither the βρώματα nor the κοιλία will have any further function, and therefore ‘God will bring to nought’ both of them.

τὸ δὲ σῶμα οὐ τῇ πορνείᾳ. No such relation exists between the σῶμα and πορνεία as between the κοιλία and Βρώματα̈. The supposed parallel breaks down in two essential particulars. (1) The σῶμα was not made for πορνεία, but for the Lord, in order to be a member of Christ, who lived and died to redeem it. (2) The σῶμα is not, like the κοιλία, to be brought to nought, but to be transformed and glorified (Php 3:21). ‘The ‘body’ is contrasted with ‘flesh and blood’ (15:37, 50), and the κοιλία belongs to the latter, and has only a temporal purpose, whereas the ‘body’ has an eternal purpose. So far, therefore, from πορνεία standing to the body in the same relation as meats to the belly, it fatally conflicts with the body’s essential destiny, which is membership with Christ.

It is possible that in selecting the relation between appetite and food as a contrast to πορνεία St Paul is indirectly discouraging Judaistic distinctions of meats, or ascetic prohibitions of flesh and wine. No kind of food is forbidden to the Christian. But even if there had been no Judaizers at work in Corinth, and no tendency towards asceticism, he would probably have selected the relation between βρώματα and κοιλία for his purpose. The argument is still used, “If I may gratify one bodily appetite, why may I not gratify another? Naturalia non sunt turpia. Omnia munda mundis.”

καὶ ὁ Κύριος τῷ σώματι. A startling assertion of perfect correction: quanta dignatio / (Beng.). The Son of God, ‘sent in the likeness of sinful flesh,’ has His purpose and destiny, viz. to dwell in and glorify the body (Rom 8:23) which is united with Him through the Spirit (v. 17); and it is lawful to say that He is for it as well as it for Him.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Meats for the belly, etc. Paul is arguing against fornication. His argument is that there is a law of adaptation running through nature, illustrated by the mutual adaptation of food and the digestive organs; but this law is violated by the prostitution of the body to fornication, for which, in God 's order, it was not adapted.

Shall destroy [καταργησει] . Rev., better, shall bring to nought. See on Rom 3:3. The mutual physical adaptation is only temporary, as the body and its nourishment are alike perishable.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vv. 13, 14. “Meats are for the belly, and the belly for meats, and God shall destroy both it and them. But the body is not for fornication; but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14. Now God hath raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by His power.” — Several commentators have thought that the contrast set up by Paul in these two verses, between the act of eating and the impure use of the body, was called forth by certain statements in the letter of the Corinthians, in which they justified this vice by assimilating it to the other bodily wants, such as that of eating and drinking. Rückert has combated this opinion, for the reason that the Church could not have gone the length of systematically justifying vice; and besides, would not Paul have repelled such an assertion with the liveliest indignation? But without any allusion to the letter of the Corinthians, he might say: “All is lawful; for, according to the principle laid down by Jesus, it is not what enters into a man that defiles him; this domain of food-taking has nothing in common with moral obligation and our eternal future; but it is wholly otherwise with impurity.”

The apostle distinguishes two opposite elements in our bodily organism: the organs of nutrition, which serve for the support of the body, and to which, by a Divinely established correlation, there correspond the external objects which serve as meats. The morally indifferent character of this domain appears from the fact of its approaching destruction: God will abolish those functions in the day of the redemption of our bodies. But it is not so with our bodies strictly so called, with the body for which Paul exclusively reserves the name, and which he identifies with our very personality. This is the permanent element in our earthly organism, that which forms the link between our present and our future body. Now this element, the essential form of our personality, is that which is involved in the vice of impurity. And hence the profound difference between impurity and the natural functions of physical life. There exists between our body and the Lord Jesus Christ a moral relation analogous to the material and temporary relation which exists between the stomach and meats. The body is for Christ, to belong to Him and serve Him, and Christ is for the body, to inhabit and glorify it.

Vv. 14. In consequence of this sublime relation, the body will not perish. As God raised up Christ, He will also raise the body which has become here below the property and sanctified organ of Christ. The apostle says, “will raise us also;” he thus expressly identifies our personality with the body which is to be its eternal organ.

The readings raises and raised are evidently erroneous. The former would be the present of the idea, which does not suit here; the latter would refer to the spiritual resurrection (Eph 2:5-6), which is stranger still to the context. The idea of the future resurrection of this earthly body, like to that in which Christ lived, is fitted to impress us with the reverence due to the future organ of our glorified personality.

The last words, by His power, perhaps allude to some doubts in regard to the possibility of the fact.

It is remarkable that Paul here places himself in the number of those who shall rise again, as elsewhere he ranks himself with those who shall be changed at Christ’s coming again. He had no fixed idea on this point, and he could have none, the day of Christ’s coming being to him unknown.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.