UTN uW Translation Notes:

1 Corinthians 11 General Notes

Structure and Formatting

5. On food (8:1–11:1) * Both freedom and care for others (10:23–11:1)6. On head coverings (11:2–16) * Heads and honor (11:2–7) * Order for men and women (11:8–12) * Argument from nature (11:13–16)7. On the Lord’s Supper (11:17–34) * The problem at Corinth (11:17–22) * The tradition from the Lord (11:23–26) * Proper behavior at the Lord’s Supper (11:27–34)Many translations include 11:1 as the conclusion of the last section of chapter 10. Consider whether translations your readers are familiar with do this or not.

Religious and Cultural Concepts in This Chapter

The head

Paul refers frequently to “the head” in 11:2–10. In some places, “head” refers to a person’s body part: his or her head (See: the first occurrences of “head” in 11:4–5; see also 11:6–7; 11:10). In other places, “head” is used to refer to a specific kind of relationship between persons (See: 11:3). Sometimes, it is not clear which use of “head” Paul intends, and perhaps it could be both (See: especially the second occurrences of “head” in 11:4–5). See the notes on these verses for translation options in context. For the figurative meaning of “head,” see the section below on “Head as metaphor.” (See: head)

Women and men

Throughout 11:2–16, Paul uses words that could identify “women” and “men” in general or that could more specifically refer to “wives” and “husbands.” Further, Paul refers to the story about how God created the first man and the first woman as it is told in Genesis 2:15–25 (See: 11:8–9). This means that Paul could be speaking about women and men in general, husbands and wives in general, or the first man and first woman whenever he uses the words “man” and “woman.” It is likely that Paul either meant women and men in general in every verse (the ULT models this option), or he had different nuances of the words “woman” and “man” in mind in different verses (the UST models this option). If your language has words that are general enough that they could indicate any of these possible nuances of “woman” and “man,” you could use those words in this chapter. (See: figs-gendernotations)

Head coverings

Paul’s instructions in 11:2–16 about “head coverings” are not clear enough to indicate exactly what the Corinthians were doing or what exactly Paul wants them to do instead. There are multiple issues that are uncertain: (1) what is the “head covering” that Paul speaks about? (2) What does the “head covering” indicate in the Corinthians’ culture? (3) Why would some women uncover their heads?First (1), the “head covering” can be understood in roughly three ways: (a) a cloth that was worn on the top and back of the head, (b) long hair itself (it is unclear how long it would need to be to count as “long”), or (c) a specific hairstyle. The UST generally follows the interpretation that argues that the head covering is a “cloth.” Other options are included in the notes.Second (2), the “head covering” could be an indication of (a) proper gender distinctions between men (uncovered) and women (covered), (b) submission to authority (that is, a wife’s submission to her husband), or (c) the honor and respectability of the woman (and men who are related to her). Of course, the “head covering” could indicate several of these options.Third (3), women in Corinth might have uncovered their heads for several reasons: (a) they thought that the work of Jesus had nullified the importance of gender, so head coverings that indicated gender distinctions were unnecessary; (b) they thought that, in church worship, there was no hierarchy of authority based on gender or marriage, so head coverings that indicated submission to authority were unnecessary; or (c) they considered the whole group of believers to be family, so head coverings that indicated honor and respectability in public were unnecessary. Of course, several of these reasons might be true.The number of interpretations and options indicates again how little we know about what Paul is talking about in 11:2–16. If possible, your translation should allow for all these interpretations since the original text of 1 Corinthians also does. For specific translation options and comments on specific issues, see the notes on the verses.

“because of the angels”

In 11:10, Paul makes his claim that “the woman ought to have authority on the head,” and then he gives a reason: “because of the angels.” However, Paul does not state what about “angels” he has in mind. There are at least three important options for understanding what he could mean. First (1), sometimes the angels are described as those who oversee the order of the world and especially of worship. The woman having “authority on the head” would satisfy what the angels require for worship practices. Second (2), sometimes the angels are described as sexually attracted to earthly women. The woman “ought to have authority on the head” to keep the angels from acting or being tempted to act sexually with these women. Third (3), sometimes angels are described as involved in the worship of the community. The woman “ought to have authority on the head” as a sign of respect to them. Paul’s sentence does not specify anything beyond the fact that “the angels” are a reason for the “authority on the head,” so the best translation also expresses “the angels” as the reason without choosing between options. (See angel)

The issue with the Lord’s Supper

In 11:17–34, Paul corrects how the Corinthians are practicing the Lord’s Supper. Since the Corinthians would know the problem he is addressing, Paul himself is not very specific about it. The clearest hints about what the problem is can be found in 11:21 and 11:33. From these two verses, the problem with how the Corinthians are practicing the Lord’s Supper can be understood in primarily three ways. First (1), the people who arrived first began to eat right away without waiting for everyone else to gather. Because of this, they would have too much to eat and drink, and those who arrived later would not get enough. Second (2), some people, especially those who were more wealthy or powerful, would bring or receive special food and more of it than other people. Third (3), some people might not be showing hospitality or offering to share food with others who did not have their own houses or lots of food. If possible, your translation should allow for readers to accept several or all three of these possible understandings. See the notes for specific translation options, especially the notes on 11:21 and 11:33. (See: lordssupper)

Translation Issues in This Chapter

Rhetorical questions

In 11:13–15 and 22, Paul uses rhetorical questions. He is not asking these questions because he wants the Corinthians to provide him with information. Rather, he is asking these questions because he wants the Corinthians to think about how they are acting and what they are thinking. The questions encourage them to think along with Paul. For ways to translate these questions, look for the notes on each verse that includes these kinds of questions. (See: figs-rquestion)

Head as metaphor

As noted above, “head” functions in 11:3–5. The two most common understandings are these: (1) “head” is a metaphor for authority, and (2) “head” is a metaphor for source. A third (3) option is to understand “head” as a metaphor for whom one represents or to whom one brings honor. Of course, some or all of these three options could be understood as part of the “head” metaphor. What is clear is that Paul uses “head” at least partly because he wants to connect the figurative use of “head” with the nonfigurative use of “head” for the body part. Because of this connection, you should try to express the “head” metaphor with a word that refers to the body part. For specific issues and translation options, see the notes on 11:3–5. (See: head and figs-metaphor)

Metaphor with bread and cup

In 11:24–25, Jesus identifies bread as “my body” and the wine in a cup as “the new covenant in my blood.” These metaphors can be understood in at least three primary ways: (1) the bread and wine somehow become Jesus’ body and blood; (2) Jesus’ body and blood are present, physically or spiritually, in the bread and wine; or (3) the bread and wine memorialize or symbolize Jesus’ body and blood. Christians are divided on this question, and metaphors that link body and blood to bread and wine are very significant in the Bible and in Christian teaching. For these reasons, it is best to preserve these metaphors without expressing them as similes or in another nonfigurative way. If you must express them in another way, see the notes on 11:24–25 for translation possibilities. (See: body, blood, bread, and figs-metaphor)

Legal language

In 11:27–32, Paul uses a number of words that would normally be used in a court of law or in other legal settings. These words include “guilty,” “examine,” “discern,” “judge,” and “condemn.” If possible, use words related to legal settings or courts of law in your translation of these verses.

Translation Issues in This Chapter

Translating gendered words

In 11:2–16, Paul uses masculine and feminine words to identify when he is addressing men and when he is addressing women. Unlike in most of the previous chapters, then, you should intentionally preserve most of the gendered language in this chapter. The notes will identify any cases of gendered language that could refer to all people. If there is no note, assume that the gendered language is functioning to distinguish between genders. (See: figs-gendernotations)

Are 11:8–9 a parenthesis?

Some translations mark 11:8–9 as an interruption or parenthesis in Paul’s argument. They do this because 11:10 seems to draw a conclusion from the point made at the end of 11:7. However, it is also quite possible that 11:10 draws its conclusion from all of 11:7–9. Because of that, neither the UST nor the ULT marks 11:8–9 as a parenthesis. Consider whether translations your readers are familiar with use parentheses here or not.

Different accounts of the Last Supper

In 11:23–25, Paul recounts the tradition of the Last Supper, which is the last meal Jesus had with his closest disciples before he was arrested and put to death. Paul uses this story to explain how the Corinthians should act at the Lord’s Supper, so he considers the Last Supper the time when Jesus began the practice of what we call the Lord’s Supper. The same story can be found in very similar form in Luke 22:19–20 and in slightly different form in Matthew 26:26–29 and Mark 14:22–25. You should translate the story as you find it here without making it the same as the other accounts.

“First, … ”

In 11:18, Paul uses “first” to introduce his instructions about the Lord’s Supper. However, he never goes on to use “second.” Most likely, he did not think he had enough time or space to cover further commands, which would have been about the Lord’s Supper, related issues of worship, or something else. In 11:34, he says “Now about the remaining things, I will give directions when I come.” Perhaps these “remaining things” included what he planned to introduce with “second” and “third” but never did. Consider whether your readers would be confused by a “first” without a “second.” If so, you could make it clearer that 11:34 refers to “second” (and so on) instructions.