I. JUDGMENT
A. Paul has an apparent conflict between what
we studied last
week and what we are studying this week. Turn
with me first to
1 Corinthians 5:12-13.
1. Are we to judge the sexually immoral? (Yes. v.12)
2. What is the
extent of our "jurisdiction" for judgment?
(Those inside
the church. We have no business judging
those outside
of the church. That is within the
"jurisdiction"
of God. vv.12&13)
3. Now read 1
Corinthians 4:5. We agreed last week that
we were not
to judge because: a) that was God's work; and
b) we cannot
know a person's motives. Can you reconcile
this seemingly
inconsistent advice from Paul?
a. Let me make it worse. In 4:3 Paul seems to say
the problem is judging him. Does Paul tell the
Corinthians they are not to judge him, but must
judge each other?
b. Is this a standard with which we can all be
comfortable: you are not to judge me, but I can
judge you?
(I read seven commentaries on 1 Corinthians,
and not one
mentioned, much less tried to explain, this
apparent
contradiction. I think the answer turns on
what is being
judged. In 1 Corinthians 4:5 Paul is talking
about members
judging the motives and relative standing
of the leaders of
the church. He never says (in that context)
he is being
accused of sin. The Corinthians are
asked not to judge
relative "goodness." On the other hand, the
judgment called
for in 1 Corinthians 5:12, is open sin that
is not even
accepted by pagans (5:1). Therefore,
I think that when it
comes to judging the "performance" of church
leaders this is
different than judging open sin. Paul
urges us to leave the
judgment of "goodness" to God because we cannot
know the
motives of the heart. But for open (and
undisputed) sin, of
the kind that brings disrepute to the church
even among
unbelievers, he says that we must act to keep
the church
pure.)
c. Do you think "motivation" is an issue in judging
open sin?
II. SEXUAL IMMORALITY
A. Now let's get into the substance of Paul's
advice. Read 1
Corinthians 5:1-3. What is the sin here? Is
this fellow having
sex with his mother? (Paul does not say this
fellow's
"mother," but his "father's wife." My
guess is (the
commentaries are in dispute on the nature
of the relationship)
that this fellow has an informal sexual relationship
with the
wife of his late father. The word "has"
("ekho") (as in "has
his father's wife") is the same word used
in John 4:18 when
Jesus met the woman at the well who had five
husbands and
Jesus said "the man you now have ["ekho"]
is not your
husband.")
B. Whatever the exact nature of this sin, can
we be sure it is
one that we would all agree is sinful? (Yes.
Paul says that
this sin would not occur "among pagans."
Robertson's
commentary (Robertson's Word Pictures of the
New Testament)
reports in the context of these verses that
the word
"Corinthianize" meant to live in sexual wantonness
and
license. It is like saying today he
is a "Playboy." The
pagan standard for comparison was very low,
and Paul said that
even the "lowlife" would not do this!)
C. What is the attitude of the Corinthian church
in this?
(Verse 2 says they are "proud.")
1. How could
they be "proud" of a sin which the pagan
Corinthians
think is wrong?
2. And, how do
you explain 1 Corinthians 1:2 where Paul
says that this
church is "sanctified in Christ Jesus and
called to be
holy?" (I do not think they are proud of the
sin. Their pride
(arrogance) makes them hard to teach. I
am grateful
to see that a group with this kind of serious
problem is still
"sanctified in Christ and called to be
holy.")
3. Which sin is worse: sexual immorality or pride?
D. Read 1 Corinthians 5:4-5. What is
Paul's prescription for
this situation? (Throw the bum out.)
1. Is this to
keep the church pure and save its
reputation?
2. Or is this
in the best interest of the sinning man?
(I think Paul
suggests that by throwing the man out of
the church,
his sin will become clear to him (or he will
sink deeper
into sin) and will eventually see his need
for repentance.
Compare the story of the prodigal son.
(Luke 15 generally
and especially, 15:17)
3. Is this true
today? Which is more redemptive: to
throw the sinner
out of church, or, with love and
patience, hope
they will change?
a. Does it depend upon the person?
b. Does it also depend upon the nature of the sin?
(Consider what Paul did here. There were two sins:
the sexual sin of the man, and the pride of the
church who tolerated this. Paul did not throw out
the whole church! He treated these sins
differently.)
4. Let's revisit
the pride v. sexual sins question I
asked you moments
ago. Do you think that pride is worse
than sexual
sins for the very reason that sexual sins
seem sinful?
(The person involved in sexual sin is more
likely to "wake
up" and realize his sin. Pride, on the
other hand,
is nearly hopeless because it keeps you from
seeing your
sin.)
a. Agree?
b. If what I just said is true, why "keep" in church
those who had the more intractable sin (pride) and
"throw out" the one who had the more treatable sin
(sexual immorality)? (Consider two possible
answers. First, different sin merits different
treatment. "Throwing out the sexual sinner" is the
right treatment to bring him back. Throwing out the
proud, will probably further harden their heart.
Second, the "proud" wanted to do God's will, they
just did not realize the condition of their heart.
The sexual sinner was a rebel.)
c. Jump ahead with me to 1 Corinthians 6:15-20.
Read. Which do these verses say is the worse sin:
pride or sexual immorality? (Verse 18 seems to say
that sexual sins are the worst!)
(1) Why? (Paul creates this logical syllogism:
(a) You are part of the body of Christ;
(b) When you have sex, your body becomes
"one" with the other person (Gen. 2:24);
(c) Therefore, if you have sex with a
prostitute, Christ becomes "one" with the
prostitute.)
(2) Does Paul's argument make sense to you?
(Don't worry if your class members are sliding
under the pews at this point. Seriously, this
same theme is argued in Proverbs 5 (see
especially, vv. 16-18) What makes sexual sins
so bad is that it involves the generation of
life. You share your life with the prostitute
(or Proverbs 5, the public). Between the AIDS
and abortion epidemics (for every two children
born alive, one is aborted) can anyone doubt
Paul's statement "he who sins sexually sins
against his own body?" (v.18))
III. DOUGHBOY, DOUGHGIRL AND DOUGHCHURCH
A. Now lets go back to chapter 5. Read 1 Corinthians
5:6-8.
What is Paul's meaning about a "little yeast?"
("Yeast" (or
leaven) is a term that Jesus used to describe
sin or sinful
teachings. In Luke 12:1 He said the "yeast"
of the Pharisees
was "hypocrisy." In Matthew 16:11-12
Jesus calls "the
teachings" of the Pharisees and Sadducees
"yeast." 1
Corinthians 5:8 calls "yeast" "malice and
wickedness.")
1. Is the "yeast"
also part of what Paul called (1
Corinthians
1:2) "sanctified...and called to be holy?"
(No! In 5:7
he says "you really are" a "batch without
yeast." Paul
is not sanitizing serious sexual sins.
Instead, he
is calling the church to be holy.)
2. Notice in
v.6 Paul complains about their "boasting."
What are they
boasting about? Are they boasting about
this man's sin?
(They are boasting that they are good
guys (remember
our discussion about the v.2 reference to
being "proud").
They think they are fine and can ignore
this one fellow.)
a. What does Paul mean in v.6 "a little yeast works
through the whole batch of dough? (Ignoring open
sin in the church tends to corrupt the entire
church.)
b. Does this counsel apply to our church today?
IV. SHUNNING?
A. Read 1 Corinthians 5:9-11. From time
to time in the media
we hear of some "peculiar" church which "shuns"
sinners.
1. Does Paul require this?
2. How is this consistent with a redemptive spirit?
3. Let me shoot
you between the eyes. Is it important to
you to have
more money? If you had more money, would you
worry less?
If you said, "yes" to either of these
questions, are
you not "greedy" (wanting more) or an
idolater (depending
upon something other than God)?
a. If I am not describing you (beware of pride!), do
you know someone in the church who should say "yes"
to either of these questions?
b. Do you "associate" with that person? (Since Paul
is writing to sinners, he obviously cannot be
counselling the church to throw out everyone who
has sin. This would tear the church apart. It
seems reasonable, from what he says and the context
of what he says, to believe that he is talking
about sins that have reached a serious stage: a
stage that is hurting the church.)
V. LAWSUITS
A. Read 1 Corinthians 6:1-6. Summarize Paul's
advice about
suing fellow members of the church? (Have
church members
adjudicate disputes; do not bring shame on
the gospel by going
to unbelievers to settle disputes.)
1. Is this an "ironclad" rule?
a. What if insurance is involved?
b. What if you live in a "Christian nation?" (Our
situation is not the same as that in Corinth.
However, the idea that we should not bring shame on
the church by bringing our disputes before
unbelievers is an eternal principle. Without going
into detail, I think that even insurance companies
would agree to an "alternative dispute resolution"
such as contractual arbitration.)
VI. SORTING OUT THE "GRAY AREAS"
A. I do not want to close without briefly considering
1
Corinthians 6:12. Read. How do you decide
what to do about
questions that do not seem to have a clear
Biblical answer?
What standard do you use (other than we have
a "rule" against
that)? (Paul is making the greater point in
v.12 about sexual
immorality, but the small point I think is
of extreme
importance. For example, smoking is not even
mentioned, let
alone discussed, in the Bible. The "standard"
answer to
smoking is 1 Corinthians 6:19 ("Your body
is a temple...").
As we have seen, v.19 refers to sexual immorality
and any
other application fails to properly consider
the context. The
proper test to apply in these areas not clearly
covered by the
Bible, according to v.12, is this: "Is this
beneficial?" No
matter what the theological debate, no matter
what the
problem, almost every "gray area" can be dealt
with by asking
yourself if involvement in that activity is
beneficial to the
kingdom or to you.)
VII. NEXT WEEK: CHRISTIAN SEXUALITY. Oh boy! Study!