1st Corinthians Chapter 6 verse 13 Holy Bible

Pulpit Commentary

Pulpit CommentaryVerse 13. - 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" (Colossians 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 (1 Corinthians 15:51, 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" (Revelation 7:16); and the meat alluded to is "meat which perisheth" (Luke 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" (1 Thessalonians 4:7). And the Lord for the body. Therefore our members ought to be used "as instruments of righteousness unto God" (Romans 5:13), and our bodies presented as a living, holy, reasonable, acceptable sacrifice to him (Romans 12:1). The end of our existence is "to serve God here and enjoy him forever hereafter."

Ellicott's Commentary

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers(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 1Corinthians 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 1Corinthians 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. . . .