Friday, July 10 –
We are at the end of the workweek and reading through 1 Corinthians in our quest to read thru the entire New Testament in a year. Today’s reading is from 1 Corinthians 5:1 – 13. It may seem short, but hang on, it’s a wild ride today! Although I read from the ESV translation, I also have other translations (about 10 in fact). If you have “The Message” Bible, it helps in understanding this passage. After you’ve read the Scripture, please come back, and we’ll look at it together.
When Jesus prayed for His disciples, he asked the Father that He would protect them, for he wanted them “to be in the world, but not of the world” (John 17:11, 14-16). In this prayer, he set a standard for our interaction with a world that does not care about God, or His world values, nor the nature of Sin. The words Jesus used are instructive. To be “in the world” means not to be “isolated” from the world. To be “not of the world” means to be “insulated” from the values and morals the world affirms that often care little about the ethical and moral values set by God in his Word. This is the tension we have to learn how to navigate in our journey – to be “in the world, but not of the world.” It is not possible to live faithfully by retreating into withdrawal, and neither is it acceptable to give in to the cultural pressures and go along with the crowd. As my Seminary professor so often said: “Any dead fish can float downstream.”
In chapter 5, Paul confronts the arrogance of some of the church who have decided they can ignore God’s Word concerning sexuality. The Sin in question is clearly named. Paul points to a confirmed report of immorality, and, this sinful act had not only been accepted in the church, but had even been boasted about: “It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father’s wife. And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you” (5:1-2).
A specific individual within the church was involved in “sexual immorality.” Those two words in English are one word in Greek – “porneia” – from which we get the word “pornography.” The Greek word in Paul’s day included a broad list of sexual acts: adultery, harlotry, incest, prostitution, fornication. Roman culture accepted these things as normal behavior, and at times, preferred. Corinth was a seaport brothel, and the tentacles of sexual perversion reached far and wide.
The act itself had come to light, but the greater sin was that the person and some in the congregation were unwilling to call it sin. Their “arrogance” accompanies Paul’s condemnation of the immoral action. Was it possible that this was a person with enough influence, money, and power to be treated differently than others? Would we be surprised if it was? The person has taken “his Father’s wife” – he has moved in with his Stepmother and has sexual relations with Her. It was a case of incest, and not even the unbelievers in Corinth thought it right. Yet, some in the church were defending it. Paul states that they are “arrogant,” which literally means to be “puffed up with pride.” The word in Greek is translated in the New Testament seven times, and six of them are in 1 Corinthians.
Whatever the reason for their failure to act on this, Paul makes it clear – “Shouldn't this break your hearts? Shouldn't it bring you to your knees in tears? Shouldn't this person and his conduct be confronted and dealt with? (5:2, The Message).
Is this relevant? Definitely. As a Pastor, I’ve seen far too many situations where marriages were destroyed, trust broken, churches divided because of sexual immorality. I’ve sat with grieving spouses who cannot believe what their spouse did, and I’ve listened to rationalizations of why the sexual immoral actions should be permissible. When I’ve tried to reason with the clear teaching of Scripture, I’ve seen everything from “well, I’m sorry, but I love...” to “I don’t care what you say the Bible says...”. After years of pastoral ministry, I am no longer surprised by these culturally accepted rationalizations. I’ll add to this sad state by confessing that it’s also a problem in those called to ministry. It’s not unusual anymore to hear of Pastors and Priests who morally fail and leave the ministry, preferring their immoral actions over obedience to Scripture. These are calls for mourning, not calls for a celebration!
What is the need? What do we do? Again, “The Message” translates verse 3 in ordinary language:
“I'll tell you what I would do. Even though I'm not there in person, consider me right there with you, because I can fully see what's going on. I'm telling you that this is wrong. You must not simply look the other way and hope it goes away on its own. Bring it out in the open and deal with it in the authority of Jesus, our Master”. (5:3).
This severe response is where the “rubber meets the road.” Paul speaks to the question – what next? We’ve often heard the plaintive cry “don’t judge,” but that is a misplaced application of Jesus’ words when clear Sinful actions have taken place.
Paul describes the needed steps in three ways. First, the derived authority to deal with this is not to be based on their sense of right or wrong but must be found on the authority of Jesus’ Word: “Assemble the community—I'll be present in spirit with you and our Master Jesus will be present in power. Hold this man's conduct up to public scrutiny. Let him defend it if he can!" The church cannot approach the need for purity by holding forth a view that makes preferences or a sense of right or wrong on its own. The Church must base its judgments on the authority of God’s word alone.
He continues: "But if he can't, then out with him! It will be totally devastating to him, of course, and embarrassing to you. But better devastation and embarrassment than damnation. You want him on his feet and forgiven before the Master on the Day of Judgment” (5:4-5, The Message).
After a church meeting to deal with the report, the second step is to expel the offender. Paul is not present physically, but spiritually he reminds them that he is still with them. He is talking about ex-communication, which means to “withdraw them from any kind of communion.” He goes beyond preventing them from taking communion but also includes having any fellowship with them! Why? Doesn’t this seem harsh? It all depends on what the church is trying to do. If it is trying to shame the person, then yes, it’s cruel. But, if the Church is making clear the severity of the sin in hopes that the person will repent and return to obedience, then it is not severe at all.
In expelling the person, a stark reality occurs. The final step occurs when the man is no longer under the protective umbrella of the church but now is in the world that is under the domain of Satan. In doing this, either one of two things will happen. On the one hand, the offender has opened his mind, heart, and soul to Satan with his actions, and the result may lead to the “destruction of the flesh.” On the other hand, having been turned out from fellowship, the offender may see the sinful actions and turn around – Repent – and makes things right. The purpose of expelling him – church discipline – is not to shame, but to make the person aware that his choices are sinful before God. “The purpose of this judgment is the man's salvation, but that can be achieved only if his sinful tendencies are overcome ("the destruction of the flesh").” (from the Reformation Study Bible notes).
It is one of the most challenging things a church ever has to do, but it is a necessary element in the church. If you wonder whether the solution is being overstated, consider this – Jesus only talked about the church twice. The first time was in Matthew 16, where he told the disciples that the church would be built on the revelation of Christ Jesus as God’s Son, who came to take away the sins of all who believe. The second time was two chapters later in Matthew 18, when Jesus talked about how to do “church discipline.” It is such a difficult tension that many churches will not exercise discipline at all. Yet, there is a fundamental need to protect the body of Christ when egregious sins are accepted. William Barclay explains:
“Always at the back of punishment and discipline in the early Church, there is the conviction that they must seek not to break but to make the man who has sinned...Discipline should never be exercised for the satisfaction of the person who exercises it, but always for the mending of the person who has sinned and for the sake of the Church. Discipline must never be vengeful; it must always be curative.”
Church discipline is an act of love when done correctly. As a parent loves their child but is not afraid to set boundaries and let a child suffer the consequences created by their own choices, so the church should do the same. The question often posed to me: “why do we want to make a big deal about this?” The answer is that regardless of what the offending member does in response, the church needs to be clear about what evil does. Paul says it is like yeast – “Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? (5:6). The Message Bible translates vs. 6 –
“Your flip and callous arrogance in these things bothers me. You pass it off as a small thing, but it's anything but that. Yeast, too, is a "small thing," but it works its way through a whole batch of bread dough pretty fast” (5:6).
Paul’s appeal is that when the church is indifferent to egregious public acts of sin, it will create division and break a fellowship apart. Yeast permeates everything, and sin unchecked – like yeast – will permeate a church body in destructive ways.
The reality for the church is theological. No longer is the purpose of Christ’s sacrifice for sin to deal with Sin. We don't have to have a Savior; we just need to forgive sin without the needed offense before God dealt with. Yet, we know Biblically, the reason why Jesus died on the cross was for our Sin, and so to willfully sin is to reject Christ’s sacrifice on one's behalf.
“So get rid of this ‘yeast.’ Our true identity is flat and plain, not puffed up with the wrong kind of ingredient. The Messiah, our Passover Lamb, has already been sacrificed for the Passover meal, and we are the Unraised Bread part of the Feast” (5:7).
Paul, in vs. 8, contrasts the two options the church has: accept the sinful actions, that like yeast will grow in “malice and evil,” or deal with it through “sincerity and truth.”
The final part of this stern chapter (5:9-10) reminds the Corinthians, and us, that as the church we have a relationship with the world, and withdrawal from unsaved people into isolation is not the solution. It is not the world that we should fear – they are doing what is natural to them. Again, “The Message” accurately conveys the meaning of vss 11-12,
“...I am saying that you shouldn't act as if everything is just fine when one of your Christian companions is promiscuous or crooked, is flip with God or rude to friends, gets drunk or becomes greedy and predatory. You can't just go along with this, treating it as acceptable behavior. I'm not responsible for what the outsiders do, but don't we have some responsibility for those within our community of believers? (5:11-12).
It is the people of the church who we have an obligation to deal with. Is it Harsh? No, because the arrogance or defiance cannot be left unchecked. The responsibility of the church is to uphold Biblical moral purity. We do that not through legalism, but through tough love. We all have contact with people whose lives are in need of redemption – that is what we should be best at pointing people towards. The church, though, is responsible for the church (5:12-13).
This section continues the practical concerns of a church that has lost touch with truth. Why? Perhaps it is poor leadership – that happens. Maybe it is lax behavior among those who have power and influence (and money) – that happens. What do we need? We need a proper appraisal of our own self. Do we appreciate purity in motives, attitudes, actions, even thoughts? We should. We should recognize that the move towards “toleration” is not always Christ. We should have convictions about what we will allow and what we will not. Yes, guard against legalism. Yes, be known by your love. But do not mistake ignoring, tolerating, excusing sin as loving. It is as loving as watching a child drink poison and not wanting to hurt their feelings by stopping them.
Peace
Comments