An Explanation of Christ’s Broken Body

I Corinthians 11:23-24: "For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He BROKE it and said, 'Take, eat; this is [meaning "represents"] My body which is BROKEN for you; do this in remembrance of Me.'"

John 19:31-37 reports that at the time of Christ's crucifixion, a soldier pierced His side with a spear. When other soldiers came to break the legs of Christ and the two robbers, they noticed that Christ had already died. Therefore, they did not break His legs. Verse 36 informs us that "these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, 'Not one of His bones shall be broken.'"  This was a specific prophetic fulfillment of Psalm 34:20 and a symbolic prophetic fulfillment of Exodus 12:46 and Numbers 34:20.

It is important that we realize the different words used in the Greek for the English word, "broken." In John 19:36, the Greek word for "broken" [in the phrase, "Not one of His bones shall be broken"] is "suntribomai," meaning "to be wholly broken." Also, when we read that the soldiers came to break the legs of the crucified victims (in verses 32 and 33), the word is "katagnumi," meaning "to break down."  Literally, we must understand that HIS BODY WAS BROKEN BUT HIS BONES WERE NOT CRUSHED. 

The specific word for Christ's "broken" body, in 1 Corinthians 11:24, is "klaomai," which is derived from the word "klao," (just meaning, "to break"). "Klao" is also used in 1 Corinthians 11:24 ("He broke" the bread), and in 1 Corinthians 10:16 ("The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?").  The use of different Greek words shows that there is NO CONTRADICTION.  Even though Christ's bones were not wholly broken or broken down, His body was clearly "broken" for us, which is signified by the "broken" Passover bread.

There is nothing biblically wrong with saying “Christ’s broken body,” in fact, it is absolutely scriptural.  There is a danger in letting the pendulum swing to extremes over the use of this particular phrase.  We need to remember that one of our sole purposes in the church is to edify, encourage, and instruct people in the whole counsel of God.  Elimination of the phrase instead of an examination of the phrase could prove damaging since we are called to “give a defense” and stand up for the teachings of Holy Writ.   Certainly, as Paul stated in his epistle, the broken body of Christ is a doctrinal fact and should be recognized as such.  I hope this helps you in your further study and examination of the Holy Scriptures.