Sanctification by the Holy Spirit In 1Co 3:1 to 1Co 14:40 Paul takes the greater part of this epistle to teach them about the process of sanctification by the Holy Spirit. However, the ways in which these issues are presented reflect the sanctification of man’s mind, body, and spirit, in that order. For example, Paul’s discussion on church divisions (1Co 3:1 to 1Co 4:21) emphasizes the sanctification of our minds so that we learn not to prefer one church member, or church leader, above another. His discussion on fornication (1Co 5:1 to 1Co 7:40) emphasizes the sanctification of our bodies, as we offer them as holy vessels to the Lord. His discussion on meats offered until idols (1Co 8:1 to 1Co 11:1) emphasizes the sanctification of our spirits as we learn to walk and conduct our lifestyles with a clean conscience, which is the voice of the spirit. Paul then turns his attention to issues regarding public worship (1Co 11:2 to 1Co 14:40). Remember in the Old Testament how the priests and Levites had to sanctify themselves before entering into the service of the Tabernacle and Temple. Therefore, Paul uses this same approach for the New Testament Church. As we allow our minds, bodies and spirits to yield to the work of sanctification by the Holy Spirit, we become vessels in which the gifts and manifestations of the Holy Spirit can operate.

Outline – Here is a proposed outline:

1. Divisions in the Church 1Co 3:1 to 1Co 4:21

2. Fornication in the Church 1Co 5:1 to 1Co 6:20

3. Idolatry and foods offered to idols 1Co 8:1 to 1Co 11:34

4. Public Worship 1Co 11:2 to 1Co 14:40

The Two Issues of Fornication and Foods Offered Unto Idols Reflect Heathen Worship Note that the two major topics that are covered in this epistle of 1 Corinthians, fornication and meat offered to idols, are two of the four issues that those the Jerusalem council decided to ask of the Gentiles. Note:

Act 15:20, “But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.”

Act 15:29, “That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.”

Act 21:25, “As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.”

In submission to the church apostles and elders a Jerusalem, Paul delivered these ordinances to the Corinthian church earlier while he lived there. In this epistle, Paul expands upon them:

1Co 11:2, “Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.”

Note also that Jesus told the church in Pergamos in the book of Revelation that these were the two doctrines of Balaam.

Rev 2:14, “But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication .”

Therefore, the practice of feasting in idolatry and fornication appears to have been a common practice in Asia Minor among the temple worship of the Greeks. We also see in Rom 1:18-32 how idolatry was followed by fornication as God turned mankind over to a reprobate mind. Thus, these two sins are associated with one another throughout the Scriptures. However, first Paul deals with church divisions.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Fornication: Sanctification of the Body to Become a Holy Vessel ( 1Co 5:1 to 1Co 7:40 ) – In 1Co 5:1 to 1Co 7:40 Paul deals with the topic of fornication in the church at Corinth, which emphasizes the sanctification of the flesh. The key word in this passage of Scripture is “fornication,” which family of words is used twelve times in this passage of Scripture: 5 times ( 1Co 5:1 ; 1Co 6:13; 1Co 6:18; 1Co 7:2), 1 time (1Co 6:18), 2 times (1Co 6:15-16) 4 times (1Co 5:9-11; 1Co 6:9). Paul has heard about these problems within this church from reliable sources. Paul relied upon reliable sources in order to deal with these issues (1Co 1:11; 1Co 5:1).

1Co 1:11, “For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.”

1Co 5:1, “It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.”

Outline – Here is a proposed outline:

1. Paul Passes Judgment in the Church 1Co 5:1-13

2. Paul Gives the Corinthians their Basis for Judging Among Themselves 1Co 6:1-11

3. Why Fornication Must be Judged 1Co 6:12-20

4. Marriage in the Church 1Co 7:1-40

Comments on Section Breaks – In 1Co 7:1 to 1Co 14:40 Paul answers a number of questions that were probably handed to him by the visiting delegate from the church at Corinth. He begins his discussion on each of these topics with the same phrase, “Now concerning…” (1Co 7:1, 1Co 8:1, 1Co 12:1) Therefore, many scholars divide 1Co 7:1 to 1Co 14:40 into a new section because of their common introductions. However, creating such a major division at 1Co 7:1 breaks the flow of Paul’s lengthy discussion on fornication, as well as the structural presentation on the sanctification of the three-fold man; spirit, soul and body.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Going to Law with Brethren.

The charge:

v. 1. Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust and not before the saints?

v. 2. Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? And if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?

v. 3. Know ye not that we shall judge angels? How much more things that pertain to this life!

v. 4. If, then, ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.

The opening of this chapter is marked by an abrupt outburst of indignant feeling at the unworthy conduct manifested by some of the Corinthian Christians, probably such as were of Gentile origin: Does any one of you dare, when having a matter against another, bring suit before the unjust and not before the saints? Does anyone have the heart to do that from which a just sense of Christian dignity should have restrained him? Does no one blush for his own audacity in bringing suit in this manner? The word used by the apostle refers to a civil suit, usually in matters of money and possessions. In the opinion of Paul it was simply unheard of that controversies among the Christians should be aired in the courts of the Gentiles. To him it was self-evident that all matters of difference should be adjusted in their own midst, by their own people. For it seemed a contradiction in itself that those who were termed unjust, unrighteous, by the Christians should be called upon to adjust quarrels within the congregation, to administer justice to the saints, whose moral dignity should have felt the absurdity of the position. “Paul does not here condemn those who from necessity have a cause before unbelieving judges, as when a person is summoned to court; but those who of their own accord bring their brethren into this situation, and harass them, as it were, by means of unbelievers, while it is in their power to employ another remedy. ” (Calvin.)

The apostle follows up his charge with a reference to their unparalleled prerogatives: Or do you not know, can it be that you are ignorant of the fact, that the saints will judge the world? This is the one passage of Scriptures which speaks of the participation of the believers in the judgment of the world. What was said of the apostles in particular, Mat 19:28, is here extended to all true followers of Christ. See Dan 7:22; Rev 2:26-27; Rev 20:4-6; 2Th 1:10; Jud 1:14. So intimate and perfect is the union of the members with Christ, their Head, that, when the Head appears in the glory of the Judgment, the members also will take part in this judicial function. And therefore Paul asks: If, then, among you, before you, the world is judged, are you unworthy of the smallest tribunals, are you incompetent to pass judgment upon comparative trifles? If they are to partake in that grand and glorious session of the Last Judgment, surely the earthly, the commonplace, the insignificant cannot be too difficult for them. How absurd for them to act that way!

To still greater heights the apostle rises: Do you not know that we shall judge angels, that it will be part of our functions to pass sentence upon the heavenly powers themselves? The good angels are excluded as being already confirmed in their bliss and as forming part of Christ’s retinue on the Day of Judgment. But upon the evil angels the believers will, on the last day, pronounce the sentence of condemnation. Satan himself, the god of this world, 2Co 4:4, and his angels, themselves world-rulers, Eph 6:12, will hear their doom spoken also by the believers whom they here tried to draw away from Christ. The final fate of angels their sentence will decide, truly to say nothing of secular matters, of things which concern this life only! Such matters the Christians will not consider beneath their dignity; rather will the assurance of their future elevated position render them all the more careful and conscientious in their judgment of the things of this life in case there should be a difference of opinion among them on any question.

The apostle now shows how widely their practice differed from the ideal state which he had in mind: If now your tribunals are held for the disposition of civil suits, if you hold them to straighten out your secular affairs, then those that are utterly despised in the Church, these you set up as judges. When court was held in Corinth, the parties were obliged to appear that had a civil suit to bring. For the purpose of adjudicating matters, the contending parties could then select a number of men from the list of the nobles whose names were entered in the rolls as possible judges; for according to Roman custom the contending parties were granted this right in order that they might place full confidence in the integrity of the men who were to act as judges. What an absurd contradiction! The Christians that were called to the hope of judging the world and even heavenly powers selected those as judges who, in spite of the respect which they enjoyed as citizens, were nevertheless regarded, from the standpoint of the believers, as devoid of all honor and respect. One can well imagine the self-sufficient, triumphant smile which appeared on the faces of the judges when quarreling Christians laid their case before them! What a disgrace to the Christian confession and to the name of Christ to be found haggling and wrangling before a Gentile court while confessing to be followers of the Prince of Peace!

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

1Co 6:1-11

Litigation before heathen courts forbidden.

1Co 6:1

Dare any of you? rather, Dare any one of you? It is in St. Paul’s view an audacious defiance of Christian duties to seek from the heathen the justice due from brother to brother. A matter; some ground of civil dispute. Against another; i.e. against another Christian. When one of the litigants was a heathen, Christians were allowed to go before heathen law courts, because no other remedy was possible. Go to law before the unjust. The “unjust” is here used for “Gentiles,” because it at once suggests a reason against the dereliction of Christian duty involved in such a step. How “unjust” the pagans were in the special sense of the word, the Christians of that day had daily opportunities of seeing; and in a more general sense, the Gentiles were “sinners” (Mat 26:45). Even the Jews were bound to settle their civil disputes before their own tribunals. The ideal Jew was jashar, or “the upright man,” and Jews could not consistently seek integrity from those who were not upright. A fortiori, Christians ought not to do so. Before the saints. All Christians were ideally “saints,” just as the heathen were normally “unjust.” If Christians went to law with one another before the heathen, they belied their profession of mutual love, caused scandal, and were almost necessarily tempted into compliance with heathen customs, even to the extent of recognizing idols. Our Lord had already laid down the rule that “brothers” ought to settle their quarrels among themselves (Mat 18:15-17).

1Co 6:2

Do ye not know? The word “or” should be supplied from , A, B, C, D, F, etc. Bishop Wordsworth points out that this emphatic question occurs ten times in these two Epistles (1Co 3:6; 1Co 5:6; 1Co 6:2, 1Co 6:3, 1Co 6:9, 1Co 6:15, 1Co 6:16, 1Co 6:19; 1Co 9:13, 1Co 9:24), and only twice in all the rest (Rom 6:16; Rom 11:2). It was a fitting rebuke to those who took for knowledge their obvious ignorance. It resembles the “Have ye not so much as read?” to Pharisees who professed such profound familiarity with the Scriptures. That the saints shall judge the world. So Daniel (Dan 7:22) had said, “The Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High.” Our Lord had confirmed this promise to his apostles, “Ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Mat 19:28). Various modes of evading the literal sense have been adopted, but even in the Book of Wisdom we find, “They [the righteous] shall judge the nations, and have dominion over the people” (Wis. 3:8). All speculation as to the manner and extent in which the saints shall share in the work of Christ as Judge of the quick and dead, are obviously futile. Shall be judged; literally, is being judgedthe present points to the future, as though that which is inevitable is already in course of fulfilment. To judge the smallest matters; literally, of the smallest judgments.

1Co 6:3

That we shall judge angels. Angels, i.e. some who belong, or once did belong, to that class. The statement furnishes no data for further speculation. It can hardly mean “evil spirits,” for where the word is entirely unqualified it always means good angels; otherwise we might refer it to the “angels which kept not their first estate” (Jud 1Co 1:6). It is impossible, and not straightforward, to explain away the word “angels” as meaning Church officials, etc., or to make the word “judge” mean “involve a condemnation of them by comparison with ourselves.” All that we can say is that “God chargeth even his angels with folly, and in his sight the very heavens are not clean” (Job 4:18); and that “to angels hath he not subjected the world to come” (Heb 2:5). We must take the plain meaning of the apostle’s words, whether we can throw any light on his conceptions or not. The only alternative is to suppose that the word means “those who once were good angels,” but are now fallen spirits. It was so understood by Tertullian, Chrysostom, etc. How much more; rather, to say nothing of. The accurate rendering of these verses is a matter of some difficulty, but not to an extent which affects the material sense, or which can be explained without a minute knowledge of Greek.

1Co 6:4

If then ye have, etc. The verse implies that civil disputes might naturally occur among them. What he is here reprobating is their objectionable method of settling them. Set them to judge who are least esteemed in the Church. This implies an utter scorn of trivial quarrels about personal rights. Surely the lowliest, the most unregarded members of the Churchthose of no accounthave wisdom enough to decide in such small matters. Thus when there arose a murmuring between Hebrews and Hellenists about the daily distribution to widows, the apostles, thinking that they had much more important work in hand than the adjustment of such jealousies, left the whole matter in the hands of the seven deacons. Some understand “those held of no account in the Church” to mean heathens; but he is here forbidding them to bring their quarrels before the heathens. Of course, ideally, none ought to be “despised” or “held of no account” in the Church; but St. Paul is here speaking relatively, and with reference to the views of the Corinthians themselves, and not without irony. The perfect participle, “those who have been set at nought,” perhaps means persons of proved inferiority of judgment.

1Co 6:5

I speak to your shame. He adds this to account for the severe irony of the last remark. Not a wise man among you. Among you, who set yourselves up as so specially wise! To judge; rather, to decide.

1Co 6:7

Now therefore; rather, Nay more, already. Utterly; rather, generally, “altogether,” “looking at the question as a whole.” A fault. The word means “a defect,” or possibly “a loss” (Rom 11:12, “the diminishing”). Your going to law is an inferiority or deficiency; you ought to know of “a more excellent way.” Why do ye not rather take wrong? Strange as such advice would sound to heathens, who prided themselves on the passionate resentment of injuries as though it were a virtue, this had been the distinct teaching of our Lord; “Resist not evil” (Mat 5:39).

1Co 6:8

Nay, ye do wrong and defraud. Thus they violated a rule which Paul had laid down to the Thessalonians (1Th 4:6), and incurred God’s anger.

1Co 6:9

Know ye not; rather, Or know ye not, as before. Are you defying God, or does your sin arise from mere ignorance? The unrighteous; better, that wrong doers, the verb being the same as “ye do wrong” in 1Co 6:8. Perhaps the Corinthians thought that they would be saved by the mere fact of having been admitted into God’s kingdom (the Christian Church in all its highest privileges) by baptism. St. Paul here lays down, as distinctly as St. James does, that faith without works is dead, and privileges without holiness are abrogated. The spirit of his warning is the same as that of Jer 7:4, “Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of the Lord are these;” or that of St. John the Baptist, “Say not unto yourselves, We be Abraham’s sons.” Christians have often been liable to the temptation of underrating the peril which results from the falling asunder of action from knowledge. There can be no greater danger than that of talking slightingly of “mere morality.” Religion is not an outward service, but a spiritual life manifested by a holy living. Be not deceived. So our Lord says,” Let no man deceive you”. St. Paul uses the warning very solemnly again in 1Co 15:33 and Gal 6:7, and St. James in Jas 1:16. The self deception of merely verbal orthodoxy is the most dangerous of all. Neither fornicators. The first four classes of sinners were specially prevalent at Corinth, where, indeed, impurity formed part of the recognized cult of the local Aphrodite. Lists of these “works of the flesh,” which were the all but universal curse and stain of heathendom, occur also in Gal 5:19-21; 1Ti 1:10, etc.; Col 3:5-7.

1Co 6:10

Nor thieves, etc. (see Rev 22:15).

1Co 6:11

And such were some of you; literally, and these things some of you were. As Gentiles, many of them had been “dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph 2:1). (For a similar contrast of the change wrought by the Spirit of God, see Tit 3:3-7.) But ye are washed. The voice and tense in the original differ from those of the following words. This cannot be accidental. It is better, therefore, to render, But ye washed away your sins; i.e. ye, by your baptism, washed away those stains (Act 22:16). The very object of Christ’s death had been that he might cleanse his Church “by the washing of water by the Word.” But ye are sanctified, but ye are justified; rather, but ye were sanctified, but y? were justified, namely, at your conversion. By “sanctified” is meant, not the progressive course of sanctification, but the consecration to God by baptism (Wickliffe, “halowed”). (For what St. Paul meant by justification, see Rom 3:24-26.) In the Name of the Lord Jesus, etc. This clause and the next belongs to all the three previous verbs. Of our God. In the word “our” is involved that appeal to Christian unity of which he never loses sight throughout the letter.

1Co 6:12-20

The inexcusable sin and shame of fornication.

1Co 6:12

All things are lawful unto me. The abruptness with which the phrase is introduced perhaps shows that, in the letter of the Corinthians to St. Paul, they had used some such expression by way of palliating their lax tolerance of violations of the law of purity. By “all things,” of course, is only meant “all things which are indifferent in themselves.” They erroneously applied this maxim of Christian liberty to that which was inherently sinful, and thus were tempted to “make their liberty a cloak of viciousness.” St. Paul, as Bengel observes, often, and especially in this Epistle, uses the first person generally in gnomic or semi-proverbial sentences (1Co 6:15; 1Co 7:7; 1Co 10:23, 1Co 10:29, 1Co 10:30; 1Co 14:11). But. This is St. Paul’s correction of too broad a formula. Are not expedient. St. Paul illustrates this in 1Co 8:8-10. We have no right to do even that which is innocent, if it be disadvantageous to the highest interests of ourselves or others. “He alone,” says St. Augustine, “does not fall into unlawful things who sometimes abstains by way of caution even from lawful ones.” Will not be brought under the power. The play of words in the original might be imitated by saying, “All things are in my power, but I will not be brought under the power of any.” In other words, “boundless intemperance” may become a tyranny. The pretence of moral freedom may end in a moral bondage.

“Obedience is better than freedom? What’s free?
The vexed foam on the wave, the tossed straw on the sea;
The ocean itself, as it rages and swells,
In the bonds of a boundless obedience dwells.”

I will be master even over my liberty by keeping it under the beneficent control of law and of charity.

1Co 6:13

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” (Col 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 (1Co 15:51, 1Co 15:52). How vile, then, is it to make a god of the bellyonly 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” (Rev 7:16); and the meat alluded to is “meat which perisheth” (Luk 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 endsnamely, to be a temple of God. “God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness” (1Th 4:7). And the Lord for the body. Therefore our members ought to be used “as instruments of righteousness unto God” (Rom 5:13), and our bodies presented as a living, holy, reasonable, acceptable sacrifice to him (Rom 12:1). The end of our existence is “to serve God here and enjoy him forever hereafter.”

1Co 6:14

God hath both raised up the Lord. St. Paul always grounds man’s resurrection] and immortality on the resurrection and ascension of Christ (see 1Co 15:1-58.; 2Co 4:14; Rom 6:5, Rom 6:8; Rom 8:11).

1Co 6:15

Members of Christ. We find the same metaphor in 1Co 12:12, 1Co 12:27; Eph 5:30. The Church is often alluded to as “the body of Christ” (Eph 1:23; Col 1:18; Col 2:19, etc.). Elsewhere the union between Christ and Christians is described by the metaphor of a tree and its branches; a building and the stones of which it is composed (Eph 2:21, Eph 2:22). God forbid. An admirable idiom to express the real force of the original, which means, “May it never be!”. It occurs in Rom 3:4, Rom 3:6, Rom 3:31; Rom 6:15; Rom 7:7, Rom 7:13; Rom 9:14; Rom 11:1, Rom 11:11; Gal 2:17; Gal 3:21. The formula, which involves the indignant rejection of some false conclusion, is characteristic of the second group of St. Paul’s Epistles, but especially (as will be seen) of the Epistle to the Romans.

1Co 6:16

What, know ye not, etc.? The clause is used to explain and justify the strong expression which he had used in the previous verse. It involves an argument against the sin which is the most original and impressive which could have been used. To this passage especially is due the tone taken by Christians as to these sins, which differed so totally from that taken by heathen. They two. The words do not occur in Gen 2:24, but are always so quoted in the New Testament. Saith he. This is a vague Jewish formula of quotation, adopted to avoid the needless introduction of the sacred Name. “He” is “God” in Scripture. Shall be one flesh; rather, shall become. This appeal to Gen 2:24 (Mat 19:5) is equivalent to the rule that no intercourse between the sexes is free from sin except under the sanction of marriage.

1Co 6:17

That is joined unto the Lord. This phrase, indicating the closest possible union, is found in Deu 10:20; 2Ki 18:6. Is one spirit. There is a “mystical union,” not only “betwixt Christ and his Church,” but also between Christ and the holy soul Hence, to St. Paul, spiritual life meant the indwelling of Christ in the heartthe life “in Christ;” so that he could say, “It is no more I that live, but Christ that liveth in me” (Gal 2:20; Gal 3:27; Col 3:17).

1Co 6:18

Flee fornication. In the battle against sensual sins, there is no victory except in absolute flight, for the reason which immediately follows, namely, that these sins have their dwelling in that body which is part of our being, and which yet they tend to destroy. They make a man his own deadliest enemy. Every sin… is without the body. Some have supposed that this cannot apply to gluttony and drunkenness, which they therefore class with fornication; but even in those sins, as in suicide, the cause of and incentive to the sin is external, whereas the source of uncleanness is in the heart and in the thoughts, which come from within, and so defile the man. Other sins may be with and by means of the body, and may injure the body; but none are so directly against the sanctity of the whole bodily being as fornication. Sinneth against his own body. By alienating it from the service of him to whom it belongs; by incorporating it with the degradation of another; by staining the flesh and the body (Pro 5:8-11; Pro 6:24-32; Pro 7:24-27); by subtly poisoning the inmost sanctities of his own being. St. Paul is here thinking mainly, however, if not exclusively, of the moral injury and defilement.

1Co 6:19

That your body is the temple (or rather, a sanctuary) of the Holy Ghost. He has already said that the Church is a shrine or sanctuary of the Holy Ghost (1Co 3:16); but here for the first time expression is given to one of the deepest and newest truths of Christianity. Three great epochs are marked by the use of the word temple. In the Old Testament it means the material temple, the sign of a localized worship and a separated people; in the Gospels our Lord uses it of his own mortal body; in the Epistles it is used (as here) of the body of every baptized Christian, sanctified by the indwelling Spirit of God. Ye are not your own. We cannot, therefore, use our bodies as though they were absolutely under our own control. They belong to God, and, “whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s” (Rom 14:8).

1Co 6:20

Ye are bought with a price. That price is the blood of Christ, wherewith he purchased the Church (Act 20:28; Heb 9:12; 1Pe 1:18, 1Pe 1:19; Rev 5:9). This metaphor of ransom (1Co 7:23; 2Pe 2:1) has its full and absolute applicability to man. The effect of Christ’s death for us is that we are redeemed from slavery and prison, and the right of our possession is with Christ. Thus by various metaphors the effects of redemption are revealed to us on the human side. When we unduly press the metaphor, and ask from whom we were purchased, and to whom the price was paid, we build up scholastic systems which have only led to error, and respecting which the Church has never sanctioned any exclusive opinion. The thoughts touched upon in this verse are fully developed in the Epistle to the Romans. Glorify God; by behaving as his redeemed children, and therefore by keeping yourselves pure. In these few brief words St. Paul sums up all he has said, as he did in 1Co 5:13. In your body. The following words, “and in your spirit, which are God’s,” are a perfectly correct and harmless gloss, but are not found in the best manuscripts, and are foreign to the drift of the passage. Your body is a temple, and in that temple God must be honoured. “Unchastity dishonours God, and that in his own temple (Rom 2:23)” (Meyer). In these clauses St. Paul has touched on three subjects which occupy important sections of the remainder of the Epistle, namely,

(1) the relation between the sexes (1Co 7:1-40.);

(2) the question of idol offerings (1Co 8:1-13.); and

(3) the doctrine of the resurrection (1Co 15:1-58.).

HOMILETICS

1Co 6:1-8

The ideal Church a tribunal.

“Dare any of you, having a matter against another,” etc.? In our sketch on the preceding verses we looked on the true Church as a feast. Here we have to look on it as a tribunal, a court of judicature, where disputes are to be settled and grievances redressed. It would appear that questions arose among the Corinthian Christians that required settlementquestions of wrong done to persons or to property, and that too the litigious spirit was so rife in their midst that they took their grievances to the heathen courts. For this the apostle reproves them. “Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?” Three remarks about the ideal Church as a tribunal.

I. IT IS SUPERIOR TO OTHER TRIBUNALS ON THE EARTH.

1. It is a court formed of morally righteous men. This is implied in the words, “Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?” Saints, or just men, form the tribunal. In worldly courts of judicature men are judged by legislative enactments or judicial decisions. Not so in this court. It is a court of equity, a court that tries cases not by statutory precepts, nor by ecclesiastical laws, but by scriptural principles, and these principles as they arc embodied in the teaching of him who delivered the Sermon on the mount. The true Church is his representative and administrator.

2. It is a court whose jurisdiction is universal. “Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?” In many ways men of Christly lives are judging the world now. Their ideas of right and wrong, between man and man, and man and God, form that standard of character to which the consciences of men are constantly appealing, and to which they are forced to bow. All men at last wilt be judged by the character of Christ, and the Church is the representative of that character. “The words I say unto you, they shall judge you in the last day.” Not only does this Church tribunal judge the world, but judges angels also. “Know ye not that we shall judge angels?” Redeemed humanity is in some respects higher than angelic natures. It has passed through greater changes and is brought into closer connection with the Divine. They who have in them the spirit of absolute justice in the highest measure are the best judges of character. In modern courts this spirit is often very feeble, and in some cases extinct. Hence the sad blunderings about the interpretation of statutes and the decisions of judges. But the spirit of absolute justice reigns in the true Church.

II. IT IS A TRIBUNAL FOR THE SETTLEMENT OF ALL DISPUTES. Paul intimates that it is to judge disputes on the “smallest matters,” and of “things pertaining to this life.” These expressions seem to comprehend all disputesnot merely religious, but secular; not only disputes on great subjects, but disputes on minor subjects as well. The instinct of Christly justice which inspires it peers into the heart of all moral conduct. It has an “anointing from the Holy One, by which it knows all things.” The more spiritually pure a man is the more readily will he detect the wrong. Only a few years ago some of our judges occupied twelve mouths or more, at an enormous expense to the nation, in order to find out whether a man was an impostor or not. To a mind full of moral justice an impostor is detected instinctively and at once. No logic can read the hidden principles of a man’s heart. Christ knew “what was in man,” and those highly imbued with his Spirit are to some extent gifted with the same insight.

III. DISPUTANTS WHO WILL NOT HAVE THEIR CASES SETTLED IN THIS COURT ARE JUSTLY LIABLE TO REPROACH.

1. Reference to another court is unwise. “If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the Church.” The meaning is that any other court to which the case is taken is of no account in the estimation of the Church it is a morally inferior institution. The tribunal of man in comparison to Christ’s tribunal is a truly contemptible thing. You Christians degrade yourselves by taking disputes to such tribunals. “I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wine man among you?” It is a shame to you to have your disputes carried to such tribunals, a shame that you cannot settle your disputes among yourselves, that “brother should go to law with brother, before the unbelievers.”

2. Reference to another court is wrong. “Now therefore, there is utterly a fault [a defect] among you, because ye go to law one with another.” Better than to do this, better than in go to a worldly tribunal to settle your disputes, better you should suffer wrong than take your grievance into the worldly courts. “The Church has principles,” says Robertson, “according to which all such matters may be set at rest. And the difference between the worldly court of justice and the Christian court of arbitration is a difference of diametrical opposition. Law says, ‘You shall have your rights;’ the spirit of the true Church says, ‘Defraud not your neighbour of his rights.’ Law says, ‘You must not be wronged;’ the Church says, ‘It is better to suffer wrong than to do wrong.'”

1Co 6:9-11

Genuine reformation.

“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” Reformation of some kind or other is an object most earnestly pursued by all in every land who are alive to the woes and wrongs of life. Some of the reformations sought are of a questionable utility; none will prove of any essential and permanent service but that presented in the text. The reformation is

I. A REFORMATION OF THE MORAL CHARACTER OF MANKIND. “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,” etc. Sin, which may be defined as self gratification, is here presented in a variety of forms”fornication,” idolatry, avarice, intemperance, etc. All these manifestations are hideous developments of the same ungodly principle, self gratification. The principle of sin, like holiness, is one and simple, but the forms are multifarious. Now, these morally corrupt classes we are here told were changed; they were “washed,” and “sanctified,” and “justified,” which, stripped of figure, means, they were changed in the very root and fountain of their character. They were, to use Scripture phraseology, converted, regenerated, created anew in Christ Jesus to good works. The reformation was not doctrinal, ecclesiastical, or institutional, but moral.

II. A REFORMATION INDISPENSABLE TO A HAPPY DESTINY. What is the only happy destiny for man? To “inherit the kingdom of God.” What is the “kingdom of God”? Righteousness, peace, joy in the Holy Ghost. It is the reign of truth, purity, light, harmony, and blessedness. To “inherit” that empire, to be in it, not as occasional visitors, but as permanent citizens, holding fellowship with its Sovereign, and mingling with the great and the good of all worlds,this is our high destiny. For this we were made, and for nothing lower. Hence Christ urges us to “seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness,” which means come under the Divine reign of truth and right. Now, there is no getting into this kingdom without this moral reformation. All who have not undergone this reformation are excluded.

III. A REFORMATION EFFECTED BY THE REDEMPTIVE AGENCY OF CHRIST. “And such were some of you: but ye are [were] washed, but ye are [were] sanctified, but ye are [were] justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” This means that they had been cleansed from all moral foulness, “washed;” that they had been consecrated to holiness, “sanctified;” that they had been made right in their being and relationships, “justified.” And all this, how? “In the Name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” This is the reformative measure, the gospel; nothing on this earth will effect this moral change but this. Not the enactments of legislations, not the creations of genius, not scientific systems. I disparage none of these, but they cannot effect this reformation of soul, the reformation which humanity wants, a reformation without which all other reformations are but reformations on parchment, a change in mere outward forms of life. “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. “Without holiness no man shall see the Lord.”

1Co 6:12-20

Christianity in relation to the body.

“All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient,” etc. It would seem that there were those in the Church at Corinth who regarded Christianity as giving them a kind of liberty to do whatsoever they wished. Some of them having left Judaism with its various restraints, and others paganism, which also had restrictions, they were too ready to push the doctrine of religious liberty, as proclaimed by Paul, far beyond its limits. The apostle here states, perhaps in answer to a question on the subject, that there is a limitation to Christian liberty. He says, “All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient.” As the liberty which they seemed to covet was a liberty in relation to the gratifications of bodily appetites, he takes occasion to state certain things in relation to the body. His remarks suggest to us the relation of Christianity to the human body. We observe

I. THAT IT RECOGNIZES ATTENTION TO THE NATURAL NEEDS OF THE BODY AS PROPER. “Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats.” This means the body has appetites, and there are provisions intended and fitted to satisfy them. Christianity allows man to partake of those provisions in nature necessary to satisfy and strengthen his physical nature. To act thus is to act in harmony with the constitution of nature. All animal existences act in this way. Christianity, instead of requiring you to starve the body by lastings, and to exhaust its energies by painful pilgrimages and self mortifications, says, “Eat and be satisfied, eat and be strong, take care of your bodies. If you choose to eat the meat offered to idols to allay your appetites and to invigorate your frames, well, eat it.” Feeding the body, however, Christianity regards, though proper as very temporary; both the food and the body must perish. They are not like spiritual existences and spiritual supplies, that have regard to an immeasureable hereafter. “All flesh is grass.”

II. THAT IT RECOGNIZES INDULGENCE IN THE GRATIFICATIONS OF THE BODY AS WRONG. “Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.” This is not a necessity of the body, like eating and drinking, but an immoral indulgence of its propensities. Man should attend to his bodily propensities as reliefs, not as gratifications. He who attends to his physical propensities in order to get pleasure out of them, sinks lower than a brute, violates the laws of his nature, degrades his being, and offends his God. Hence intemperance, whether in eating or drinking, is a moral outrage. The crime and curse of men in all ages have been seeking happiness out of the gastric, the sexual, and other propensities of their physical being.

III. THAT IT RECOGNIZES THE PROPER TREATMENT OF THE BODY AS IDENTIFYING WITH CHRIST.

1. It is a property of Christ. It is “for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.” It is not ours; we are its trustees, not its proprietors; we hold it “for the Lord,” and we should use it according to his directions. It is his will that it should be used by the soul to convey from the external universe quickening and hallowing impressions of the Divine, and used to express and develop the holy thoughts and purposes which such impressions should produce. It is to let in God to the soul and to reveal God to our race.

2. It is a member of Christ. “Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ?” If we are genuine Christians, he regards even our bodies as having a vital connection with him. He had a human body, and that human body raised to heaven is the model into which our bodies shall be changed. This being so, the prostitution of the body to sensual indulgence of any kind is an incongruity and an outrage. “Shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit,” etc.

3. It is a temple of Christ. “What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God?” Christ, by his Spirit, claims the body as a temple, in which he is to dwell, be revealed and worshipped. It is his property. “Ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.” The language here is, of course, figurative. It does not mean that there was a strictly commercial transaction in the redemption of man, a literal quid pro quo, for the thing spoken of pertains to spiritual interests and relations, and not to commerce.

HOMILIES BY C. LIPSCOMB

1Co 6:1-11

Civil relations and Church membership; litigation before heathen courts.

The chapter opens abruptly. “Dare any of you”a strong expression of disapproval”having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust?” Judaism had taught the Jews not to go before Gentile judges with a lawsuit against their brethren; the Romans had accorded to the Jews the right to settle their disputes among themselves, and Christians at that time might avail themselves of this rule (Lunge). But St. Paul, true to his ruling method, views the matter from Christian ground and treats it solely on the principles of the gospel. The argument in the preceding chapter concerned social relations, the present argument applies to civil relations, and yet they are sympathetic in his mind. Emotion is an associative force, and often establishes or rather discloses connections of ideas not perceptible in the “dry light” of intellect. In both these arguments the underlying sentiment is the same, viz. the dignity of Christian character and the supremacy of its obligations over interest, custom, usage, and every form of self not compatible with the generous spirit of sacrifice “for Christ’s sake.” Bear in mind, then, in reading St. Paul’s Epistles, that if at times you lose the compactness of logic and its tenacious unity, you are always sure to find that more interior tie which binds thought to sentiment and displaces order for the gain of a higher method. Method, rather than order, marks the thinker whose vocation is to instruct the mass of mankind. Saints, as saints exist in the ideal of Christianity, “shall judge the world.” They are to rule with Christ, to share his glory, and be acknowledged by the universe as participants in the final triumph of his mediatorial authority. If so, the mediatorial honour in future prospect has a certain scope of present activity, since it could not be then unless it were now. Of the character of these functions and the circumstances incident to their display, what know we? They fall under that law of reserve which the Lord Jesus spoke of when he said, “Of the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power,” we are kept ignorant, and are the better for the ignorance. Details of great facts may intensify the intellect of sense, and work damage to the higher mind. If Christ was the Son of man, and as such filled the sphere of humanity, while admitting as such the limitation of his knowledge in one direction, viz. “of that day and hour knoweth no man,” surely we need not perplex ourselves as to specific theories bearing on this subject. Christianity lays the stress on intelligence rather than on information, and, in fact, assures us that restraint is essential in our condition to equable development. St. Paul argues from the future to the present; thus, “shall judge the world, shall judge angels;” and the conclusion is emphasized,”how much more things that pertain to this life!” On this ground of the spiritual superiority of the saints in Christ, he claims that the judgment of believers may now be most advantageously exercised. It is a training in the school of Christ, and the discipline, while varied, is adapted to the highest good. Does St. Paul mean to put earthly tribunals under the ban? By no means. Again and again he sought their protection against Jews and Gentiles, and, if Roman law had not befriended him, his apostleship as men reason would have had a speedy termination. Who was more explicit and earnest than he in urging the doctrine that human government was a Divine ordinance, and as such to be obeyed and honoured? And who among statesmen and philosophers ever saw as deeply into the nature and functions of sovereignty as an essential element of the idea of man in the scheme of the universe? In law, in its administration of justice, in its protection of persons and property, in its power to verify and conserve the multitudinous interests of society, he recognized the right arm of Providence. The sense of providence must be social no less than individual, must transcend geographical bounds, and embrace the human family as a family of “one blood,” or it failed of its office. So, then, he has no issue with law and its adjudications as such. But the uses of the law by Christians; the common and facile resort to it in order to gratify covetousness, pride, ambition, revenge, and any and every form of selfishness;that is the grave matter before his mind. “There is utterly a fault among you,” a weakness, a repudiation of noble sentiment, a departure from the idea of the true self in Christ, “because ye go to law one with another” before unbelievers; brother arrayed against brother; and this exposure of a mutilated unity, with its accompanying evils, made in the presence of men whose criticisms would be only too eager to detect and magnify your imperfections. This is one aspect of the matter. But you gain your rights. Ay, and rights may be purchased too dearly. Go to law and get your rights; and then, as you retire from the seat of judgment, think of what you leave behind youwhat losses of sentiment, trust in others, hope of humanity, brotherliness of heart, perchance even integrity and honour. Right and rights, how often they part company, and the one is the burlesque, the shame, the bitter contempt of the other! “Rather take wrong;” it is altogether a manlier thing, if done for Christ’s sake. Lord Erskine, when at the bar, once said to Dr. Parr, “Accommodate the difference amicably. I can scarcely figure to myself a situation in which a lawsuit is not, if possible, to be avoided.” This is another aspect of the matter. Alas! there is an aspect yet sadder. Law is used as a means to inflict a wrong. “Ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.” What gigantic wrongs have been perpetrated under the name of law, we all know; but who can tell how far this spirit, which uses justice to accomplish injustice, has gone forth into all the relationships of men, and vitiated life among the sacred retreats of home and the Church? The depravity of man’s lower nature is fearful, not because it is cruel and brutal, but because it is continually reinforced and invigorated by the depravity of his higher nature. What is true of the individual in this respect is true also of society. History and our own observation warrant the statement that the grossest perverters of law and justice have been found among those who were wealthy, or in high office, or otherwise influential. Their example, in very many instances, has worked downward, just as certain poisonous gases, too heavy to ascend, have infected the air on a level with us. Then follows a question containing its own answer: “Know ye not that the unjust shall not inherit the kingdom of God?” His impassioned formula, “Be not deceived,” introduces a catalogue of immoralities that shut out men from God’s kingdom, in which we have a startling revelation, common with St. Paul, of bodily sins. Such were some of you. But how different now!washed, sanctified, justified, in the Name of Christ, and by the Spirit. Would they fall back into their heathenish practices? Within the compass of a few verses, St. Paul gives us principles that permeate civil society no less than religious. If carried out, we should have much less law and much more equity, and both law and equity would be immense gainers by the change. The tendency of the argument is the thing to notice. That tendency is to give men a true spiritual conception of themselves, and to develop their thought of self in accordance with God’s thought of them. The sense of public justice may compel us to resort to law, but this will not conflict with St. Paul’s idea. ‘On the other hand, any abuse of an institution, whether governmental or domestic, whether ecclesiastical or earthly, is an abuse of manhood, and on this truth he expends the force of his reasoning. In these verses, as in the previous chapters, arguing, denouncing, exhorting, pleading,it is the voice of a grand doctrine and a lofty trust and a sublime hope that we hear. And we hear it in the midst of strife and turbulence, out of the depths of a heart most sorrowful and yet “always rejoicing,” and able to command itself and its faculties and resources whenever and wherever needed.L.

1Co 6:12-20

The human body and its relation to Christ.

Among the objects about him proper for use and enjoymentthose objects which accorded with his nature and position as a redeemed manwas there anything from which he was excluded? “All things are lawful unto me,” and, in this sense, liberty and law are identical, the measure of the one being the measure of the other. If law is of God, so is freedom; if the former is the expression of the Divine will and character, so is the latter; and if man is the image of Christ in law, so is he in freedom. Observe, then, that it is not law and liberty as existing in a perfect world that the apostle is considering, but as found in this mixed and disordered world, in which probation is going on to its eternal issues. Ideally “all things are lawful,” and yet, because life is a discipline, how could it be otherwise than that liberty should be abridged? One of the main purposes of probation is to discipline the will, to choose for itself among a multitude of objects addressing our sensibilities. Scores of things appeal daily to our senses, and, if all our sensations are converted into desires, thence into motives, thence accepted by volition, and made a part of ourselves, then certainly this is not freedom for the ends of moral discipline, but freedom for simple and universal gratification. Freedom in St. Paul’s view is not a final cause, it is a means; and he would have the Corinthian remember that one of their greatest obligations was to restrain this freedom. The freedom itself had a large range as to the objects allowed its use and enjoyment. Should it cover the whole area of activity? Nay, says the apostle, this would be bondage in another form. “I will not be brought under the power of any,” for “all things are lawful unto me,” which is to say, “all things are in my power,” and I will exercise my power by imposing limitations on self indulgence. Of course, then, this restraint put on individual freedom is our own voluntary act. Such is the stress laid on personality that a man’s Christian virtue must be specifically his own, and recognized by infallible signs as his own. Development is a common duty, self development segregates a man from his fellows that he may grow in a given way. Self denial is a common duty, but under this law of individuality in using our freedom, self denial assumes a variety of shapes, and becomes wonderfully potential in human affairs by the diversity it presents. In this view the self denial of A is no guide for B. The special form of your self denial may not commend itself to me, nay, it may be hurtful to me; and, assuredly, it will lose its virtue if I adopt it merely because it is yours. And hence the value of example in this respect is not to create a slavish imitation on the part of others, but to set forth the worth inherent in the spirit of self denial. If this principle, so boldly urged by St. Paul, had been faithfully adhered to, it would have saved the Church from many inconsistencies. Private opinion, while it is content to be such, may be over stringent, and yet do no great harm. But in many cases it exceeds the limits of individuality and takes shape as the tyranny of public opinion. Morbidness is rarely satisfied till it acquires notoriety before the eyes of men, and so it comes to pass that we have ecclesiastical agitation and legislation about many thingsfor instance, amusementsconcerning which no exact standard can be set up foreverybody. If we could have an exact standard, it would not compensate for the loss of personal freedom, since this is precisely one of those matters in which self denial owes all its excellence to the restrictions that it imposes upon itself. St. Paul’s emphatic “I” in this connection is the “I” of every redeemed man, and accordingly, as a universal prerogative, this exalted characteristic of individuality is most carefully guarded. And how is it guarded? To say nothing of what Christian freedom is in itself as delegated by God in Christ, and conditioned widely different from Adam’s sovereignty in Eden; to say nothing of its original limitations by the Divine Law, and the fixed barriers over which it may not pass, and, if true to itself, cannot pass; what is this liberty but a glorious privilege to be made still more glorious by our own self enacted laws of restraint? It is a new limitation peculiar to man. It is a limitation which each man under the grace of the Spirit originates and executes in attestation of his own endowments as God’s redeemed servant, It is sonship in its most beautiful and tender formthe “Abba, Father,” which is not heard in the responses of the Church, nor in hymns of social worship, but is an utterance that rises to God in those hours when loneliness is a supreme joy. I have the power; I will not use it; I will deny myself its exercise, and I will do it because “all things are not expedient.” What other eye save his own could penetrate those mysteries, from which he draws reasons and motives for particular acts of self denial? Mysteries, we say; for many an advanced believer yields in this phase of experience to half awakened instincts and undefined impulses. How can ministers of the gospel, how can Churches in their official capacity, get at the knowledge of what is wisest and best in those matters that belong to the very highest attributes of personality as the ground of individuality? “Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.” “Fully persuaded” he can never be unless he use his liberty untrammelled. If you dogmatize and legislate, the full persuasion cannot be the outcome of “his own mind.” If God can trust him, why not you? The safeguard has been providedit is expediency. And this sense of expediency or of fitness and propriety is a conservative and prudential force, which operates to check all excesses, and binds about the man the golden cestus of moderation. Expediency is never self willed and arbitrary. It presides over tastes and the minor moralities no less than over the more prominent virtues; nor does it trifle with trifles nor disdain the helps of look and tone and manner, but is cardinal to whatsoever reflects the man upon his associates. Keenly alive to discriminations, it educates us to know the best from the merely good, and, by its fine tact and subtle sagacity, goes on swift wing to the noblest objects. It considers, as though it were a part of itself, the welfare of others, and thus becomes a guarantee that a man’s liberty shall not invade the rights of his fellow man. And remembering that “all things” are his only so far as he is Christ’s, he realizes that it is “no more I that live, but Christ liveth in me.” Then St. Paul proceeds to dwell on the sanctity of the human bodya favourite topic, on which he expends much thought. In the third chapter he had discussed it, and in subsequent passages, every one of them singularly clear and vivid, he recurs to this great topic. Here the leading idea is that our bodies “are the members” of Christ’s body. “The body is for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.” And hence St. Paul, in his concrete method of thinking, refuses to separate, even in thought, body and soul, as they are connected with redemption, Matter and mind are perfectly unlike; they are known to us only by their infinite contrariety; and yet matter and mind meet and unite as body and soul, and the union is human nature. These two substances grow each in its own way, the natural union at birth becoming closer and yet closer as years progress, and the body subordinating itself more and more to the mind’s service, in the mature manthe mechanic, the accountant, the artist, the poet, the philosophera vast advance has occurred in i he nearness and adaptability of the corporeity to the wants, demands, and aspirations of the spirit. If the providential idea in education and culture be fulfilled, the cooperative activity constantly increases, each forward step a step for both, and the law of development taking effect in mutuality of advantage. Still more fully is this fact brought out in Christian experience. St. Paul’s figures on this subject stand for facts. Bodily appetites cease to be mere animal instincts. They are elevated and purified. If Christ was raised from the dead, so too our bodies shall be raised, for the companionship of mind and matter as soul and body is not a transient but an eternal fact. One may speak of being “here in the body pent” and of the “body of humiliation” (vile body), but the idea of body as an investiture of spirit and an auxiliary to its functions is a part of the original scheme of humanity, and will have its complete development in the future life. Little do we realize that the resurrection man is now in a process of training as to his corporeal form. This training is doublemental and materialand hence, while it is true that certain physical functions will expire and be known no more, yet the effects of their experience will survive in the soul itself. “A spiritual body” is assured us by Christianity and confirmed to us by Christ’s resurrection; and, agreeably to this doctrine, the present growth of body into the mind’s service, the tuition of the senses, the reduction of the nerves to the will, the command which is acquired over the lower organs, all indicate that the resurrection man of body and spirit is now in process of formation. If this is true; if the resurrection is not only a prospective glory but a realization now going on by means of the present ennoblement and sanctification of the human body; and, furthermore, if Christ’s education of his own body to the offices he filled as Teacher, Miracle Worker, Philanthropist, Redeemer, etc., as to the spirit actuating him, an example to his followers;then surely we have the weightiest of reasons for regarding the body as the “temple of the Holy Ghost.” Greek philosophy had abused the truth that all creatures are for man, and that he is the measure of all things. Professing Christians had followed a carnal philosophy in the application of this truth. And now that St. Paul has rescued it from its perversions and set it in its proper light, he may well urge the conclusion, “Ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.” Could anything more timely, more momentous, more significant of the aim of Christianity as it respected the social regeneration of mankind, have been said by St. Paul? The sin of the body; that one sin which surrenders the body to another and degrades it as nothing else can degrade; that sin of sins, which debauches the body where it ought to be purest, and sinks lowest that which should be highest;could its wickedness be set forth in stronger language than when he speaks of the body as the tabernacle, in which not only the soul but the Holy Ghost dwells? “Which ye have of God,” and therefore “not your own,” but “bought with a price.” And yet this redeemed possession, the purchase of Christ’s blood, a member of his mystical body, a tabernacle of the Spirit, alienated, abused, prostituted to the most shameful and the most fatal of all vices. Of nothing is it so true as of this vice, that we become like that with which we associate. Association is assimilation, and, in this case, assimilation is the most dreadful form of desecration. These verses (18-20) contain, as has been suggested (Alford), the germ of the three weighty sections of the Epistle about to follow. And we do well to enter into their meaning and implore the grace of God to assist us, lest we fail to receive the profound impression sought to be made. It is useless to blink the fact that among Christian nations and in the nineteenth century this colossal vice of a desecrated human body is the Satanic citadel of iniquity. Take all the vices and sins on earth, aggregate them in one huge bulk, and the misfortunes, evils, catastrophes, tragic disasters, put together, would not outweigh the consequences morally and socially viewed of this enormity. Half of the man goes straight and quick into the hands of the devil, and the other half, unless God interpose, follows on in a fascination of blindness exceptional among illusions. God help us! For verily “vain,” in this instance, “is the help of man.” We need a much larger and bolder discussion of the religion of the human body; and if writers and preachers would study the art of doing this work, the Church and the world would be vast gainers. Any way, this is open to us all, viz. to lay a much greater stress than is commonly done on the dignity, worth, and glory of the human body as seen in the light of Christ’s teaching. Full justice is not done this subject, not even approximative justice, and, therefore, no wonder the body is disparaged, vilified, tolerated by many as a nuisance, and immolated by thousands as a creature of appetite and lust. “Bought with a price,” the blood of the Lord Jesus paid for ita glorious thing to be bought and not too precious a ransom paid, and now sprinkled by that blood and hallowed by the indwelling Spirit. Oh what intenseness of soul should go into the pleading, “Glorify God in your body”!L.

HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON

1Co 6:1-8

Litigation; or, How shall Christians settle their differences and disputes?

Remarkable is the insight which this Epistle affords us into the interior life of a Church of the first age. We seem to be brought into the presence of remarkable virtues and of remarkable faults, and are impressed with the incongruity of the picture. One thing is certain, that human nature was then what it is now, and that Christianity offers the one Divine remedy for individual and for social ills.

I. IT IS TO BE EXPECTED THAT DIFFERENCES AND DISPUTES WILL ARISE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF CHRISTIAN COMMUNITIES. The occasions are manifold; the conflict of interests and of opinions and of tastes will account for not a few. It is irrational to suppose that human nature can be at once transformed from the condition of the self indulgent pagan, for example, to the position of a mature and holy servant of God. There are to be found in the Church on earth persons occupying every point intermediate between these extremes; and among such “offences will come.”

II. IT IS SCANDALOUS THAT SUCH DISPUTES SHOULD BE BROUGHT BEFORE A HEATHEN TRIBUNAL. The Greeks were an especially disputatious and litigious race. It was natural enough that those who in the days of their heathenism had been accustomed to refer their disputes to the judges of the city should still carry any differences that might arise into the same courts. But reflection, as the apostle urges, must have made manifest the unwisdom of such a proceeding. Christianity proclaimed itself a religion of peace and love; and its adherents spoke of one another as brothers; whilst it was known that the great Lord had enjoined the forgiveness of injuries, and had himself set an example of such forgiveness. It is clear that for Christians to go to law with one another before the tribunals of the heathen was to create a scandal, and to bring both the religion and its professors into contempt. The same reasonings apply wherever, in our own day, the powers that be are unchristian, and the followers of Jesus are but as leaven in the mass of heathenism.

III. EVERY CHRISTIAN SOCIETY CONTAINS WITHIN ITSELF ELEMENTS CAPABLE OF DEALING WITH SUCH EMERGENCIES. According to the apostle’s teaching, the “saints” shall be assessors with the Lord Christ in the judgment of the world and of angels; and those destined to fulfil functions so majestic may surely be entrusted with the settlement of trivial disputes. It is best if the two persons between whom a misunderstanding has arisen can compose their differences with no outside assistance; if this cannot be done, it is well to call in the aid of a Christian of calm, impartial character and of large experience, with a common agreement to accept his award without murmuring. There is surely a large opportunity for the exercise of the virtues of wisdom and justice in such directions as these. Much bickering and heart burning might be avoided were there a sincere and general desire to act upon the counsels of the apostle. The courts of justice, even in Christian countries, might thus be relieved of much of their business, to the advantage of the whole community.

IV. THE BEST PREVENTIVE OF QUARRELLING IS A DISPOSITION TO SUFFER INJURIES RATHER THAN TO RESENT OR EVEN TO REDRESS WRONG. There is something very startling and very grand in the apostle’s sudden, unexpected questions, “Why not rather take wrong’? why not rather be defrauded?” These are “counsels of perfection.” The alternative already suggested is good; but this is better far, however it be opposed to the inclinations of” the natural man.” Christ has given us an example of suffering wrong. From the world we are bound, if it be so ordered, to accept with patience language of contumely or treatment of injustice. And it is suggested that, even amongst those who are fellow members of the same body, there may be mutual forbearance, there may be a patience amounting to magnanimity, a renunciation of rights which shall make it clear of how little importance are all those matters upon which it is possible for good men to differ.

“Learn how sublime a thing it is
To suffer, and be strong!”

T.

1Co 6:11

Past, present, and future.

In the two preceding verses the apostle has described, in terse, plain terms, the awful vices to which the heathen inhabitants of Corinth were addicted. To his enlightened mind the kingdom of Satan and the kingdom of God were diametrically opposed; and the test by which Paul judged them was the test of moral charactera test which the reason and conscience cannot but approve. The apostle knew from what a slough some of his Corinthian converts had been delivered, and he points the contrast between the kingdom in their person and history.

I. A BLESSING AS RESPECTS THE PAST: THE CHRISTIAN IS WASHED FROM MORAL FOULNESS. The language of this passage must have gone home with power to some hearts: “Such were some of you!” They had indulged in sins of the flesh and of the spirit, in vices which were deemed pardonable, and in vices which were deemed vile, in transgressions against their own nature and against society. Some had been notorious and flagrant, others ordinary, offenders. But all had contracted moral defilement. And what had Christianity done for them? What has it done for all to whom it has come? It has purified them from their old sins. “Ye were washed.” The lustration of baptismal waters was a symbol of the purification wrought in the spirit by the redemption of Christ, by the Holy Spirit of God.

II. A BLESSING AS RESPECTS THE PRESENT: THE CHRISTIAN IS RENEWED IN HOLINESS. Forgiveness and cleansing from impurity may justly be regarded as the means to an end; i.e. to hallowing or sanctification. This is the positive, to which the other is the negative, side. Set free from vice and crime, the subject of the Divine power of the cross comes under a new and inspiring influence. The Holy Spirit creates the nature afresh. No inferior power is adequate to produce a change so vast. It is a proof of the Divine origin and adaptation of Christianity that it attempts and achieves a task so superhuman. These moral miracles of sanctification constitute an evidence of Christianity which is to many minds the most conclusive of all.

III. A BLESSING AS RESPECTS THE FUTURE: THE CHRISTIAN IS JUSTIFIED FROM CONDEMNATION. The expression employed refers to the government of God and our relation to it. Justification is acquittal at the bar of the righteous Judge. By anticipation Scripture represents this acquittal as already pronounced in the case of those who have accepted the terms of salvation. For such the Name of Jesus Christ avails, and in such the Spirit of God graciously works. Justification is conferred now; but the full benefit of it will appear by contrast in the day of judgment.

APPLICATION.
1. The question is suggested to every hearer of the gospelCould the apostle have used this language with reference to me? Are the signs of this mighty change manifest in my life?

2. The reflection is suggested to those who have experienced this moral transformationHow wonderful and how effectual is the grace of God! How vast is the debt of gratitude we owe to the Father who loved us, the Saviour who redeemed us, the Holy Spirit who sanctifies us!T.

1Co 6:12-16

The sanctity of the body.

At Corinth idolatry assumed a most imposing, luxurious, and voluptuous form. It is quite in accordance with all we know of the opulent and pleasure loving inhabitants of and visitors to “the star of Hellas,” that those controversies and scandals which are dealt with so fully in this chapter should arise in a Christian society planted by the apostle at Corinth. It should be more especially noticed that there is a sufficient reason for the remarkable fact that sexual matters should be treated more fully in this Epistle than in any other part of the New Testament. The apostle in this passage demolishes the sophistical arguments and excuses by which certain professed Christians at Corinth were disposed to defend the practice of fornication. It was said that matters relating to the bodily life were indifferent to the moral welfare of men, that as an enlightened man will eat this food or that, irrespectively of any superstitious prejudices, inasmuch as food and the digestive system are naturally in corelation with each other, so he will satisfy the sensual appetites of his body in whatever way may be convenient and agreeable to him. Against this doctrine of devils Paul here argues, not on grounds of asceticism, but on grounds which must be conceded as secure by the moral and especially by the Christian thinker.

I. THE GROUNDS UPON WHICH CHRISTIANITY ESTABLISHES THE SANCTITY OF THE BODY. As here presented, they may appear to some readers to be mystical, but in fact they are in harmony both with the facts of human nature and with the great doctrines of the New Testament.

1. The Lord Christ and the body of man are “for” each other. In his incarnation Christ has assumed the human body, in his ministry he has honoured it, in his death he has redeemed it. Not the soul only, but the body, is God’s creation, and the object of Christ’s regard, and partaker of the benefits of his mediation. As the Lord is for the body, so is the body for the Lord.

2. More particularly, the bodies of Christians are members of Christ. The ransomed and renewed humanity is one glorious whole, one Divine organism, the Lord Jesus being himself the authoritative Head. If the Head, the informing Spirit, is holy, must not also the subordinate members be also pure and consecrated?

3. Christ having been raised from the dead, it is appointed that the body of every follower and friend of Christ shall share in this resuscitation and exaltation. In what way this shall take place is immaterial to the argument. The spiritual renewal is the earnest of the high and immortal resurrection of the whole man. These things being so, the body of the Christian standing in relation so intimate to the glorious and holy Mediator and Lord,is there any consistency between such a connection with the King of saints and a life of filthy sensuality? The incompatibility is apparent and undeniable.

II. THE PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES WHICH FOLLOW UPON THE CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE OF THE BODY. These are broadly distinguished into two classes.

1. Food is a matter of indifference. Many weak Christians laid great stress upon clean and unclean food; some objected to eat what had been or might have been offered to idols. Now, the apostle claims all this as a province of Christian liberty. Diet was a matter “without” the body. All things were lawful. Those who ate and those who refrained from eating were forbidden to despise one another; for both alike were called upon to act in this matter “as unto the Lord.”

2. Impurity is absolutely forbidden. There is a vital difference between the satisfaction of hunger and the gratification of the sexual appetite. This latter is only permissible within the boundaries of holy matrimony. Fornication is an abuse of the body, a defilement of Christ’s members, an insult to the Lord himself, whose property it not only takes by theft from him, but hands over to a harlot. This is very plain speaking on the part of the apostle. But it is just; and if it was necessary in those days, it is equally necessary now. Physiology is often invoked to sanction vice; but it is well to listen to the nobler and purer counsels of the apostles, which are not more in harmony with the loftiest ethics than they are with the soundest conclusions of physical and of social science.T.

1Co 6:17

Christ and his people are one.

It was the wont of the apostle to associate the commonest duties of life with the highest motives drawn from spiritual realities and relations, in dissuading from the sin of impurity, he might have adduced considerations drawn from physical laws or from social conditions; but it is more in harmony with his convictions and habits to appeal to the loftiest principles of the Christian religion.

I. THE BOND WHICH UNITES CHRISTIANS TO THEIR LORD. It is a personal relation which is here asserted, and evidently not one of mere external association, but of vital and spiritual union.

1. It is a bond of faith. “Whom not having seen,” etc. Christians receive with cordiality the gospel concerning Christ; they receive Christ himself to dwell in their hearts by faith.

2. It is a bond of love. They are joined to him as the bride to the bridegroom, in a spiritual affection, in love “stronger than death.”

3. It is a bond of affinity. Drawn to Jesus as sinners to the Saviour, they remain with him as friends congenial in character, in disposition, and in aims.

II. THE CONSEQUENT UNITY BETWEEN CHRISTIANS AND THEIR LORD. They are “one spirit.”

1. They are in a spirit of subjection to the Father, whose will and law are authoritative and supreme.

2. They are one in the love of all that is holy and morally admirable. The sympathy that exists is sympathy with regard to matters of the highest moment, with regard to the principles that animate and the aims that dignify the moral life.

3. They are one in the bonds of an immortal fellowship. Christ’s prayer for his people was, “That they may be with me where I am”a prayer which the Father is graciously and constantly answering.

III. THE PRACTICAL PROOFS OF THIS UNITY.

1. A repugnance on the part of Christians to all which is repugnant to their Lord; as e.g. those vices to which allusion is made in the context, practised by the heathen, but hateful to those who name the Name of Christ.

2. A cultivation of the spirit of brotherly love. The “one spirit” must needs be a spirit of true love, linking together the members of the mystical body of Christ, and disposing them to a sympathetic and harmonious action.T.

1Co 6:19, 1Co 6:20

A purchased possession.

Every noble character and life is based upon self renunciation. A man, in order to make his mark upon the world, must lose himself in some great cause, that e.g. of his country, of science, of art, of humanity. Is there an all absorbing aim in which men generally may justly lose themselves? If there be, it must be the highest, all comprehending, perfectly and lastingly satisfactory. Christians have found this secret: they live to God in Christ. They are not their own, for they are bought, they are owned by the Son of God.

I. THE STATE OF BONDAGE FROM WHICH CHRISTIANS ARE RANSOMED.

1. There was a time, a state, in which they thought themselves “their own.” They followed their own desires and went their own way.

2. But in reality they were in bondageto the Law and its sentence of condemnation; to sin and its cruel fetters; to Satan and his wretched service.

3. The power of evil then fostered the delusion of liberty, flattered pride and fostered selfishness, all the while drawing tighter and tighter the chains of spiritual bondage.

II. THE LIBERATOR TO WHOM CHRISTIANS ARE INDEBTED FOR THEIR REDEMPTION. They were ransomed:

1. By One whose laws and service had been forsaken and despised.

2. By One without whose help bondage would have been eternal.

3. By One upon whom we sinful men had no claim based upon right and justice.

4. By One whose heart was moved with pity by the sad spectacle of our slavery.

5. By One who graciously resolved to do and to suffer all that might be involved in the work of our deliverance.

III. THE COST AT WHICH CHRISTIANS WERE RANSOMED FROM SLAVERY AND PURCHASED AS THE FREE BONDMEN OF GOD.

1. It was a price which no mere man could by any possibility have paid.

2. It was a price which could not be reckoned and estimated in any earthly or human equivalent.

3. It was a price in order to pay which it was necessary that the Son of God should become incarnate, and empty himself of his glory.

4. It was a price which consisted in “the precious blood of Christ.”

IV. THE OBLIGATIONS WHICH THIS PURCHASE AND REDEMPTION LAY UPON CHRISTIANS. These may be regarded in two aspects.

1. Negatively. “Ye are not your own.” Your heart is not your own, but Christ’s; your thoughts are not your own, but his who liveth in you; your time is not your own, but is redeemed for the Redeemer; your abilities and influence are not your own, but are to be consecrated to him to whom you owe both them and the bias which has been given them; your property is not your own, but his who claims your all.

2. Positively. “Glorify God therefore.” The praise is due to him who in his own mind conceived the purpose of redemption. The service is due to him whom to love is of necessity to serve. All the faculties of our nature and all the opportunities of our life may well be laid, as a consecrated offering, upon the altar of God, whose we are, not only by right of creation, but by right of grace and redemption, whose we are by every tie, and whom we are bound to serve as the best expression of our gratitude and the best exercise of our liberty.T.

1Co 6:20

“Glorify God.”

“The heavens declare the glory of God.” Hosts of angelic and glorified spirits give “glory, honour, and thanksgiving unto him.” “All nations whom he hath made shall come and glorify his Name.”

“And shall man alone be dumb
Till this glorious kingdom come?
No! the Church delights to raise
Psalms and hymns and songs of praise.”

I. ON WHAT GROUNDS SHOULD CHRISTIANS GLORIFY GOD? This is a reasonable service, a reasonable requirement.

1. God has a natural right over us, i.e. by his creative power and providential care. “Man’s chief end,” says a famous Catechism, “is to glorify God.”

2. Redemption is the great reason adduced why Christians should glorify God. This is the doctrine of the context. The claim of purchase is added to the claim of creation.

II. FROM WHAT MOTIVES SHOULD CHRISTIANS GLORIFY GOD?

1. From a remembrance of the danger and ruin consequent upon any other end in life. Exemplified in Scripture history, as in the instance of Belshazzar, to whom it was said, “The God, etc., hast thou not glorified,” and in the instance of Herod, who “gave not God the glory.”

2. From a grateful acknowledgment of the love and grace to which they are indebted for their redemption. The ransom and redemption do indeed avail for all men; but multitudes are insensible to the loving kindness of the Lord. They who have tasted and seen that the Lord is good are prompted by their experience to yield themselves to the service of their Saviour.

3. From a desire to secure their own highest happiness. They have learned how every other principle of life fails to yield a deep and lasting satisfaction; and now they are learning, by happy experience, how truly blessed is the life which is unto the Lord of love and glory. This is exemplified in the history of this very Apostle Paul.

4. From a delight in the Divine commands. It is an invitation, bat it is also a behest: “Glorify God.” And nothing is so congenial to the Christian as what is enjoined upon him by his Lord’s authority.

III. IS WHAT MANNER MAY CHRISTIANS GLORIFY GOD?

1. By praise, “Whoso offereth praise glorifieth me.” “Confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” Public, cordial, unceasing praises should ascend from every company of the redeemed.

2. By obedience and service; and that not only of spirit, as is presumed, but of body, as is here expressed. The occasion of this chapter, the prevalence of sensual sin, seems to give an especially appositeness and force to this admonition, “Glorify God in your body.” That which had been the instrument of unrighteousness and uncleanness, becomes, through the redemption of Christ, the instrument of obedience and holiness.T.

HOMILIES BY E. HURNDALL

1Co 6:1-8

Christians and the law courts.

How far are Paul’s exhortations applicable to believers in the present day? Amongst the ancients, laws were often unjust, judges venal, and frequently certain objectionable formalities, such as adjuration by false deities, had to be observed. In our own land and time these things happily are not as of old. Yet even amongst us there are laws tainted with injustice, and there is not a little in our modes of legal procedure which is objectionable. Legal proceedings are sometimes necessary. Paul appealed to Caesar. And our duty to society may render it incumbent upon us not to allow an evil doer to escape. Nevertheless litigation between professing Christians

I. OFTEN PRESENTS A MELANCHOLY SPECTACLE.

1. The principals frequently receive injury.Not in pocket only; and in this respect he who gains the suit is generally little better off than he who loses. But morally and spiritually. Anger is excited, and ill feeling, if not positive hatred, towards the opponent. There is the direst temptation to take every possible advantage. The legal atmosphere is largely of the earth, earthy, and does not engender the state of mind needful for the beautiful but very heart searching petition, “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us.” The prayer, “Lead us not into temptation,” may indeed be offered, for the man who loves legal contests requires no leading into temptation, since he runs into it headlong of his own accord.

2. Brings scandal upon the Church. Both as

(1) to its lack of wise men capable of forming a true judgment;

(2) to the real condition of its members.

The world judges all by those it sees. Irritated, if not vengeful, litigants will be taken as samples fairly representing the “Church of the redeemed.” Thus:

3. Christianity itself becomes lowered in the estimation of men. To them it will seem as though the religion of peace, forbearance, unity, and love had failed at its very headquarters. So:

4. A great in fury is done to the world. By prejudicing it against the truth whereby alone it can be saved. Faulty Christian conduct drives men away from Christianity itself. Professors of religion have made ninny atheists.

II. MUCH LITIGATION MIGHT BE AVOIDED BY:

1. Desiring only the right. Men who want their due and a little more rush to the courts. Many who think themselves very just are very unjust in their desires. It is very easy to become unjust almost unconsciously. If men would only judge their own cause justly there would often be an end of the dispute. It is astonishing how many men fail in forming a fair estimate of their own claims: there seems an almost invincible tendency to exaggeration. We should sternly educate ourselves in principles of justice. We should judge cur own cause impartially, as though it were not our own.

2. Being content oftentimes to take less than our due. The law promises to us all that we can claim, but we should not always seek all that we can claim. A spirit of sacrifice is not unchristian. “Suffering wrongfully” is not altogether deprecated in Holy Writ. Even if we are smitten on the cheek, our Master does not counsel to instantly cast our assailant into prison, and to keep him there until he has paid the last farthing of damages. Forgiveness, disposition to pass by injury, the most charitable view of an opponent’s motives and conduct,these things are “of Christ.”

3. Not making great matters of little. If theoretically we deem ourselves justified in going to taw, we may well ask ourselves the questionIs the matter in dispute worth disputing, and worth causing the evils likely to arise therefrom?

4. Remembrance of our relationship. “All ye are brethren.” If Christians, we are trying to do the same work, to follow the same Lord, to serve the same God, to reach the same home. Is the contemplated litigation consistent with this relationship, and is it likely to promote “brotherly love”? And here we must avoid becoming prejudiced against our opponent. Opposing us, being on the other side, often makes all the difference. If on our side, a man is evidently a Christian, consistent, a credit to the community; but if against us, he is very apt to be everything objectionable. So some have a very easy conscience in going to law against a brother, because before doing so they have mentally ejected him from the brotherhood on account of his numerous delinquencies.

5. Submitting the matter in dispute to the arbitration of Christian brethren. Earnestly does the apostle recommend this course. He seeks to arouse the spiritually dormant Corinthians by the sarcastic supposition that, with all their boasted wisdom, they have not a man sufficiently wise to arbitrate in a case of dispute between two brethren. He unfolds a startling truth respecting believers, viz. that hereafter they shall judge

(1) the world (verse2);

(2) angels (verse3).

This declaration has much mystery attaching to it, but it accords with Christ’s promise to his disciples, that they should sit upon twelve thrones and judge the twelve tribes of Israel (Mat 19:28; see also Rev 3:21). And Jude tells us (Jud 1:6) that fallen angels are reserved for future judgment. We get thus a glimpse of the future exaltation of the redeemed. Having shared in the shame of Christ, they will share in his glory and power. He is the great Judge, but they will be identified with him in judgment. “I in them, and they in me.” As the Law on Sinai was ordained by means of angels, so the saints shall administer the kingdom of their Lord.

(1) If believers are to exercise such exalted functions hereafter, they should on earth be able to judge many of the causes of their brethren, and to do so with fairness and impartiality. Some are shy of arbitration, because sometimes it has had very little justice in it.

(2) In thus administering justice below, believers are preparing themselves for the duties of the life to come. Such work should not be slighted; it is in the highest degree educational. It should be performed with all possible care. Injustice done to others is always injury done to ourselves.H.

1Co 6:9-11

Our inheritance in peril

I. WHAT OUR INHERITANCE IS. “The kingdom of God:” present, but chiefly future. Of which Peter speaks (2Pe 3:13), “We, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.” Heaven, and the heavenly life, and the heavenly joys; the “rest that remaineth for the people of God;” the nightless, sinless, curseless, painless land; the “many mansions” of the Father’s house; the eternal home, where we “shall see his face.” This inheritance is in a certain sense the inheritance of all, since Christ died for the sins of the world. The gospel invitation is addressed to all. We disinherit ourselves.

II. SINS WHICH HINDER US FROM INHERITING THE KINGDOM OF GOD.

1. Sins of sensuality. Brutal lusts; unholy indulgence. Amongst the ancients (and also amongst the moderns too) vices existed which must not be so much as named amongst the decent and pure.

2. Idolatry. If we serve false gods, how can we expect a reward from the true God? Some have keen eyes for injuries done to men; idolatry is a preeminent sin against God. And we may be thorough idolaters whilst we are professed Christians. What is that which occupies the throne of our heart and of our life? Is it an idol or is it God?

3. Theft, covetousness, extortion. These may be grouped together. They do not seem so heinous as the foregoing, but they are associated with themand through them, equally with the others, may the inheritance be lost. Such sin shows that our heart is not right either towards man or God. And the three are much upon a par. Yet many a man would be horrified at the thought of being a thief who is not at all horrified at being undoubtedly covetous and extortionate. How names betray us! Why, what is covetousness but theft in the bud? And extortion is theftunmitigated theftin the blossom! Many a man steals mentally, and is as guilty as if he stole actually; for nothing but the restraints of society and the dock keep his hands still. And he passes for an honest man! Many a theft is committed in a court of justice before the very eyes of judge and jury, and sometimes with the assistance of a bewigged counsel; for example, when a man is striving to get more than his due.

4. Drunkenness. This curse of our landwhat men lose by it! Health, respect, friends, position, home, wealthand the kingdom of God.

5. Foul language. Reviling, railing, sins of the tongue. Foul lips which speak of a foul heart, for the sweet fountain sends not forth bitter waters. Sins such as these entail the forfeiture of the great inheritance. Plainly are we here taught that a nominal faith can never save us. All the profession in the world cannot carry us an inch towards the promised land. It is the old pagan notion that religion consists in outward observances and not in heart and life.

III. THESE HINDRANCES MAY BE REMOVED. Here is consolation for great sinnersand who are small ones? When a man is deeply convinced of sin he is often tempted to despair. Can I, the unclean, the immoral, the foul mouthed, the foul hearted, enter into the kingdom of ineffable holiness? It seems impossible. But after detailing some of the vilest acts of which humanity can be guilty, the apostle turns upon the Corinthians and says, “And such were some of you.” Of greatest sinners God has sometimes made greatest saints. If the heart be contrite, there is no cause for the abandonment of hope. The barriers which are insuperable to man can be cast down by the might of God. In our sin we need look to God, for none besides can aid us. Our sickness is beyond all skill save that of the great Physician.

IV. THE MANNER OF REMOVAL. The apostle speaks of “washing”the great need of the defiledand then directs attention to its twofold character. That the impure may enter into the all pure kingdom of God, two things are necessary.

1. Justificationwhich we receive through Christ (1Co 6:11). He took our place; he bore our sins; he made atonement for us. Our sins are imputed to him; his righteousness is imputed to us. Through him God can be just and yet the Justifier of the ungodly. “With his stripes we are healed; The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin” (1Jn 1:7); he is able to save “to the uttermost;” “Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow” (Isa 1:18).

2. Sanctificationwhich we receive through the operation of “the Spirit of our God” (1Co 6:11), the Holy Ghost. Justification is that which is done for us; sanctification is that which is done in us. Yet one is not without the other. By the Divine Spirit we become “born again,” “born of the Spirit,” made pure inwardly; our affections purged, our desires corrected, our spiritual being controlled and purified (see Joh 3:3).

V. A CAUTION IMPLIED. “And such were some of you.” Are ye becoming so again? We need beware of “going back” to those things which once barred our access to the kingdom of God, and which will do so again if indulged in. Our great inheritance may be lost after all! It will be, unless we “endure to the end.” How earnest anxious, prayerful, watchful should we be lest we “come short”! There is One who is “able to keep us from falling” (Jud 1:24). “Cleave unto the Lord your God” (Jos 23:8).H.

1Co 6:12

The lawful and the expedient.

I. IT IS IMPORTANT TO ASCERTAIN WHAT IS LAWFUL FOR US IN LIFE. All things indifferent (i.e. not evil in themselves) are lawful for the Christian. He has the widest liberty. He is not under the restriction of the older economy. To him “every creature of God is good” (1Ti 4:4), and to be received with thanksgiving. The Christian must abide within the limits of the lawful. Nothing that seems expedient outside of the lawful must be touched by him. He is under the rule of righteousness, and must not allow himself in aught that is unrighteous. Note: Nothing is really expedient outside of the limits of the lawful, but many things may appear to be so.

II. BUT ANOTHER QUESTION HAS TO BE ANSWERED BEFORE CONDUCT CAN BE DETERMINED, VIZ.WHAT IS EXPEDIENT WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE LAWFUL? The Christian must not use his liberty indiscriminately; he must consider probable results. The end does not justify the means, but the end often determines whether means (justifiable in themselves) shall be used or not. Means, good enough in themselves, may under certain conditions lead to most undesirable ends; those ends foreseen determine for the believer that those means shall not be employed. The Christian has to select the truly expedient out of the truly lawful. It has been well said, “Unlawful things ruin thousands, lawful things (unlawfully used) ten thousands.” And also, “Nowhere does the devil build his little chapels more cunningly than right by the side of the temple of Christian liberty.” A Christian, before availing himself of his liberty, had need ask such questions as the following:

1. What will be the effect upon myself? Shall I be made less spiritual, less useful, less pleasing to God? All that we do we do more or less “unto ourselves.” We mould ourselves very largely by what we allow to ourselves.

2. What will be the effect upon my liberty! Liberty may commit suicide. Undue indulgence of liberty results in slavery. Paul was intensely anxious “not to be brought under the power of any;” even lawful, thing. It is of the greatest importance to the moral health and needful freedom of the soul that it should not be in subjection to any appetite or desire, however innocent.

3. What will be the effect upon my fellows? Will it aid or hinder them? “No man liveth unto himself.” Every man is “a man of influence.” Innocent things to us may be by no means innocent things to others. By example we may lead men to destruction, whilst we withal escape. “If meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth” (1Co 8:13).

4. How will my conduct appear to God? Is this that I propose to do, not only good in itself, but the best thing for me to do at this time? Whatever the Christian does, he is to do to the glory of God, even in matters of eating and drinking. Can I do this to the glory of God? The familiar question, “Is it wrong to do this or to go thither?” is often both misleading and utterly irrelevant. The answer to the question may be “No.” Then the fallacious reasoning follows, “If it is not wrong, I may do it without sin.” Stop! that is unsound logic. The thing thoroughly right may be unutterably wrong! “All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient,” and the Christian is bound by every obligation to do that which is expedient within the realms of the lawful. He must do what is best; to do aught else is to sin. What he ought to do, and what he may do lawfully, are often two very different things. “Ye are not your own; for ye are bought with a price” (1Co 6:19, 1Co 6:20).H.

1Co 6:13-19

Duties to the body.

Christianity concerns itself about man’s body as well as about man’s soul. Christianity is a religion for manfor a whole man. When considering matters of religion, we are apt to leave the body too much out of account. Our remissness might be corrected if we remembered how large an influence the body has upon the mind and soul.

I. CONSIDER WHAT CHRISTIANITY SAYS ABOUT THE BODY. It is:

1. For the Lord.

(1) For his service and glory. We may serve Christ with our body. We may glorify God with our body (1Co 6:20). With our whole being we should serve the Lord. Our body should be “set apart” for God. How much more useful many would be if they did but cultivate physical health! Their uncared for bodies become grievous burdens and woeful hindrances. Disorder in the body is contagious, and often spreads to mind and soul. Athletics, rightly ordered, lie within the realm of religion. The man who, not neglecting other duties, seeks to make his body thoroughly strong and vigorous, is more pious, not less. With others, diseases the fruits of old sins, abide and greatly check them in active service for God.

(2) The body of the Christian is a member of Christ (1Co 6:15). Closely united to the great Head. He took our naturenot only our spiritual and mental nature, but our bodily nature. We are one with him in our whole being.

(3) Purchased by Christ. When he redeemed man he redeemed man in his entirety. Our bodies have a part in “the great salvation.” And at what a price was the purchase made!

2. A temple of the Holy Ghost. Solemn thought! How trueyet how often forgotten! Whilst in the body, God dwells in us. The body is the outer framework of the sanctuary of the Divine Spirit. It is thus consecrated for a high, holy, and sacred purpose. It is God’s possession and dwelling place, like the temple of old. Thus:

3. It is not our own. Then we must not deaf with it as though it were. It has been bought by Christ, and should be freely and fully surrendered to him. When we give him our heart we should give him our body also. Many forget to do this.

4. Cared for by God. “The Lord is for the body.” He preserves, feeds, clothes, shelters, guards it. How soon it would perish if uncared for by him!

5. To be raised. The resurrection of the body is a cardinal doctrine of Christianity, and insisted upon at great length by the apostle in the fifteenth chapter of this Epistle. We are but too apt to ignore this, and practically to conclude that at death we shall part with the body forever. We think it worthless, but God does not. He will raise it in a glorified form. Its present constitution will be greatly changed, as the apostle intimates in 1Co 6:13. The time will come when the body will not be sustained, as it now is, by meats. It will be a “glorious body” (Php 3:21), a “spiritual body” (1Co 15:44).

II. THESE TRUTHS RESPECTING THE BODY SHOULD:

1. Greatly ennoble it in our estimation. It is not to be thought lightly of or treated with contempt. Ancient philosophy taught hatred of the body, but ancient philosophy is not Christianity. We must not despise the body; this is a dire mistake often perpetrated. The body has a great part to play both here and hereafter. It has been an occasion of sinoften is a burden; but it is in the hands of God, and he will fully redeem and glorify it. It is his workmanship, thrown much out of gear by evil; but he shall rectify its defects, and make it “meet for the inheritance.”

2. Lead us to use it most carefully. Being precious in God’s sight, purchased by Christ, tenanted by the Divine Spirit,shall we deal with it as though it were a common thing? There is one sin mentioned by the apostle which injures the body grievously, and utterly outrages the Divine intent concerning it. Let us guard carefully against this and kindred evils; terrible will be the punishment of those who defile the temple of the Holy Ghost, and who prostitute to base uses the “members of Christ. Pure body, pure mind, pure soul;may this trinity of blessings be ours!H.

HOMILIES BY E. BREMNER

1Co 6:1-8

On going to law.

Among other evils at Corinth calling for correction, a litigious spirit had begun to show itself, fostered doubtless by the unpleasant friction of parties. Brother went to law with brother before the heathen tribunals, and the Christian name was thereby brought into ill repute. For this the apostle rebukes them, and assigns weighty reasons why they should settle their disputes otherwise.

I. THE JUDICIAL FUNCTION OF THE SAINTS. All judgment has been committed to Christ (Joh 5:22), and in the exercise of this function his saints are associated with him. Suffering with him here, they shall reign with him hereafter (2Ti 2:12), a kingdom being given to them (Dan 7:22; Mat 19:28); and when he comes again he will be accompanied by them in glory (Jud 1Co 1:14, 1Co 1:15). In this capacity they shall judge, not only mankind, but also the angels. Whether the apostle has in view good angels or bad, it is not essential to inquire; the point is that the judicial dignity of the saints is so great that they shall sit in judgment even on angelic beings. How wonderful an honour! Meantime we share in the humiliation of our Lord. The saints are not exalted to the judgment seats of the earth. They walk here as kings in disguise, unknown by a world that lets itself be governed by the prince of darkness. Even now they exercise a judging influence, their holy lives condemning the ungodly around them; but the full manifestation of their judicial function is reserved for the time when Jesus comes in power. Oh, it will be a bright day for this world when holiness is exalted to the throne and all the evil of earth and hell is summoned to its bar, when the moral confusion meantime prevailing shall give place to the fair order of the reign of righteousness! What manner of persons ought they to be who are appointed to judge the universe of men and angels?

II. THE RIGHT SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES BETWEEN CHRISTIANS.

1. Do not take them to a heathen court. To seek redress from unbelievers is an offence against Christian dignity. If the saints are to judge the world, why go to this same world for judgment? These pagan magistrates shall yet stand at your bar; why demean yourselves by standing at theirs? The question comes, how far this rule is binding upon us. Are we forbidden in every case to go to law with a brother? Looking strictly at the case of a quarrel between two Christians, the spirit of the apostolic rule is certainly of permanent obligation. While our courts of law are free from many of the objectionable features of heathen tribunals, they are not so thoroughly Christian as to justify believers in appealing to them, especially when redress may be had otherwise. And it is as unseemly for brother to sue brother at law as for members of the same family. Paul’s appeal to Caesar cannot be cited against his prohibtion here; for it was not a going to law at his own instance, but an appeal from one court to another where justice was more likely to be done.

2. Refer them to Christian arbitration. If the saints are to judge the world and angels, surely they are capable of deciding in matters pertaining to this life. Refer the quarrel to some wise Christian brother possessing the confidence of both parties, and let him judge. Arbitration has much to recommend it, even in matters purely civil; and in the case supposed, it tends to promote brotherly kindness, while securing the ends of equity. This does not warrant any judicial interference of the Church in matters properly belonging to the state. She is not to be “a judge or a divider” in secular affairs (Luk 12:14). It is in disputes arising between her own members that she is to adopt this method of friendly settlement.

III. THE AVOIDANCE OF DISPUTES. If quarrels between Christians arise, let them be settled as directed; but why should they arise? “Why not rather take wrong? why not rather be defrauded?” This is the spirit of our Lord’s teaching (Mat 5:38-40), which goes to the root of the evil. Instead of insisting on your legal pound of flesh, it is better to suffer yourselves to be wronged. This is the sublime unselfishness of Christianity. Unworkable? On this principle Jesus acted (1Pe 2:23), and Paul (1Co 4:12); and in proportion as it pervades society will wrong doing cease. There is something higher than mere rights, something diviner than legal justice; it is to “endure griefs, suffering wrongfully,” in the spirit of him who won his triumph by the cross. Thus willing to suffer injustice, while careful to do no wrong, disputes will be avoided.B.

1Co 6:9-11

Before and after: two pictures.

The apostle reminds them that wrong doing of every kind excludes from the kingdom of God, and that consequently their quarrels and litigation are bringing them into danger. They are forgetting the meaning of their conversion.

I. OUR ORIGINAL CONDITION. Though this dark picture is meant to represent sinners at Corinth, its general features are universally applicable.

1. Sin is various, yet one. The branches are many, but they grow out of the same root. “For out of the heart come forth evil thoughts, murders,” etc. (Mat 15:19). They are all “works of the flesh” (Gal 5:19-21), conceived in the heart and brought forth in the life. Some are sins directly against God; some against our neighbour’s person, estate, good name; some against ourselves. Let us not excuse ourselves by looking on another’s sin, and thanking God we are free from that. In some other form it besets us, and “Whosoever shall keep the whole Law, and yet stumble in one point, he is become guilty of all” (Jas 2:10, Jas 2:11). How awful a thing is sin! Let it work its way, and it will utterly corrupt soul and body, the family and society. Every man has in him by nature the seed whence these fruits of Sodom grow.

2. The practice of sin excludes from the kingdom of God. Between such sins and the kingdom there is an absolute contradiction. The kingdom is righteousness (Rom 14:17), and these are forms of unrighteousness. Religion and morality, faith and works, creed and conduct, go together. “Regenerate thieves! regenerate libertines! regenerate extortioners! There is a horrible contradiction in the very thought” (F. W. Robertson). Let us guard against deception here. No amount of outward observance can atone for an immoral life. “Without are the dogs” (Rev 22:15).

II. OUR CHANGED CONDITION, At conversion all this is changed. We become new creatures, the old things passing away (2Co 5:17). Three aspects of this change are mentioned.

1. Washing. Sin is pollution, and from this we are cleansed by the blood of Jesus (1Jn 1:7), “Through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost” (Tit 3:5). This is set forth in baptism, and it was a prominent idea in the Old Testament ritual (Exo 40:30-32; Psa 51:7).

2. Sanctification. Devoted to sin once, we arc now consecrated to God. We are separated from the world and devoted to the service of Christ.

3. Justification. The guilt of sin is removed, and we are accepted as righteous in Christ on the ground of what he has done for us. And this many sided blessing of salvation is procured for us by the Lord Jesus Christ, and applied to us by the Spirit of our God.

Compare these two pictures and:

1. Ask which of them represents you. Have you been washed, sanctified, justified? Is there a “but” in your spiritual history, dividing the new from the old?

2. Learn your indebtedness to saving grace, and be humble and grateful.

3. Have done with sin in every form. It is a return to the condition from which you have been delivered. “Put off the old man with his doings.”B.

1Co 6:12-20

Abuse of Christian liberty.

It appears that the principle of Christian liberty, “All things are lawful for me,” had been greatly abused by some in the Church at Corinth. It was cited in defence of fornication, as well as of eating all kinds of meats. They confounded it with the philosophical maxim that man is the measure for himself; from which they drew the conclusion that the sexual appetite may be gratified in the same indiscriminate way as that of hunger. This pernicious abuse the apostle corrects, first by setting the doctrine of Christian freedom in its true light, and then by presenting a variety of arguments against the sin of fornication.

I. CHRISTIAN LIBERTY, ITS GROUNDS AND LIMITS, “All things are lawful for me.” Under. the old dispensation there was curtailment of freedom in respect of meats and drinks and days; but this is now removed. In Jesus Christ the believer is restored to dominion over the creatures, all things being put under his feet (Psa 8:6; Heb 2:7-9). “All things are yours” (1Co 3:22). The world and its contents exist for the sons of God, to subserve their welfare. But this large freedom has obvious limitations.

1. The limit of expediency. Many things in our power may not be for our good, either in themselves or because of special circumstances. This is true of foods, and of many forms of work and pleasure lawful in themselves. Here, too, the good of others comes into view as a limiting consideration. The exercise of my liberty must be tempered by a regard to the welfare of my brother (1Co 8:13). Apply this to certain forms of amusement, the use of wine, etc.

2. The limit imposed by the duty of preserving our liberty. “I will not be brought under the power of any.” “Every creature of God is good” (1Ti 4:4), but only when used as a servant. We must not suffer ourselves to be brought into bondage to anything. Music, e.g., is a legitimate and healthful enjoyment, but I must not become its slave.

II. THE SIN OF FORNICATION.

1. Fornication is not warranted by the analogy of meats. “Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats.” The one has been created for the other. The stomach demands food, and all kinds of food have been made for the stomach; hence it is lawful to eat whatever is good for us. But there is no similar adaptation between the body and sensuality. The one was not made for the other. Again, both the belly and its food belong to a transitory condition of things. Both shall be brought to nought when this present world age is completed, and the natural body becomes the spiritual body. But the body shall not thus perish; it has an eternal destiny. In both these respects, therefore, the analogy fails; and fornication cannot be defended as a case of nature.

2. It takes away from Christ that which belongs to him. The Christian’s body is the Lord’s.

(1) It exists for him, and he for it. The relation is mutual. Christ redeems, sustains, rules, and glorifies the body; the body is subject to him for his service.

(2) It is a “member of Christ” (1Co 6:15). Our bodies are essential parts of ourselves, and as such belong to Christ’s body (Eph 5:30). The same Spirit dwells in him and in us (1Co 6:17); the life of the Head is the life of the body and its members. How awful the sin of prostituting that which is a member of Christ!

3. It is inconsistent with the eternal destiny of the body. The relation of the body to Christ is abiding. He who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead will also quicken our mortal bodies (Rom 8:11), raising them to a glorious life in him. The resurrection of the body tells us that it is not to be treated as a temporary thing, belonging only to this stage of existence. It is not to be destroyed like the belly and meats, but is united to Christ forever. Fornication, therefore, decades the body, inasmuch as it is thereby treated as the instrument of a perishable appetite.

4. It is in its own nature degrading. The act itself is a union with the vilest characters (1Co 6:16). Think of the dignity of the Christian’s person as a member of Christ, standing in everlasting union with him; and with what holy horror should we regard this sin!

5. It is peculiarly a sin against the body. (1Co 6:18.) “Drunkenness and gluttony are sins done in and by the body, and are sins by abuse of the body; but they are still without the bodyintroduced from without, sinful not in their act, but in their effect, which effect it is each man’s duty to foresee and avoid. But fornication is the alienating that body which is the Lord’s, and making it a harlot’s body; it is sin against a man’s own body, in its very natureagainst the verity and nature of his body; not an effect on the body from participation of things without, but a contradiction of the truth of the body, wrought within itself” (Alford). The awful effects of this sin are frequently written in characters of fire in the physical system.

6. It is a profanation of the Divine temple. ‘I he body is “a temple of the Holy Ghost” (1Co 6:19). What was said before of the believer is here said of the body (1Co 3:16, where see homily). The body is the outer court of the temple, but still a part of it, and therefore holy. Dare we admit unholy feet to tread this court? Dare we profane the sanctuary by devoting it to sacrilegious uses? Will the Spirit of God continue to dwell in a polluted temple?

7. It contradicts the Divine proprietorship of the body. Believers are not their own, but the purchased position of God, bought for himself with precious blood (1Co 6:20; Act 20:28; 1Pe 1:18, 1Pe 1:19). Our bodies are not our own to do with them as we please. We are God’s bondservants, bought for the purpose of serving and glorifying him (1Pe 2:9). How weighty an argument for entire devotion to (God’s service! Love to our redeeming God is the only sufficient motive for a holy life. “Glorify God therefore in your body.”

LEARN:
1. The sacredness of the body.

2. The extent of sanctificationit reaches to the utmost circumference of our being (1Th 5:23).

3. Flee fornication. Victory here is to be won by flight, not by fight (Gen 39:12).

4. Watch against everything that might lead to this sin.B.

HOMILIES BY J. WAITE

1Co 6:12

Free, and yet not free.

The first step to a right understanding of this passage is to observe that the “all things” of which the apostle speaks are things in themselves indifferent (), not things in which any vital principle of morality or point of Christian doctrine is involved. Nothing could be “lawful” to him that was in its essential nature unlawful. There are matters in which the question of right and wrong is fixed, absolute, changeless; and there are others in which it is variable, conditional, determined by circumstances. It is of the latter that he speaks. He is consciously raised above the bondage of mere conventional or traditionary distinctions of clean and unclean, sacred and common, etc. A man is free from the restraint of external law when he has the spirit of it in his heart. All things are lawful to him when the governing principle of his life is that “love which is the fulfilling” of all holy law. The singularity of this declaration is that, while the apostle asserts his freedom, he at the same time surrenders it. He asserts it by voluntarily submitting to that which seems to be a denial of it. There is something paradoxical in this. But are we not familiar with many similar paradoxes? External nature is a marvellous combination of what seem to be conflicting elementslaws that limit, forces that balance each other, processes that run in opposite directions. What a strange commingling is there in the world around us of beauty and deformity, economy and waste, order and disorder, life and death! Divine providence presents the same characteristics. The wheels of the great providential plan move in different, often contradictory, directions; but the sovereign Spirit that controls and guides them develops from them one grand result. What is every man’s daily history, in the common relationships of life, but a perpetual working and counterworking of what seem to be incongruous principles. He loses that he may win, serves that he may rule, stoops to conquer, sacrifices liberty in one direction that he may secure it in another, denies himself to please himself, suffers that he may enjoy, dies that he may live. No wonder there should be a similar balancing and limiting of seemingly discordant principles in the sphere of Christian doctrine and Christian life. Two views of personal freedom are here given.

I. FREEDOM LIMITED BY THE THOUGHT OF MORAL ADVANTAGE. That is in the highest sense “expedient” which is morally right and good. A thing may be “lawful” and yet, considering all the conditions of the case, not desirable, because unprofitable. Legitimate enough in itself, it may have bearings and involve consequences that are neither right nor good. In such a case a man of fine Christian sensibility will feel that, while perfectly free in one sense, in another sense he is not free. His conscience and the sympathies and affections of his religions life will restrain his use of that freedom. There is something dearer to a noble soul than even liberty. The thought of the higher profitableness of a thing should be more to us than the thought of its abstract lawfulness. Freedom is not in itself an end, but the means to an end above and beyond itself. To seek after “whatsoever things are true, honest, just,” etc., even though it may involve us in many penalties, is better than to be always jealously maintaining our exemption from the bonds of external restraint. One of the finest examples of this principle is supplied by our Lord’s payment of the temple tax (Mat 17:24-27) Though “the children were free,” yet, lest there should be “offence,” he will pay the claim and work a miracle to provide the means of payment. The Sonship that relaxed one law only made the other the more sacred and binding. The apostolic Epistles are full of illustrations of the same principle (1Co 9:14, 1Co 9:15, 1Co 9:19-22; Gal 5:13; 1Pe 2:16). Never are we so loftily conscious of our Christian freedom, and never is that freedom so manifest, as when, for some high end, we choose to forego it.

“A life of self renouncing love
Is a life of liberty.”

II. FREEDOM CONTROLLED BY THE CONSCIOUSNESS OF MORAL POWER. “I will not,” etc. This is self assertion of the right order; the manly use of the power by which it is given us to determine our own course, and not allow it to be left at the mercy of outward influences, or to be determined for us by the persuasive force that happens to be the strongest. As a mere act of self discipline, this is good; for the will, like any other faculty, grows by use, and self mastery by the power of a resolute will is the basis of all moral excellence. Think what differences there are among men in this respect. The secret of success or failure in the lower interests of human life lies mainly here. It depends far less on native talent, favourable circumstances, etc., than it does on the energy of a self regulating will. This power is necessary to give due effect to any other power. Many a man has noble qualities both of mind and heartquick intelligence, wise judgment, warm enthusiasmbut lacks the steadfast will that would bind them all together, giving unity and strength to his character and effective force to his endeavour. According, however, to the greatness and strength of this faculty, so is the danger of its being misdirectedlike the forces of nature, water, steam, electricity, etc. Self will is blind, lawless, immoral, and therefore not really free. Moral freedom lies in the mastery of a will that determines for the right, chooses to move in harmony with the Divine will, the “will that is holy and just and good.” Learn chiefly two grand lessons.

1. That things lawful and innocent in themselves may become evil by being allowed to gain an undue mastery over us.

2. That our only effectual preservative against this is the resistive energy of a will inspired by the Spirit of the well beloved Son.W.

1Co 6:19

Divine ownership.

One of the most elementary principles of Christian thought and life is expressed in these words: “Ye are not your own.” The sense of Divine ownership rather than self ownership is the inspiration of all Christian dignity and strength. Consider

I. THE NATURE AND GROUNDS OF THIS PERSUASION. There is a sense in which it is true of all men that they are not their own. It is a necessary inference from the fact that they are created and dependent beings. But more than this is meant here. As a mere truth of natural religion, it is lifeless and profitless. As in so many other cases, it must be elevated to the level of a Christian doctrine, linked with, set in the light of, the great facts that belong to the “record God has given us of his Son,” before there can be any efficacious force in it. As a reality of Christian life, then, this Divine ownership rests on two distinct grounds.

1. Purchase. “Ye were bought with a price.” The apostle refers to a historic fact of the past, viz. the personal self surrender and sacrifice of Jesus, the Son of God, for the redemption of men. This, with all that it involved of obedience, humiliation, and suffering even unto death, was the “price” that bought us. We may differ in our abstract ideas as to the nature of the atonement, but this fact is to the Christian mind indisputable. “The Son of man came to give his life a ransom for many” (Mat 20:28); “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse,” etc. (Gal 3:13); “Redeemed with the precious blood of Christ,” etc. (1Pe 1:19). Like the noble Roman youth who, as tradition tells, leaped full armed into the yawning chasm because the city could only be saved by the sacrifice of her best treasure, so did Jesus, the “well beloved” of heaven, the noblest treasure of earth, the “only begotten of the Father,” the Head and Chief of our humanity, yield up his life to redeem the life of the world. He gave himself for us. “He suffered, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us unto God.” Not that there was any essential moral efficacy in the mere fact of suffering, but that that suffering was the measure of our value in the sight of infinite and eternal Love. Pure love invests its object with a value in comparison with which all that belongs to itself is as nothing. The heart in which it dwells finds its deepest satisfaction in the joy of another. Saving another, itself it “cannot save.” All tender human relationships are meant to develop in us this Divine sensibility. How spontaneously does all the thought and care and passion of the mother’s soul, the deep exhaustless wealth of her being, flow out towards her child! She loses herself to find a dearer self in him. How instinctively, at any risk, does she shield him from danger! With what sublime self forgetfulness does she surrender her own ease and comfort, to toil through the livelong day, and watch through the weary night, and let her very life ebb slowly and silently away, that she may find a deeper joy, a better life, in nourishing and saving his! So has it been with Christ’s more than human, more than mother’s love. “Herein is love,” etc. (1Jn 4:10). It is the memory and consciousness of this, and all that it means, that produces in us a profound impression that we are “not our own.” Of all the forces that move the spirit to grateful self surrender, none so mighty as this sense of personal obligation to redeeming love. “The love of Christ constraineth us,” etc. (2Co 5:14).

“Love so amazing, so Divine,
Demands my soul, my life, my all.”

2. Possession. “Your body is a temple of the Holy Ghost.” The context requires that we give to this a strictly individual application. It is spoken here, not of the Church as the Body of Christ, “the fulness of him that filleth all in all,” but of the physical personality of each individual member of that body. And it is spoken of as a simple, unquestionable element of Christian knowledge and consciousness. “What, know ye not,” etc.? The heathen have had their ideas of Divine “possession;” but their possession has been exceptional, transitory, fictitious, the device of priestcraft, the wild dream of mystic superstition. Here the Divine possession is real, reasonable, permanent, fruitful of blessed issues. If we could only realize it more, not with anything like the wildness of a dangerous fanaticism, but with the calm quiet dignity of a spirit that is consciously walking in the light of God, what strength and beauty it would give to our life! Imagine the awful sanctity with which the temple of old must have been invested to the view of the worshipping people as soon as the heaven kindled fire came down, and “the glory of the Lord had filled the house.” With what higher sanctity still should we clothe the being of a man in whom the Holy Spirit dwells! Shall not “Holiness unto the Lord” be the acknowledged, manifest, and all pervading law of his life?

II. THE PRACTICAL RESULTS OF IT. “Glorify God therefore in your body.” This is something more than a mere passive, negative abstinence from evil. It is the consecration of the powers of our nature to all holy service, the active expression of the inner Divine life in all possible forms of well doing. It implies:

1. Conscious spiritual freedom. Christ delivers us from all kinds of degrading moral bondage when he thus redeems us and makes us his own forever. And “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” Spiritual freedom lies in willing personal subjection to him who is our rightful Lord. Self hood in all its forms and phases is the slavery, the paralysis, and death of the soul. Live in and for yourself, as if you were “your own,” and you have a very hard and oppressive taskmaster. Live unto the Lord, and you are most truly and joyously free.

2. The mastery of the spiritual over the fleshly part of us. The apostle has in view a special and most important aspect of the sanctity of the body. But we may take this word “body” as symbolizing the whole form and fashion and habit of the outward life. From the inner shrine of a spirit that has thus become the Lord’s, the glory will stream forth through all channels of self revelation. The very outskirts of our being, the very lowest part of our nature, will be sure to be lighted up, spiritualized, beautified by it. We are apt to think of the body as being necessarily the encumbrance and the foe of the spirit. This is not a Christian way of thinking. Rather let us regard it as an instrument that God has wisely constructed, “fearfully and wonderfully made,” and through which the holy energy of the spirit may serve his purposes and do him honour.W.

HOMILIES BY D. FRASER

1Co 6:11

Great sinners saved.

It has been alleged that the early Christians were gathered from the mere rabble and offscourings of the ancient world. Gibbon remarks, with his usual sneer, that “the missionaries of the gospel, after the example of their Divine Master, disdained not the society of men, and especially of women, oppressed by the consciousness and very often by the effects of their vices.” But it is not the fact, and it is not fair to insinuate, that the Church was formed from the mire of society. The gospel then, as now, influenced in some measure all ranks of society, all aiders of mind, and all grades of moral culture. Yet it is not to be concealed, and indeed it is to the credit of the gospel, that it brought newness of heart and life to some of the most profligate inhabitants of the ancient cities where it was preached. Not only in Judaea had it saved the very harlots; but in the licentious cities of the heathen, as Ephesus, Corinth, and Rome, it had rescued persons who were steeped in sensual vice. “Such were some of you,” writes the apostle to the members of” the Church of God at Corinth.” He had put down a terrible catalogue of sinners, who were not to inherit the kingdom of God. “Such were some of you; but you are so no longer: I recognize the mighty change.”

I. THE THREEFOLD CHANGE.

1. “Ye were washed.” “Ye washed yourselves.” A definite fact, as much so as the washing of Naaman in the river which took away his leprosy. Such is the way of Divine grace. The thought of man’s heart is that his sins may be rubbed out, or the traces worn out by lapse of time, or that by repentance and amendment of life they are atoned for. But nothing removes sin except washing. “The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all sin.”

2. “Ye were sanctified.” After the washing comes the anointing with holy oil. They who are cleansed are consecrated and set apart for Divine use. This is sanctification of the Spirit, which is imparted freely and at once to those who receive the gospel, though it is only gradually realized in experience and practice.

3. “Ye were justified.” Being defiled, ye were cleansed; being profane, ye were hallowed; and being unrighteous, ye were Justified. You are no longer under condemnation, but being regarded as “in Christ,” you are reckoned righteous in him. And this too is an accomplished fact in God’s grace. Know it well, for it is the charter of your acceptance, and the warrant of your peace.

II. THE PHILOSOPHY OF THIS CHANGE.

1. “In the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ.” Warnings of the consequences of vice, expositions of the beauty and advantage of virtue, can do little in such cases as are indicated here. It was not for want of sages to sound the praise and discuss the nature of virtue that the Greeks of Corinth had been so vicious. But no change was wrought upon them till the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ was published. Here was not a sage turning fine sentences, but a Saviour who could save men from themselves, and make them sons of God. In this Name it was, and to this day it is, that the soiled are washed, the unholy sanctified, the guilty justified.

2. “And by the Spirit of our God.” For it is that Spirit who convinces men of their sins, and who brings and unites them to the Saviour, in whom they are made new creatures. What condescension in that pure and Holy Spirit, to come near to such vile persons as the previous verse describes, and transform such sinners into saints!

III. THE LESSONS SUGGESTED.

1. That no sinner’s case is too desperate for the gospel remedy. Christianity can do more than develop germs of goodness where they exist. It has a new creating energy, and can inspire good motives and feelings where there seemed to be nothing but evil, evil continually. There is no case so sunk and lost as to baffle the power of Christ’s Name and the Holy Spirit’s quickening grace. We do not make light of moral gradations. It is a thing to be thankful for, if one has been preserved from gross sin. It is a thing to be bitterly lamented, if one has committed, even in thought, such sins as the apostle enumerates. But the most moral man has something on his heart to be ashamed of before God. And the immoral have grievous confessions to make. Let the shame and grief be felt; they are wholesome for the soul. But let no one despond or despair. The Divine grace which brings salvation is no perquisite of the higher and middle classes of sinners. It goes down through all degrees to the lowest depth of human sin and misery. The Name of the Lord Jesus Christ is a shield for the most unclean. The Spirit of our God can renew those who are dead in trespasses and sins.

2. That a Christian is to be known by what he is, not what he once was. Many seem to have no real conception of the transforming power which the Holy Spirit exerts on those who truly receive the gospel; and, accordingly, when one who was known to be a sinner begins to confess the Saviour’s Name, many virtuous persons shake their heads suspiciously, and sometimes wag their heads reproachfully, and relate all that they have heard, however vaguely, of such a person’s faults, as though they must cleave to him forever. Thus the old sins are kept hanging as a perpetual reproach over the head of the new recruit to the Christian army, just as though there were no washing possible, no sanctification, no justification. But how unreasonable is this! Is it not from the ranks of sinners that the ranks of the saints have always been filled up? Is there not a significant “but” in our text, indicating the transition from the old state to the new? And is it not true in life, as well as in Scripture? You tell me what this person was: I bid you see what this person is, and glorify God, whose grace works such blessed changes among the children of men. Make not the conversion of a sinner more difficult than it need be, by your suspicions. Reserve your strictest judgments for yourself.F.

HOMILIES BY R. TUCK

1Co 6:1-8

The relations of Christians to public law.

The apostle here deals with a fresh mistake made by the Corinthian Christians. In view of the extensive commercial interests of Corinth, we can well understand that disputes constantly arose which could only be settled by the common law courts. St. Paul does not intend us to infer that these law courts were unjustly conducted, or that, in ordinary matters and under ordinary circumstances, recourse may not be had to them. He only points out that the new feeling and sentiment which they should have and cherish, as Christian disciples, would be opposed to the litigious spirit, and fill them with an anxiety to set things right with their brethren rather than to struggle for the securing of their own rights. He glances, further, at the misconception which the surrounding heathen would form of such indications of quarrelling among the Christians. “We can well understand how detrimental to the best interests of Christianity it would be for the Christian communion, founded as it was on principles of unity and love, to be perpetually, through the hasty temper and weakness of individual members, held up to the scorn of the heathen, as a scene of intestine strife.” The principle laid down by the apostle led in later times to the appointment of courts of arbitration. Of these we have historical evidence in the middle of the second century. It has been pointed out that the proper illustration of St. Paul’s principle should be sought, not in a Christian country, but in a heathen country where Christians may Happen to reside. On his principle, as it may now be applicable to us, we propose to dwell.

I. ST. PAUL THROWS NO SLIGHT ON PUBLIC LAW. HOW are we to regard law? Is it the arbitrary command of a ruler? Or is it a national code created by the gifts of some legal genius, some Lycurgus or Justinian? Is it not rather a nation discovering the importance of the protection of its persons and. property, mutually agreeing to the adoption of rules for the securing of such protection, and putting the applications of such rules into the hands of certain individuals, called kings, judges, or magistrates? So for a people to disobey the laws is more truly rebellion against themselves, against their best interests, than against their rulers; and every individual in a nation is bound both to honour and to keep the law. St. Paul would fully recognize this, and intend no disrespect by what he says concerning it. We should observe that he carefully distinguishes the sphere of law to which he refers. Explain the difference between the “criminal” and “equity” courts at our assizes. St. Paul deals with matters of dispute, with equity questions, not with crime. And he very properly urges that such disputes usually rest on “strong feeling,” “misunderstanding,” etc., and consequently can be best dealt with from within the Christian brotherhood, which can recognize “feeling,” and help its members to overcome “faults.” Elsewhere he urges full obedience to the “powers that be.” But he pleads that the Christians only confessed their failure from the Christian spirit when they could not give way one to the other, but were compelled to get outsiders and heathen to tell them what was just and right. So still we may say there are only a few things in respect of which Christians are justified in going to law, and they concern wholly the interpretations of national law in relation to rights of property. For these it is sometimes necessary to get an authoritative decision. Happily, the principle of arbitration is spreading in trade disputes and in national differences. Christians will hail the day when arbitration, the handmaid of peace, gains her rule in every land, and men and nations “learn war no more.”

II. ST. PAUL ASSUMES THE AUTONOMY (SELF RULE) OF CHRIST‘S CHURCH. He would have them fully understand that, as a Church, they were quite competent to manage their own affairsall their affairs, and certainly all internal disputes. Show on what frequently declared and comprehensive principles the apostle’s argument is based.

1. The Church of Christ is a society.

2. It is a separated society, standing free from the world; in it, but not of it.

3. It is a complete society; the Head and the members together make up a “whole body.”

4. It is a society resting on a common basis, the “life in Christ,” not on a common opinion, nor on a common order, but on a common life, which makes it as one family.

5. It is a society under a living Head. It endures as “seeing him who is invisible;” and it is a spiritual realization of the “theocracy,” or direct practical ruling of the Divine Lord.

6. It is a society with judicial functions. Show that the Church has disciplinary powers which it may bring to bear on the moral offender (as at Corinth); and consultative powers which it may employ to settle family, trade, or society disputes.

7. It is a society with a character, one of whose leading features is “mutual forbearance”a self denying regard rather for the welfare of others than for our own. In such a society it would be manifestly inappropriate for any member who had a contention with a fellow member to “go to law before the unjust.” The high Christian feeling finds expression in St. Paul’s intense language, “Why do ye not rather take wrong, why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?”R.T.

1Co 6:2, 1Co 6:3

The judgment of the saints.

The Christian disciples are called “saints,” not because they are actually holy, but because they are

(1) consecrated to God;

(2) separated for the world;

(3) under moral obligation to seek for and attain personal holiness.

St. Paul here speaks of them as “saints,” to remind them that they hold their Christian standing by virtue of their character, that their “goodness” was to be their power. The word “judge” should be treated as the equivalent of “govern;” it does not, as used by St. Paul here, merely mean “give legal decisions.” Illustrate by the work of the judges in ancient Israel; they were virtually rulers of the country.

I. THE SAINTS‘ JUDGMENT OF THE WORLD. F. W. Robertson says, “Successively have force, hereditary right, talent, wealth, been the aristocracies of the earth. But then, in that kingdom to come, goodness shall be the only condition of supremacy.” For the idea of our sharing with Christ in the judgment, at his second coming, see Dan 7:22; Mat 19:28; Luk 22:30. It is better, however, to impress the point that the actual presence of good men in the world, in society, is a constant testing and showing up of the evil of the world.

II. THE SAINTS‘ JUDGMENT OF ANGELS. This must refer to evil angels. We may, however, treat it as an intense expression of the apostle’s, uttered under the deep impress of all that might be involved in the spiritual union of Christ and his people. Christ rules the angels, and so do we, since we are in him. “It is better to regard the passage as a climax arising out of the apostle’s intense realization of the unity of Christ and his Church triumphanta point which seems ever present to the mind of St. Paul when he speaks of the dignity of Christianity. In this sense, redeemed humanity will be superior to, and judges of, the spiritual world.”

III. THE SAINTS‘ JUDGMENT OF EVERYDAY MATTERS. The argument of the apostle is that, if they recognize their high standing and privilege, and the power and responsibility of judging such external things as the “world” and the “angels,” they ought also, and much more anxiously, to recognize their power to rule and judge all small matters arising within the Christian fellowship. What must be their condition if they could not find among themselves an efficient arbitrator? Illustrate by our Lord’s advice to his disciples in relation to their disputes.

(1) The two disputants were to confer together;

(2) if that failed to settle the difficulty, then two or three witnesses might be brought into the conference; if that also failed, then

(3) the matter was to be told to the Church, and its decision sought. The apostle does but find adaptation for the comprehensive principle which was laid down by Christ, and can be equally adapted by us in the perplexities and misunderstandings of Church and social life.R.T.

1Co 6:9

Inheriting the kingdom.

“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God?” The phrases “kingdom of heaven,” “kingdom of God,” are familiar enough to the New Testament reader, as synonyms for the new, the Christian dispensation. The apostles seem to use the term for a kingdom which, they conceive, will be set up at Christ’s second coming and the “restitution of all things.” There is an important sense in which we are to recognize that the “kingdom” is actually now established; but it need not interfere with our cherishing the high hope of a day when that kingdom shall be fully perfected, and in some glorious way declared to be the kingdom of the world become the kingdom of God. The figure contained in he word “inherit” is taken from Israel’s long journey through the deserts to the promised land, which was a country to be “inherited.” Under careful limitations, the figure may be carried over into Christianity, and the Christian may be spoken of as “seeking a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” We are “heirs of salvation,” which is “ready to be revealed in the last time.” John Bunyan makes his pilgrim talk persuasively to Pliable, and say, “There is an endless kingdom to be inhabited, and everlasting life to be given us, that we may inhabit that kingdom forever,” etc. For gracious moral purposes, for the furtherance of his sanctifying work, God would have us think of the privileges of salvation as both realized now and to be realized more fully by and by. This St. Peter states with the utmost plainness in his Epistle (1Pe 1:3-6). A present keeping and a present joy are directly associated with the “lively hope” of an “inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and fading not away.” Consider, then

I. THE POWER OF A PROMISED FUTURE. That is, its bearing on the Christian

(1) spirit,

(2) character,

(3) opinions,

(4) conduct.

Hope is one of man’s most important moral forces; strong according to the reasonable grounds upon which it rests. A man is never lost until he has lost hope. A man can rise up out of the uttermost disability and distress so long as he can imagine a brighter future, and fix his hope on it. Explain the relation in which “faith” stands to “hope,” so that it may give us a sense of the present possession of that we hope for. “Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Also show the influence of hope as:

1. Producing a restful feeling, a contentment with present circumstances. Illustrate from St. Paul, who could say, “I have learned in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content,” but only because he could also say, “There is laid up for me a crown of righteousness.”

2. An inspiration to patient and earnest endeavour. Thousands are kept at work by the hope of success. The value and strength of the inspiration depend greatly on the character of the hope. How great, then, must be the inspiration of the Christian hope! and how practically purifying, seeing it is the hope of perfect and everlasting righteousness! “We shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.”

II. THE INFLUENCE OF A SENSE OF RIGHT TO THE PROMISED FUTURE. That right we have; but it is not of merit or of mere birth, it is wholly by grace, and belongs to our new birth through the Spirit. Still, we have a distinct sense of right; and that we ought to keep and to cherish, recognizing that varying moods of feeling, or conditions of frame, can in no way affect our standing and our rights. “If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself;” “Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.” Illustrate by the influence of the sense of right and possession which the husband and wife have in each other. Also by the spirit of noblesse oblige, which gives tone and character to all the sayings and doings of the young heir. Also by the claim to nobility which the Roman felt was laid on him by his Roman rights, in whatever country he might reside. If we have a right of heritage in God’s everlasting and holy kingdom, we are under a constant impulsion to “walk worthy of our vocation.”R.T.

1Co 6:11

Recalling grace received.

We should be always prepared to make direct personal applications of Holy Scripture; and the skill of applying general principles to particular cases is one of the proper results of Christian culture and experience. This, however, often involves accommodation and modification. Principles which Scripture illustrates in particular instances need adaptation when referred to new and different cases; and we should clearly apprehend that Scripture does not propose to provide mere examples for a bare imitation, but rather principles which are so truly human that they may be applied to the varying conditions and circumstances of every age and clime, so that the sacred Word has really been written “for our sakes, on whom the ends of the world are come.” At first sight, the passage now before us does not seem suited to us. The list of sins here given is not ours; it is essentially pagan. We do not even know what some of these words stand for; and to say to us, “Such were some of you,” rouses a feeling of indignation and opposition. Yet if we can reach beyond the mere terms to the spirit and principle of the apostle’s appeal, we shall find it bears its message also to us. St. Paul is really dealing with what is consistent for a Christian.; and he puts it in this way, “What is in true harmony with one who is washed, sanctified, and justified?” We can settle every difficult question by askingIs the thing befitting a sanctified man? And to realize our Christian standing becomes the best resistance of evil.

I. RECALL YOUR SELF SEEKING PAST. “Such were some of you.” Apply to the Corinthians. Indicate something of the luxury and vice of Corinthian society. For them it was a marvellous change to become pure and sober minded Christians. We think that we have no such review; most of us have no experience of violent and open forms of ungodliness. But if we look a little deeper, may we not see that those Corinthian sins were but the forms for that age of the universal sin and self seeking of mankind? They all mean just thisman, asserting his independence of God, throwing off all bondages of authority, and seeking his own will and pleasure. Then we can see that the same root of evil has been in our past; and we must not let the mere refinement of modern terms for sin blind us to the fact that, in us, is the same heart evil (see Eph 2:1-3, Eph 2:10-12). In the light of this fact of depravity review your past, see the stain of self seeking, and then you will feel that St. Paul may say even to you, “And such were some of you.”

II. ESTIMATE YOUR CHRISTIAN STANDING. “Ye are washed,” etc. We need not fear to do this; since it is a standing of grace, our so doing need not nourish any pride or self reliance. Our “standing” is set under three figures.

1. Washed; or perhaps the translation should be, “Ye have got yourselves washed.” The figure for putting away old sins and sinful habits.

2. Sanctified. The figure for having consecrated yourselves; being separated unto holy uses; and we are sealed in such consecration, by the gift and abiding presence of the Holy Ghost.

3. Justified. The figure for our being, as washed and consecrated, received into gracious relations of acceptance with God. The order of the terms seems to be singular, but, when rightly understood, it is seen to be correct:

(1) put away sin;

(2) devote yourself to God;

(3) receive the sense of acceptance.

And this is our present Christian standing; we are clean, consecrated, and accepted. And all is through grace.

III. RENEW YOUR SENSE OF RESPONSIBILITY. For to such a “standing” something is becoming. The apostle wants us so to feel this that we should not require any telling. We are under obligation to live such a life as would worthily express our thankfulness for grace received; such a life as would manifestly harmonize with our standing. We are called with a holy calling. But we have to find out what precisely is “holy” and “good” in our times. Everything that is pure, true, self denying, good, and kind we may be sure is becoming to our Christian standing. Nay, we may come in from all mere general terms, and we may say, “A life for Christ, and a life like Christ’s,these are the ‘becoming’ for all those who have received his salvation.” “What manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness?”R.T.

1Co 6:11

What we were and what we are.

The early Churches were gathered out from corrupt heathenism, and this was sadly sensual and immoral. This occasioned difficulty in dealing with the Churches. The question had to be metIs moral defilement absolutely incompatible with the Christian profession? Show how this question is answered now, in our day, and by the Apostle Paul in his day. Now the answer is sadly uncertain, especially if moral delinquency happens to be joined with riches. By St. Paul it is answered with a noble firmness and fidelity. Take two topics for consideration.

I. OUT OF THE SELF LIFE. Show that the characteristic of a Christian is his deliverance from the slavery of the self rule. Then all yieldings to self and passion must, for him, be wrong.

II. INTO THE CHRIST RULED LIFE. This process is conceived under three forms and by two agents.

(1) Washing;

(2) sanctifying;

(3) justifying.

The two agents are

(1) the Lord Jesus;

(2) the Spirit of our God.

Then it follows that an entire yielding to the pure impulses and guidances of God’s indwelling Spirit in all the life and all the relationships and all the conduct is forevery Christian the right and the necessary thing.R.T.

1Co 6:12

The lawful and the expedient.

“All things are lawful for me; but not all things are expedient.” This is the statement of a general principle, which may be thus expressed: when a man is renewed in Christ Jesus, he becomes a law unto himself, his regenerate conscience sufficiently attests what is lawful and what is expedient. The apostle is applying the principle to two subjects of discussion which were closely connected with the heathen worship:

(1) whether it was lawful for Christians to eat food which had been offered in sacrifice to idols;

(2) whether it was permissible to overlook, in Christians, indulgence in the sin of fornication. It seems that, because St. Paul affirmed the right of Christian liberty in relation to the heathen food, his enemies declared that he also held loose notions concerning Christian immoralities. St. Paul, therefore, makes it quite clear that the liberty which he claims is a reasonable liberty, duly toned and tempered by a quickened and sensitive consciousness of what is becoming and what is right. “There is such a thing as becoming the very slave of liberty itself. If we sacrifice the power of choice which is implied in the thought of liberty, we cease to be free; we are brought under the power of that which should be in our power.” “Starting from the doctrine of Christian liberty taught by Christ (Joh 8:32, Joh 8:36), and proclaimed with one mouth by his apostles (Rom 8:2; Jas 2:12; 1Pe 2:16), they declared that the Christian was bound to a ‘service’ which was ‘perfect freedom.’ St. Paul accepts the principle, but with limitations. No actions were in themselves unlawful, he was ready to admit, provided

(1) that they were in accordance with God’s design in creation;

(2) that they were calculated to promote the general welfare of mankind; and

(3) that we were masters of our actions, not they of us.” We here consider the lawful and the expedient, and we observe that

I. EVERY MAN MUST RECOGNIZE THIS DISTINCTION. In all the practical relations of life it comes up to view continually; in the home, in the business, and in society, a man has constantly to say, “I may, but I will not. I have an absolute right to do it, yet for others’ sakes I must not do it.” Observe that the expedient is not here the self serving or the time serving. A man’s limitations are not, first of all, his own personal interests, but

(1) the sense of the fitness of things; and

(2) the well being of others.

Illustrate the distinction as applied to such questions as the use of strong drinks; modes of keeping sabbath; limits of permissible amusements, etc.

II. THE DISTINCTION NO MAN FINDS SO SEARCHING AS DOES THE CHRISTIAN, By reason of

(1) his sensitiveness to what is in harmony with the Christian profession; and

(2) his charitable consideration of even the weaknesses of others. He is most jealous of himself, lest he should cast a stumbling block in his brother’s way. The subject can be efficiently illustrated from the details of modern Christian life. And the following passages sufficiently suggest the practical application of the subject:”Ye are called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion unto the flesh, but by love serve one another;” “Be not conformed to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind.” Our Lord Jesus could demand absolute liberty; all things were lawful to him, because, his will being wholly right, his choices and preferences and decisions were fully according to God’s will. A man must be right before we can give him liberty.R.T.

1Co 6:19

The temple body and its sanctity.

The idea of the old temple was not that of the modern church, which is a building in which men may gather to worship God. The old temple was a shrine for Deity to dwell in; and this Divine presence in the central shrine was conceived as hallowing the entire temple buildings, right through to the outer courts and gates. Nothing might enter the precincts that defiled or worked abomination. Illustrate from Solomon’s temple, and the extreme jealousy with which the Jews regarded the sacred place. Two points may be dwelt on as working out the figure of the text.

I. THE DEITY IN THE SHRINE SANCTIFIED ALL THE COURTS MAKING UP THE TEMPLE BUILDINGS.

II. THE DEITY IN THE SHRINE SANCTIFIED THE VERY CITY AND LAND. So, if “Christ dwells in our hearts by faith,” if our souls know his Divine presence,then all the forces and powers of our body are consecrated, and ought to be hallowed. Our whole life, in its narrower and in its wider circles of relationship, must be thought of as sanctified, treated as pure, made and kept ever “clean,” ever “holy.”R.T.

1Co 6:19

The Christian has no personal rights.

This assertion may be made both concerning himself and concerning the things which he is said to possess. Three points claim consideration.

I. THE CHRISTIAN IS NOT HIS OWN. Before conversion he may have so thought of himself. The essence of conversion is a voluntary surrender of will and life to Christ.

II. HE IS A BOUGHT ONE. And he dwells with holy satisfaction on the “precious blood” which was as it were his purchase money (1Pe 1:18, 1Pe 1:19).

III. HE IS A BOND SLAVE TO CHRIST. Held indeed by purchase rights, but quite as truly held by the entire and willing surrender of a thankful love. Therefore in all the Christian is, in all the Christian has, and in all the Christian can be, he is under solemn obligation to glorify God, who is his Lord. And the Lord whom he serves, and who holds sole right in him and his, he is permitted to apprehend and recognize as his gracious Master, the glorified “Man Christ Jesus,” whose service is perfect freedom and holiest joy.R.T.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

1Co 6:1. Before the unjust, and not before the saints The heathen judges, as St. Paul here in effect declares, were generally unjust; Christians at that time were generally good, righteous, and holy men: there might be exceptions on each side; but the Apostle’s argument turns on what might commonly be supposed: the saints who are to judge angels, and not merely professing Christians. See Locke, Doddridge, and Whitby.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

1Co 6:1 . A new section, not connected with what has gone before. Paul starts at once with a question of lively surprise: Dare [872] any one , etc., and so plunges in medium rem . [873] The connections of thought, which some have traced out, are arbitrary inventions. This applies not only to Baur’s view (in the theol. Jahrb. 1852, p. 10 f.), that it was the damage done to the Christian cause in public opinion , both by the immorality discussed in chap. 5 and by the lawsuits carried on before the heathen, that led the apostle thus to pass from the one subject to the other, but also to the connection which Hofmann seeks to establish between this passage and the censure pronounced upon the insufficient judicial action taken by the church with its members after the occurrence of the case already adverted to. The judicial proceedings now referred to are plainly of quite another kind, not in the way of discipline, but of private lawsuits; and, moreover, as to former judicial action of the church, not merely was it insufficient , but nothing of the sort had taken place at all with respect to the . Paul does not employ so much as a , or an , or any other form of connection, but goes on with epistolary freedom, leaping, as it were, from one point of censure to another.

] any one whate1Co 6: The quite general treatment of the subject which follows shows that no specific individual (Semler) is meant, although it must be left undetermined whether some specially striking case, possibly that of a rich and powerful man (Ewald), may not have given occasion for the apostle’s sending these admonitions.

] lawsuit, matter of dispute . Comp Xen. Mem. ii. 9. 1; Demosth. 1120. 26; Josephus, Antt. xiv. 10. 7.

] go to law, litigare ; see on Rom 3:4 ; Wetstein, a [875] Mat 5:40 .

] before (Winer, p. 351 [E. T. 469]) the unrighteous ; a specially significant designation of the heathen (see on Gal 2:5 ), as contrasted with the Christians, who are (see on 1Co 1:2 ). Chrysostom puts it well: (as in 1Co 6:6 , where the opposite of was required), , , . There is indeed a contradictio in adjecto in the . ! For the Rabbinical prohibitions of going to law before the heathen, see Eisenmenger, Entdeckt. Judenth . II. p. 472 ff. ( e.g. Tanchuma , f. 92. 2 : “Statutum est, ad quod omnes Israelitae obligantur, eum, qui litem cum alio habet, non debere eam tractare coram gentibus”). The tribunal intended by Paul is not merely that of arbitration , which had passed over from Judaism (see Michaelis, Einl. II. p. 1221 f.; comp Lightfoot, Hor. on 1Co 6:4 ; Vitringa, de Synag. p. 816 ff.) to Christianity, but his meaning is: instead of carrying on lawsuits against each other before the heathen, they were to adjust their disputes before Christians, which could of course be done only in the way of arbitration [877] (comp 1Co 6:5 ); according to this, therefore, different forms of the are present to the apostle’s mind in speaking of the judgment . . and . . ; in the former case, that by legal process ; in the latter, that by arbitration through means of .

Theodoret remarks justly (on 1Co 6:6 ), that the prohibition of the is not at variance with Rom 13:1 ff.: , . .

[872] Bengel says aptly: “ grandi verbo notatur laesa majestas Christianorum.” Schrader imports an ironical meaning into the word, which is irrelevant. The right interpretation is given by Chrysostom: . See as to , sustinere, non erubescere , Stallbaum, ad Plat. Phil. p. 13 D; Jacobs, ad Athen. addit. p. 309. Comp. the proverbial phrase .

[873] It is out of the harmony with the fervid tone of the whole passage, in which question is heaped on question, to understand ver. 1 as affirmative (against Lachmann). Least of all can we agree with Hofmann in taking the words down to affirmatively, and then regarding . . . as a query which strikes in there: for . , . . ., is plainly just the ordinary antithesis of assertion and negation joined together by . To make Hofmann’s rendering logically tenable, it would be needful that Paul should, instead of . , have written: , and why not before the saints?

[875] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.

[877] Hence this passage does not at all run counter to the injunction to obey magistrates. Comp. Weiss, bibl. Theol. p. 417.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

1Co 6:1-11 . The readers are not to go to law before the heathen (1Co 6:1-6 ); and generally, they are, instead of contending with one another, rather to suffer wrong than to do it, bearing in mind that the unrighteous shall not become partakers in the Messianic kingdom (1Co 6:7-10 ), and that they, as Christians, have become pure, holy, and righteous (1Co 6:11 ).

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

XI.A LACK OF PROPER CHURCH SPIRIT IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THE CIVIL RELATIONS OF THE CHURCH-MEMBERS AMONG THEMSELVES. LITIGATION BEFORE HEATHEN TRIBUNALS

1Co 6:1-11

1Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to the law before the unjust, 2and not before the saints? Do [Or1 do] ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more [to say nothing of] things that pertain to this life? 4If then ye have judgments of things 5pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak2 to your shame. Isaiah 3 it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one4 that shall be able to judge between his brethren? 6But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. 7Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, [a loss to you5] because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not 8rather take wrong? Why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, 9[On the contrary, ] ye do wrong, and defraud, and that6 your brethren. [Or ] Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God?7 Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind. 10Nor thieves, nor covetous,8 nor [not, 9] drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall10 inherit the kingdom of God. 11And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus,11 and by the Spirit of our God.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

[The connection of this paragraph with the preceding, seems to be, As we have nothing to do with judging the heathen, so we ought not to go to law before them, or suffer them to judge us. This question was not new. It was held unlawful among the Jews for any Jew to bring a lawsuit against his countrymen before a Gentile judge, on the ground that in Exo 21:1, it is commanded: These are the judgments which thou shalt set beforenot the Gentiles, but themthe Jews. If any one brings the judgments of Israel before the Gentiles, he profanes the name of God, and honors the name of an idol. They who so do give occasion to the strangers to say, See how harmonious they are who worship one God. This right of settling their own disputes, was conceded to them by the Romans; and hence the speech of Gallio to the Jews who attacked St. Paul. In the first beginning of Christianity, the same rule would be naturally held to apply. The existence of separate courts for the disputes of Christians among themselves, is implied [?] in this passage. The Apostolic Constitutions (II: 4, 5, 46, 47) and the Clementines, in language evidently founded upon this text, imply the existence of such courts at the time when those works were compiled, i. e. , apparently about A. D. 150. When one of the parties was a heathen, then it was thought lawful to prosecute before a heathen tribunal.

Under these circumstances, it was natural that the same controversy, which in a mixed society of Jewish and Gentile Christians ran through be many other departments of human life, should se felt here also; and that the Gentile Christians should still wish to carry on their litigations in the same courts to which they had been previously accustomed, and to indulge the same litigious spirit which had characterized the Greek nation from the time of Aristophanes downward. But in whatever way this tendency originated, the Apostle [here] treats it altogether irrespectively of any Jewish or Gentile custom, and condemns it solely on the ground of the low views which it implied of the greatness of a Christians privileges, and the closeness of the bond of Christian brotherhood. Stanley.]

1Co 6:1. Here also, as in chap, 5, there is indicated a lack of true Christian spirit in the failure to maintain the honor of the Church. In the former case it arose from a want of moral earnestness, here from an earthly temper, and from stubbornness of opinion. The tone of address is sharp.Dare any of you.This is not ironical, as Schrader imagines; but it is the direct outburst of indignation at the unworthy conduct, manifested [and also at the risk run], The injured majesty of Christians, says Bengel, is here noted by a grand word. , sustinere, to have the heart to do that from which a just sense of the Christian dignity should have restrained them. Here the culpable party must be regarded, as consisting mainly of Gentile converts, since it was already a custom among the Jews to choose their own umpireshaving a matter. is a phrase denoting civil suits, especially in matters of money and possessions.against anotherof course, a fellow church-membergo to law,, to separate oneself, to part from, then to contend, to strive, also to debate, and that before a tribunal. This love of litigationa remnant of the old leaven which abounded among the traffickers of Corinthmust have derived abundant nourishment from the divisions existing in the Church.Besser.before, as in Act 23:30the unjust. These are the heathen. So in Mat 26:45, they are called , sinners; while the Israelites, on the contrary, are termed , just; Wis 18:20; Wis 16:17; Wis 11:15. The designation unjust is employed to bring out more prominently the absurdity [and the peril] of seeking for justice in such a quarter. It exhibits those to whom it is applied as devoid of that true righteousness which is found alone in Gods kingdom, as withholding from God His due, and therefore as unqualified to administer justice among His people. On (= 1Co 5:12) comp. 1Co 1:2.[Paul does not here condemn those who from necessity have a cause before unbelieving judges, as when a person is summoned to court; but those who of their own accord bring their brethren into this situation, and harass them, as it were, through means of unbelievers, while it is in their power to employ another remedy. Calvin. And besides the scandal of such a proceeding, as exposing their internal differences to the eyes of the heathen, there were certain formularies to be gone through in the heathen Law Courts, such as adjuration by heathen Deities, which would involve them in idolatrous practices. Words.]

1Co 6:2. He here goes on to show still further what an entire disregard of the true dignity of the Christian state was evinced in their conduct.Or do ye not know.The or presents an alternative, suggesting some other cause for their conduct, viz., that of ignorance; and the interrogative form used intimates that it was a culpable ignorance of an indubitable and plain truth. [ This question, says Words., occurs no less than ten times in this Epistle, and only twice in all the rest. It was a very fit mode of remonstrance with those who vaunted themselves most on their knowledge.]that the saints shall judge the world?This is the only clear, direct enunciation we have of the truth here expressed, though it is in perfect harmony with conclusions elsewhere furnished. Burger. The words imply more than an indirect participation in the judgment of the world, such as is brought to view in Mat 12:41, where it is said: The men of Nineveh shall rise up in judgment against this generation, etc., viz., that in contrast with the conduct, or faith exhibited by them, the guilt of the world will be set forth in clearer light, [so Chrys. and most of the Greek fathers, Erasmus, Words.]. Nor is it meant that the saints will simply unite in assenting to the sentence pronounced by Christ as assessors on his judgment seat [Barnes, et al.]; nor that they in some general way will be glorified with Him, [Schleus., Heyden., Barnes.]. Still less do they refer to any future judicial functions, which saints are to possess in this world as its princes and rulers, [Lightfoot, Whitby]; nor to any peculiar ability to estimate the value of the worlds opinions and doings, [Mosh. Rosen.] (1Co 2:15, comp. 1Co 6:3). And least of all are they to be interpreters of the church as the perpetual judge of the world, in so far as it carries the light which ever separates the darkness of the world from itself. (Cath.). But they refer to that reigning with Christ which is elsewhere promised to the faithful, (Rom 8:17; 2Ti 2:12), and serve to define more exactly the import of the expression: glorified with Him. What was said especially of the Apostles, that they should sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Mat 19:28), is here extended, in general, to all the true followers of ChristHis royal people, in relation to that portion of the race which shall persist in its opposition to the Gospel, viz. , the world. In short, Paul here asserts the active participation by the saints in the judicial work of Christ, such as is ascribed to them in Dan 7:22 : Until the ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. [The same prediction reappears again in the Apocryphal Book, Wisdom III: 1 Corinthians 8 : They (the righteous) shall judge the nations, and have dominion over the people, and their Lord shall reign forever]; also Rev 2:26-27; Rev 20:4-6. That this is the element in their glory which the Apostle alludes to, the context clearly shows. [Such is the interpretation also of Calvin, Beza, Alf., Stanley, and others. And it is plainly the only tenable one. The others are either too far fetched, or imply a more general acquaintance with the New Testament, in its present form, than could have been possible for the Corinthians; and we cannot suppose that the Apostle would be likely to consider their ignorance of the matters suggested a fit ground for rebuke. But the prophecy of Daniel was in their hands; and the anticipations of the final triumph and glory of the righteous during the reign of the Messiah, were current among believers; and the ignoring or over-looking of these matters might well have been reproved. In fact the final and complete supremacy of Christs kingdom was already assured in the very character of its head, and the former could not be disavowed without offence done to the latter. As to the character of the functions which the saints were to fulfil, opinions will vary according to the views adopted in respect to the nature of the millennial glory, and of the relation which the church will sustain to the world at that time. But whatever these functions may be, the language which describes them plainly implies the exercise of an active supremacy in the affairs of the world. That which saints are expected to do then, must, in some way, be analogous to the duties which the Apostle urges upon the church-members to discharge for themselves in the present age. For this reason the view of Hodge and Barnes and others, who suppose a reference in the text to the future and final judgment (with a somewhat uncertain allusion to Dan 7:22, as though the event pointed to here were the same as the other), must be set aside. On that occasion the saints appear only as the retinue of the Judge, and are nowhere represented as taking an active part in the trial. The idea of Barnes that the saints are to judge the world by simply encompassing the throne, and assenting to Christs judgment, and occupying a post of honor As If they were associated with him in judgment, hardly suits the style of the Apostles reasoning]. The natural conclusion from all this, viz., that persons destined to so lofty an office, ought also to be deemed worthy of passing judgment on the trifling matters of this life, is put in the form of a question, expressive of astonishment. This, as is often the case, is introduced with an and. The question, however, is not thereby made dependent on the previous one, Know ye not? but it stands by itself.And if among you the world is to be judged.The judges are here conceived of as constituting one vast assembly, in the midst of which the adjudication proceeds. The is not precisely equivalent to: through you, as in Act 17:31; nor to: , by you, though the sense is about the same; nor: in you, i. e., by your example; but properly: in the midst of you, and so; before you: (coram). [Winer XL.VIII., etc. Hence, says Meyer, it is evident that the saints themselves are to be the judges sitting in judgment. And is employed in view of the following , since the Christians judging therein, are conceived of as one judicial concourse, for the sake of representing the idea more vividly]. The if, in , as the context shows, is not meant to exhibit the judgment as at all problematical, but only states it as indubitably presupposed in what follows. The notion of futurity here retires into the background.Are ye unworthy of the smallest judgments? is a word used to denote both places or courts of trials, and also the trials themselves which are there held. Here it means the latter, and the whole clause is to be taken in an active sense, q. d., are ye unworthy of holding trial in the smallest matters? [Many, like de Wette, Olsh., Hodge, Words., understand by , the matters in trial, as better suited to the context, 1Co 6:4; 1Co 6:7, but Meyer says that this is contrary to all usage]. The adjective here () refers to the matters brought to trial, and which are here designated as of the most trifling sort, having to do simply with the earthly mine and thine, Luk 16:10.

1Co 6:3. Know ye not that we shall judge angels? to say nothing of things that pertain to this life?[A still wider contrast.] But are there here two questions, or only one or are we to take the second clause as a corollary? Since in the first instance means, not at all (Passow . p. 230. [Rob. Gr. Lex.]), and then: yet much less, it would seem to indicate that there is also a second question here. The sense then would be: Our judicial power, as ye ought to know, extends even beyond, even unto celestial beings; should it not then be now first applied to terrestrial matters? i. e., how much more now ought it to be applied to these?In respect to the fact first alluded to, the judging of angels, we must at the outset put aside every explanation, which makes the phrase expressive of something inferior to the work of judging the world, instead of something which is an advance upon itwhether this be done by taking angels to mean church officers, or priests, or teachers distinguished for devilish cunning; and by supposing the judgment spoken of to be of a spiritual kind, as relating to the errors of these parties, or to be even a mere ability to judge, (Gal 1:8). The only point in doubt is, whether angels in general are referred to, or merely good angels, or merely bad ones. Besser says: both classes; to the damnation of the bad, but on the good, to pronounce a judgment of blessing, since they will be united with us under one Head in Christ. (Eph 1:10). Since, however, the idea that good angels are meant, finds support only in that relation which they sustain to believers, hinted at in Heb 1:14, and in the hypothetical expression found in Gal 1:8, and inasmuch as good angels are represented as furnishing a part of Christs retinue in judgment, and as acting the part of organs and witnesses of His judicial work, (Mat 13:39; Mat 16:27; Mat 24:31; Mat 25:31, 2Th 1:7, Rev 20:1 ff.), we are constrained to adopt the explanation, which supposes evil angels to be referred to, as the only correct one. [So Chrys. and most of the Greek fathers, and Calvin and Beza, and Bengel, Poole, and most of commentators. Whitby, with the same reference understands the judgment to denote that expulsion of the devils from their dominion over the world by the power of the Gospel, of which our Saviour speaks in Joh 12:31; Joh 16:11. On the contrary, Meyer, Alf. and Hodge, following the usage of the N. T., where the word , without any qualifying epithet always means good angels, interpret it so here. But they do not profess to explain how these are to be judged, or they give to the word, judge, a very comprehensive meaning, implying only superiority of a general sort. Billr., de Wette, Stanley, leave the matter undecided. See Pool and Whitby.] At the same time it must be said that the unqualified term angels indicates the superhuman nature of the beings contemplated, and puts them in contrast with the world; [and the argument will be not less conclusive in this way. Calvin;] while the position they are in, so analogous to that of the world, marks them as standing in an abnormal relation to God, and implies that the judgment spoken of will be one of condemnation, the same as in 1Co 6:2, and not one that merely decides upon honors and rewards.=things serviceable for this life (Luk 8:43), which belong to bodily sustenance, and are therefore of an earthly, temporal sort, as is every thing which forms a ground for suits respecting property, debts or inheritance. [The Latin translation of this word by scularia, is probably one of the first instances of the use of that word, in its modern sense of worldly as opposed to spiritual, instead of its ancient sense, belonging to a cycle of a hundred years; and from this has sprung the signification of the word secular in modern European languages. Stanley].

1Co 6:4. Secular trials indeed then would ye have.[ is repeated with emphasis, and so stands first, and] is to be construed as in 1Co 6:2, not as equivalent to , matters to be judged, for this rendering is void of support. might denote in this connection: to have on hand; or, to have a just comprehension of; consequently: to be in a condition to manage (as in the phrases, , , , etc.), and this would fit well with what precedes. The , introducing a clause correlative to the one following, might remain untranslated, and be rendered by, then, accordingly, or by some word of transition, which would indicate that the point mentioned has been established, and that the clause where it occurs also stands in inward connection with some previous expression. Properly: Have ye then indeed such trials? but ye by no means proceed in a manner suitable to this fact! This thought would then be expressed by a protasis and apodosis, of which the latter is to be regarded as a question of astonishment at such procedure. An interrogation similar to this we have in Joh 10:36 (comp. Joh 6:35), how happens it that ye do this? But such an explanation would necessitate our taking as equivalent to , which could only be justified on the score of the laxity of the later Greek in this respect, and provided another interpretation were inadmissible. But we may interpret the , of the actual existence of such trials among them; in which case would mean, if, in case that, and we should interpret the clause thus: if now it should happen that trials, involving secular matters, are held among you,those despised in the church these do ye set up?i. e. as judges. By the despised, he means the unjust or the unbelievers, before spoken of, who, as such, pass for nothing in the Church, and enjoy no confidence or authority there. [This translation, Hodge says, is generally preferred as best in keeping with the context, and Wordsworth adopts it also. See, however, the note below]. But if any do not choose to construe it as a question of astonishment, it may be taken as a simple affirmation, stating once more what was actually occurring among them. [So in the main, Luther, Calvin, Rckert, Olsh., de Wette, Neander, and otters]. The would then be an ecbatic particle. Yet the form of the question would in any case, be the more emphatic. The use of is also a remarkable way of expressing an appeal to heathen judges on the part of Christians, for it implies that such judges were formally set up in office by the Christians themselves, when they could have had no hand in their appointment, and only seemed to do so by appealing to them for decision in cases over which they ought to have no adjudication., these, an emphatic repetition of the persons alluded to [involving also contempt]. Others, objecting partly to the use of in relation to heathen authorities, who are supposed to be already existing, and partly to the application of to the heathen as unsuitable [and inconsistent with the respect which Paul inculcates toward heathen magistrates], understand the latter to denote church members, and construe the whole in the Imp. as an injunction [of rather an ironical sort]: If you must have trials, those least esteemed in the Church, these set up rather as judges. But in such a case the text ought to read: , and the word rather, would be an arbitrary insertion. This insertion would, however, be necessary, if we understood the Apostle to mean such persons as might be suitable for the office in question, but who, for some reason, were of little repute. But, however this may be, still our first interpretation is favored by what follows.12

1Co 6:5-6.To your shame I speak.Comp. on 1Co 4:14. The expression applies, as in 1Co 15:34, to what precedes; and what follows, in part, explains more fully how far that spoken of in 1Co 6:4 is disgraceful to them, and, in part, repeats emphatically the case as it stood.So is there not among you not even one wise man.The is either climacteric, meaning: so completely are ye wanting in wise men, which rendering does not well suit a strong negation [but is adopted by Chrys., Luther, Billr., Calvin, Alf., Olsh., Rckert]; or it is: in this way, under these circumstances, referring back to 1Co 6:4 : seeing that ye set up those persons despised in the Church for judges. [So Meyer. The rendering here must be determined by the view taken of the import of 1Co 6:4. If that last advocated be the correct one, it would be more natural to understand in the former sense. King James translation places the stress of the interrogation here, deviating in this respect from the previous versions which translate it, utterly, at all, and supposes an ellipsis: Is it so that there is not?]. is for , an adverbial use of the without the copula=is there, does there exist.. , a strong expression, like non ullus, nemo unus, not even one. Considering how wise they were in their own conceit, the question here is a very cutting one. At the same time it suggests a strong reason for their altering their conduct. By it he would urge them to the practical exercise of their vaunted wisdoma matter in which they sadly failed. , skilful, expert in resources, experienced, discreet.who shall be ablei. e., when a cause comes upto decide. to arbitrate in a formal mannerbetween his brother, ,a wise expression, where a person understanding himself to be meant, supplies in thought: and a brother. Meyer regards the party distinctly mentioned as the complainant (the defendant he understood as a matter of course, who is specified by way of distinction, as the party in fault). Had the plural been used, the two litigants would then have been equally brought to view. In the use of the term brother, a rebuke is intended which is still further enlarged uponbut brother goeth to law with brother.This is not a question, whether considered independently, or as continuing the previous one; but it is an affirmation full of severe reproof. [, after a question, passes rapidly on to the other alternative, the particle, which negatives the question being supressed, q. d., nay; but. Alf.]. , goeth to law, stands opposed to , to arbitrate. Then, by way of contrast with the wise man among you, before whom they ought to have settled their difficulties, we have the sad opposite:and that before unbelievers.[and that, a form of expression used when particular stress is to be laid on the circumstance indicated. Hodge].

1Co 6:7-8. Looking away now from the point last mentioned, i. e., going to law before unbelievers, he here passes to rebuke the entire practice of litigation among Christians as in itself wrong.indeed therefore . The gives a peculiar prominence to the point to be mentioned as being the worst of all; is simply transitional and conjunctive; but (see Passow .1326ff.) is a determinative particle, which serves, in part, to strengthen the whole clause, and, in part, to call particular attention to certain thoughts about to be presented.it is in any case a loss for you.presents the aspect of the case generally, without reference to any peculiar, aggravating circumstances, such as going to law before unbelievers. [Stanley renders it: certainly] . lit.: a falling short; it is used, partly, of failings and imperfections (hence the var. ), and, partly, of injuries, or damage, whether it be in an ethical sense, as caused by the outbreak of sin and the violence of passion (comp: , 2Pe 2:20; , Rom 12:21), or as some evil consequence upon these outbreaks, such as hinderance to our salvation, and to our participation in Gods kingdom. It is here undoubtedly the latter, and points to what is more fully stated in 1Co 6:9. This is undoubtedly the more correct interpretation, and it forms an implied contrast to any supposed temporal advantage they might gain by any legal process. [So Meyer, de Wette, Words., Alf., Hodge. But Calvin, Beng., Billr., Stanley, Rckert, Olsh., all prefer the meaning: fault, imperfection, weakness. And there is strong ground for their interpretation]. Neander: A backsliding of the Church, and sinking down from the high standard of pure Christian feeling. , Dative of interestthat ye have lawsuits with yourselves. elsewhere means, judicial decision, sentence, also judgment. With this rendering the sense would be: that it comes to this, that ye have legal decisions, etc. The same sense substantially is obtained if we adopt the meaning which attaches to , and which does not elsewhere appear, viz.: lawsuits. [So Rob. Lex. sub. voce; but Alf. says: matters of dispute]. : with yourselves; more expressive than : one another. [It suggests the unity of the Christian body, so in contrast with the segregated condition of the world].How Christians ought to conduct themselves in cases affecting the mine and thine, he states in the more striking form of a question.Why do ye not rather take injustice? Why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?The verbs are both middle and to be rendered as above. They imply the suffering of a loss. It is one, however, only in appearance, being a victory in fact (Osi.). Comp. Mat 5:39 ff. What follows may be taken as a strong assertion, or as a question, which either stands independently, or is depending still on why, since the question or do you not know, of 1Co 6:9, has also its logical relations in the why (so Meyer, ed. 2). But the former construction, which makes the sentence direct and independent, would be more expressive, and it is supported by . The a then will have its proper force.But ye (. emphatic, ye Christians) do injustice and defraud[the same verbs as in the previous clause, but active transitive] and that brethren.[This passage is remarkable as being founded on the spirit of Mat 5:40. Stanley]. [On the nature of ecclesiastical jurisdiction maintained by the early Church in secular affairs, its relation to that of the State, and the evils resulting from it, see Neanders Church History, Vol. II. p. 139ff., Torreys Translation].

1Co 6:9-10. Or know ye not.The question presupposes a self-evident answer respecting the conduct spoken of. Such proceedings should not hate been allowed by you, a people whose hope takes hold on Gods kingdom, and who profess to be the children, and so the heirs of the Most High. Or, etc., i. e, your conduct can only be explained on the supposition of such ignorance.that the unjust Gods kingdom shall not inherit?Here () the idea I involved in , to do injustice, must be kept in view, yet looking away from the point wherein they as members of the Church were especially guilty. The unjust (a term used of the heathen in 1Co 6:1, and here designedly brought in for the purpose of putting all who were unjust on a par with the heathen Neander) are properly those among whom the practice of injustice has become habitual, who persist in wrong without repenting.But here the word denotes the immoral generally, those who offend God and man by iniquities of every kind, such as are specified in the following context.In reference to Gods kingdom, see on 1Co 4:20. Considered in its perfection, as the object of Christian hope, the kingdom of God is the blessed state, wherein the will of a holy, loving, all-restoring, beatific God is fully realized; or, in other words, a condition wherein men and angels are unitedly and perfectly controlled by the Divine will, lead a life of righteousness and peace, and together with this, possess the highest good which it is desirable for men to participate in. And this participation is expressed by the word inherit (). It is something that properly belongs to the believer as a child of God (Rom 8:17; Gal 4:7), and involves a gracious right and an enduring possession. The expression, meaning literally, to obtain by lot, and then, to receive as an inheritance, belongs to the language of the Theocracy, and is used in the Old Testament to denote the entrance into the promised land, and into the society of those who are governed by the will of God. And this was but the type or shadow () of the kingdom, of God that was to be set up on a renovated earth (2Pe 3:13; Mat 5:5). (That the verb takes after it the Accusative instead of the Genitive, belongs to the later Hellenic usage). The not inheriting, implying an exclusion from the possession of the highest good, explains what is meant by . and .That all conduct, which contravenes the justice of God, or the ordering of holy love, should cause a forfeiture of this inheritance, lies in the very nature of the case. In the Corinthian Church, however, there appear to have been some light-minded people who sought to persuade themselves and others that God did not mean exactly what he said, that this inheritance could never be withheld from any who had joined the Church. [Such a divorce of morality from religion has been manifested in all ages, and under all forms of religion. The pagan, the Jew, the Mohammedan, the nominal Christian, have all been exact in the performance of religious services, while unrestrained in the indulgence, of every evil passion. This arises from looking on religion as an outward service, and God as a being to be feared and propitiated, not loved and served. Hodge]. Against all such false conceptions and vain words (Eph 5:6), Paul here warns the Church with his oft-recurringBe not deceived (1Co 15:33; Gal 6:7, etc.)To this he appends a full catalogue of such immoralities as exclude from Gods kingdom:neither fornicators.This indicates the vice prevalent in Corinth, and points back to chap. 5. To this he annexes, that wherewith fornication was closely connected in Heathendom, and which I when practised by Gods people, was termed both fornication and adultery:nor idolaters.Then comes that inordinate indulgence of the sexual passion which violated alike the Divine ordinance of marriage, and the rights of the married parties:nor adulterers.The series of this class ends with the mention of that unnatural gratification of lust indicated in the words:nor effeminate, nor Sodomites.These express correlative ideas. The former denotes those who allowed themselves to be used as women (qui muliebria patiuntur); the latter, such as used the former in this unnatural waya wide-spread vice in that period (comp. Wetstein on this passage, and on Rom 1:27). Next follow classes of the unjust, in the more restricted sense, such as violently seized upon others possessions, or more indirectly sought for them:nor thieves, nor covetous,(comp. on 1Co 5:10 ff.).In like manner in regard to the followingnor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners.The enumeration is not strictly logical, since those last mentioned would naturally come in after the covetous. But drunkards and revilers naturally go together, since the vice of the latter commonly results from that of the former. After asserting solemnly that suchshall not inherit the kingdom of God,he goes on to remind the Corinthians that for them these trials belonged to the past, and that indulgence in such vices was for them a backsliding into their old heathenish state, which utterly contradicted their high Christian experience.

1Co 6:11. And these things some (of you) were.The neuter carries a contemptuous implication, q. d., such a set, such stuff (Meyer). : some, not all. What otherwise would be a too sweeping and severe imputation is thus limited in its application and softened in tone. [Calvin and Hodge regard the as redundant or as distributive, q. d., some were one thing and some another]. The simple , or , would imply too much, since all the Corinthian converts, without exception, had not been addicted to either one or all the immoralities specified; yet, on the other hand, would have implied too little. It would bring the whole body prominently to notice, and intimate that only a part would agree with the description. Osiander. The change which, however, had passed over them, is indicated by three expressions introduced with the emphatic repetition of but, designed to set forth the contrast more strongly.But ye were washed clean.[; off, all off, clean, intensive. This refers to their joining the Church in baptism. Comp. Tit 3:5. In like manner Act 22:16, where the verb is aor. mid., and signifies, baptize thyself, or, cause thyself to be baptized, not, be baptized, as though it were passive. And so the verb here is middle, and must be taken in a reflexive sense, though it is difficult to translate it thus in English]. The term wash, points to the defilement incurred by the sins before spoken of, and to the purification effected through the forgiveness obtained in baptism, or the removal of guilt then pledged (Act 22:16). It is analogous to (Eph 5:26). The moral purification, by the doing away of all that is sinful (Rckert), we cannot therefore take to be here meant: although repentance and faith are presupposed in baptism. In this washing of baptism, however, the cleansing through the blood of Christ (Rev 1:5; 1Jn 1:7) must be considered as included.Ye sanctified yourselves, This, too, is middle. It cannot therefore be supposed to denote the inward, progressive sanctification accomplished by the Spirit; but, as in 1Co 1:2, the act of personal consecration to God, of separation from the world and translation into fellowship with God; yet this, not putatively, nor externally merely, but as involving also some operation of the Divine Spirit on the heart (comp. Tit 3:5; 1Pe 1:2).Ye were justified, .This, in accordance with the usage of Paul and of the Bible generally, is to be construed, not after Augustine and the Council of Trent, as if it meant: made righteous inwardly. This is contradicted by the aorist tense of the verb. But it implies an introduction into the state of the just, admission to a participation in the salvation of Godto a place in His kingdom and a share in His blessings. This exhibits the positive side of Gods salvation (the removal of guilt being the negative side), and is the result of consecration to God. Hence it fitly concludes the series. All three taken together denote an entrance into the state of grace [ and refer to the first conversion. Stanley. The view given by Kling is substantially that of Calvin, Hodge, Alf., Words. But the words also carry a further implication in the way of contrast. Having become thus, ye are not to defile and pollute yourselves afresh and incur, renewed condemnation].in the name of the Lord Jesus and in the Spirit of our God.These qualifying phrases are by some referred to all three of the foregoing verbs, and by others to the last alone. Others still make a division, referring the words, in the name to justified, or to this and washed; but the words, in the Spirit to sanctified. These attempts are a failure; although it is indeed true that the washing and the justification are grounded upon the name of Christ. Even as, on the other hand, sanctification comes through the Spirit. Again the reference of these phrases to all three of the verbs appears to be opposed by the separation of the verbs effected by but, as well as by the unsuitableness of connecting the fact of the washing with the Spirit, since according to the rule (to which Act 4:7 is no exception) the reception of the Spirit is consequent on baptism (Meyer). But the first reason given cannot be decisive; and so far as the second goes, we find that in Tit 3:5, the renewal of the spirit is connected directly with baptism, as epexegetical of . And as the phrase in the name of Christ, indicates the objective ground on which the washing rests, so does the phrase, in the Spirit, indicate the subjective ground of the same, that is, the principle which inwardly imparts and applies the absolution implied in the washing. On the name of Christ comp. on 1Co 1:2. The entire personality of Jesus, so far as it is made known to us in the work of redemption and indicated in the name, is the objective ground both of the pardon granted in baptism and of our justification and sanctification, according to the sense of the terms above given. But the Spirit of God applies to each individual what is offered to us in that name. He brings it directly to our consciousness, insures and imparts it to us, and enables us to realize it all within our own hearts. [By the : our, added to God, he binds the Corinthians and himself together in the glorious blessings of the Gospel state, and mingles the oil of joy with the mourning which by his reproof he is reluctantly creating. Alford],

[Obs. This whole passage 1Co 6:1-9, is memorable as laying the foundation for that ecclesiastical jurisdiction in civil affairs which in the lapse of centuries grew to such mighty proportions as to overshadow for a time the temporal sovereignty, and even threaten to subjugate it altogether. There are traces of the existence of church-courts for civil causes among Christians as early as the middle of the second century, and in the Apost. Const. , II. 47, the rule for the regulation of their proceedings is laid down. Ordinarily, however, the bishop became the referee in such disputes, and his office as umpire contributed largely to the increase of his importance and authority, and also greatly endangered his spirituality. When the State became Christian, this jurisdiction was conferred by law, and made binding on all parties that appealed to it. The custom once established, gradually extended itself with the increase of ecclesiastical pretensions, and the decay of secular power, until the Church assumed the form of a political association, with a well defined system of ecclesiastical polity that divided the control with the State both over the laity and the clergy, even in temporal matters, and aimed steadily at exempting the latter in particular from all amenability to the State. The history of this wonderful and yet perverse development of authority from the positions laid down in the text, furnishes a most instructive commentary on its meaning, and shows us the necessity of correctly interpreting it.

The limitations by which the precept is beset are as follows: 1. The litigants must be both church-members. Redress from wrongs inflicted from without may be sought at civil tribunals when public justice seems to require itPaul, e. g., appealed to Csar. 2. The causes, comparatively trivial, the minor matters of property, for example, in relation to which it were better that covetousness be mortified by quietly enduring the wrong, than indulged by the enforcement of rights. 3. The tribunals, heathen, or of a heathenish kind. The case may be altered when the judges are Christians. Yet even under such circumstances litigation between brethren ought, if possible, to be avoided. 4. The nature of the adjudication, informalthat of umpires chosen for the purpose by the contestants, and not of regular church courts. Pauls aim was to preserve the peace and spirituality of the Church by the avoidance of litigation, not to convert the Church into an arena for conflicts, and thus to secularize it. The Church was never constituted to be a ruler and a divider among men. 5. The evil condemned is not the practice of going to law, as though this were wrong in itself, for the magistrate, too, is a member of God for good, but the litigious spirit so contrary to the Christian temper. There are instances when it would be a manifest sin not to seek justice. But in doing so, a Christian should take care to show that he was actuated, not by feelings of revenge, but by a supreme regard to law and order, and by a desire that even the wrong-doer may be reconciled to Him.]

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. [The judicial function of the Saints in the age to come]. Those are mighty words, the saints shall judge the world, we shall judge angels. Through them we catch a glimpse into the mysteries of the Heavenly kingdom, especially into the fundamental mystery of the creating and judging Word, and into the vital fellowship which believers have with their Lord, likewise also into the mystery of the future, when the inward life of the saints, which is now hid with Christ in glory, will be made manifest as a life of Divine power and holiness. Those of whom Christ said, I in them and they in me, of whom it is grandly sung,

Devoid of strength they are guardians for all;
Poor, yet they win, let the worst befall,
who here on earth have shared with their Redeemer in His sufferings and shame, these very ones will share with Him hereafter in the manifestations of His glory. When Christ, who is their life, shall appear, exhibiting Himself as He really is, then will they also appear with Him as gods of earth, to the astonishment of the world. They will reign and flourish eternally, shining as stars in the firmament of God.
But by virtue of this union with Christ in glory, they become partners also in His judicial authority. Having been exempted from judgment through faith in their Lord, they will join with Him in executing judgment over all, whether men or angels, who amid the exhibitions of Divine love and wisdom and power and righteousness have continued hostile to Gods truth, disregardful of His grace, contemptuous toward His salvation, and opposed to all the ways of His kingdomhardening themselves evermore in their enmity, until past hope. And this judgment will be an act both of deepest insight,piercing through to the very centre of the heart, and detecting there the inexcusableness of sin, and of highest moral powerexhibiting a righteousness full of decision and vigorallowing of no further protestsexposing the fallacy of excuses, and annihilating them all as false and untenable through the might of an all-enlightening truth.

And this power to discern and judge at that period, is a living principle imparted to Christians now, through the indwelling life of Christ, and it unfolds itself onward unto perfection with the growth of their spiritual life, until it reaches its highest state of exercise in the future kingdom of glory. There is always implied in it a demonstration of the mind of Christ, as well in that pitying love which goes out after the lost, tracks them in their wanderings, and wisely and patiently applies the means of their restoration, as in that holiness which should keep them from all fellowship with sin, consecrate them entirely to God, and maintain them in the obedience of faith amid manifold temptations from within and from without, in joy and sorrow, in honor and dishonor, in abundance and want, in health and sickness, even unto death; so that, as the instruments of Christs truth and love, they shall have done what they could towards awakening, convincing and converting those who still walk in darknessthus proving themselves fit and warranted to act the part of judges with their Lord at the last.
But as their authority is also to be exercised over the world of spirits, these too must in some way be regarded as coming under this saving influence. For is not the blood of Christs cross said to be Gods means for reconciling all things unto Himself, whether they be things in earth or things in heaven? (Col 1:20). And is not the manifold wisdom of God to be proclaimed by means of the Church, even unto principalities and powers in heavenly places? (Eph 3:10). Shall we then mistake if we imagine that even in the extra mundane sphere there are also fallen beings, yet capable of salvation; and that into this sphere, whence came temptation and ruin unto our race, there shall in return go forth blessed agencies of deliverance from this very race, according to the wonderful council of God, and by virtue of the advent of His Son, through whom every thing above and beneath has been created? This is indeed an operation which, like that of the operation of this spirit-world upon us, comes not within the direct consciousness of believers; yet this fact does not militate against its reality, and like much that is now concealed, it will be made known to believers, as they enter upon their heavenly state. And if it be true, this circumstance will the more qualify believers for sitting in judgment over those bad spirits who obstinately close themselves against all such gracious influences, and scorn the salvation offered in Christ. These are conjectures indeed, and they might be carried out still further into the consideration of the particular duties in which the departed saints might engage in the other world. But it will not do to reject them as idle dreams, since they are in accordance with the analogy of Scripture, and are supported by the essential connection which exists between the judgment, and prevenient efforts directed to the recovery of the fallen.

Since the judicial work of the saints is not simply a corroboration of the sentence pronounced by Christ, but also an active participation in the judgment carried on by Him, as the organs of His office, a training preparatory to this high function will naturally be required of them. To this there belongs1, a learning to speak what is true and right, not only in public, but also in private stations, so that a readiness may be acquired in distinguishing between right and wrong, and there shall be no danger of being misled, either through the purblindness of the foolish, or by the corrupt sophistries and wretched infatuation of the self-opinionated and dogmatic (analogous with Luk 16:10 ff; Luk 19:17 ff.); 2, a calm, self-denying willingness to accept justice as set forth in the sentence rendered, whether it come from a judge or an umpire; for here the rule holds good, that obedience to authority is the best qualification for exercising authority; 3, the still loftier self-denial shown in a readiness to suffer wrong rather than to gain aught by going to law at the expense of love and unity. On the other hand, the habit of over-reaching and defrauding, originating in a spirit of selfish greed, as it disqualifies for admission into Gods kingdom, so does it in an especial manner unfit a person to exercise judgment. And this is true also of every act which violates the rights either of God or man; for all such acts virtually disown and entirely neutralize that state of grace into which a person has been brought through the name of Christ and by the Spirit of God. The persons who practise them have washed and consecrated themselves, and been justified (in baptism) to no purpose.

[2. The natural condition of man, depraved and lost (1Co 6:9-11). When unchecked, the original sin of our constitution breaks out into the most flagrant vices and crimes, which reveal the inherent corruption. The most refined Pagan civilization has no power to restrain and cure it. Rather it serves to intensify the evil. The most demoralized society in the old world was to be found in the most refined of its cities. And the character, thus vitiated, forever excludes from a state of glory. It shall not inherit the kingdom of God. The strong negation here precludes all hope for such as possess it, and together with this puts the stamp of falsehood upon the figment of a universal salvation. No statement could be more explicit and conclusive]

[3. The change which fits the sinner for heaven is a radical one, wrought in Christ and through the Spirit, yet not independently of human volition. Ye have washed yourselves clean, ye have sanctified yourselves, ye are justified. The filth of sin is voluntarily removed. From being his own, the person consecrates himself to God, and becomes forgiven and reconciled to God through faith in the work of Christ, and by the influence of the Spirit. Thus old things pass away, and all things become new, under the operation of Divine grace, and through the consent of the individual. There is, therefore, in renewal a voluntary assumption of the weightiest obligation to keep ones self unspotted from the world].

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

[Litigation on the part of Christians1, involves great risk, and betokens a corresponding daring, for it is a seeking for justice before the avowedly unjust, 1Co 6:1 a; 2 is a repudiation of their proper society, and of the advantages its saintly character holds out, 1Co 6:1 b; 3, is derogatory to the dignity of the litigants themselves, who are, by their profession, destined to be hereafter judges of the world and of angels, 1Co 6:2-3; 1 Corinthians 4, is an imputation upon the ability of their brethren to decide in the matters of lesser moment here, 1Co 6:2; 1Co 6:5; 1 Corinthians 5, should be superseded by the selection of umpires in the Church, and the small matters it involves treated as they deserve, 1Co 6:4; 1 Corinthians 6, is a disgrace to the Church and a cause of scandal, as it opens the faults of Christians to the observation and sneers of the world; 7, iscontrary to the spirit of Christ, who, when He was reviled, reviled not again, and when He suffered, threatened not, but committed Himself to Him that judgeth righteously, 1Co 6:7; 1 Corinthians 8, implies wrong doing on the part of Christians, provoking litigation by their conduct towards each other, 1Co 6:8; 1 Corinthians 9, those who by their offences provoke litigation are in danger of losing their inheritance in Gods kingdom and becoming outcasts with the vicious of every class, 1Co 6:9-10; 1 Corinthians 10, the offences which cause it, and the spirit in which it is often done, are contrary to the change which believers profess to have passed through, 1Co 6:11].

Starke:

1Co 6:1. It is not in itself wrong to seek justice before earthly tribunals, since government, too, is a Divine ordinance, designed for protection and order; and Paul himself appealed to unbelieving magistrates against the persecution of the Jews (Act 22:25; Act 25:10). But in all law-suits let every one take care wherefore, and before whom, and how he litigates. Otherwise his action may prove both a disgrace and a sin.

1Co 6:2. In the coming judgment of the saints there is great comfort for those who have lost a righteous cause. Let corrupt judges mark well. Against whatsoever righteous ones they have declared unrighteous judgment, by these will they be righteously judged at the last day.

1Co 6:3. To be associated with Christ in judgment is one of the loftiest honors promised to believers, 1Pe 2:9; Rev 1:5-6; Rev 3:21. The dignity thus conferred should be displayed even in this life by the control which they maintain not only over themselves and the world, but also over the Devil, and so in their conquest over all their spiritual enemies. It should be shown also in the way they judge and condemn the world in and through their life and doctrine.

1Co 6:4. Those who know and enjoy God ought to be held in higher esteem, and deemed more worthy of confidence, than those in whom such knowledge is wanting.

1Co 6:6. Earthly goods are the means of separating the most united, heavenly goods can unite the most hostile.

1Co 6:7. Christians ought to hold temporal possessions of such small account that the prime question with them should not be whether they have, or have not; and they should be so affectionate toward each other, that in case of dissension about the mine and thine the temporal good should seem so small and the brother so important, that ere they would disquiet their spirits by litigation, and unfit themselves for religious duties, and cause offence to their neighbors, they would let the whole thing go and suffer the loss.

1Co 6:8. (Hed.). If an intelligent person is guilty of the wrong, then he commits the greater sin in putting the innocent person to so much cost and trouble with his lies; if the wrong-doer is ignorant, then it is not right, 1, to pursue the most stringent course with him and practise no forbearance; 2, to go to law in envious, avaricious, or ugly temper; 3, besides, the thing does not pay.

1Co 6:9-10. Those who needlessly go to law are classed with thieves and licentious persons, etc., and incur a like condemnation. The world evidently judges very different from the Holy Spirit. Nothing is more common than to excuse sin because of its commonness. If all on this catalogue are lost, you can count the saved, almost all. Ye unrighteous litigants, fornicators, small and great thieves, sly and open thieves, be alarmed!

1Co 6:11. (Hed.): Such were some, etc., sweet word were. To be and to be willing to remain suchthat were the pity. Those who have escaped from the snares of the Devil should bear the past in mind continually, as a motive to avoid sin and foster gratitude.

Berlen. Bib.:

1Co 6:1. The reason why the righteous are often passed by, and the unrighteous are chosen as judges, is because people hope to make something out of the latter.

1Co 6:2. Judicial honors hereafter await those only who have acted justly here, and allowed themselves to be judged.

1Co 6:7. So completely does the Holy Spirit drive nature from her supposed rights, and subject it to patient suffering, yea, to death, that we are not at liberty to maintain our rights arbitrarily, but are bound, everywhere and at all times, to have regard to the jewel of our peace, and see that it be neither injured nor destroyed.

1Co 6:9-11. The unrighteous are all the unregenerate, 1Jn 3:7; Joh 3:3. There are many kinds of sins. Hence, if thou seest another sin, point not thy finger at him. Perhaps thou art implicated in another sin more deeply than he is in this. Remembrance of the past ought to cause perpetual humiliation. To this end we ought to think of our old sins, but for other reasons we ought to forget them. But,but,but. O the importance and the preciousness of the change. Gracious acts all go together, though they are distinguishable. If we pray, God be merciful to me a sinner, that implies, create within me a clean heart. What God hath joined let no man put asunder. Salvation comprises forgiveness, sanctification, redemption, and we can get it in no other way than through the name of Jesus and the power of the Holy Ghost.

Reiger:

1Co 6:2-3.We must improve the glimpses here allowed into the grander future, in such a way, that even here, amid our small engagements, we may as far as possible be lifted into higher moods. Through selfishness, impatience, anger, greed, the complainant often incurs as much guilt afterwards as the man has who injured him.

Heubner:

1Co 6:1. Every true Christian ought to be a sort of a justice of the peace.

1Co 6:3. It is very natural that the betrayed should judge the betrayer. From a presentiment of this springs the hatred of evil angels against Christians.

1Co 6:5. The lack of wise men in a church is great disgrace.

1Co 6:6. That justice should be enforced by the secular power between those who profess to be governed by law is also a disgrace.

Besser:If we kept in mind what glory awaits us in the Church, it would prove a sad thing for us to strive with our brethren about mine and thine, and if we were drawn into strife then would the judges find in us peaceable people who respected the decision of the saints.

1Co 6:7-8. Paul says ye. Mark then, a little leaven leavens the whole lump! The flagrant immoralities of some did not constrain the Church to mourning, did not move them to the exercise of discipline. A Christian Church, however, is not a mere aggregate of names, but it is the body of one Spirit, composed of many members. Hence the declaration of the Apostle, ye do wrong, struck at the whole Church, and stuck in it like an arrow until it acknowledged its own disgrace in bitter repentance.

1Co 6:11. Whatever has been done for us and is to be found in the name of Jesus, that is appropriated to us through the Spirit of our Godthat God, who is our God and highest Good in Jesus Christ our Lord.

[F. W. Robertson:Let us guard against a natural misconception of the Apostles meaning. You might think that he meant to say, that the Corinthians should have ecclesiastical instead of civil courts; and for this reason, that churchmen and clergy will decide rightly by a special promise of guidance, and heathen and laymer wrongly. But this has not to do with the case. It is not a question here between ecclesiastical and civil courts, but between law and equity, between litigation and arbitration. The remedy [for offences] is, not more elaborate law, nor cheaper law, nor greater facility for law, but more Christianity, less loud cries about Rights, more earnest anxiety on both and all sides to do no wrong].

Footnotes:

[1]1Co 6:2.The omission of in the Rec. is feebly sustained. [A. B. C. D. F. Cod. Sin. and several versions insert it.]

[2]1Co 6:5.Lachmann reads instead of after B.

[3]1Co 6:5. [according to B. C. L. Cod. Sin.]. The Rec. has which is less authorized [being found only in D. F. though more commonly substituted].

[4]1Co 6:5. probably genuine. [It is found in D.3 L. Syr. Vulg. and maintained by Wordsworth. The omission of it [in B. C. Cod. Sin.] is to be attributed to oversight, the transcriber passing directly from to . The or before are critical attempts to restore the text.] [The former is found in B. C. L. Cod. Sin. and the latter in F.]

[5]1Co 6:7.The Rec. has . The was probably inserted to accord with the meaning: fault, given to [A. B. C. D. L. Cod. Sin. all omit it and it is rejected by Meyer, Alf; Words. Stanley, however, retains it.]

[6]1Co 6:8.The Rec. has , which is not by any means so well authorized as [which is found in A. B. C. D. Cod. Sin.] It was changed for the plural probably to conform to the two verbs preceding.

[7]1Co 6:8.The Rec. has the more common order before . as in 1Co 6:10. [The reverse order is found in A. B. C. D. Cod. Sin.]

[8]1Co 6:10.[The order of these two is reversed in D. L., a large number of the cursive MSS. and in the Greek fathers. ].

[9]1Co 6:10.The Rec. with Lach. has [according to B. D.3 L. But is found in A. C. Cod. Sin.] But the authorities for have the same also before the following words. A. C. Cod. Sin. and the best critical edition, however, read there likewise.]

[10]1Co 6:10.The Rec. has before which was, perhaps, inserted in accordance with the same in 1Co 6:9.

[11]1Co 6:11.The variations of after and of after are undoubtedly insertions.

[12][Yet the interpretation which Kling sets aside appears in all the six earlier English versions. Wicklif: Ordeyne ye the contemptible men that ben in the chirche to deme. Tyndale: Take them which are despised in the congregacion, and make them judges. Cranmer, the same. Geneva: Them which are least esteemed in the Churche, them I say set in judgment. Rheims: The contemptible in the Church set them to judge. In like manner the Ree version. Conant adopts it also. So, too, Syr. Vulg., most of the Greek Fathers, Calvin, Beza, Bengel, Hammond, Stanley, Alford. And certainly this interpretation is one which most readily suggests itself, being most in accordance with the tone of the Apostles expostulation, full of lofty irony, and with the order of the words with the designations used, and with the use of with the subj. (see Khner, 339, 2 ii. b.), and with the natural sense of : set up. What Paul means to say is: that if they would have trials over such trivial matters (a thing which he supposes they would have, even though they ought not), they ought to set up judges accordingly, not those of highest character, whose destiny was hereafter to judge angels, but persons who were comparatively of no account. This would be dealing with their litigious spirit as it deserved. And if we consider the complaints of Augustine, which Calvin alludes to, in consequence of the necessity he was under of devoting so large a portion of his precious time to secular affairs, we should see what reason the Apostle had for advising that the Corinthians should choose those least esteemed for this business].

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

The Apostle opens this Chapter, with giving Directions to the Church, how to manage their Disputes without the Law. He closeth the Chapter with a short, but very blessed Account, that the Bodies of Christ’s People are Members of Christ’s Body.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

(1) Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? (2) Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? (3) Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? (4) If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. (5) I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? (6) But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. (7) Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? (8) Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.

If what the Apostle hath said in these verses, was duly considered, and more especially, the authority by which the Apostle delivered it, was taken into the account, it would put an end to a thousand vexatious contests in life. There is some little difficulty to apprehend what Paul meant by the saints judging the world, and judging angels. And, yet, from the manner of speaking, which the Apostle useth, in saying, know we not, it should seem to be a thing so perfectly well understood, as admitted no question or necessity of enquiry. Certain it is, that the Lord Jesus spake of this judgment, when telling his disciples, that they which had continued with him in his temptations, he had appointed to a kingdom; and that they should eat and drink at his table in his kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel, Luk 22:28-30 . See also Rev 3:21Rev 3:21 . And, as the saints of God have passed from death to life at regeneration, and being, justified freely in Christ, there is now no condemnation to them, the judgment which is to take place on the ungodly, they will behold on the great day, Rom 8:1 . But how far those scriptures are intended to imply, that Christ’s members are to be assessors with him, I leave with the Reader to consider.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

1Co 6:3

Astronomy without Christianity only reaches as far as ‘Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels and put all things under his feet’; Christianity says beyond this ‘Know ye not that we shall judge angels (as also the lower creatures shall judge us!)’

Ruskin, Mornings in Florence (137).

Reference. VI. 3, 4. Expositor (6th Series), vol. vii. p. 109.

1Co 6:9

Religion co-exists, as it were, in the mind of an Italian Catholic, with a faith in that of which all men have the most certain knowledge. It is interwoven with the whole fabric of life. It is adoration, faith, submission, penitence, blind admiration; not a rule for moral conduct. It has no necessary connection with any one virtue. The most atrocious villain may be rigidly devout, and without any shock to established faith, confess himself to be so. Religion pervades intensely the whole frame of society, and is according to the temper of the mind which it inhabits, a passion, a persuasion, an excuse, a refuge; never a check.

Shelley, Preface to The Cenci.

References. VI. 9. Expositor (4th Series), vol. x. p. 200; ibid. (5th Series), vol. x. p. 108. VI. 9-11. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlvi. No. 2661. VI. 10. J. Aspinall, Parish Sermons (1st Series), p. 162. VI. 11. J. Keble, Village Sermons on the Baptismal Service, p. 86. Expositor (4th Series), vol. ix. p. 91. VI. 12. H. M. Butler, Harrow School Sermons (2nd Series), p. 30. Expositor (6th Series), vol. xii. p. 275. VI. 12-20. Ibid. vol. i. p. 280. VI. 13. Expositor (4th Series), vol. ii. p. 42. VI. 15. T. Arnold, Christian Life: Its Hopes, p. 147. Expositor (6th Series), vol. x. p. 366. VI. 17. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvi. No. 961. Expositor (4th Series), vol. ii. p. 49; ibid. (6th Series), vol. ix. pp. 63, 155.

The Body a Temple

1Co 6:19

Let us ask how as Christian people we ought to look upon our bodies, and what new light is shed upon their part in life through the redemption accomplished by Jesus Christ.

I. First note the dignity of the body. The text informs us what the Apostle believed about that. He has no hesitation in saying that these bodies of ours are temples of the Holy Ghost, or, as he puts it a verse or two before, ‘members of Christ’. Think what that metaphor of the temple meant. There had been a temple in Israel before, all compact of ivory and gold and marble; and not many years were to pass, from the date of this letter, till its hour struck and it passed away. But, ere it fell, its place had been taken by the redeemed personalities in which Christ was dwelling. So St. Paul’s argument is very simple only this; God inhabits us; we inhabit our bodies; therefore our bodies are God’s temple. Though he had laboured the point for page on page, he could have added nothing to the solemn emphasis of that one word the body a Divine temple.

Let us lay the truth to heart, that Christ has redeemed both parts of our nature, and that His will for us covers both the material and the spiritual. The body has its own share in the great salvation. Certain ancient philosophers and some Christian thinkers who ought to have known better, have tended to despise the body; they have heaped abuse upon it, as the jail and prison of the soul; but the one fact of Christ’s coming in the flesh has swept away all such shame and contempt and poured honour upon every member. Wherever His Gospel has penetrated, it has taught men a sweet and beautiful reverence even for the bodies of the dead. The nobility and sanctity of the human organism have been revealed in Jesus.

Moreover, if the body is redeemed, it is no longer our own, and has to be cared for as particularly as honesty bids us care for some one else’s property. The guarding of health is a part of religion. To neglect or squander our bodily powers is to steal what belongs to God. As Charles Kingsley said once, and no man had a better right to speak: ‘There has always seemed to me something impious in the neglect of personal health…. I could not do half the good I do do, if it were not for the strength and activity some consider coarse and degrading.’

II. Note, secondly, the gravity of bodily sin. Strictly speaking, this is the connection in which the text occurs. St. Paul is warning the Corinthians against the foul practices which made their city a byword, and tainted every breath they drew. On that subject he does not argue. He simply bids them consider that their bodies are God’s temples.

Where lies the gravity and guilt of sins like gluttony, intemperance, or lust in any form? In this, for one thing, that they give the body the upper hand. The only right and safe thing is that the body shall always serve. Any attempt to reverse the Divine law of our nature, that that part of us which is akin to God must rule, means a loss of true manhood and inevitable suffering. Forget this, and the appetite which was but a means in the Divine plan comes to be an end it itself. ‘Hold off from sensuality,’ Cicero writes, ‘for if yon once give yourself to it, you will not be able to think of anything else.’ The body ceases to be the soul’s instrument or servant, and becomes its dungeon, then its tomb; so that the drunkard reeling down the street is, in too many cases, a man whose body has already become the grave of a lost spirit.

Then again, bodily sin is so heinous because it defiles what Christ has redeemed. The reason why Christ’s atoning passion was endured, and followed by triumphant resurrection, lay in God’s great purpose that our human nature, in both its parts, should be cleansed and restored in beauty and purity. For this He bore the shame, the grief, the scourging, the spitting, the awful desolation of the last hour. The aim and issue of it all was that we should become a habitation of God through the Spirit. Gross sin in the body thwarts and defeats that purpose. Therefore it is to be feared and avoided by men and women who have a stake in the Divine redemption, and know that God has called them unto holiness.

III. Lastly, note the prospects of the body. What is supremely important here also is to fix in our minds that truth, that the body has its own real share in the hopes and promises that cluster round the name of Jesus. The heathen said our modern heathen say still the body will perish like the animals; what matters it how we treat it? let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. Nay, replies Christian faith, there is a second and nobler chapter in the story even of this frail tenement we here inhabit, which sheds back its light upon the chapter we are living in now. God, who raised up Jesus, shall in due time also quicken your mortal bodies.

H. R. Mackintosh, Life on God’s Plan, p. 129.

1Co 6:19

‘The body the temple of the living God,’ Kingsley writes in one of his early letters. ‘There has always seemed to me something impious in the neglect of personal health, strength, and beauty, which the religious, and sometimes clergymen of this day affect. It is very often a mere form of laziness.’

References. VI. 19. J. C. Hill, Preacher’s Magazine, vol. v. p. 130. J. Stalker, Christian World Pulpit, vol. lv. p. 346. R. J. Wardell, Preacher’s Magazine, vol. xvii. p. 266. W. Unsworth, ibid. vol. xix. p. 33. Expositor (4th Series), vol. ii. p. 42; ibid. (7th Series), vol. v. p. 498. VI. 19, 20. Brooke Herford, Courage and Cheer, p. 191. D. W. Simon, Twice Born and Other Sermons, p. 141. T. Arnold, Christian Life: Its Hopes, p. 147. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvii. No. 1004; vol. xxvi. No. 1554.

The Body in the Light of the Resurrection

1Co 6:20

The Resurrection of Jesus, which we celebrate afresh at Easter-tide, is the witness not to the existence of a shadowy, unsubstantial life separated from these delightful shores by the untravelled sea, but to the largeness of a life that knows no death, and is as real, every bit of it, as the sky above us and the earth beneath our feet.

What a great thing it would be if people could be brought to see, as the Christians of whom we read in the New Testament most certainly saw, that it is a matter of supreme moment, not so much to what is sometimes understood by our eternal welfare, as to our whole view of what is meant by the life through which we are now passing, whether our conduct and conception of the world are really governed by our belief in Jesus’ Resurrection.

I. It was no spirit from the vasty deep that first affrighted and then gladdened the eyes of those who had seen their Master die on the deserted cross of Calvary. Ghosts do not change the lives of men, inspiring the fearful with courage, the despairing with hope, the dying with life. ‘Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself.’ It was no impalpable apparition that stood in the midst of those who had been the disciples of the crucified Nazarene, and said, ‘Peace be unto you’. It was Jesus Himself in all the fulness, in all the reality of His rich, warm personality.

The sun shone with fairer light, as the old carol has it, on the morning when Jesus Christ arose. Many philosophers have taught that the soul is immortal; Christians believe in the resurrection of the flesh. Earth and sky seem more real to the sons of the Resurrection. We cannot picture to ourselves the garden of the Holy Sepulchre but as spread with a carpet of living green and decked with the fresh flowers of spring. The Christian falls in love afresh with the beauty of the world, as he is awakened by the joyous pealing of the bells in the dawn of Easter Day. If we meet a young man striding down the valley on his way to the early Communion, we find ourselves rejoicing in the strength of his limbs, in the glory of his manhood, in the dew of his youth, as from the womb of the morning. And the lithe form of a maiden tripping across the fields brings a new sympathy with the poet’s fancy when he sings, ‘her feet have touched the meadows and left the daisies rosy’.

This could never be, unless we felt instinctively that to the Christian the world meant infinitely more than it could ever mean to such as have never found that inexhaustible capacity for pure enjoyment which comes from drinking of the Well of Life. We who have been redeemed at the cost of God’s own tears and blood, not from the body, but from the curse which has rested upon it, take our true place in universal nature, and amid the chorus of the birds, the hum of the bees, the sounding waves, the rushing winds, the breath of a living and life-giving earth, know how good it is to be alive as we offer the praise of redeemed lips, the thankful exercise of all our liberated forces to Him Who is the Father of our whole being.

II. St. Paul was a much greater Christian than those who came after him, and who emended the grand simplicity of his text until the shadow of that fatal distinction between body and soul, which in the history of the human race has again and again proved either the sanction of a maimed experience or the excuse for sinful indulgence, seems almost to rest upon one of the most magnificent passages in the whole Bible?

Do not let us mar the directness of this appeal by imitating the timidity of those later interpreters who read: ‘Glorify God in your body and in your spirit’. We do not want to have our life divided up into body and spirit, secular and sacred, weekday and Sunday. The Devil likes to keep us talking about what we ought not to do on Sunday morning, because none knows better than he that our destinies are really determined by what we do on Saturday night. A few reserves which are labelled ‘sacred’ are the best guarantee that Beelzebub can have for undisturbed possession of the character. ‘Give me the body’ is the cry of every claimant for the citadel of Mansoul, ‘and let who will have the spirit.’

Yes! there is but one problem in human life, and that is the problem of the body, the organ through which alone life manifests itself, the home of our activities, the seat of our desires. ‘Glorify God in your body’ was the straight appeal of one who knew what it was to stand fast in the liberty with which Christ had made him free. ‘I beseech you,’ he cries, ‘by the mercies of God’ by the very form, that is, which your redemption has taken, by the manifestation of the Son of God in the likeness of sinful flesh, by the offering, not of the spirit, but of the body of Christ once for all, by the condemnation, the killing, the extermination of sin in the flesh, by the return of the Body which was crucified from the grave by which it could not be holden, and by the quickening of our mortal bodies of which that Resurrection is the pledge ‘I beseech you by the mercies of God that you present your bodies a living sacrifice,’ a holy offering, to the God Who has redeemed them. That, and that alone, is ‘your spiritual service’.

J. G. Simpson, The Church Times, 19th May, 1911.

References. VI. 20. E. M. Geldart, Echoes of Truth, p. 234. J. B. Lightfoot, Cambridge Sermons, p. 283. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xx. No. 1163. Expositor (4th Series), vol. vi. p. 29; ibid. (6th Series), vol. iv. p. 279; ibid. vol. ix. p. 44. VII. Ibid. vol. i. p. 284. VII. 1 . Ibid. p. 253; ibid. (5th Series), vol. v. p. 142; ibid. vol. vi. p. 73; ibid. (6th Series), vol. i. p. 284. VII. 2. Ibid. vol. x. p. 278. VII. 1-25. Ibid. vol. vii. p. 117. VII. 5. Ibid. (4th Series), vol. i. p. 350; ibid. (5th Series), vol. i. p. 15; ibid. (6th Series), vol. x. p. 372; ibid. (7th Series), vol. vi. pp. 20, 23. VII. 6. Ibid. vol. i. p. 373; ibid. vol. iii. p. 277; ibid. vol. i. p. 373. VII. 7, 8. Ibid. vol. v. p. 442.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

XVII

THE RELAXATION OF MORALS

1Co 5:1-6:20 .

In the last chapter we considered the revolt against apostolic authority, and now we are to take up another disorder that is a con-sequence of that one the relaxation of morals. It is a settled principle that one sin begets another. In hunting I have sometimes thought that I saw just one quail, but when I flushed him there were two, and sometimes a covey. Longfellow in Hiawatha uses this language: Never stoops the soaring vulture On his quarry in the desert, On the sick or wounded bison, But another vulture, watching From his high aerial lockout, Sees the downward plunge and follows; And a third pursues a second, Coming from invisible ether, First a speck and then a vulture, Till the air is dark with pinions.

That illustrates how sins are gregarious going in troops. I do not believe it is possible for any man or any church to commit a single sin. There are sure to be more than one, if we ever commence at all. It seemed a little thing that they should sin in the way of factions, or that they should sin in the way of revolt against apostolic authority, but these two sins begat this third sin that we are discussing the relaxation of morals.

The case in point is thus referred to in 1Co 5 :

It is actually reported that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not even among the Gentiles, that one of you hath his father’s wife. And ye are puffed up, and did not rather mourn, that he that had done this deed might be taken away from ‘among you. For I verily, being absent in the body but present in spirit, have already as though I were present judged him that hath so wrought this thing, in the name of our Lord Jesus, ye being gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, to deliver such a one unto ‘Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, even as ye are unleavened. For our Passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ: wherefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

I wrote unto you in my epistle to have no company with fornicators; not at all meaning with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous and extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world; but as it is, I wrote unto you not to keep company, if any man that is named a brother be a fomicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one no, not to eat. For what have I to do with judging them that are without? Do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Put away the wicked man from among yourselves.

That is the whole of 1Co 5 . It is a fine thing for preachers of this day when they have a case of discipline that they have express apostolic authority as to how to treat the case. This man’s father had doubtless married the second time, and the son by the first wife took his wife away from the father, i.e., took his stepmother. Paul says, “Ye are puffed up . . . your glorifying is not good.” They had written to him saying very complimentary things about themselves that they were doing fine. He didn’t agree with them, not with such disorder as this on hand, and the other disorders that have been discussed.

He tells what to do. He says, “This man must be taken away from among yourselves.” The church must do that as a proof that it is a church action. He says, “When you are gathered together,” and in the second letter we find that what was done in obedience to this letter was done by a majority vote. So that here is a case that unmistakably calls for church action. Offenses of this kind must not be committed in the church of Jesus Christ, and the injunction is peremptory that the church must withdraw fellowship in such cases.

The next thing besides this church action was apostolic action. Paul could do what the church could not do what no other preacher except an apostle could do that is, he could deliver such a one over to Satan. They had accused him of not exercising his apostolic power, and he proposes if they do not heed that, he will use his power. He had the power from Jesus Christ to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, but the spirit would be saved in the day of Jesus Christ.

We want to understand what that means. It shows that this sin in the church may be by a Christian, and that delivering him to Satan is not his ultimate destruction, but the destruction of his flesh, that his soul may be saved in the day of Jesus Christ. It is necessary that we understand what this means. We find in the book of Job that God turns Job over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, and grievous sores came on him, but it was not that Job might be destroyed by the devil. God says to the devil, “Touch not his life.” We see the case of the apostles when Jesus says, “Simon, Satan hath obtained you apostles by asking that he may sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not.” Satan came up to Christ and asked that he might deal with them as wheat, and if they were wheat the sifting would help them, and so even this remarkable case of sifting was not done to destroy the offending brother, but to gain him; and there are some cases that cannot be gained except by stern, prompt discipline.

All over the country we have churches that are suffering for the lack of just that thing, and they are injuring these church sinners. I will illustrate: Suppose in the jungles of Africa a company of people and animals were camped for the night, and they built a stockade to keep off wild beasts, and some of the animals, a cow perhaps, gets unmanageable and bellows and butts around and tries to get out. They turn her out, and let her hear the lion roar, and she wants to get back. The thought is that the one that won’t be quiet in good company should be showed that there is worse company on the outside. I heard an old Baptist preacher say, “If you put a wild hog in a pen and he goes to squealing, let him out, and he will strike for the woods and never come back, because he is a hog. But if a sheep is turned out it will bleat around the gate until you open the pen and let the sheep come back on good behavior.” If a man is not a converted man he ought not to be in there; let the hog out and let him strike for the woods; if he is a sheep and hears the lion roar he will bleat around to get back, and he will behave himself next time.

The primary object, if a converted man, is to save him; and the second is to purify the church, and this Paul proceeds to argue. He says, “Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ, our Passover, is sacrificed for us.” Here he uses an Old Testament illustration the preparation for the Passover. Before the Passover was observed there was the preparation for the Passover. The houses were inspected, the walls were scraped lest there was something left, and leprosy would leave particles sticking to the wall. They were going to keep the feast, and Paul says, “Christ, our Passover Lamb, is sacrificed for us.” In other words, “We have a feast to keep the Lord’s Supper and in order that we may keep that feast let us examine ourselves and see if we be in the faith. Let us inspect our hearts and our lives, because the law is, with the man that is living disorderly, ye must not eat.” It does not refer to a common meal. It refers to the Lord’s Supper, and the one in disorder may not rightfully partake of the Lord’s Supper. Henry Ward Beecher boasted that in his church there never had been a case of discipline since it was organized. Not that it was a pure church, for it was very impure; never having discipline in it, they had no standard of doctrine and no standard of life. And the first case that ever came up was Beecher himself, and they will bring us up if we, as pastors of churches, are forever silent on the subject of discipline.

Paul now explains. He says, “I wrote you a letter.” It was not preserved. It was not necessary to preserve every one of his letters. John says if everything that Jesus said and did had been preserved the world would not hold the books. But enough is preserved to form a guide for God’s people. He continues: “And in that letter I wrote you not to keep company with fornicators, and ye misunderstood me.” He says, “I did not mean that with respect to the world, for that would mean for you to go out of the world; when I said to keep no company and not eat, I meant with a man who is called a brother; if such a one be a fornicator or an adulterer you are to judge those that are within. What have ye to do with those that are within? What have ye to do with those that are without?” He is showing over whom the church has authority to exercise discipline not outsiders, but insiders.

The next disorder is in 1Co 6:1 : “Dare any of you, having a matter against his neighbor, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? Or know ye not that the saints shall judge the world? And if the world is judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that ye shall judge angels? how much more, things that pertain to this life? If then ye have to judge things pertaining to this life, do ye set them to judge who are of no account in the church? I say this to move you to shame. What? Cannot there be found among you a wise man who shall be able to decide between his brethren, but brother goeth to law with brother, and that before unbelievers? Nay, already it is altogether a defect in you, that ye have lawsuits one with another. Why not rather take wrong? Why not rather be defrauded? Nay, but ye yourselves do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.”

This is a remarkable declaration. I will discuss it a little in order to make an impression on the minds of young preachers, for we have almost gone astray on it in our religious life. There isn’t a country or a community in the state that some members in the church do not violate that law, and they say they are not heathen. That is not Paul’s point at all. His point is that the saints have the highest Judicatory power vested in them that they will judge the world and the angels. It is simply a question of two courts the church-court or the world-court. Which will we take? To which court are we going to appeal the case? That is what he is discussing. This is illustrated in my book, Baptists and Their Doctrines, which gives a view of the world-court and the church-court.

He brings up the following points on this discussion: First, that God had placed the judicatory power in the church, as our Lord says, “If any man sin, go right along and convict him of his sin. You have gained the brother.” He does not say, “If any member of the church sin against you, whether it is a personal or a public offense, and you know it, you go right along and convict him of that sin. If you fail, take two of the brethren with you; if he will not hear them, tell it to the human court.” No, tell it to the church. There is the judicatory court that Christ established. Here comes up a difference between two brethren on a matter of business. A says that B owes him $100. B denies it. Shall A go to law with B? A starts to go to law and a third man, G, comes to him and says, “A, you are committing an offense; you are doing wrong,” and A refuses to hear C, and C goes off and gets D and E, and A won’t yield. Then if C, D and E come before the church and say, “We are not judging as to the merits in the case; we do not say A is doing wrong in going to law, but we do say A is doing wrong in the kind of court he goes to.” Who shall be the arbitrator? A says that he won’t listen to the church; B may owe A that $100, we don’t deny that. Here A denies the jurisdiction of Jesus Christ. Suppose A says, “I will hear the church,” and the case is put on its merits. Paul says (and the revised version puts an entirely new sense on it), “If then ye have to judge things pertaining to this life, do you set them to judge who are of no account in the church?” In other words, “Is that the way you are going to do? When the case comes up between A and B) are you going to select people that are no account? Haven’t you got some disinterested party? Are you going to select a committee of B-partisans, or of A-partisans?” The common version does not give that sense at all. It says, “Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you?”

We come now to the case that will prevent final church action: Suppose you say to A, “Are you willing to leave this matter to a disinterested committee of brethren as to what are the merits of your question? They do not want to say B robbed you, and they do not want to say you harmed B; are you willing for a third disinterested party to take it up and bring it up on the merits of the case before you get to final church action?”

There is a passage upon which I preached one sermon, “Jesus the Arbiter of the Nations.” I preached it on the occasion of the meeting of The Hague Conference. It shows even in matters of diplomacy that it is better to settle the matter by arbitration than to go to war. In the millennium there will be no war because Jesus is the arbiter between the nations. If that is to take place on a scale in which nations are involved, why cannot we find in the church a small committee of wise and disinterested brethren that will look into the case and settle it without ever going to final church action? But suppose this committee does not settle the case. They say, “Brethren, we have tried to settle it, and here it is before the church. The question is, does B owe A this $100? If he does he ought to pay it; if he does not, A ought not to worry about it.” If a man won’t let his brethren settle these matters for him, what is he going to do at the judgment? He presents a case; he says that rather than go to an outsider why not say, “I will just bear this wrong.” Well, but suppose they defrauded him?

I have been defrauded many a time, more than once since I moved to Fort Worth. Why should I parade before outsiders my case?

The saddest case in the Texas affairs of our denomination illustrates that. Here we had a brother, very prominent, who kept bringing cases before the General Convention of Texas, and every time he would bring it they decided against him. He would not let it stay undecided. Finally, he took the case into court, and if any man was ever present one day when that case was on trial and heard the infidel lawyers and the lawyers of other denominations gloat over the Baptist trouble, he would never forget it. Suppose that man had had the sounds preserved in a graphophone, and had that in his family, and when any one would come to see him he would have that instrument to reproduce those vile sentences against our very best men? Oh, it was infamous! Of course it ruined that man. It didn’t ultimately hurt the other men, but it surely killed the man that resorted to it.

Paul then announces a fundamental principle. He is discussing the point whether a fornicator or adulterer should be retained in the church, and he says, “Know ye not that a fornicator, an adulterer, a covetous man shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven?” He will be excluded there certainly; he will never get in; the gates will be barred. In other words, Christianity is designed to be a maker of character. If it does not make a man better than he was before, it is not worth anything; ‘if it does not make a father a better father, a mother a better mother, a sister a better sister, a brother a better brother, a child a better child if there is no improvement in the character of the man, then we may be sure that he has never been born again, because the Spirit does not produce that kind of fruit. And Paul says that the fruits of the flesh are manifest. Then he tells what they are and says that the fruits of the Spirit are manifest. “By their fruits ye shall know them,” says Jesus.

And then again they were liable to misunderstand. He says, “I don’t mean that the murderer never gets to heaven; I don’t mean that men who were fornicators never get to heaven, for such were some of you. You belonged to that very crowd, but ye were washed; the Holy Spirit took you in charge; you desired to obey God, not to disobey him.”

In other words, the Holy Spirit is greater than total depravity. It can overcome total depravity, because total depravity is of the first birth; but this being born again by the power of the Holy Spirit makes one of another seed, of the word of God, that liveth and abideth forever.

And the murderer can be saved, as thousands of them have been saved. It was the greatest triumph of Christianity to look upon that Corinthian crowd. All the depths of infamy through which some of them had passed could not be named in a mixed audience, but by the power of God they were washed, and they lived, and one of the most remarkable cases as bearing upon it, is the case of the celebrated Augustine. His mother was a saint, and she loved her wild, wayward boy. It seemed that the bridle had been taken off, and the devil was riding him “bareback” down to hell. He, after his conversion, often referred to the shameless infamies he committed. This is a case worthy of consideration. Everyone ought to read Augustine’s confessions. He did not keep on living that life after he was converted; he was one of the greatest preachers that ever lived. What we call Calvinism is the doctrine of Augustine. He saved the church for 300 years from going astray. So Paul says, “Such were some of you; but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified.”

He comes now to something more difficult. He is discussing this debasing sin of fornication, and says, “Every sin that a man doeth is without the body (except this one).” Now instead of sin’s residing in the body and corrupting the spirit, it is the spirit that sins and corrupts the body. Envy, that is not a bodily sin; hate, that is not a bodily sin; malice, that is not a bodily sin; pride, presumption, every sin that a man commits is apart from his body except fornication. There the body is made the instrument of the sin. And Paul brings up this argument, “Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you?” Generally when he refers to the temple, he refers to a church, as he says to this church, “Ye are God’s building, ye are the temple of God,” and where he says, “Every separate congregation groweth up into the holy temple of God, a habitation of the Spirit,” but in this particular case he makes the body of the Christian a temple of the Spirit, because the Holy Spirit enters into him and dwells in him, and if he dwells in him, then the body is the temple in which he dwells.

QUESTIONS

1. What is the relation between the revolt against apostolic authority and the relaxation of morals?

2. Illustrate how sins are gregarious.

3. What is the case of discipline discussed in 1Co 5 ?

4. What relation did this man sustain to the woman whom he took?

5. What church action did Paul prescribe?

6. What apostolic action in this case, what illustration from the Old Testament, and what one also from the New Testament?

7. What is the object of correction discipline in the church member, and what illustration given?

8. What is the object relative to the church, what Paul’s argument, what Old Testament illustration, and what the New Testament application?

9. What is the meaning and application of 1Co 5:11 ?

10. What is the meaning and application of 1Co 5:12-13 ?

11. What is the fourth ecclesiastical disorder, and where discussed?

12. What of the prevalence of this sin?

13. What is Paul’s argument against this disorder?

14. What is Christ’s direction in such cases?

15. Describe a typical case of “going to law” scripturally.

16. In case a proper adjustment cannot be made, what does Paul recommend?

18. What fundamental principle does Paul enunciate in this connection?

19. What is the design of Christianity?

20. What Paul’s teaching elsewhere on this point, and what does Christ say also?

21. What is the character of the Corinthians before hearing the gospel, and what their character afterwards?

22. What remarkable case of this transformation cited, and what is Calvinism.?

23. What is the meaning of “Every sin that a man doeth is without the body . . .” and what the application?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?

Ver. 1. Go to law before the unjust ] All unbelievers are, 1. Void of Christ’s righteousness imputed; 2. Of true civil righteousness, as being self-seekers in all. 3. They oppress the saints, and draw them before the judgment seats,Jas 2:6Jas 2:6 , where they are so ill dealt with oftentimes, that they come to be of Themistocles’ mind, who professed, that if two ways were showed him, one to hell, and the other to the bar, he would choose that which went to hell, and forsake the other.

And not before the saints ] Christians first brought their causes before the bishops to be judged. And hence grew their power (as Paraeus noteth), which the Christian emperors first would not, and afterwards could not, take away from them. This raised papacy and prelacy to such a height, they would be princes as well as bishops.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

1 11. ] PROHIBITION TO SETTLE THEIR DIFFER CES IN THE LEGAL COURTS OF THE HEATHEN: RATHER SHOULD THESE BE ADJUDGED AMONG THEMSELVES (1 6): BUT FAR BETTER NOT TO QUARREL RATHER TO SUFFER WRONG, WAITING FOR JUSTICE TO BE DONE AT THE COMING OF THE LORD, WHEN ALL WHO DO WRONG SHALL BE EXCLUDED FORM HIS KINGDOM (6 11).

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

1. ] On , Dares , Bengel remarks, “Grandi verbo notatur lsa majestas Christianorum.”

, no particular individual, but any one : for he proceeds in the plur., 1Co 6:4 ; 1Co 6:7 .

] So ref. and Demosth. . . p. 1120, ;

, reff., to go to law . So Eur. Med. 609, , and Anthol. ii. 30, , . Wetst. on Mat 5:40 .

(reff.), before , as judges.

] , , , , , . . , , , , , , , ; Chrys. Hom. xvi. p 137.

The Rabbinical prohibitions against going to law before Gentiles may be seen in Wetst.: e.g. “Statutum est, ad quod omnes Israelit obligantur, eum qui litem cum alio habet, non debere eam tractare coram gentilibus.” Tanchuma, xcii. 2.

. ] The Apostle does not mean that the Christians had their courts of law, but that they should submit their differences to courts of arbitration among themselves. Such courts of arbitration were common among the Jews. In Jos. Antt. xiv. 10. 17, there is a decree by which the Jews of Sardis are allowed the use of a , . .

Theodoret shews, (Rom 13:1 ff.): , . See Stanley in loc., who thinks the existence of such courts is here implied. But his support of his view from the Ap. Constt. and the Clementines, cir. A.D. 150, would only go to shew that the Apostle’s injunction here had been obeyed, and that those courts were the result.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

1Co 6:1-6 . 17. LAW-SUITS IN HEATHEN COURTS. Beside the , amongst those to be excommunicated at Cor [887] , stood the (1Co 5:11 ); fraud and robbery were only less rife than licentiousness; and this element of corruption, along with the other, had reappeared within the Church (1Co 6:8 ). Instead of being repressed by timely correction, the evil had grown rank; in several instances aggrieved Christian parties had carried their complaints before the civil Courts, to the scandal of the Church and to Paul’s high indignation. Two links of thought connect chh. 5. and 6.: (1) the kindred nature of sins of impurity and of covetousness , both prevalent at Cor [888] , both destructive of society; (2) the lamentable lack of Church discipline (1Co 5:12 ), which enabled these mischiefs to gather head.

[887] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.

[888] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

1Co 6:1 . . . .; “Does any one of you dare?”etc. “notatur lsa majestas Christianorum” (Bg [889] ): , sustinere, non erubescere . This also was matter of common knowledge, like the crime of 1Co 5:1 . The abrupt interrog. marks the outburst of indignant feeling. You treat the Church, the seat of the Holy Spirit (1Co 3:16 f.), as though it were without authority or wisdom; you take your case from the highest court to the lowest! So the appellant is first censured; in 1Co 6:4 the whole Church comes in for blame. ( res, negotium ), (mid [890] ; see parls.), with gen [891] , (1Co 6:2 ), (1Co 6:2 ), (1Co 6:4 ), and perhaps (1Co 6:7 ), are all in this passage technical legal expressions. the term applied by the Jews ( cf. Gal 2:15 ), and then by Christians, to the heathen marks the action censured as self-stultifying to seek for right from “the unrighteous”! P. himself appealed to Roman justice, but never in matters “between brother and brother,” nor in the way of accusing his injurers (Act 28:19 ); only in defence of his work. indicates by contrast the moral dignity of Christians (see 1Co 1:2 , and note), a judicial attribute; cf. sanctitas fori (Quintilian, xi., 3. 58). There exists a similar Rabbinical inhibition: “It is forbidden to bring a matter of right before idolatrous judges. Whosoever goeth before them with a law-suit is impious, and does the same as though he blasphemed and cursed; and hath lifted his hand against the law of Moses our Teacher, blessed be he!” ( Shulchan aruch, Choshen hammishpat , 29). The Roman Government allowed the Jews liberty of internal jurisdiction; the Bethdin ( house of judgment ) was as regular a part of the Israelite economy as the Beth-keneseth ( synagogue ). In Rom 13:1 ff. P. regards the power of the State from a diff [892] point of view.

[889] Bengel’s Gnomon Novi Testamenti.

[890] middle voice.

[891] genitive case.

[892] difference, different, differently.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

1 Corinthians Chapter 6

We have now to encounter a worldly evil among the Corinthian saints, as distinguished from the fleshly state and the corruption which have already passed before us.

“Dare any of you having a matter against another, go to law [seek judgment] before the unjust and not before the saints?” (Ver. 1.) Here modern practice, or even thought, greatly differs from apostolic principle. Christians now-a-days have little conscience in appealing to a worldly tribunal. It is evident that the Holy Ghost felt it to be an outrage, nor could any Christian walking rightly think of prosecuting a suit before the world against another however wrong. He must forget what God accounts each to be: the world, as having rejected His Son; the saints, as those that are by grace separated from it to God.

Here however the apostle grounds his reproof on the anomaly of seeking judgment at the hands of those whom we shall judge at Christ’s coming. “*Know ye not that the saints shall judge the world? And if the world is judged by you, are ye unworthy of the least judgments? Do ye not know that we shall judge angels? Much more things of this life. If then ye have judgments in things of this life, set up those who are of no esteem in the church.” (Ver. 2-4.) The apostle thus brings in the light of the coming day to bear upon present matters. This is certain from verse 8, if any one could question verse 2. In vain the efforts of ancients (Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret, etc.) to make it moral, or of moderns (Mosheim, Rosenmller, etc.) to make it political and worldly. The future judgment of the quick in the kingdom of our Lord is a reality that acts on the apostle now. He uses it to judge the conduct of every day. How can it be a living truth if it operate not thus? Even the Corinthians did not doubt the fact as to the future; but, like all unspiritual persons, they had let it slip now where they ought to have remembered it.

* A B C Dp.m. F G P, at least ten cursives, etc., read omitted in Tex, Rec. on the authority of two or three uncials and most cursives.

It is evident however that “that day” was a truth so familiar and admitted on all sides by the saints that Paul could reason from it as unquestionable. The saints have the same life now, and the same Spirit; they have also the word of God. How monstrous then thus to ignore the glory with Christ to which grace calls them, and to fall into the ways of men! To faith it was the grossest inconsistency; for if the world is judged by the saints, are they unworthy of the “least judgments?” Such were and are the questions on which men usually go to law. Nor is it only the world but other beings the saints are to judge. “Know ye not that we shall judge angels? Much more things in this life.”

The future judgment of the world and of angels has slipped away from Christians generally. They believe in the judgment of the dead, not of the living; and hence the ground of the apostle’s appeal no longer exists for them. Scriptures such as these become unreal to their minds. So far they are practically infidel; and necessarily their practice is worldly in this respect. Alas! it is only a sample, not an exception. The difficult times of the last days are come, when men are lovers of self and of money, boastful and arrogant, abusive and disobedient to parents, lovers of pleasure rather than of God, having a form of piety but denying its power. From these we are commanded to turn away. Scripture is the grand resource; and this, not forgetting the apostle’s conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, persecution, suffering, and the certainty that all who desire to live piously in Christ shall be persecuted, while wicked men and impostors grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. The time is come when men will not bear sound teaching, but according to their own lusts will heap up to themselves teachers, having itching ears, turning away from the truth as decidedly as they have turned aside to fables. What more mischievous delusion than a millennium to be brought in by the church’s testimony and labours? It will really follow divine judgment when the Lord Himself comes, who, after executing it, will pour out the Spirit afresh on all flesh, when they see the salvation of God.

The Corinthians were not so far gone as the Christians of our day. They were well aware that the saints shall judge the world: only selfishness had dulled their remembrance of it. The Spirit of God now recalls the truth to them, and appeals to their sense of the evident incongruity that those who are to judge the world on the grandest scale were accounting themselves in feet unworthy of the smallest judgments. Such no doubt were those that could be then before the Corinthian brethren, whereas by-and-by the gravest will be held by them when glorified. And the apostle makes the inconsistency more pungently felt by characterising the world as the “unjust” and themselves as “the saints” – nay, by reminding them that we shall judge angels. Surely then things pertaining to this life between brethren ought not to go farther! Where was their faith and their love? Where their hope?

Some interpreters, as we know, take verse 4 interrogatively, others sarcastically. There seems no particular reason for the former, Matters of this life require no more than good sense and honesty; and surely the possession of these would not constitute a claim for honour in the church. Brethren might have both, and be little esteemed there, where the grace and power of Christ alone constitute such a claim. The decision of those matters in no way called for high spirituality. Indeed the apostle says, “I speak to your shame. Thus there is not among you one wise [man] who shall be able to decide between brethren” (literally, “brother [and brother]”). “But brother goeth to law with brother, and this before unbelievers. Already therefore* it is altogether a fault in you that ye go to law among yourselves. Why are ye not rather wronged? why are ye not rather defrauded? But ye do wrong and defraud, and this, brethren.” (Ver. 5-8.)

* p m. Dp.m., several cursives, etc., omit .

So it is, , in A B C D E P, etc.; in Tex. Rec., with L and most cursives, etc.

It is clear that the apostle in no way wished such disputes to be brought, in the first instance at least, before the assembly. The gravest cases should be, not lighter ones. Had they not even one wise man to decide them? He is slighting such questions as well as reproving themselves for their worldliness; and their moral state was worse to him than their lack of wisdom. The Christian is called to suffer, even when he does well, and to take it patiently, not to go to law. The Corinthians were sadly forgetful of the true glory of the church; and when Christians thus forget their proper standing and the conduct that suite it, they cease to walk even as upright men should. “Ye do wrong and defraud, and this, brethren.” Nor is it so surprising, when we consider that it never was intended that Christians should walk well except by faith, any more than Peter could walk on the waves without looking to Christ. When he ceased to look to Him, he begins to sink at once, less safe than those who had never ventured out of the ship.

Failure in faith and hope too, I must repeat, will soon be found to involve failure in love. “Ye do wrong and defraud, and this, brethren.” All through from first to last, it was a direct dishonour to God, and a false testimony to their relationship to Him, if indeed they were born of God. His sense of their failure as Christians does not lessen his horror at the dishonesty or other wrong which provoked the law-suits. “Know ye not that unjust [men] shall not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor abusers of themselves as women, nor abusers of themselves with men, nor rapacious, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit God’s kingdom.” (Vers. 9, 10.) It is clear that the apostle, without confining himself to the actual case, is exposing severely the habits so common at Corinth – corruption much more than violence. He is speaking for profit and for solemn warning as the Holy Ghost always does, if He touches sin at all. He is not beating the air, nor denouncing sins only found elsewhere. Fleshly add worldly licence would surely end, if unjudged, in revolting excesses. Tampering with a little evil is the straight road to more and worse, and in none so certainly as the professing Christian. To indulge in any evil is in works to deny Christ. The business of a Christian is to manifest Him. The Corinthian saints were in danger of slipping back into the vilest ways of human corruption.

“And these things were some of you.” This would give Satan an advantage if they looked away from Christ. Old habits then resume their power, and evil communications corrupt good manners. Then he adds, “But ye were washed” [literally, “had yourselves washed”], “but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus [Christ]* and by the Spirit of our God.” (Ver. 11.) He reminds them of the gracious power of God in Christ on whom they believed by the action of His Spirit; and will not allow that this could be all in vain. In there may be an allusion to the administrative sign, as in Act 22:16 ; but the connection here points rather to the reality signified. The sanctification is clearly the setting apart of the Christian to God which the Holy Spirit effects in conversion, rather than the practical holiness which He afterwards works to make good, the former being absolute as the latter is relative. This is shown conclusively by its preceding justification, which has here of course its regular sense, when the soul is not only born of God but stands acquitted of all charge before Him through the work of Christ, and is then sealed by the Spirit.

* is here read by B C D p.m. E P, some cursives, and almost all the ancient versions, etc.

The apostle turns next to fleshly abuses: the first in respect of meats, the second and gravest in fornication. He had shown that, whatever the grace of God is in calling the vilest, all such are saved after a holy sort. This he now exemplifies in two instances where some pleaded liberty to deny practical purity. Of this he will not hear. He will not diminish liberty one jot, but he asserts its character to be Christian, as all our other privileges are. If not of Christ, it is sin. So is it with all we boast: life, righteousness, peace, and glory. In this liberty differs not from the rest. What Christian could wish any of these in or for the flesh? It would be to abandon the Second man for the first: to wish licence for sin proves utter lack of love and honour for the Saviour.

“All things are lawful to me, but all things do not profit; all things are lawful to me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats, but God will bring to nought both it and them; but the body [is] not for fornication but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. And God both raised the Lord, and will raise up us by his power. Know ye not, that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then taking the members of Christ make [them] members of a harlot? Let it not be. What!* Know ye not that he that is joined to the harlot is one body? For, saith he, the two [shall be] one flesh. But he that is joined to the Lord is one spirit. Flee fornication. Every sin which a man may practise is outside the body, but the fornicator sinneth against his own body. What! Know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit that [is] in you, which ye have from God; and ye are not your own? For ye were bought with a price: do then glorify God in your body.” (Ver. 12-20.)

* is read by A B C F G P and other authorities.

to; Ap.m. B C D E F G K P, etc,; Ap.m. L, many cursives, etc.

The common reading , is absent from A B Cs.m. Dp.m. E F G, and many excellent witnesses.

If all things are lawful to the Christian, certainly all do not profit. As Christ never did what did not profit, so neither should the Christian. He is free, but it is only according to Christ for good, and this in love, the good of others. But there is another guard: if all things are lawful to the Christian, he refuses to be brought under the power of anything: were it not so, it would be bondage, not liberty. Thus to have regard for others’ good must be kept up, as well the liberty itself intact. The Christian is called to serve others, never to be the slave of a habit in anything great or small.

The first application of the apostle is to meats, which he deals with in terms so curtly contemptuous as to decide the question for every godly soul. “Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats, but God will bring to nought both it and them;” He then points out an analogy as forcible as it is surprising and withal no less true: they mutually suit one another, and both perish under God’s dealing. They are but temporary. It was the more striking, as coming through one who had been a Jew to those who had been Gentiles; and all know the place meats had in Judaism. But Christianity brings in the light of God and of the future for our present guidance; as we see in the second case still more at length. For “the body is not for fornication but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.” If the belly is put down to its true and passing use, the body is exalted to a place of which philosophy knew nothing. As it was not formed for unhallowed or promiscuous indulgence, so it is for the Lord and the Lord is for it.

Never was the honour of the body set in its true light till Christ came and proved it not only in His own person as man but in ours as redeemed by His blood and indwelt by the Holy Spirit. (Compare Rom 6:12 , Rom 6:13 , Rom 6:19 ; Rom 8:10 ; Rom 12:1 ; Col 2:23 ; 1Th 4:4 ; 1Th 5:23 ; 1Ti 4:3-5 .) Even now the Lord disdains not this temple of the Spirit: how much less when changed into the likeness of His glory? (Rom 8:11 , Rom 8:18-23 ; Phi 3:21 .) In this body we shall have the portion of our Lord. For “God both raised the Lord and will raise up us by his power.” (See 1Co 15 ; 2Co 4:14 .)

It is not merely that our spirits go to be with the Lord in heaven; our bodies shall be raised like His at His coming, as many bodies of the saints which slept arose and came out of their graves after His resurrection. For if death shows man’s weakness, resurrection displays God’s power. The actual spiritual effect of this is immense. Not our souls but our bodies are declared to be members of Christ. Those who descant on the soul only may claim a superior elevation. But it is never really so in practice or in theory. On the contrary the immortality of the soul is easily perverted to man’s pride; not so the resurrection, which not only exalts God and humbles man but delivers from present ease and indulgence where it is held in faith. Of this the Holy Spirit is the earnest, who joins us to the Lord and constitutes our bodies members of Christ. Hence the enormity of fornication. (Vers. 15, 16.) How basely inconsistent with such intimacy, yea union, is impurity with a harlot! It was the more needful to urge this on a city more than any other noted for this sort of licence, besides the broad fact that the heathen in general regarded fornication as an indifferent act like eating and not as in itself a sin. “The two, saith he, shall be one flesh; but he that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit.” (Vers. 16, 17.)

But its incongruity with our relation to Christ is not all that the apostle urges. Fornication he would have avoided earnestly, because of its peculiar character, differing as it does from every other sin in this that it is against the body itself, while others are external to it. How dreadful then to think not merely of the body so misused, but the Christian’s body, temple of the Holy Spirit as it is! not from any mere consecration to Him but from His being in us, and this from God, on the ground of purchase by Christ’s blood. Therefore the apostle’s appeal to glorify God in their body.

It was only because of Christ’s work that the Holy Spirit could thus be given to us and dwell in us. He quickened souls before Christ shed His blood, but He never sealed them till after. Jesus, the Holy One of God, is the sole example of man so sealed without blood. But He is the exception that proves the rule. Adam was not, because, though innocent, he was not holy nor is ever said to have been; the Second man was, and only He apart from redemption; and therefore was He sealed by God the Father in virtue and witness of His intrinsic perfection. If we can be and are, it is solely in virtue of being perfected by His one offering, and we are therefore exhorted not to grieve the Holy Spirit of God whereby we are sealed unto the day of redemption (that is, of our bodies). The Spirit given is the expression of God’s love shed abroad in our hearts; He is also the measure by which we should try our conduct, and the power of enjoying and representing Christ aright. Bought then so that we are not our own but God’s, we are called accordingly to glorify God in our body. A wondrous fact to be assured of on divine authority that such as we by grace can and should glorify God!

These then are the motives for us. We are bought with a price, and we have the Holy Spirit dwelling in us. “Know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit that is in you, which ye have from God; and ye are not your own? For ye were bought with a price.” It enhances the presence of the Spirit in us when we are told that we have Him from God. It could not be otherwise of course; but to have it thus stated is precious and solemn God would have us to remember and feel that it is from Him we have the Spirit thus given.

But let us not forget that it is in our body we are to glorify God. Many a one deceives himself in the thought that he is all right in spirit, though he dare not say that he keeps his body under and brings it into subjection. The Christian is bound to glorify God in his body.

So in the consecration of the priests under the law (Lev 8 ) we may see that the washing of water preceded the putting on of blood, and the anointing of oil closed the matter. It is just the same order of truth which is discernible here, and which is true of the Christian in fact. Of old followed the duties of the priestly office according to the instructions of Jehovah; as we see the Christian here exhorted to glorify God. What a claim! How God values the spirit, ways, communion, and conduct of the Christian! How lowering to the standard when, like the Corinthians, we forget that we are no longer men striving to walk with decency through the world, but our body the temple of the Holy Ghost and ourselves the purchase of Christ’s blood, and with such an aim set before us as glorifying God! The unbelief of believers is the delight of the adversary and the saddest hindrance to His glory in and by us. It is the fertile source of every failure and of the most grievous sins in the saints. It is the main stumbling-block for every serious man in the world. It makes the glorifying of God an impossibility. May we be enabled then to meet the simplest matter of every-day propriety in the faith that is familiar with the richest and highest displays of God’s grace in the redemption of Christ and the gift of the Spirit!

Fuente: William Kelly Major Works (New Testament)

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: 1Co 6:1-6

1Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? 2Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? 3Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? 4So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? 5I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, 6 but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?

1Co 6:1

NASB”a case”

NKJV”a matter”

NRSV”a grievance”

TEV”a dispute”

NJB”a complaint”

This is used in the Koine Greek Papyri found in Egypt for (1) “an action” or “a deed”; (2) “a lawsuit”; (3) “trouble” or “difficulty”; (4) “business” or “trade” (cf. Moulton and Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, p. 532). Number two fits this context best. We know from the Athenian documents that Greeks were culturally prone to litigations. The same, to some extent, applies to Romans. The Corinth of Paul’s day was not Greek, but Roman (see Bruce W. Winter, After Paul Left Corinth, Eerdmans, 2001).

NASB”his neighbor”

NKJV, NRSV,

NJB”another”

TEV”another Christian”

This is literally heteros (cf. 1Co 10:24; 1Co 14:17; Gal 6:4). In Classical Greek there was a distinction between alla (i.e another of the same kind) and heteros (i.e., another of a different kind). This distinction in Koine Greek (as were many of the distinctions of Classical Greek grammar and usage) was fading. This context is a good example. The use here of heteros, referring to a fellow believer, is paralleled in Rom 13:8. In Rom 2:1 the term has a wider meaning, possibly neighbor, fellow citizen, or Jew. The contextual clincher for the connotation in this verse is the phrase “before the saints.” A lost neighbor would probably not agree to go before a church court (cf. Mat 18:17; Jas 2:1-4) in a dispute with a believer.

It is surely possible that Paul had a two-level distinction. It is a problem for a believer against a nonbeliever to go before a pagan tribunal. It is even worse for a believer to take another believer before a pagan tribunal. I prefer the interpretation that “neighbor” in 1Co 6:1 also means “covenant partner” or “fellow believer.”

“dare” This Greek term (i.e., tolma) is used several times in the Corinthian letters in the sense of “to presume” or “to assure a boldness” (cf. 1Co 6:1; 2Co 6:2; 2Co 6:10; 2Co 11:21; and Rom 5:7; Rom 15:15; Rom 15:18; Jud 1:9).

NASB, NKJV”go to law before the unrighteous”

NRSV”to take it to court before the unrighteous”

TEV”go before heathen judges”

NJB”to seek judgement from sinners”

Paul was not worried about believers being treated unfairly, but about exposing Christian problems before unbelievers. The Spirit is the key to interpersonal relationships in the church, not pagan law. Evangelism is more important than personal justice!

1Co 6:2 “do you not know” See note at 1Co 5:6.

“the saints” “Saints” (hogioi) is from the OT term “holy,” (kadosh) which meant “set apart for God’s service” (cf. Exo 19:6; Deu 7:6; 1Co 1:2; 2Co 1:1; Rom 1:1; Eph 1:1; Php 1:1; Col 1:2). It is always plural in the NT except for one time in Philippians (1Co 4:21), but even there, it is used corporately. To be saved is to be part of the covenant community of faith, the family of believers. See SPECIAL TOPIC: SAINTS at 1Co 1:2.

God’s people are holy because of the imputed righteousness of Jesus (i.e., the indicative statement, cf. Romans 4; 2Co 5:21). It is God’s will that they live holy lives (i.e., the imperative command, cf. Eph 1:4; Eph 4:1; Eph 5:27; Col 1:22; Col 3:12). Believers are declared holy (positional sanctification) and also called to lifestyle holiness (progressive sanctification). Justification and sanctification must be held together! See SPECIAL TOPIC: NEW TESTAMENT HOLINESS/SANCTIFICATION at 1Co 1:2.

“will judge the world” Although Jesus mentioned specifically that the Apostles will act as judges, the logical extension of that truth is that saints will also judge (cf. Dan 7:22; Dan 7:27; Mat 19:28; Luk 22:28-30; Rev 2:26; Rev 3:21; Rev 20:4). When and how are the hard questions.

“If” This is a first class conditional sentence, which assumes that saints will participate as judges in the end-time events.

NASB”are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts”

NKJV”are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters”

NRSV”are you incompetent to try trivial cases”

TEV”aren’t you capable of judging small matters”

NJB”are you not competent for petty cases”

This is biting sarcasm directed to those who claimed to have superior wisdom! This same term (i.e., anaxios) is used of the inappropriate behavior of the Corinthian churches at the Lord’s Supper (cf. 1Co 11:27; 1Co 11:29). These immature believers, who claimed so much special spiritual insight, in reality did not know how to evaluate properly or act properly!

The term “smallest” is the superlative form of mikros. Paul used it earlier in 1Co 4:3. Its use heightens the sarcasm.

1Co 6:3 “Do you not know that we will judge angels” The grammar expects a “yes” answer. Believers are a higher spiritual order than the angels. It is hard for believers, trapped in this fallen world, to realize our true spiritual standing (cf. 1Co 13:12). Angels were created as servants of God and of redeemed humanity (cf. Heb 1:14). It is humanity that is created in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gen 1:26-27), not the angels. It is for humanity that Jesus gave His life, not for angels (cf. Heb 2:14-16). Believers will one day judge the angels (i.e., rebellious angels, cf. Genesis 6; Mat 25:41; 2Pe 2:4-9; Jud 1:6 or all angels as a metaphor of universal domination, Dan 7:22; Dan 7:27).

According to rabbinical theology the angels have always been jealous of God’s love, care, and provision for fallen humanity. The Jewish apocalyptic literature even asserts that Satan’s rebellion was related to God’s command to serve Adam’s race.

“How much more” This reflects a strong enclitic particle (i.e., ge), which is used to indicate emphasis (cf. Moulton’s Analytical Lexicon, Revised, p. 75). The sarcastic contrast is obvious.

1Co 6:4 “if” This is a third class conditional sentence, which means potential action.

“do you appoint” There are several possible ways to translate this phrase. The theories are

1. indicative (a statement), “you do set up”

2. interrogative (a question), “do you set up?”

3. exclamation (cf. NJB, NIV), “you set up!”

4. IMPERATIVE (a command), “set up”

The point is that the least Christian should be able to judge simple and ordinary earthly matters. To try to clarify the options more, there are two ways to view this text: (1) it is referring to pagan judges or (2) it is referring to the least significant members of the church. If so, it is continuing sarcasm.

NASB, NJB”who are of no account”

NKJV”those who are least esteemed”

NRSV, TEV”those who have no standing”

This very term (i.e., exouthene, perfect passive participle) was used by Paul in 1Co 1:28 to show that God uses the “base things,” “the despised,” “the things that are not” to confound the world’s wisdom so that God Himself will receive the glory. Here it seems to imply those in the church with no standing or leadership skills. The least of the people of God are more adequate because of God’s wisdom and Spirit to deal with problems than the best educated and experienced unbelieving secular judges.

“church” See Special Topic at 1Co 1:2.

1Co 6:5 “I say this to your shame” Paul uses this word often (cf. 1Co 4:14; 1Co 6:5; 1Co 15:34; 2Th 3:14; Tit 2:8). Shaming is one of the Spirit’s tools to bring conviction and allow truth and trustworthy actions and attitudes to develop. This verse continues the biting sarcasm.

“Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man” This was biting sarcasm to this intellectually arrogant church. This is an emphatic double negative question, which expects a “yes” answer. See note at 1Co 4:7.

1Co 6:6 “and that before unbelievers” There is no article, therefore, the emphasis is on the worldly quality of “pagan” judges.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

any. App-123.

against. App-104.

another = the other. App-124.

go to law. Literally be judged. App-122.

before. App-104.

unjust. Greek. adikos. See Act 24:15 and compare App-128.

saints. See Act 26:10.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

1-11.] PROHIBITION TO SETTLE THEIR DIFFER CES IN THE LEGAL COURTS OF THE HEATHEN: RATHER SHOULD THESE BE ADJUDGED AMONG THEMSELVES (1-6): BUT FAR BETTER NOT TO QUARREL-RATHER TO SUFFER WRONG, WAITING FOR JUSTICE TO BE DONE AT THE COMING OF THE LORD, WHEN ALL WHO DO WRONG SHALL BE EXCLUDED FORM HIS KINGDOM (6-11).

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Chapter 6

Now Paul brings up another issue, and that was the taking of a brother before the pagan courts.

Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do you not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if you are going to be judging the world, are you unworthy to judge in the smallest matters? ( 1Co 6:1-2 )

Now, there were those within the church of Corinth that were going to the pagan courts in Corinth with judgments against a brother within the church. And Paul is saying ideally your differences should be resolved within the church, by the church, for God has committed judgment to the church; the church will be judging the world.

Now, we know that Christ will be the one that judges the world, but we are one in Christ. And so in Him we will be participating in the judgment of the world. Now, if that awesome responsibility is to be placed upon the church in Christ, then surely we should be able to judge in these small matters that exist between brothers. And differences should be resolved, if possible, within the church.

Now Paul is not saying that, if necessary, that we should not take legal recourse. He is dealing, first of all, with a situation within the church itself. There are those that perhaps you have a legal problem with who are outside of the church and they would not submit to the authority of the church’s decision. And thus, it is sometimes necessary to take legal recourse in order that you might obtain justice.

Paul himself, when he was getting the old political runaround before Festus, when Festus said, “Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem and face these charges?” And he’d already spent two years waiting for justice to be done there in the prison in Caesarea. And Paul realizing this is just one more little political go-round, and he said, “I appeal unto Caesar.” And he exercised his right as a Roman citizen, made his appeal to Caesar.

So that Paul himself took a legal recourse to save himself further manipulating by the politicians. But as much as God has placed judgment within the church, we should be able to judge in the matters that deal with those within the church.

Know ye not that we shall judge angels? ( 1Co 6:3 )

Now, there are angels which did not keep their first estate. Who probably with Satan rebelled against the authority of God, for Revelation would indicate that as many as perhaps one third of the angels joined Satan’s conspiracy against the authority of God. And Jude tells us that they are being reserved in chains awaiting the day of judgment.

Now again, Christ will be, no doubt, the one figure of judgment against the angels, but we are in Christ and we are associated with Christ. We are together with Him, joined with Him in the kingdom age as one with Him. And so we join in Him even in the judgment of angels.

Now, it doesn’t mean that you’re going to have a chance to say to your guardian angel, “Hey, where were you on the sixteenth of October when I ran into that guy? Why weren’t you there to hold me back?”

But those angels which kept not their first principals are to be judged. They are awaiting the day of judgment in chains of darkness, awaiting the day of judgment. But if we’re going to be judging in these spiritual issues,

how much more should we be able to judge in things that pertain to this life? If then you have judgment of things pertaining to this life, set those to judge who are least esteemed in the church ( 1Co 6:3-4 ).

You know, the least esteemed Christian is more capable of honest, true judgment than the smartest judge in the superior court, as far as able to render righteous judgment. Now, more and more as I read of some of the judgments coming out of the superior courts, I wonder concerning the competency to judge. I am alarmed; I’m shocked at how light a sentence or non-sentences some of those convicted of terrible crimes are receiving.

So the least esteemed. You see, the courts of the land know nothing of the laws of the Spirit. Paul was talking about the natural man does not know the things of the Spirit, or does not understand the things of the Spirit, neither can he know them; they are spiritually discerned. But he which is spiritual understands all things, though he is not understood by the world. So in dealing with issues within the church, especially issues that involve spiritual things, the least of the saints are more competent to judge than the wisest of the world. In the same token, you can learn more divine truth from an uneducated, simple, Spirit-filled believer, you can learn more spiritual truth from them than you can the wisest Ph.D. or Th.D. in the country who is not born again.

Scholarship has nothing to do with the understanding of things of the Spirit because the natural man cannot understand them, neither does he know them. And thus, they cannot be a guide to spiritual truth nor can they be competent to judge in spiritual matters. These issues should all be settled within the church. Paul said,

I’m speaking to your shame ( 1Co 6:5 ).

I’m hoping to shame you by your actions.

Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? ( 1Co 6:5 )

Don’t you have one person there who is wise enough to deal with these issues?

But a brother goes to law with a brother, and that before the pagans. Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because you go to law with one another. Why do you not rather take wrong? Why do you not rather allow yourselves to be defrauded? No, you do wrong, and you defraud, and that your own brethren ( 1Co 6:6-8 ).

Tragic, tragic that it hasn’t stopped. There are still those who are within the church today who would defraud even their own brothers. It’s a shame. And so Paul is speaking of the shameful condition. Now again, this does not at all dictate against going to court with a person who is not a brother; that is sometimes our only recourse. And it is not a prohibition, nor is it to my knowledge or understanding a prohibition of going to court with a brother if the brother is not willing to settle it within the church. You see, if he’s unwilling to submit to the arbitration within the church, then you may have to take other recourse, but Paul said that’s a shame. It would be better if you would just be defrauded. Allow it. If a man sues you to get your coat, give him your cloak also, Jesus said.

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? ( 1Co 6:9 )

Now we’re getting down to some very serious issues. Those who are going to inherit the kingdom of God. Paul declares, “Don’t you realize that the unrighteous are not going to inherit the kingdom of God?

Don’t be deceived: neither fornicators ( 1Co 6:9 ),

The word here in Greek is male prostitutes.

nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor [the homosexuals] the abusers of themselves with mankind [is the Greek word for homosexuals], nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revelers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God ( 1Co 6:9-10 ).

Paul, writing to the Galatians in chapter 5, declares, “For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh. And these are contrary one to the other so that you cannot do the things that you would. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh which are manifest are these: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft [which is in the Greek pharmachia, the use of drugs], hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revelings, and such like, of the which I’ve told you before, as I’ve also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God” ( Gal 5:17-21 ).

Is that plain? Paul said don’t be deceived. A lot of people are deceived into thinking that they can live however they please and still inherit the kingdom of God. Not so. And thus, these words should come as a searchlight to our own hearts. If I desire to inherit the kingdom of God, these things should be searching my own soul. For the unrighteous are not going to inherit the kingdom of God, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, not abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

And such were some of you: but you have been washed, but you are sanctified [that is, set apart for God’s use], you are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God ( 1Co 6:11 ).

Though that may have been a part of your past life, that’s where it should be, in the past life. If any man is in Christ, he is a new creation, and the old things are passed away. But what do I say if the old things are not passed away? Then obviously you’re not a new creation. Don’t be deceived. Do not be deceived in taking the grace of God as a cloak for lasciviousness, thinking, “Because the grace of God is covering my life, I can live as I please after the flesh.”

There is a lot of clamor today, even within the church, to broaden the road to eternal life, to open the doors to all kinds of lifestyles, to a toleration of ungodly lifestyles within the family of God. For are we not all seeking the same goal? Are we not all walking the same path? For all roads lead to God. And that endeavor to broaden the road.

But let me remind you that Jesus said, “Strive to enter in at the straight gate, for straight is the gate and narrow is the way that leads to eternal life and few there be that find it. But broad is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction and many go in thereat. Beware then,” He said, “of false prophets.” Right after warning about these two gates. “Beware of false prophets, who will be there as wolves in sheep’s clothing” ( Mat 7:13-15 ). The false prophets who say, “Hey, it doesn’t matter. God loves everybody. It doesn’t matter how you live.” Beware of false prophets. They may have reversed collars. They may be there in ministerial garb, but many of them are wolves in sheep’s clothing. “But, Grandma, what a big mouth you have.”

I get so totally upset with men who purport themselves to be ministers of Jesus Christ. They seem to love to take the title of Reverend. And do you know that in a suit filed against President Reagan by the ACLU, that they have several ministers from the Southern California area here who have joined in the suit against President Reagan for declaring 1983 as the Year of the Bible? And they have filed a civil suit against the President, several ministers. They must be ministers because they have Reverends in front of their names. Hey, they are wolves in sheep’s clothing. They’re disguising themselves as servants of Christ, but as Satan is able to transform himself into an angel of light in order to deceive, so are his ministers.

And these are servants of Satan disguised as ministers of Jesus Christ, and they are working to destroy the body of Christ and the church. The communists have planted many men in places of position in some of the major denominations across the United States. The World Counsel of Churches is close to a communist front organization and espouses almost every communist cause and supports every crooked thing going. I could get carried away with this. I’ll tell you, I would not give one dime to any church that is a part of the World Counsel of Churches or the National Counsel of Churches. When they support the guerrillas that are killing the missionaries in Zimbabwe and the little children over there, when these militant groups are supported by the World Counsel of Churches. Your money would be used when they support PLO, when they support Angela Davis.

Some of you were such, but thank God we’ve been washed. Washed, first of all, then sanctified, then justified. Oh, that glorious work of God in my heart through Jesus Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit. I have been changed. I no longer am what I was. My life has been changed through the power of the Holy Spirit and faith in Jesus Christ. And it is a new life and the old things have passed away and all things are become new. Now,

All things are lawful unto me ( 1Co 6:12 ),

That is a very, very broad statement. It is as about as broad an ethic as any man could ever express. The Epicurean philosophy came close to it; they said, “All things are lawful for me if they bring me pleasure.” It doesn’t matter what it is, as long as it brings me pleasure it’s all right to do. So you talk to them about some horrible thing you did, “Well, did you enjoy it?” “Oh, yes.” “Well, it’s all right as long as it brought you pleasure.”

Paul said,

All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient ( 1Co 6:12 ):

Again, as a child of God I’m a goal-oriented person. My goal is to be found in Him, not having my own righteousness which is by the law, but the righteousness which is of Christ through faith. My goal, one day I’m going to stand before Jesus Christ, and you are going to stand before Him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ to receive for the things that we have done while we are in these bodies, to receive the rewards for our faithfulness for our stewardship in our lives, what I have done for the Lord. Because I have only one life and it soon will be past, and only what I do for Jesus Christ is going to last.

And I’m going to stand before Him to receive the things done in my body. My works will be judged by fire, what sort they were. And my goal is that when I stand before Jesus in that day of judgment, He will look upon me and say, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant. You’ve been faithful in a few things, now enter into the joy of the Lord. I’ll make you ruler over Kauai. Have thou rule over five cities, or ten cities, or whatever.” I don’t care what I’ve done in life, what I’ve accomplished, what I’ve gained for myself, none of that will matter when I stand before Jesus. At that point, to receive His words of approval and commendation are all important. That’s what I’m living for; that’s what I’m looking towards.

Now, there are things that I can do that would be all right. They’re not going to damn me. I am saved because of my trust and faith in Jesus Christ. But there are things that I could get caught up in, very easily caught up in them, that would impede my progress towards my goal, that would rob my time and my energies so that I would not have time or energy to do the work of the Lord or the things for the Lord. I could become so involved, oh they’re perfectly all right, there’s nothing wrong with it. But yet, it takes me away from my primary goal. It’s an impediment in my movement towards my desired end. And thus, though it is lawful, though it is all right, I don’t do it because it’s not expedient. It doesn’t expedite my journey towards my goal.

So it is important as a Christian that I learn to prioritize my life lest I get caught up and I’m spending an inordinate amount of time in nonessentials. Because that’s a very easy trap for people to fall in, where you get so involved in things that really don’t count eternally. And you can spend months in these projects and then watch the whole thing go down the tube. And then, “Hey, what have you been doing for the last six months?” “Nothing, it all blew up last week.” Six months of labor.

Yet, Paul tells us at the end of the epistle, “Know this, that your labor for the Lord is never in vain.” One day we’re going to stand before the judgment seat of Christ. Oh, to hear Him say, “Good job, well done. Enter into the joy of the Lord.”

all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any ( 1Co 6:12 ).

Only a Christian knows what it is to be free. The man who is living in sin is not free at all. Paul, writing to Timothy, said, “That we might take them from the captivity of the enemy who has taken them captives against their will” ( 2Ti 2:26 ). Paul writes, “That the god of this world has blinded their eyes that they cannot see the truth.” So he’s holding them captive against their will, blinding their eyes, and you can’t say he’s really free.

Don’t tell me that fellow snorting coke every weekend is free. Don’t tell me the alcoholic is free. Or a person who is bound by any kind of a habit, “Oh I’ve just got to go out, man. I gotta have it,” you know. That’s not freedom; that’s bondage. Only the child of God knows what it is to be free. I appreciate my freedom. I love my freedom.

You see, it isn’t really the freedom to do those things that’s so exciting to me, it’s the freedom not to have to do them. That’s the kind of freedom I enjoy. I have the freedom not to have to do them. I don’t have to do those things to get kicks. I don’t have to do those things to feel a sense of well being or get excitement, or whatever else. Thank God I don’t have to do them. I’m free.

Now, being free, it is possible to exercise that freedom in such a way as to bring myself into bondage. Being free to drink if I so desire. By the exercising of that freedom, if I drink to the point that my mind is now influenced by the alcohol that I’ve ingested into my system, that my judgment is now fuzzy or impaired that I am no longer able to think clearly, then I am not free; I am under the power or the influence of the alcohol that is numbing a part of my brain cells. Free to snort coke. But what I am doing is putting an insulator between the synapse gaps so that in my thinking now I can’t make those connections, the synapse gap doesn’t snap across. And though it may prolong a pleasurable sensation, I cannot make the proper connection in the synapse gaps. And thus, I don’t think rationally and I can get addicted where I have to have it, and then I am not free. I’ve been brought under the power of it.

So it is foolish to exercise your freedom in such a way as to bring you into bondage, because you’re no longer free. And some people have unwisely exercised their freedom in such a way as to bring themselves into bondage. So, though all things are lawful for me, I will not be brought under the power of any, because of my love for freedom that I have received through the power of Jesus Christ, that glorious freedom not to do those things that are destructive.

Meats are for the belly, and the belly for meats ( 1Co 6:13 ):

That’s a part of the body itself. So if I eat meat, it doesn’t matter. That’s not the issue that’s being dealt with. The meat that I eat is going to be destroyed.

God will destroy both it and them. But the body is not for fornication ( 1Co 6:13 ),

God didn’t give you this beautiful instrument, God didn’t place that strong sex drive in you, nor the pleasurable delight that you might use the body for fornication.

Your body is not for fornication, but it is for the Lord; and the Lord is for the body. And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power ( 1Co 6:13-14 ).

Now, I’m to have a new body. Even as God raised up Jesus Christ, so He’s going to raise me up. And my body is not for living after the flesh or after the things of the flesh, after fornication. It isn’t just to satisfy the desires of my body that I live in this body. But it becomes a beautiful, delicate instrument in the hands of God to do His will and to do His work.

Know you not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ [or the instruments of Christ], and make them members of a harlot [or a prostitute]? God forbid. Don’t you realize that he which is joined to a prostitute is one body with her? for the scripture says the two shall become one ( 1Co 6:15-16 ).

Through the act of intercourse the two become one. Now, your body is a member of Christ, or an instrument of Jesus Christ. And if you use your body for fornication or to be joined with a prostitute, you are actually joining Christ together, if such could be the case, with that relationship.

But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit ( 1Co 6:17 ).

We are joined to Jesus Christ, one spirit with Him, and thus, we are not to take our bodies and use them in an animalistic way.

Flee fornication ( 1Co 6:18 ).

Paul, writing to Timothy, said, “Flee youthful lust. Run from them, Timothy.”

Oh, God help us to run from temptation, to be like Joseph who, when Potiphar’s wife grabbed hold of him and said, “You’re going to go to bed with me,” wriggled loose and ran naked out of the house rather than to succumb to her charms. God help us to flee fornication.

Every sin that a man does is without the body; but he that commits fornication sins against his own body ( 1Co 6:18 ).

Most of the rest of the sins are done without the body, outside of the body. But fornication is a sin done against your own body.

What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which you have of God, and you are not your own? ( 1Co 6:19 )

“Don’t you realize this?” Paul said. Your body is the temple, and again, this is the Greek word naos, which is the Holy of Holies. It’s the dwelling place of God. It’s a place of divine activity. It’s not the hieron, the whole temple precinct. It’s the naos, the inner sanctuary. Your body is the inner sanctuary of the Holy Spirit, which you have of God. You are not your own.

For you have been bought with a price ( 1Co 6:20 ):

That’s what redemption is all about. You see, I was a slave to sin. I was a slave to my own flesh. I did those things because I was bound by my flesh. But Jesus Christ set me free, free so that I don’t have to do those things anymore. And my body, which I once abused, I now offer to Him as the instrument through which He might work, the temple in which He might dwell. And thus, it becomes a holy place, a sanctuary.

For you see, Jesus redeemed me. He paid the price. He purchased me from my slavery to sin in order that I now might be His servant. But as His servant, I must obey Him. I’ve been bought with a price. I belong not to me. He didn’t redeem me so that I could be my own man. He redeemed me so that I would belong to Him. I’ve been bought with a price; I am not my own to do with as I please. My life now belongs to Him to do as He pleases.

therefore we are to glorify God both in our bodies, and our spirits, which are his ( 1Co 6:20 ).

Again, “If any man defiles the temple of God, him will God destroy” ( 1Co 3:17 ), Paul said. We need to respect our bodies. They are marvelous instruments created by God.

I was reading the other day that your brain in one day makes more connections than all of the telephone systems in the entire world. No wonder you’re tired at night. The operator up there is putting all these lines together, all day long. More connections are made in your brain in a single day than in all of the telephone systems of the world.

As David said, “We are fearfully and wonderfully made.” A beautiful instrument, my body, given to me by God that it might be the medium of expression for my spirit. That it might become the medium of expression for God. That God might express Himself through my body, and that’s the divine ideal. God revealing Himself through you, through your body, as His instrument, revealing His love, revealing His work, revealing His plan.

And so we need to hold our bodies as instruments of God and respect them as such and not do that which would destroy or harm the temple of God. Oh yes, it may be lawful. You may be able to prove that it’s all right, but that’s not the question. Is it expedient? Does it bring you under its power? Does it build you up or tear you down?

Father, we thank You for Thy Word. May it be like a light shining in the dark recesses of our lives, illuminating, bringing to light those hidden things. That if there be in us, oh God, a wicked heart, an evil desire, a covetousness, an envy, bitterness, that these things, oh Lord, might be exposed by the light of Your Word and brought unto the cross and placed there. That we might renounce those hidden works of darkness and walk in the light as He is in the light. Knowing this beautiful union and fellowship with Him as our lives are being cleansed by the blood of Jesus Christ. Thank You, Lord, for Thy Word and for the privilege of fellowshipping together with your children. Thank You, Lord, for making us one together, to share in Thy kingdom and in the joy of Your kingdom forever. Bless us now. Help us now. In Jesus’ name we pray. Amen.

May the blessing of the Lord rest upon your life and may you be enriched in all things in Christ Jesus as you grow in grace and in knowledge of His love and of His way and of His goodness. And may your body become truly an instrument through which God works as He seeks to reveal Himself to a lost world. God bless you and strengthen you in your walk with Him and give you discernment and help you in using your time well as you redeem the time in this present evil age. In Jesus’ name. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

1. Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?

In those days, the courts of law were utterly unjust. It was all a matter of who could bribe the most, for he would gain the suit. I think that we cannot say that it is quite like this at the present time in our law courts, neither can this verse be strictly a rule for the guidance of men in these days, except that, in the spirit of Pauls words, all lawsuits among Christians should be avoided if possible.

1Co 6:2-3. Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels?

Sitting with Christ, at the last great day of judgment, we shall give our Amen to the condemnation of the fallen spirits.

1Co 6:3-4. How much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.

For they will be better judges than the best of worldly men. Do you set such people to judge your difficult matters? And if you do not, then why do you go to those who are even worse fitted to give a right decision?

1Co 6:5-11. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortionist, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you:

They were Corinthians, and some of them had fallen into the same sad and shameful condition as the rest of the inhabitants of Corinth. Many of them had been fetched, by almighty grace, out of the very depths of the grossest sin, so that Paul, after giving a list of the blackest sinners, could add, and such were some of you.

1Co 6:11-12. But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient:

There are some things that I may do; that is, I have the liberty to do them if I please; but I must also consider whether they are expedient, or whether they will damage others, and do mischief to them; for, if so, it will be better for me not to do them, because they are not expedient, even though they are lawful.

1Co 6:12-13. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them.

So, on the one hand, do not make too much of abstaining from this or that, for these things, after all, are but small matters to glory in; but, on the other hand, let no man ever call himself a Christian while he is a slave to any evil habit. What says Paul? God shall destroy both it and them. In the previous verse, he says, I will not be brought under the power of any. The immortal spirit under the power of materialism? ay, that must never be.

1Co 6:13-14. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body. And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.

Our bodies belong to him; therefore, let us think highly of them, and never do anything to injure them; and, especially, let us take care never to let them become instruments of iniquity to the grieving of the blessed Spirit of God.

Fuente: Spurgeon’s Verse Expositions of the Bible

1Co 6:1. , dare) Treason against Christians is denoted, by this high-sounding word.-, any one) even one single person.-) in the middle voice, that is , obtain a judgment, go to law, v. 7.-, before the unjust) Every unbeliever is unjust; generally so, even as a citizen.- , before the saints) Christians. The great privilege of believers was to settle even civil matters among themselves, and the magistrate ought not to interfere at all with private affairs, unless in the case of those who especially apply to him. The heathen magistrates were very indulgent to the Jews; and in this department no difference was hitherto made between the Jews and the Christians.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

1Co 6:1

1Co 6:1

Dare any of you,- [The word dare implies that the resort to civil courts to settle differences between Christians is wholly inconsistent with the will of Christ, and that even one case would be outrageous.]

having a matter against his neighbor, go to law before the unrighteous,-To neglect or reject the authority of God at one point prepares the way and leads to the setting aside his authority at all points. The Corinthians turned from adherence to the law of God, and became followers of men. They gave up the high regard for morality and palliated the grossest forms of licentiousness. They set aside the leaders of the congregation as the divinely appointed tribunal for deciding differences that might arise among them, and resorted to the tribunals of the heathen, or the government of the unbelievers; and Paul now comes to remonstrate with them for setting aside the divine authority.

and not before the saints?-It was anticipated that Christians would have troubles or differences in their affairs, and Jesus gave (Mat 18:15-20) rules by which to settle them. The judgment of the saints was obtained when the directions given were followed. Paul regarded it as a daring sin in Christians to neglect the law of Christ and seek the tribunals of the State. This did not conflict with Pauls own course of appealing to Caesars court for protection, when the servants of Caesar were used to persecute him. He appealed to the protection Caesars laws guaranteed when those were perverted and abused to punish him by the laws of Caesar. Caesars courts are recognized as the courts of unbelievers; the decisions of the church as courts of the believers. Since the days of the union of Church and State, and while believers participate in State affairs, this distinction is lost sight of, and the admonition is disregarded. The decisions of the church are brought into disrepute, because they are so often mere efforts at compromise instead of decisions of justice. Compromise of right, truth, and justice can never command the respect of God or man.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

The apostle now passed to another dereliction. Disputes in the church were being submitted to heathen tribunals. What these matters were we are not told. The teaching of the apostle is clear, and has application for all time. Disputes among saints should be settled between saints, and wholly within the confines of the church. The argument as to the fitness of the saints for the work is that as they will finally have to judge angels, surely they ought to be able to judge things pertaining to this life. The apostle declared that it is better to bear wrong than to appeal for right to a tribunal of unrighteous men. His argument as to the unfitness of unbelievers is that “the unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God.”

Under certain circumstances lawful things may not be right for the Christian. First, lawful things may not be expedient, and, second, lawful things must not gain mastery. In the compass of the first limitation, namely, expediency, the whole outlook of the Christian is undoubtedly included, not merely personal right, but the culture of the life; and, moreover, relative responsibility concerning others. Things which are lawful in themselves if they do not directly tend to profit both the individual and those who may be influenced by the individual are inexpedient.

The second limitation is that things which are perfectly lawful must not be permitted to obtain mastery over life. With a passing reference to the question of meats, the apostle deals with the sin of fornication. How high and stately is the ground of his argument, that the body is now a member of Christ and is for the Lord. The person joined to the Lord “is one spirit,” and therefore, all the functions and powers of the life must be dominated by that spirit.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

6:1-11. LITIGATION BEFORE HEATHEN COURTS

The Apostle passes on to a third matter for censure, and in discussing it he first treats of the evil and its evil occasion (1-8), and then, in preparation for what is to follow, points out that all unrighteousness is a survival from a bad past which the Corinthians ought to have left behind them (9-11).

1-8. The Evil and Its Evil Occasion

How can you dare to go to law with one another in heathen caurts? If there must be suits, let Christian judge Christian.

1 The subject of judging brings me to another matter. Is it possible that, when one of you has a dispute with a fellow-Christian, he takes upon himself to bring the dispute before a heathen tribunal, instead of bringing it before believers. Or is it that you do not know that, at the Last Day, believers will sit with Christ to judge the world? And if the world is to be judged hereafter at your bar, are you incompetent to serve in the pettiest tribunals? Do not you know that we are to sit in judgment on angels? After that, one need hardly mention things of daily life. If, then, you have questions of daily life to be decided, do you really take heathens, who are of no account to those who are in the Church, and set them to judge you? 5 It is to move you to shame that I am speaking like this. Have things come to such a pass that, among the whole of you, there is not a single person who is competent to arbitrate between one Christian and another, but that, on the contrary, Christian goes to law with Christian, and that too before unbelievers? 7 Nay, at the very outset, there is a terrible defect in your Christianity that you have lawsuits at all with one another. Why not rather accept injury? Why not rather submit to being deprived? But, so far from enduring wrong, what you do is this; you wrong and deprive other people, and those people your fellow-Christians.

The subject of going to law before heathen tribunals is linked to the subject discussed in the previous chapter by the reference to the question of judgment (5:12, 13).* The moral sense of a Christian community, which ought to make itself felt in judging offenders within its own circle, ought still more to suffice for settling disputes among its members, without recourse to heathen courts, whose judges stand presumably on a lower ethical level than Christians. But there is no real argumentative connexion with the preceding section. The Apostle has finished two points in his indictment, and he now passes on to another.

The Apostles principles with regard to secular and heathen magistrates are perfectly consistent. In Rom_13 he inculcates the attitude of a good citizen, which is not only obedience to law, but the recognition of the magistrate as Gods minister. This carries with it submission to the law as administered by the courts, and acceptance of the authority of the courts in criminal cases. St Paul had had experience of the protection of Roman Justice (Act 18:12 f., Act 25:16), and he himself appealed to Caesar. But to invoke the courts to decide disputes between Christians was quite another matter; and he lays it down here that to do so is a confession of the failure of that justice which ought to reign in the Christian Society. Obey the criminal courts, but do not go out of your way to invoke the civil courts, is a fair, if rough, summary of his teaching.

1. . We know nothing of the facts, but it is clear from v. 8 that the Apostle has no merely isolated case in view: grandi verbo notatur laesa majestas Christianorum (Beng.); Rom 15:18. The word is an argument in itself; How can you dare, endure, bring yourself to?

. In the forensic sense; a cause for trial, a case, Joseph. Ant. xiv. x. 7.

. Not another (AV.), but his neighbour (RV.), his fellow (10:24, 14:17; Rom 2:1; Gal 6:4).

. Middle; go to law, seek for judgment. Cf. (Mat 5:40; Ecc 6:10). The question comes with increased force after 5:12, 13. It is no business of ours to judge the heathen: and are we to ask them to judge us?

. Before the unrighteous.* The term is not meant to imply that there was small chance of getting justice in a heathen court; St Pauls own experience had taught him otherwise. The term reflects, not on Roman tribunals, but on the pagan world to which they belonged. He perhaps chose the word rather than , in order to suggest the paradox of seeking justice among the unjust. The Rabbis taught that Jews must not carry their cases before Gentiles, and we may be sure that it was in the Greek majority at Corinth, and not in the Jewish minority, that this evil prevailed.* Greeks were fond of litigation, (Arist. Rhet. II. xxiii. 23), and as there were no Christian courts they must enter heathen tribunals if they wanted to go to law. See Edwards. For see 2Co 7:14; Mar 13:9; Act 25:9.

. He does not mean that Christian courts ought to be instituted, but that Christian disputants should submit to Christian arbitration.

2. . Such conduct was incompatible with principles which ought to be familiar to them. He first asks, How can you be so presumptuous? Then, on the supposition that this is not the cause of their error, he asks, How can you be so ignorant? The introduces an alternative explanation. The formula occurs five times in this chapter (2, 3, 9, 16, 19; cf. 2Co 13:5, etc.).

. Here, no doubt, the verb should be accented as a future; contrast 5:13. It is in the Messianic Kingdom that the saints will share in Christs reign over the created universe. Judge does not here mean condemn, and the world does not mean the evil world. It is only from the context, as in Act 13:27, that sometimes becomes equivalent to , and frequently is used without any idea of moral, i.e. immoral quality; cf. 3:22. Indeed, it is not clear that here means will pronounce judgment upon; it is perhaps used in the Hebraic sense of ruling. So also in Mat 19:28. This sense is frequent in Judges (3:10, 10:2, 3, 12:9, 11, 13, 14, etc.).Wisd. 3:8 is parallel; They shall judge the nations and have dominion over the peoples; also Ecclus. 4:15. St Paul may have known the Book of Wisdom. Cf. the Book of Enoch (108:12), I will bring forth clad in shining light those who have loved My holy Name, and I will seat each on the throne of his honour. The saints are to share in the final perfection of the Messianic reign of Christ. They themselves are to appear before the Judge (Rom 14:10; 2Ti 4:1) and are then to share His glory (4:8; Rom 8:17; Dan 7:22; Rev 2:26, Rev 2:27, Rev 2:3:21, Rev 2:20:4). The Apostles eschatology (15:21-24) supplies him with the thought of these verses. He is certainly not thinking of the time when earthly tribunals will be filled with Christian judges.

. The adds a further question, and presses home the bearing of the preceding question. The is less easy to explain; among you, in your court, in your jurisdiction, may be the meaning. Or we may fall back on the instrumental use of . Like in v. 12, expresses what is normal. The heathen are to be judged by you; they are in your jurisdiction. How incongruous that you should ask to be judged by them!

. Are ye unworthy of the smallest tribunals? So in RV. marg. Cf. Jam 2:6; Jdg 5:10; Dan 7:10, Dan 7:26; Susann. 49: also (Apost. Const. ii:45). In papyri, means those who preside in tribunals. The meaning case or cause is insufficiently supported. is found nowhere else in N.T.

D3 E L, AV. omit before .

3. The thought of v. 2 is repeated and expanded. To say that Christians will judge angels restates will judge the world in an extreme form, for the sake of sharpening the contrast. are the highest order of beings under God, yet they are creatures and are part of the . But the members of Christ are to be crowned with glory and honour (Psa 8:6), and are to share in His regal exaltation, which exceeds any angelic dignity. He judges, i.e. rules over, angels, and the saints share to that rule. The words may mean that the saints are to be His assessors in the Day of Judgment, that angels will then be judged, and that the saints will take part in sentencing them. If so, this must refer to fallen angels, for it is difficult to believe that St Paul held that all angels, good and bad, will be judged hereafter. But he gives no epithet to angels here, because it is not needed for his argument; indeed, to have said fallen angels, or evil angels, would rather have marred his argument. As Evans rightly insists, it is the exalted nature of angels that is the Apostles point. You are to judge the world. Nay, you are to judge, not only men, but angels. Are you unable to settle petty disputes among yourselves? St Pauls purpose is to emphasize the augustness of the judging to which members of Christ are called.* To press the statement in such a way as to raise the question of the exact nature, scope, or details, of the judgment of angels, is to go altogether beyond the Apostles purpose. Thackeray (St Paul and Contemporary Jewish Thought, pp. 152 f.) has shown from Jud 1:6, Wisd. 3:8, and Enoch 13-16 that there is nothing in this unique statement to which a Jew of that day would not have subscribed. See Abbott, The Son of Man, p. 213.

. The strengthens the force of the , which is that of a condensed question; need I so much as mention? Nedum quae ad hujus vitae usum pertinent (Beza): quanto magis saecularia. The clause may be regarded as part of the preceding question (WH.), or as a separate question (AV., RV.), or as an appended remark, to say nothing at all of things of this life (Ellicott). The adjective occurs Luk 21:34, but is not found in LXX, nor earlier than Aristotle. Following the well-known difference in N.T. between and (see on Luk 8:43), means questions relating to our life on earth on its merely human side, or to the resources of life, such as food, clothing, property, etc. Philo (Vit. Mos. iii.18), . See Trench, Syn. xxvii.; Cremer, Lex. p. 272; Lightfoot on Ign. Rom 7:3.

is written by different editors as one word, or as two ( ), or as three. Tregelles is perhaps alone in writing .

4. . Tribunals dealing with worldly matters. The adj. is repeated with emphasis, which is increased by its being placed first. That is the surprising thing, that Christians should have that require litigation.

. Nay but, or Nay rather. The force of the words is either to emphasize the cumulative scandal of having such cases at all and of bringing them , or (if is imperative) to advise an alternative course to that described in v. 2.

. This form of protasis (cf. 4:15) requires a future or its equivalent in the apodosis. Here we have an equivalent, whether we take as imperative or interrogative. If you must have such things as courts to deal with these petty matters, then set, etc.; or do you set?-Is that your way of dealing with the matter? It is intolerably forced to put a comma after , make it an accus. pendens, and take with .

. If is imperative, then these words mean those in the Church who are held of no account, i.e. the least esteemed of the Christians. The Apostle sarcastically tells them that, so far from there being any excuse for resorting to heathen tribunals, any selection of the simplest among themselves would be competent to settle their disputes about trifles. Let the insignificant decide what is insignificant.

If is indicative and the sentence interrogative, then these words mean, those who, in the Church, are held of no account, viz. the of v. 1. The meaning is the same if the sentence is categorical.

Both constructions are possible, and both make good sense. Alford, Edwards, Ellicott, Evans, and Lightfoot give strong reasons for preferring the imperative, as AV. In this they follow a strong body of authorities; the Vulgate, Peshito, Coptic, and Armenian, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Augustine, Beza, Calvin, Estius, Bengel, and Wetstein. To mention only one of the arguments used;-it does seem improbable that St Paul would call heathen magistrates those who, in the Church, are held of no account. He has, it is true, spoken of the heathen in general (not the magistrates in particular) as : but here he is speaking of those who preside in the heathen tribunals. And if he wanted to speak disparagingly of them, is those whom Christians despise a likely phrase for him to use? The Vulgate renders, contemptibiles qui sunt in ecclesia, illos constituite ad judicandum; but the Greek means contemptos rather than contemptibiles. Augustine also has contemptibiles, but he renders , hos collocate.*

Nevertheless, Tischendorf, WH. and the Revisers support a considerable number of commentators, from Luther to Schmiedel, in punctuating the sentence as a question. It is urged that the Apostle, after the reminder of vv. 2, 3, returns to the question of v. 1; Will they, by going outside their own body for justice, confess themselves, the appointed judges of angels, to be unfit to decide the pettiest arbitrations?*

We must be content to leave the question open. The general sense is clear. The Corinthians were doing a shameful thing in going to heathen civil courts to settle disputes between Christians.

. I say this to move you to shame; see on 4:14. As to 15:34, the words refer to what precedes, and they suit either of the interpretations given above, either the sarcastic command or the reproachful question; but they suit the latter somewhat better. Only here, and 15:34 does occur in. N.T., but it is not rare in the Psalms.

5. … Is there such a total lack among you of any wise person that you are thus obliged to go outside? Or, So is there not found among you one wise person? The refers to the condition of things in the Corinthian Church: Chrys., ; it is now commonly admitted that is not a contraction from , but the preposition or , strengthened by a vigorous accent, like , , and used with an ellipse of the substantive verb (Lightfoot on Gal 3:28; J. B. Mayor on Jam 1:17): translate, therefore, is not found.

. A highly condensed sentence; to decide between his fellow-Christian meaning to act as arbitrator between one fellow-Christian and another. We want . , like (Gen 23:15). J. H. Moulton (Gr. p. 99) suspects a corruption in the text, but dictation may account for the abbreviation: is the simplest conjecture. The compound preposition is frequent in papyri. As the Lord had directed (Mat 18:17), the aggrieved brother ought to tell it to the Church.*

Both here and in 15:34 there is difference of reading between and . Here ( D E F G L P) is to be preferred to (B, with C doubtful). ( B C L P) rather than (D E F G). ( B C 17, Copt.) rather than (F G P) or (F G P) or (D 3 L) or without or (D* E, Aeth.). For some editors conjecture .

6. … We have the same doubt as that respecting (v. 3). This verse may be a continuation of the preceding question (WH. RV.), or a separate question (AV.), or an appended statement (Ellicott). In the last case, is Nay, On the contrary.

. This is the climax. That there should be disputes about is bad; that Christian should go to law with Christian is worse; that Christians should do this before unbelievers is worst of all. It is a scandal before the heathen world. Cf. (Rom 13:11; 3Jn 1:5) and the more classical (Heb 11:12), of which Wetstein gives numerous examples.

7. . Nay, verily there is at once, there is to begin with, without going any further: , separate, as in v. 4, and with no to answer to the .

. Altogether, i.e. no matter what the tribunal may be: or generally, under any circumstances, i.e. no matter what the result may be.

. A falling short of spiritual attainment, or of Christian blessings, a defect (RV.), or possibly a defeat. They have been worsted in the spiritual fight. Origen here contrasts with . Cf. Isa 31:8, *. In Rom 11:12 the meaning seems to be defeat (see note there), and these are the only passages in the Bible in which the word occurs. See Field, Otium Norvic. 3:97.

. Elsewhere in N.T. the word means decrees or judgments, but here it is almost equivalent to (v. 4) matters for judgment, lawsuits.

. Literally, with your own selves. It is possible that this use of for is deliberate, in order to show that in bringing a suit against a fellow-Christian they were bringing a suit against themselves, so close was the relationship. The solidarity of the Church made such conduct suicidal. But the substitution occurs where no such idea can be understood (Mar 16:3).

There are passages in M. Aurelius which are very much in harmony with these verses. He argues that men are kinsmen, and that all wrong-doing is the result of ignorance. Those who know better must be patient with those who know not what they do in being insolent and malicious. But I, who have seen the nature of the good that it is beautiful, and of the bad that it is base (), and the nature of him that does the wrong, that it is akin to me, not so much by community of blood and seed as by community of intelligence and divine endowment,-I can neither be injured by any of them, for no one can fix on me what is base; nor can I be angry with one who is my kinsman, nor feel hatred against him (2:1). On every occasion a man should say, This comes from God: this is from one of the same tribe and family and society, but from one who does not know what befits his nature. But I know; therefore I treat him according to the natural law of fellowship with kindness and justice (3:11). With what are you so displeased? with the badness of men? Consider the decision, that rational beings exist for one another, and that to be patient is a part of righteousness, and that men do wrong against their will (4:3).

, . Endure wrong, endure deprivation. The verbs are middle, not passive.

(3 A B C D3 E L P, Aeth.); omit (* D.* 17, Vulg. Copt. Arm.). The is probably genuine. A omits . The before has very little authority; est in vobis (Vulg.).

8. . Whereas you, on the contrary. The emphatic pronoun contrasts their conduct with what is fitting. Not content with refusing to endure wrong (and as Christians you ought to be ready to endure it), you yourselves inflict it, and that on fellow-Christians;-a climax of unchristian conduct. Mat 5:39-41 teaches far otherwise; and the substance of the Sermon on the Mount would be known to them. The sentence is not part of the preceding question.*

D transposes and . For , L, Arm., Chrys., Thdrt. have , perhaps to cover the two verbs.

9-11. Unrighteousness in All Its Forms is a Survival from a Bad Past, Which the Corinthians Ought to Have Left Behind Them

Evil-doers, such as some of you were, cannot enter the Kingdom.

9 Is this wilfulness on your part, or is it that you do not know that wrong-doers will have no share in the Kingdom? Do not be led astray by false teachers. No fornicator, idolater, adulterer, sensualist, sodomite, 10 thief, cheat, drunkard, reviler, or extortioner will have any share in Gods Kingdom. 11 And of such vile sort some of you once were. But you washed your pollutions away, you were made holy, you were made righteous, by sharing in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ and in the gift of the Spirit of God.

These three verses conclude the subject of vv. 1-8 by an appeal to wider principles, and thus prepare the way for the fourth matter of censure (12-20). The connexion with vv. 1-8 is definite, although not close. The Corinthians have shown themselves , in the narrower sense of unjust, by their conduct to one another (, v. 8). They need, however, to be reminded that in any sense (see note below) excludes a man from the heritage of Gods Kingdom. The Apostle goes on to specify several forms of which they ought to have abandoned, and finally returns to the subject of .

9. . See vv. 2 and 19. There is an alternative implied. [Is it from a reckless determination to do as they please regardless of the consequences,] or is it from real ignorance of the consequences? In either case their error is disastrous.

. The word is suggested by the previous , and this should be marked in translation; ye do wrong wrongdoers shall not inherit. No English version preserves the connexion; nor does the Vulgate, injuriam facitis iniqui: but Beza does so, injuriam facitis injustos. Now the word takes a wider meaning; it is wrongdoing of any kind, and not the special kind of being unjust in matters of personal rights, that is meant; and here the Apostle passes to a more comprehensive survey of the spiritual state of his readers, and also to a sterner tone: (Chrys.). The evil that he has now to deal with is the danger of Gentile licentiousness.

. When St Paul uses the shorter form, Gods Kingdom (v. 10, 15:50; Gal 5:21), instead of the more usual . . (4:20; Rom 14:17; 2Th 1:5; cf. Eph 5:5), he elsewhere writes . . Here is placed first, in order to bring and into emphatic contrast by juxtaposition: wrong-doers are manifestly out of place in Gods Kingdom, Cf. (Gal 2:6). To inherit the Kingdom of Gods is a Jewish thought, in allusion to the promise given to Abraham; but St Paul, in accordance with his doctrine of grace, enlarges and spiritualizes the idea of inheritance. He reminds the Corinthians that, although all Christians are heirs, yet heirs may be disinherited. They may disqualify themselves. In 4:20, the Kingdom is regarded as present. Here and 15:50 it is regarded as future. It is both: see J. Kaftan, Jesus u. Paulus, p. 24; Dalman, Words, p. 125; Abbott, The Son of Man, p. 576.

. See on Luk 21:8. The verb is passive, Do not be led astray, and implies fundamental error.* The revisers sometimes correct the deceived of AV. to led astray, but here and 15:33 they retain deceived. The charge is a sharper repetition of . Some Jews held that the belief in one God sufficed without holiness of life. Judaizers may have been teaching in Corinth that faith sufficed.

The order of the ten kinds of offenders is unstudied. He enumerates sins which were prevalent at Corinth just as they occur to him. Of the first five, three (and perhaps four) deal with sinners against purity, while the fifth, idolaters, were frequently sinners of the same kind. Of the last five, three are sinners against personal property or rights, such as are censured in v. 8. All of them are in apposition to , an apposition which would seem quite natural to Greeks, who were accustomed to regard as the sum-total of virtues (Arist. Eth. Nic. v. i:15), and therefore as the sum-total of vices (ibid. 19: see on Luk 13:27). Several of these forms of evil are dealt with in this Epistle (vv. 13-18, v. 1, 11, 8:10, 10:14, etc.): cf. Rom 1:27 and 3:13; Gal 5:19, Gal 5:20; 1Ti 1:10*

For , L d e f Vulg. have the more usual . . D* has throughout vv. 9, 10. ( A C P 17) rather than . (B D3 E L). L P insert before at the end of v. 10.

11. . And such dreadful things as these some of you were. While the neuter indicates a horror of what has been mentioned, the and the tense lighten the sad statement. Not all of them, not even many, but only some, are said to have been guilty; and it is all a thing of the past. Cf. in Rom 6:17.

. The threefold But emphasizes strongly the contrast between their present state and their past, and the consequent demand which their changed moral condition makes upon them.

. Neither ye are washed (AV.), nor ye were washed (RV.), nor ye washed yourselves (RV. marg.), but ye washed them away from you, ye washed away your sins; exactly as in Act 22:16, the only other place in N.T. in which the compound verb occurs; . Their seeking baptism was their own act, and they entered the water as voluntary agents, just as St Paul did. Cf. 2Ti 2:21.

, . The repetitions of the aorist show that these verbs refer to the same event as . The crisis, of which their baptism was the concrete embodiment, had marked their transition from the rule of self to the service of God (consecration), and from the condition of guilty sinners to that of pardoned children of God (justification). Neither of the verbs here is to be taken in the technical theological sense which each of them sometimes bears: cf. (1:2) and (7:14). Here forms a kind of climax, completing the contrast with (v. 9). The new life is viewed here as implicit in the first decisive turn to Christ, which again was inseparably connected with their baptism. Cf. Rom 6:7.

. . . . As in Act 2:38, Act 2:10:48; cf. ., Act 8:16, Act 19:5.Mat 28:19 is the only passage in which the Trinitarian form is found. See Hastings, DB. 1. p. 241 f. This passage is remarkable as being an approach to the Trinitarian form, for is coupled with in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and is added; so that God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Spirit are all mentioned. But it is doubtful whether this verse can be taken as evidence of a baptismal formula. Godet certainly goes too far in claiming it as implying the use of the threefold Name (see on Mat 28:19). But it is right to take … with all three verbs. Cf. saved in His Name (Enoch, 48:7).

B C P 17, Vulg. Copt. Arm. Aeth. insert after : A D E L omit. It is not easy to decide. B C D* E P, Vulg. Copt. Arm. Aeth. insert after : A D3 L omit. The word is probably genuine. In both cases the evidence of C is not clear: there is space for the word, but it is not legible.

6:12-20. THE SUBJECT OF FORNICATION IN THE LIGHT OF FIRST PRINCIPLES

Christian freedom is not licentiousness. Our bodies were not made for unchastity. The body is a temple of the Spirit.

12 Perhaps I may have said to you at some time; In all things I can do as I like. Very possibly. But not all things that I may do do me good. In all things I can do as I like, but I shall never allow anything to do as it likes with me. 13 I am not going to let myself be the slave of appetite. It is true that the stomach and food were made for one another. Yet they were not made to last for ever: the God who made them will put an end to both. But it is not true that the body was made for fornication. The body is there to serve the Lord, and the Lord is there to have the body for His service: 14 and as God raised Him from the dead, so will He also raise us up by His own power. 15 Is it that you do not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take away from Christ members which are His and make them members of a harlot? Away with so dreadful a thought! 16 Or is it that you do not know that the union of a man with his harlot makes the two to be one body? I am not exaggerating; for the Scripture says, The two shall become one flesh. 17 But the union of a man with the Lord makes the two to be one spirit. 18 Do not stop to parley with fornication: turn and fly. In the case of no other sin is such grievous injury done to the body as in this case: the fornicator sins against his own body. 19 Does that statement surprise you? Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who makes His home in you, being sent for that very purpose from God? And, what is more, you are not your own property, but Gods. He paid a high price for you. Surely you are bound to use to His glory the body which He has bought.

12-20. St Paul now passes to a fourth matter for censure. He has already taken occasion, in connexion with a specially flagrant case of , to blame the lack of moral discipline in the community. He now takes up the subject of generally, dealing with it in the light of first principles. The sin was prevalent at Corinth (v. 9, 7:2; 2Co 12:21), and was virtually condoned by public opinion in Greece and in Rome. Moreover, the Apostles own teaching as to Christian liberty (Rom 5:20, Rom 6:14) had been perverted and caricatured, not only by opponents (Rom 3:8), but also by some emancipated Christians at Corinth itself. The latter had made it an excuse for licence. He proceeds now to show the real meaning and scope of Christian liberty, and in so doing sets forth the Christian doctrine of the body as destined for eternal union with Christ.

12. . These are St Pauls own words (see on 10:23). They may have been current among the Corinthians as a trite maxim. If so, the Apostle here adopts them as his own, adding the considerations which limit their scope. More probably they were words he had used, which were well known as his, and which had been misused by persons whom he now proceeds to warn. Of course, is not absolute in extent: no sane person would maintain that it was meant to cover such things as and justify . It covers, however, a very great deal, viz. the whole of that wide range of things which are not wrong per se. But within this wide range of things which are indifferent, and therefore permissible, there are many things which become wrong, and therefore not permissible, in view of principles which are now to be explained.

. Saepe Paulus prima persona singulari eloquitur, quae vim habent gnomes; in hac praesertim epistola, v. 15, 7:7, 8:13, 10:23, 29, 30, 14:11 (Beng.). The saying applies to all Christians. On its import see J. Kaftan, Jesus u. Paulus, PP. 51, 52.

. Liberty is limited by the law of the higher expediency, i.e. by reference to the moral or religious life of all those who are concerned, viz. the agent and those whom his conduct may influence. In this first point the Apostle is possibly thinking chiefly of the people influenced.* We have no longer any right to do what in itself is innocent, when our doing it will have a bad effect on others. Our liberty is abused when our use of it causes grave scandal.

. This is the second point; really included in the higher law of expediency, but requiring to be stated separately, in order to show that the agent, quite apart from those whom his conduct may influence, has to be considered. What effect will his action have upon himself? We have no longer any right to do what in itself is innocent, when experience has proved that our doing it has a bad effect on ourselves. Our liberty is abused when our use of it weakens our character and lessens our power of self-control. St Paul says that, for his part, he will not be brought under the power of anything. The is emphatic, and the slightly so, but very slightly: the is rendered almost necessary by the preceding . We must beware of using liberty in such a way as to lose it, e.g. in becoming slaves to a habit respecting things which in themselves are lawful. The is neuter, being one of the .

The verb is chosen because of its close connexion with through : it is frequent in LXX, especially in Ecclesiastes; in N.T., 7:4 and Luk 22:25. This play on words cannot be reproduced exactly in English; perhaps I can make free with all things, but I shall not let anything make free with me may serve to show the kind of thought: mihi res non me rebus submittere conor.

These two verses (12, 13) are a kind of preface to the subject of , to show that it is not one of those things which may or may not be lawful according to circumstances. It is in all circumstances wholly outside the scope of Christian liberty, however that liberty may be defined. While many things are lawful, and become wrong only if indulged (like the appetite for food) to an extent that is harmful to ourselves or to others, fornication is not a legitimate use of the body, but a gross abuse of it, being destructive of the purpose for which the body really exists.

13. . It is quite possible that some of the Corinthians confused what the Apostle here so clearly distinguishes, the appetite for food and the craving for sensual indulgence. We have traces of this gross moral confusion in the Apostolic Letter (Act 15:23-29), where things wholly diverse are combined, as directions about meats to be avoided and a prohibition of fornication (Lightfoot). The Apostles, who framed these regulations, did not regard them as on the same plane, but the heathen, for whom they were framed, did. St Paul makes the distinction luminously clear. Not only are meats made for the belly, but the belly, which is essential to physical existence, is made for meats, and cannot exist without them. There is absolute correlation between the two, as long as earthly life lasts: but no longer, for both of them will eventually be done away. When the ceases to be and becomes (15:44), neither the nor the will have any further function, and therefore God will bring to nought both of them.

. No such relation exists between the and as between the and . The supposed parallel breaks down in two essential particulars. (1) The was not made for , but for the Lord, in order to be a member of Christ, who lived and died to redeem it. (2) The is not, like the , to be brought to nought, but to be transformed and glorified (Php 3:21). The body is contrasted with flesh and blood (15:37, 50), and the belongs to the latter, and has only a temporal purpose, whereas the body has an eternal purpose. So far, therefore, from standing to the body in the same relation as meats to the belly, it fatally conflicts with the bodys essential destiny, which is membership with Christ.

It is possible that in selecting the relation between appetite and food as a contrast to St Paul is indirectly discouraging Judaistic distinctions of meats, or ascetic prohibitions of flesh and wine. No kind of food is forbidden to the Christian. But even if there had been no Judaizers at work in Corinth, and no tendency towards asceticism, he would probably have selected the relation between and for his purpose. The argument is still used, If I may gratify one bodily appetite, why may I not gratify another? Naturalia non sunt turpia. Omnia munda mundis.

. A startling assertion of perfect correction: quanta dignatio / (Beng.). The Son of God, sent in the likeness of sinful flesh, has His purpose and destiny, viz. to dwell in and glorify the body (Rom 8:23) which is united with Him through the Spirit (v. 17); and it is lawful to say that He is for it as well as it for Him.

14. . This is parallel to in v. 13, and puts the contrast between the two cases in a very marked way. In the case of the , and the to which it is related, God will reduce both of them to nothingness. In the case of the , and the to which it is related, God will reduce both of them to nothingness. In the case of the , and the to which it is related, God has raised the , and will raise up the of every one who is a member of Him. The contrast between the two cases in complete. On the other hand, the close relationship between the Lord and all true Christians is shown by the doubled conjunction; . See Sanday (The Life of Christ in Recent Research, p. 132) on the view that it was St Paul who deified Christ.

The change from the simple () to the compound verb () has perhaps little meaning. In late Greek, compounds do not always have any additional force, and the difference is not greater than that between raise and raise up. The compound may be used to mark the future raising as not less sure than the one which is past, and it is well to mark the difference, as RV. does. AV., with raise up for both, ignores the change, as does Vulg., suscitavit suscitabit, and Iren. int. (5:6:2). The compound occurs only here and Rom 9:17 in N.T.; in LXX it is very frequent. See on , 3:18.

. This may qualify both verbs, but is more appropriate to . There was need to remind the Corinthians of Gods power, in order to confirm their belief in their own future resurrection (15:12); but no one who believed that Christ had been raised needed to be reminded of that: cf. Mat 22:29. It is worth observing that St Paul does not take any account of the quick who will not need to be raised. Contrast 15:51; 1Th 4:15 f.; Rom 8:11.

( C D3 E,KL Vulg. Syrr. Copt. Aeth.) is probably to be preferred to (A D Q, d e suscitat), or to (B, Am. suscitavit). (P) may be regarded as supporting either of the first two, of which may be safely set aside. It is possible that B has preserved the original reading, for no intelligent copyist would alter into , but an unintelligent one might assimilate the second verb to the first. If is regarded as original it may be explained as referring to spiritual resurrection to newness of life, or possibly as referring to our resurrection as comprised potentially in that of Christ: God both raised the Lord and (by so doing) raised up us. But it is unlikely that the Apostle would have obscured the cetainty of the future resurrection of the body by using language which would have encouraged Hymensus and Philetus (2Ti 2:17, 2Ti 2:18). Qui dominum suscitavit, et nos suscitabit (Tert. Marc. v. 7).

15. … He presses home the principle that the body is for the Lord. By virtue of that principle every Christian, and every one of his members, is a member of Christ. The higher heathen view was that mans body is in common with the brutes, , and only his reason and intelligence in common with the gods (Epict. Dissert. 1. iii. 1); but the Christian view is .*. Epictetus speaks of both God and gods, and in popular language calls God Zeus. In this chapter he speaks of God as the father of men and gods; but, at the best, he falls far short of Christian Theism. The Christian view, which first appears here, is developed in another connexion in 12 and in Rom_12. See also Eph 4:15, Eph 4:16, Eph 4:5:30.

. The AV. misses a point in translating, Shall I then take the members of Christ? The RV. has, Shall I then take away the members of Christ? is not simply, to take, which is , but either to take up, raise (Act 27:17), or to take away (v. 2; Eph 4:31; Col 2:14; and nowhere else in Paul). The. verb is very common in Gospels and Acts; elsewhere rare in N.T. The Apostle assumes that union with a harlot, unlike union with a lawful wife, robs Christ of members which belong to Him. Union with Christ attaches to our body through the spirit (v. 17), and sin is apostasy from the spiritual union with Christ. This is true of all sin, but is a peculiarly direct blow at the principle . Quantum flagitium est, corpus nostrum a sacra illa conjunctione abreptum ad res Christo indignas transferri (Calv.). As Augustine remarks (De Civ. Dei xxi. 25), they cannot be at once the members of Christ and the members of a harlot.

. It is impossible and unimportant to decide whether is deliberative subjunctive (Am I to take away and make?) or future indicative (Shall I take away? etc.). The two aorists would mark two aspects, simultaneous in effect, of one and the same act. But the future harmonizes better with AV., RV., Alford, Edwards, Ellicott, B. Weiss prefer the future.

. Like , this expression of strong dissent is frequent in this group of the Pauline Epistles (Romans, ten times; Galatians, twice; and here). Elsewhere in N.T., Luk 20:16. It is rare in LXX, and never stands as an independent sentence: Gen 44:7, Gen 44:17; Jos 22:29, Jos 22:24:16; 1Ki 20:[21] 3. It is one of several translations of the same Hebrew, another of which is (1Ch 11:19; 2Sa 20:20; Mat 16:22). Neither nor is confined to Jewish and Christian writings: the former is frequent in Arrian, the latter is found in inscriptions. In Hom. Od. vii. 316 we have , of detaining Ulysses against his wish. Cf. Di meliora. Here it expresses horror.

After there is the common confusion between (3 B C D E F G K L P, Latt.) and (* A). (P and a few cursives) or (F G) cannot be regarded as more probable than ( A B C D E, etc.); yet Baljon adopts it: has much force, not only in marking the grievous wrong done to Christ, but also in showing the voluntary, and even deliberate, character of the act.

16. . Again (v. 2 we have this reproachful question. The Apostle proceeds to corroborate the of v. 15.

. The word may come from in Gen 2:24, as in Eph 5:31, or possibly from Ecclus. 19:2, . Both the simple and the compound verb are frequent in LXX; in N.T. the compound is very rare. In both, only the passive, with reflective sense, is found. In N.T. the usual construction is the simple dat., as here. In LXX the constr. varies greatly, and there (2Ki 18:6; cf. Ecclus. 2:3) we have , as here, to express loyal and permanent adherence, resulting in complete spiritual union. This is placed in marked contrast to the temporary physical union which is so monstrous. The verb is frequent in Ep. Barnabas (ix. 9, x. 11, xix. 2, 6, xx. 2).

, , . . The subject to be understood with must always depend upon the context. The word may introduce the objection of an opponent (2Co 10:10). In Heb 8:5 we must understand God. Here we may do the same, or (what amounts to the same) supply . The in 15:27, and the in 2Co 6:2, and Gal 3:16, and Eph 4:8, are similar. In each case there is divine authority for the statement. The quotation is direct from the LXX, which has , as in Mat 9:5; Mar 10:8; Eph 5:31, although it is not in the original. For = there is perhaps no exact parallel in N.T., although the expression is frequent; 14:22; 2Co 6:18; Eph 1:12; Heb 1:5, Heb 1:8:10; etc. In most of these cases may mean to serve as. It is manifest that here no distinction is to be drawn between and .

18. . Do not stop to dispute about it: make a practice (pres. imperat.) of flying at once. So also of idolatry, which was so closely allied with impurity, 10:14. The asyndeton marks the urgency. Cf. 1Th 4:3.

… The difficulty of this passage lies in the distinction drawn between . , the predicate of every sin that a man doeth, and . , as marking the distinctive sin of the fornicator. Commentators differ greatly as to the explanation of . , which is the specially difficult expression. But the general meaning of vv. 13b-18 is plain. The body has an eternal destiny, . Fornication takes the body away from the Lord and robs it of its glorious future, of which the presence of the Spirit is the present guarantee (cf. Rom 8:9-11). In v. 18 we have the sharply cut practical issue, Flee fornication. Clearly the words that follow are meant to strengthen the severitas cum fastidio of the abrupt imperative: they are not an anti-climax. Any exegesis which fails to satisfy this elementary requirement may be set aside; and for this reason the explanations of Evans, Meyer, and Heinrici may be passed over.

It is obvious that and are related as opposites. The meaning of either will help to determine the meaning of the other; and the meaning of . is fairly certain. For , by the common usage of secular and Biblical Greek, means to sin against. It cannot mean sin in, or sin by means of, or involve in sin. What then does to sin against ones own body mean? The axiom, , , answers this question. To sin against ones own body is to defraud it of its part in Christ, to cut it off from its eternal destiny. This is what fornication does in a unique degree.* While fornication is ., other sins are . The one phrase is the opposite of the other. What St Paul asserts of fornication he denies of every other sin.

In what sense does he deny of all other sins that they are sins against a mans own body? If pressed and made absolute, the denial becomes a paradox. He has just told us (vv. 9, 10) thatthere are many sins which exclude their doer from the Kingdom, and which therefore deprive the body of its future life in Christ. Obviously, he is here speaking relatively, and by way of comparison. All other sins are ., in the sense that they do not, as directly as fornication does, alienate the body from Christ, its Life and its Goal.

This explanation gains in clearness if we compare the words of our Lord (Mat 12:31), , … There too the language may be comparative. We know abundantly from Scripture that there is forgiveness for every sin, if rightly sought. In the first clause the Saviour does not proclaim an absolute indiscriminate amnesty for every other sin any sin, unrepented and unabsolved, is an (Mar 3:29). Neither clause is to be pressed beyond its purpose to an absolute sense. But sin against the Spirit is so incomparably less pardonable than any other, that, by comparison with it, they may be regarded as venial. He who sins against the Spirit is erecting a barrier, insuperable to a unique degree, against his own forgiveness. In like manner, the words . are not absolutely nor unconditionally predicated of every sin which a man doeth:* they merely assert that other sins stop short of the baleful import of sensual sin with its direct onslaught on the dominant principle, Cf. Hos 6:6, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, which does not mean that sacrifice is forbidden, but that mercy is greatly superior. Luk 10:20, Luk 10:14:12, Luk 10:13, Luk 10:23:28 are similar. Cf. 9:10, 10:24, 33.

19. . Or, if you cannot see that unchastity is a sin against your own body, are you ignorant that the body of each of you is a sanctuary (Joh 2:21) of the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:11; 2Co 6:16; 2Ti 1:14)? What in 3:16 he stated of the Christian community as a whole, he here states of every member of it. In each case he appeals to facts which ought to be well known, as in vv. 2, 3, 9, 15, 16, 5:6, 9:13, 24; Rom 6:19, Rom 11:2. Excepting Jam 4:4, the expression is peculiar to these Epistles. Note the emphatic position of : it is a Spirit that is holy that is in you. In the temple of Aphrodite at Corinth, was regarded as consecration: the Corinthians are here told that it is a monstrous desecration (Findlay). Epictetus (Dis. ii. 8) says, Wretch, you are carrying God with you, and you know it not. Do you think I mean some god of silver or gold? You carry Him within yourself, and perceive not that you are polluting Him by impure thoughts and dirty deeds.

. The relative is attracted out of its own case, as often. Not content with emphasizing holy, he gives further emphasis to the preceding plea by pointing out that the indwelling Spirit is a gift direct from God Himself. Such a Spirit cannot dwell in a polluted sanctuary. Ep. of Barnabas iv. 11, vi. 15.

For , A 2 L 17, Copt. Arm. have , and Vulg. has membra.

. I spoke of your body; but in truth the body is not your own to do as you please with it, any more than the Spirit is your own. You have no right of property in either case. Indeed, your whole personality is not your own property, for God bought you with the life-blood of His Son. Act 20:28; Rom 14:8. Epictetus again has a remarkable parallel; If you were a statue of Phidias, you would think both of yourself and of the artist, and you would try to do nothing unworthy of him who made you, or of yourself. But now, because Zeus has made you, for this reason you do not care how you shall appear. And yet, is the artist in the one case like the artist in the other? or the work in the one case like the other? See Longs translation and notes, 1. pp. 156, 157, 288.

20. . This buying with a price, which causes a change of ownership, is a different metaphor from paying a ransom (, : , ), which causes freedom. There is no need to state the price; , (1Pe 1:19, where see Hort). The Vulgate has pretio only in 7:23, but here has pretio magno, and the epithet weakens the effect. And there is no person from whom we are bought (Abbott, The Son of Man, p. 702).

. . . . As in v. 18, we have a sharp practical injunction which carries us a great deal further, and this same injunction is given in still more comprehensive terms to close the question about partaking of idol-meats (10:31). Habitually to keep the body free from unchastity is imperative; but we must do more than that. Seeing that we belong, not to ourselves, but to God, we must use the body, in which He has placed His Spirit, to His glory. This verse goes far beyond the negative injunction in v. 18, and hence the enforcing the imperative, as in Act 13:2; Luk 2:15; Judith 13:11, , : Hom. Od. xx. 18, , . The Therefore of AV. and RV. is not quite right; therefore would be , as in 10:31: Be sure to glorify, I urge you to glorify is the force of the particle used here.

*, d e Copt. omit . Vulg., Tert. Cypr. Lucif. Ambrst. have glorificate (or clarificate) et portate (or tollite) deum (or dominum) in corpore vestro. Lightfoot suggests that portate (or tollite) may have arisen from a reading (Mat 7:20, Mat 7:17:26; Act 17:27?) which was confused with . Marcion read , which may be mere dittography, or from = (Nestle, p. 307). Methodius read , omitting . Chrys, seems to have read .

The addition (C 3 D 2 D 3 K L P, Syrr. A V.) is rejected by all editors. The words are wanfing in all the best witnesses and are not required for the argument. The Apostle is concerned with the sanctity of the body: the spirit is beside the mark. Lightfoot thinks that this may possibly be a liturgical insertion, like that of the doxology to the Lords Prayer (Mat 6:13) and the baptismal formula. (Act 8:37). But the words do not occur in any liturgy that is known to us, and the addition may be due to a wish to make the conclusion less abrupt and more complete.

* There may be another link. In 5:10, 11 St Paul twice brackets the with the , and he now passes from the one to the other. It was desire to have more than one had a right to () which led to this litigation in heathen courts. See on Eph 4:19.

* Augustine (De doct. Christ. iv. 18) seems to have read . . He has, judicari ab iniquis et non apud sanctos. Vulg. has apud with both words, as also has Augustine, Enchir. ad Laurent. 78.

* To bring a lawsuit before a court of idolaters was regarded as blasphemy against the Law.

Polycarp quotes the question, Know we not that the saints shall judge the world? as the doctrine of Paul (Phil. 11).

D D (Sixth century.) Codex Clarmontanus; now at Paris. A Graeco-Latin MS. 14:13 -22 is supplied by a later but ancient hand. Many subsequent hands (sixth to ninth centuries) have corrected the MS. (See Gregory, Prolegomena , pp. 418-422).

E E (Ninth century). At Petrograd. A copy of D, and unimportant

L L (Ninth century). Codex Angelicus; At Rome.

* Godet remarks that Paul ne veut pas dsigner tels ou tels anges; il veut rveiller dans Pglise le sentiment de sa comptence et de sa dignit, en lui rappelasit que des tres dune nature aussi leve serout un jour soumis sa jurisdiction. See also Milligan on 1Th 3:13, and Findlay here.

* It is evident that is a word which is more suitable for constituting simple Christians as arbitrators than for adopting heathen magistrates, already appointed, as judges of Christians.

*

There is yet another way, suggested by J. C. K. Hofmann and accepted by Findlay; Well then, as for secular tribunals-if you have men that are made of no account in the Church, set these on the bench! The punctuation does not seem to be very probable.

With the use of here we may compare in 16:3 and in 2Th 3:4.

* Cicero (Ad Fam, ix:25) writes to Papirius Paetus, Noli pati litigare fratres, et judiciis turpibus conflictari.

(Fourth century.) The Sinaitic MS., now at St Petersburg, the only MS. containing the whole N.T.

F F (Late ninth century). Codex Augiensis (from Reichenau); now at Trin. Coll. Cambr. Probably a copy of G in any case, secondary to G, from which it very rarely varies (see Gregory, p. 429).

G G (Late ninth century). Codex Boernerianus; at Dresden. Interlined with the Latin (in minluscules). Lacks 1Co 3:8-16, 1Co 6:7-14 (F).

P P (Ninth century). Porfirianus Chiovensis. A palimpsest acquired in the East by Porphyrius Bishop of Kiew. Lacks 7:15 -17 : 12:23 -13:5 -: 14:23 . A good type of text in St Pauls Epistles.

B B (Fourth century.) The Vatican MS.

C C (Fifth century). The Codex Ephraem, a Palimpsest; now at Paris. Lacks 7:18 -9:6 : 13:8 -14:40 .

17 17. (Ev. 33, Act_13. Ninth century.) At Paris (Nat. Gr. 14). See Westcott and Hort., Introd. 211, 212.

*

He says that the man who accepts injury without retaliating , while the man who brings an action against a fellow-Christian . He is worsted, has lost his cause, by the very fact of entering a law-court. Similarly, Clem. Alex. Strom. 7:14, which is a commentary on this section;

To say then that the wronged man goes to law before the wrong-doers is nothing else than to say that he desires to retaliate and wishes to do wrong to the second in return, which is likewise to do wrong also himself.

A A (Fifth century.) The Codex Alexandrinus; now at the British Museum.

* It is remarkable that in six verses we have four cases in which there is doubt whether the sentence is interrogative or not; vv. 3, 4, 6, 8. In this last case the interrogative is very improbable. See also on v. 13.

* Origen illustrates thus; Let no one lead you astray with persuasive words, saying that God is merciful, kind, and loving, and ready to forgive sins.

Duchesne thinks that there is nothing in 1 or 2 Corinthians to lead to the conclusion that the Apostles rivals had introduced Judaizing tendencies in Corinth (Early Hist. of the Chr. Church, p. 23). That can hardly be maintained respecting 2 Corinthians, and is very disputable about this Epistle.

*

There is a manifest reproduction of vv. 9, 10 in Ign. Eph. 16; also in Ep. of Polycarp, 5. On the general sense of the two verses see Sanday on St Pauls Equivalent for the Kingdom of Heaven, JTS. July 1900, pp. 481 f.

Aristot. (Eth. Nic. 7. 4. 4) says that people are called in reference to the same things as they are called , viz. : Plato (Rep. 8. 556 B) Origen here gives the word a darker meaning. See Deissmann, Light, p. 150. He gives a striking illustration of the list of vices here and elsewhere, derived from counters in an ancient game. Each counter had the name of a vice or a virtue on it; and in the specimens in museums the vices greatly preponderate (pp. 320f.).

d d The Latin text of D

e e The Latin text of E

f f The Latin text of F

* In 10:23 f., where St Paul again twice quotes his own , he is certainly thinking chiefly of the people influenced.

Nowhere else does the possive occur. But in late Greek the rule that only verbs which have an accusative can be used in the passive is not observed. See Lightfoot on (Col 2:20).

K K (Ninth century). Codex S. Synod. xcviii. Lacks 1:1-6:13 : 8:7 -8:11 .

* Origen says, , .

* Alford puts a similar view somewhat differently. The Apostles assertion is strictly true. Drunkeness and gluttony are sins done in any by the body, and are sins by abuse of the body, but they are introduced from without, sinful in their effect, which effect it is each mans duty to foresee and avoid. But fornication is the alienating that body which is the Lords, and making it a harlots body; it is not an effect on their body from participation of things without, but a contradiction of the truth of the body, wrought within itself.

* On in relative sentences see Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 201 f.

Fuente: International Critical Commentary New Testament

Settling Differences between Brethren

1Co 6:1-11

The Apostle was clearly of the opinion that it was wiser for a Christian to bear injustice and wrong than to go to law before a heathen tribunal. It would have been a happy solution of myriads of disputes if his advice had been followed. Where a course of lawless crime has to be arrested in the interests of the weak and defenseless, it is necessary to call in the law and police to vindicate and protect; but when our private, personal and individual interests alone are concerned, we should be wise to submit our case to arbitration or suffer patiently.

Who are the heirs of the kingdom of heaven, 1Co 6:9-11? Do not inquire into their past history. There are pages in their lives that had better be obliterated and forgotten; or, if remembered, they should be the foil to set forth the matchless grace and love of God. Yes, that grace shall be our theme forever, when we recall the depths out of which it lifted us, and the heights to which it raised us. Let us note that the Lord Jesus and the Holy Spirit are named together. It is by the Holy Spirit that we become possessed of the nature of our Lord, which takes the place of our old evil nature and empowers us to repeat His life.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Lecture 13

On Going To Law

1Co 6:1-11

Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. (vv. 1-11)

We have noticed in our study of this epistle that the apostle was used of God to correct a great many erroneous thoughts, and to suggest a remedy for many wrong practices in the church of God in ancient times, also that this letter with its varied instructions was intended not only for the church of God some nineteen hundred years ago but that it is addressed to all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord. If the churches of God today would be subject to the teachings of the first letter to the Corinthians, we would be delivered from a great many things that hinder the progress of the gospel and impede the working of the Spirit of God among us.

In this section Paul inveighs against a practice which was growing in Corinth, and which I am afraid has been in evidence in many other places since, of Christians quarreling with other Christians about temporal matters, and dragging one another into the worlds law courts for the adjudication of their difficulties. This is utterly abhorrent to the spirit of Christianity. It puts the Christian in a false position before the world and before his brethren. It is saying to the world, We Christians are just as covetous and just as quarrelsome, we are just as much concerned about having our own way and about self-pleasing as you of the world are. We recognize your judges as having authority over the church of God, and it is degrading to the Christian thus to act.

The apostle says, Dare any of you? He is stirred with indignation and his language is very strong, Dare any of you, having a matter against another-he means, of course, another brother-go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? This chapter does not teach that a Christian should never go to law. It is quite impossible at times to avoid it, and even the writer of these words when falsely accused before a Roman governor said, I appeal to Caesar, and stood upon his natural rights as a Roman citizen and insisted that his case should be heard in the imperial court. I know some brethren are wiser than the apostle Paul and feel that he made a mistake. They are quite sure that if they had been in his place, they would have acted more wisely. It is a pity that the apostle could not have availed himself of their advice! He acted quite within his right as a Christian, for that was a matter not of going to law with his brethren before the unjust but of having things heard in a clear, straightforward way before the supreme tribunal of the Roman empire. When in Philippi, the judges would have dismissed him and would have him go out under cover without a clear, public justification, but he said, No, we have been wrongfully accused and unjustly treated. You admit you have made a mistake; make the admission publicly. That was perfectly right and proper.

But here is an entirely different case. Now we have brethren dragging each other before the worlds courts. He says, Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? If Christians have disagreements which they are not able to iron out between themselves, let them consult their brethren, bring in others in whom they have confidence, and let them agree to abide by their brethrens judgment just as truly as they would have to abide by a decision from a worldly court.

Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? This refers to something that many Christians have lost sight of. Our Lord Jesus Christ is coming again to reign for a thousand wonderful years. Then judgment shall return to righteousness, and when He reigns we shall reign with Him. It is written, The time came that the saints possessed the kingdom (Dan 7:22). If we are going to reign with Christ, going to sit on thrones of judgment with Him in that coming glorious kingdom age, what an absurd thing to think that we are not fit to judge matters having to do with temporalities here on earth when our brethren are in difficulty.

Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? After all, these things are so trivial; matters of money, of property, matters concerning personal reputation, are such small things when viewed in the light of eternity. We may make a great deal of them, we may magnify them and give them a place of importance altogether beyond that which they deserve, but the apostle declares they are very small matters indeed, and he strengthens his position as he adds, Know ye not that we shall judge angels? What is that? Angels who are greater in power and might, are we going to sit in judgment upon them? Are angels coming into judgment? Yes, we read twice in the New Testament of angels coming into judgment. In 2Pe 2:4 we read, For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment, and then certain conclusions follow. Then in the epistle of Jude, verse 6, we read, And the angels which kept not their first estate [their own principality], but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Now it is the final judgment that is in view, and at that last great assize these fallen angels shall be all brought into judgment. And who will sit upon that throne of judgment? Our Lord Jesus Christ, and all the redeemed throughout the ages will be associ- ated with Him. We will be there with our Lord as assessors, we may say, in that last great assize. If this dignity is to be ours, if we are to judge the world during the kingdom age, if we are to judge angels when eternity begins, are we then unfit to judge affairs of this life? How much more should we be able to judge between our brethren!

In verse 4 he says something that evidently was not very clear, it seems to me, to the minds of those who years ago prepared this wonderful King James Version of ours. It says, If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. The thought then would be, these matters are so trivial, they are of so little importance that even those who are least esteemed in the church ought to be fit to adjudicate in such cases. And yet I question if that is what the apostle is really saying, for in the next verse he tells us, I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? There he implies that if the church is to take up matters of this kind, there should be wise men giving decisions, and that would hardly seem to be in harmony with the rendering that we have in verse 4. But if you put an exclamation point after that verse, it changes the entire meaning of it. If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church! The Revised Version makes it a question, If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, do you set them to judge who are of no account in the church? If you drag your Christian brother before one of the unconverted judges of this world, you are bringing him before a man who, whatever his place in the world, is of no account in the church of God unless he himself happens also to be a Christian. So I take it this is what the apostle means to say: Dont you see what you are doing? You are dragging your brother before men who have no place in the church of God whatever; their dignity and probity do not give them place in the church of God. Whether honorable or not, if they have not been born again, if not converted men, they are of no account in the church of God.

I speak to your shame [in doing this you are degrading yourselves and you might well bow your heads in shame]. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. This is altogether wrong. He says, There is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Even though you say, I do not know of any Christian to whom I could submit this case, there is another way out. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? You do not have to stand on your own rights, it is not necessary that you should always be cleared, it is not necessary that you should always prove that you have been wronged in matters of this kind. You can, if you will, bow your head and say, I leave all with God. I am not going to say anything about it; if they wrong me, He understands.

Many years ago as a little fellow I attended a meeting in Toronto where some difficulty had come up between brethren and they did as the apostle suggests. My dear mother took me along. Little pitchers have big ears, and I well remember how horrified I was to see men I esteemed and had been taught to respect apparently so indignant with each other. I can remember one man springing to his feet and with clenched fists saying, I will put up with a good deal, but one thing I will not put up with, I will not allow you to put anything over on me; I will have my rights! An old Scotch brother who was rather hard of hearing leaned forward holding his ear and said, What was that, brother? I did not get that! I say, I will have my rights, said the man. But you did not mean that, did you? Your rights? If ye had your rights, you would be in hell, wouldnt you? And you are forgetting-arent you?-that Jesus did not come to get His rights, He came to get His wrongs, and He got them. I can still see that man standing there for a moment like one transfixed, and then the tears broke from his eyes and he said, Brethren, I have been all wrong. Handle the case as you think best, and he sat down and put his face in his hands and sobbed before the Lord, and everything was settled in three minutes. When in this spirit it is so easy to clear things up; when we bow before the Lord, He straightens them out.

And then think of what grace has already done for you. Think how marvelously God has dealt with you in spite of all the sin and iniquity that you have been guilty of in the past. In the next verse he reminds them that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God, and then he sets forth a fearful catalogue of sins and transgressions against God, nature, and man, and as he repeats this awful list, he turns to that redeemed company and says, And such were some of you. These are the things from which you have been saved, these are the transgressions that have been forgiven you, from these unholy, wicked, impure things you have been cleansed. You were sinners of five hundred pence, but God has forgiven all. Shall you hold your brother accountable because he owes you a small debt when God has so graciously dealt with you?

Such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. Notice the order here: washed-sanctified-justified. I went into a mission in San Francisco years ago and sat for perhaps half-an-hour listening to marvelous testimonies of redeeming grace. One after another rose and painted a dreadful picture of his past life and then told how God had saved him. I had come to that meeting with a little sermon all made up, but as I sat listening to these testimonies, I said, O dear, my stupid little sermon! To think I imagined I could go into my study and develop a little discourse that would suit a congregation like this, when I had no idea of the kind of people I was going to address. So I just canned my sermon; I put it out of my mind, and when I rose to speak, I took this text: And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. It was easy to preach to them then without a lot of study. These sermons that you get up are so hard to preach, but those that come down are so much easier. At the close a dignified personage came to me and said, Do you know, you got your theology terribly mixed tonight?

Did I? I said. Straighten me out.

You put sanctification before justification. You have to be justified and then you get the second blessing.

Pardon me, but you are mistaken, I said. I did not put sanctification before justification.

You most certainly did.

I most certainly did not; it was the apostle Paul who did.

Why, you cannot blame your wrong theology on him.

I was simply quoting Scripture.

You misquoted it. It reads, Ye are justified, ye are sanctified.

No, no, I said; read it.

And he began to read, But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified, and then he said, Why, there is a misprint there. Wait a minute; I will get a Revised Bible.

He got it and looked at it, and read, Washed, sanctified, justified.

Why, he said, I never saw that before; but all I have to say is the apostle Paul was not clear on the holiness question when he wrote that!

But what does the apostle really say? Ye are washed. What does that mean? It is the washing of regeneration. When the Word of God is applied to the heart and conscience, when first awakened and turned to the Lord, it results in deliverance from the impurity of the old life. We are cleansed by the washing of water by the Word.

But ye are sanctified. What is it to be sanctified? It is to be set apart to God in Christ, and that is true of everyone who turns to the Lord Jesus Christ. There is a work that begins even before a man is conscious of his justification. Were it not for that, not one of us would ever turn to Christ. The Spirit begins that work which exercises and convicts and leads us to feel our need, and through the Word we are washed and cleansed, and thus Christ is revealed to our souls, and putting our trust in Him we are justified from all things.

Washed-that has to do with the practical cleansing. Sanctified-set apart to God in Christ. Justified-that means we are judicially cleared before the throne of God. God has nothing against the man who stands justified before Him. These are our blessings, they are true of every believer. How our hearts ought to thrill with worship and praise as we think how God has dealt with us!

Fuente: Commentaries on the New Testament and Prophets

1Co 6:2-3

I. The Apostle seems to refer to something in the Christian doctrine which was well known then, but certainly it is very obscure now. We always look forward to being judged, not to judging others, and therefore the appeal of the Apostle has no force for us. If the words stood alone, indeed, we should probably be inclined to think that they only spoke of judging in the sense of condemning by contrast or example, as our Lord said that the men of Nineveh would rise in judgment with that generation and condemn it. But this reference to future judgment does not stand alone; there are several passages having the same reference (Dan 7:22; Mat 19:28; Rev 20:4). That all these references are obscure is plain enough, but it is also plain that they mean something, and that the exercise of judicial authority on the part of the saints shall be real, however difficult for us to comprehend.

II. The saints shall judge the world, and yet they must themselves be judged, and it is plain that one judgment will decide the fate of all. There can be no favouritism with Him before whom we must all stand. These things can only be reconciled by the supposition that the saints will be called to the first (and strictest) account, and that, having been approved and found worthy, they will then become assessors of their Judge in passing judgment on the rest, and sit beside Him, hearing and approving His sentence.

III. When it says that the saints shall judge the world, I think that reason and analogy of Scripture teach us to limit “the world” to the heathen world. I cannot think that judging their fellow-Christians can ever be the lot of any, however perfect. The judgment of angels we must certainly limit to bad angels, for it does not appear how the others which never swerved from their allegiance would be liable to any judgment at all; none can be judged unless there be some accusation against them. Surely the solemn thought that we shall be called upon to assist in passing sentence upon immortal beings may serve, as the Apostle intended it, to show the pettiness, the unworthiness, of much of our daily life and strife! We are quarrelsome over trifles, exasperated over slights, driven to extremities over imaginary wrongs. God forgive us Christians! We had forgotten that we were to judge the world, and angels too, in a little while.

R. Winterbotham, Sermons and Expositions, p. 299.

References: 1Co 6:7.-G. Calthrop, Christian World Pulpit, vol. ii., p. 165. 1Co 6:9.-W. M. Arthur, Ibid., vol. xiv., p. 253. 1Co 6:11.-E. Cooper, Practical Sermons, p. 177. 1Co 6:12.-A. Mursell, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xviii., p. 264. 1Co 6:15-20.-T. Arnold, Sermons, vol. v., p. 147. 1Co 6:17.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvi., No. 961. 1Co 6:18.-R. D. B. Rawnsley, Village Sermons, p. 119. 1Co 6:18-20.-E. Garbett, Experiences of the Inner Life, p. 179. 1Co 6:19.-J. Pulsford, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xv., p. 312; Church of England Pulpit, vol. ix., p. 253.

1Co 6:19-20

Note:-

I. God’s consecration of the body. The image of the text is that of a shrine in which a god dwells. The body of a Christian believer holds another tenant than his human spirit; a Divine presence is within him, at once his glory and his power. And that Divine presence confers an unutterable sacredness upon his body. The body is a medium of Divine service. That is one of the suggestions of God’s consecration of it. The impulses of the indwelling Spirit ask for its co-operation; they need its ministry if they are to pass from gracious thoughts into Christian acts. We can set no limits to God’s consecration of the body of the Christian believer, can form but little conception of the complete and noble service which is possible to us because He has made such a shrine in which to dwell. These things speak of the “temple of the body,” and lend an awful, glorious meaning to the admonition which bids us glorify God in our body as well as in our spirit, since the body, equally with the spirit, is His.

II. Our consecration of our bodies. The first essential to our glorifying God in our body is that we regard it with reverence. That is the use Paul is here making of the fact that it, equally with the spirit, is redeemed; that it, equally with the spirit, is a sphere of Divine service. Irreverence for the body, disregard of all its noble capabilities, and the ends to which it may be made to minister, was closely connected with the sin of impurity, which the Apostle is rebuking. We may make another application of our text. It is a Christian duty to do all in our power for the relief of bodily suffering, both in ourselves and others. Next to the work of preaching the gospel and healing the spiritual woes of men, which are the root of all their bodily sufferings-a work which remains in its importance first and unapproachable-comes the work of fighting against and destroying the pains that afflict humanity. A wonderful framework is the human body, writing out the story of sin in sickness; lending itself to all the process of human discipline; aiding the endeavour after spiritual perfection; making the noblest human ministries and a high Divine service possible to us.

A. Mackennal, The Life of Christian Consecration, p. 100.

(See also Christian World Pulpit, vol. viii., p. 276.)

References: 1Co 6:19-20.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xvii., No. 1004; vol. xxvi., No. 1554; Sermons for Boys and Girls, p. 340; Three Hundred Outlines, p. 143; W. Hubbard, Christian World Pulpit, vol. xxvii., p. 102; Homilist, vol. iii., p. 370. 1Co 6:20.-Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xx., No. 1163; W. Lamson, Christian World Pulpit, vol. vii., p. 239; Ibid., vol. xi., p. 31. 1Co 7:3.-Expositor, 1st series, vol. ix., p. 388.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

CHAPTER 6

1. Concerning Disputes before Heathen Courts. (1Co 6:1-7).

2. The Holiness of Believers; Their Bodies the Temples of the Holy Spirit. (1Co 6:8-20).

Instead of settling their disputes amongst themselves, as it becomes the Saints of God, they brought their difficulties before a heathen court. In doing this they had lost sight of the dignity of their calling. The Saints of God are to reign with Christ and share His glory; they shall judge the world and angels in that day. Going to a heathen court to have these matters settled by one who was not a child of God, but unrighteous, was unworthy of them; they were making known their own shame before the world. If they had remembered that coming day of glory, when as Saints they were to participate in the judgment of the world, they would not have acted in such a way. They would have gladly suffered wrong themselves and permitted themselves to be defrauded instead of rushing with their grievances before a heathen court. Mat 18:15-18 shows the true way for believers to settle such matters. They were doing wrong and defrauding their own brethren. In all this they dishonored God and denied their relationship to Him. And these Corinthian failures are today in professing Christendom fully developed.

The unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God. He reminds them what some of them had been in their unconverted state. They had practiced the vile things of the flesh, which were so common in Corinth. And connected with this there is a warning. If the little leaven was allowed to work, if they continued in the evil ways they were following, they would surely relapse into their former state. But even more, the Apostle reminds them what the grace of God had done for them in saving them from such a life. They had been translated from the power of darkness into the Kingdom of the Son of His love. And such were some of you, but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. The washing has nothing to do with baptism, as some claim. Through regeneration (called in Tit 3:5, the washing of regeneration), the believing sinner becomes clean every whit (Joh 13:10). Then he is also sanctified in Christ, set apart unto God. And the holy Spirit takes possession of the believer as His own temple. This is the meaning here of Justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. He is the seal.

Then the question concerning the believers body is introduced. A believer is no longer under the law as to meats and foods, as the Jews were. All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not profitable. A believer is not to be brought under the power of any of these things. He is not in bondage to anything, but is to have perfect liberty. To be a slave to anything, for instance, a habit, would be wrong. Meats are for the belly; they are but temporary and will pass away. God will bring to nought both it (the belly) and them (the meats). But the body itself is something different. In the body of the believer the Holy Spirit is the abiding guest, the divine Indweller. The body is therefore for the Lord and the Lord for the body. The body has the promise of redemption. God, who raised up the Lord, will also raise us up by His own power. And the bodies of believers are members of Christ, joined to Himself by the Spirit of God. For he that is joined unto the Lord is one Spirit. And all is in warning against the horrible sin, which was so prominent in Corinth, fornication. The bodies of believers belong to the Lord. They are the temples of the Holy Spirit. Therefore we are not our own. Furthermore, all this has been accomplished by the great redemption price, the price paid upon Calvarys cross. The body must be yielded to God as a living sacrifice. For ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body, which are Gods.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

having: Mat 18:15-17, Act 18:14, Act 18:15, Act 19:38

go: 1Co 6:6, 1Co 6:7

the saints: 1Co 1:2, 1Co 14:33, 1Co 16:1, 1Co 16:15

Reciprocal: Exo 18:16 – a matter Mat 18:17 – tell 1Co 1:11 – that there 1Co 3:3 – for whereas 1Co 5:12 – do not 1Co 11:18 – I hear

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

THERE WAS ANOTHER very grievous scandal amongst these Corinthians, to which Paul alludes in chapter 6. It was less grave perhaps than the foregoing, but apparently it was more widespread. Some amongst them were quarrelsome, and dragging their disputes into the public law courts. Thus they launched their accusations and aired their wrongs, whether real or imaginary, before the unbelievers.

Here again spiritual instinct ought to have delivered them from such an error. It was virtually confessing that they had not one wise man in their midst with the ability to discriminate and judge in such matters. Thus they were noising abroad their own shame.

And further than this, they were proclaiming their own ignorance. Verse 1Co 6:2 commences with, Do ye not know? and five times before the chapter is finished do we find the question, Know ye not? Like many other carnal believers the Corinthians did not know nearly as much as they thought they did. If truth governs US, we really know it. Mere intellectual knowledge does not count.

They ought to have really known that the saints shall judge the world. This fact had been stated in the Old Testament. The Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom (Dan 7:22). Had they really known it they would not have dragged one another into heathen law courts. If we really knew it, we perhaps should avoid certain things that we do. A still more astonishing fact confronts us in verse 1Co 6:3 : though here the change from, the saints, to, we, may indicate that the judging of angels is confined to the apostles.

Be that as it may, these verses open up before us a vista of extraordinary authority and responsibility, in the light of which things pertaining to this life can only be spoken of as the smallest matters. In keeping with this estimate, is the instruction that if such questions are brought before the saints for judgment, those least esteemed in the church are to hear the case. We notice that it does not say that all the saints are going to judge in the coming age. Perhaps all are not, and so those least likely to be judges then are to be judges now. Such is the estimate which Scripture gives of the relative importance of the things of the coming age as compared with the things of this age.

It is quite evident, then, that if one Christian has an accusation of unrighteousness to lay against another, he must lay his case before the saints and not before the world. There is however something better than that, as indicated in verse 1Co 6:7. Better than all is it to meekly suffer the wrong, leaving the Lord to deal with it, and work repentance in the wrong-doer. Worst of all is it to do the wrong and defraud even the brethren.

If one called a Christian acts fraudulently, serious questions are raised in view of the fact that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God. The first question we ask is-Is he a true Christian after all? God alone knows. We stand in doubt of him. A true believer may fall into any of the terrible evils enumerated in verses 1Co 6:9-10, but he is not characterized by any of them, and through repentance he is eventually restored. Those characterized by these things have no part in the kingdom of God, either here or hereafter. They are consequently clean outside the fellowship of the assembly of God.

Some of the Corinthians had been sinners of this type, but their conversion had involved three things-washing, sanctification, justification. Washing signifies that deep and fundamental work of moral renovation which is accomplished by the new birth. Sanctification is a setting apart for God, now to be for His use and pleasure. Justification is a clearance from every count that otherwise would lie against us; a judicial setting right, so that we stand in righteousness before God. All three are ours in the Name of the Lord Jesus-that is, in virtue of His sacrificial work; and by the Spirit of our God-that is, by His effective work in our hearts. We might have been inclined to connect the washing with the work of the Spirit exclusively, and the justification exclusively with the work of Christ. But it is not so stated here. The objective and the subjective go hand in hand.

We might also have been inclined to have put justification in the first place. But washing comes first here, since the point of the passage is, that the believer manifests an altogether new character. The old filthy characteristics are washed away in the new birth. And if they are manifestly not washed away, then no matter what a man may profess he cannot be accepted as a true believer, or in Gods kingdom.

Verse 1Co 6:12 commences a fresh paragraph, and introduces another line of thought. Meats are mentioned in the next verse, and we shall have more concerning that matter in chapter viii. It was a burning question amongst the early Christians. In such matters as that Paul was not under law. Yet even so what is quite lawful may be by no means expedient, or profitable (see margin). Moreover even a lawful thing may have a tendency to enslave, and we are not to allow ourselves to be brought under the power of anything, but rather hold ourselves free to be the bondslaves of our Lord and Saviour. How often one hears it said concerning a debated point- But it is not forbidden. What is the harm of it? And the reply has to be in the form of another question-Is it profitable? We want things which have not only the negative virtue of having no harm in them but also the positive virtue of having profit in them.

This last paragraph of the chapter contains very important teaching as to the body of the believer. As yet our bodies are not redeemed, and consequently are the seat of various lusts, and they must be held as dead. Still we must not fall into the error of treating them lightly. Three great facts concerning them are stated in this passage.

First, they are members of Christ. (ver. 15). Though not yet redeemed, they are going to be redeemed, and the Lord claims them as His. So really are they His that it is possible for the life of Jesus to be made manifest in our bodies. (See 2Co 4:10). They are members in which is to be displayed the life of Him who is our Head.

Second, the body of each believer is the temple of the Holy Ghost. (ver. 19). Our old life has been judged. Sin in the flesh, which formerly dominated us, has been condemned; and now the Spirit indwells us as the energy of that new life which we have in Christ. Every believer should regard his body as a shrine wherein dwells the Holy Spirit, which he has of God. God has taken possession of his body in this way: a fact of tremendous import.

Third, we have been bought with a price, (ver. 20) body as well as soul. The price that has been paid is beyond all our computation, as we know right well. The point we might overlook is that it covers the purchase of our bodies.

Now note the implications of these facts. How can we make the members of Christ the members of an harlot? Again, how can I treat my body as if it were exclusively my own? We are not our own. We are Anothers, spirit and soul and body. Hence, glorify God in your body, is the word for us. The whole idea of the unconverted is to gratify and glorify themselves in and through their bodies. Be it ours to gratify and glorify God.

What a lofty standard is set before us in these things! We may feel that it is indeed high and that we do not attain unto it. Still we would not have it altered. A great present blessing lies here, and also a great pledge of future glory. If already our bodies are the temples of the Holy Ghost. how sure it must be that the redemption of our bodies is coming. Then the Holy Spirit will have a temple perfect in holiness. Meanwhile He promotes holiness in us, and that is for our highest blessing.

Finally, glance at verse 17. This verse flatly denies the idea that our union with Christ lies in the Incarnation, which idea lies at the root of much ritualistic error. The union lies not in flesh but in spirit. This is one of the cases where it is a question whether to begin the word spirit with a capital or not. The Spirit, who indwells us, is the Spirit of Christ; and by Him we are one spirit with the Lord. What a marvellous fact! Ponder it well.

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

The Indwelling Holy Spirit

1Co 6:1-20

INTRODUCTORY WORDS

The studies in the Epistle to the Corinthians are not written to be shelved, but to be carefully studied, and followed, lest we fall, as saints, into the same line of carnalities, as those into which they fell.

In the last study we discovered a deplorable condition in the Church at Corinth. Now, other shortcomings are before us. All of these are due to the one fact,-the Corinthians failed to walk in the Spirit, and to yield themselves wholly to Him.

1. The great lack of the present hour among the churches is their utter failure to give to the Spirit of God His rightful place in the church, and in the heart. In preaching, we said, “If we had our way we would place in every seminary, in every Bible School, and in every church a specially prepared teacher to proclaim the Spirit-filled life.”

Did not the Lord command the saints of old to tarry at Jerusalem until they were endued with power from on high? The Lord knew the helplessness of any service unendued from on high.

Did not the Lord, through the Apostle, say, “Be filled with the Spirit”? He knew that the fruit of the Spirit could not be produced in believers who were not Spirit-filled.

2. The emphasis in the present Sunday school program is on efficiency, established by and accomplished by organization. The Sunday School must be well graded, divided and subdivided. It must be run with clocklike precision, and by methods developed by experts. One would think the Holy Spirit was not to be considered, as an important feature in that service. If He has any place, it is a secondary place.

3. The pastor of today must be efficient in every line of social, financial, and philanthropic activity if he is able to cope with the demand of the modern church. He must possess those business qualities which the prince of merchants needs, in managing a large department store. There is no question from the pew as to whether he is filled with the Holy Ghost, or taught by Him in the Word of the evangel; what the pew wants is a good mixer, a good organizer, and an up-to-the-minute financier, etc. If the pastor is rhetorical, well versed in literature, and gifted in oratorical powers, that is enough. The Spirit-filled, Spirit-taught and Spirit-led preacher is not to be sought.

4. The average church member is living wholly apart from any personal contact with, or knowledge of, the Spirit. He seeks to fulfill every Divine requirement, both in service and in holy living, by his own power and initiative, unaided by the Lord. There is no wonder that we have such a great lack in the membership of our churches. There is, for this cause, no fervor in work, no joy in worship.

If we stop a moment to look at the Church of the first century, we find that they were all filled with the Holy Ghost. They ate their meat with gladness, and singleness of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people. They continued daily, and with one accord in the Temple, and in the breaking of bread from house to house. The believers were together and had all things common. When they were scattered by the persecution that arose at that time, they went everywhere preaching Christ.

What was the blessed finale of such a Spirit-filled people? Here it is-“And the Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved.” The great concern of the Apostles of Christ was that every one should receive the Spirit.

I. SHOULD A CHRISTIAN GO TO LAW WITH HIS BROTHER? (1Co 6:1)

1. As far as it is possible we should live at peace with all men. It is far better to suffer evil, than to avenge oneself. If our enemy hunger, we should feed him; if he thirst, we should give him drink. If one should strike us on the right cheek, we should turn to him our other cheek also.

We should, wherever possible, overcome evil with good. We should under no circumstance render evil for evil, but the rather provide things honest in the sight of all men. Another Scripture adds, “But ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men.”

2. Where questions are such that we must seek judgment against a brother, we should not make it a matter of the courts of the land; but we should ask the spiritual among the brethren to judge our case. The Spirit considers the unjust unable to rightly judge the saints. Do we imagine that the unjust can judge our matters, better than they who are godly? Do we think that men who know not God, can the better decide matters of justice, than can the men who know God, and walk in the truth?

3. How Bible instructions are set aside by the children of God. As we pause for a moment, let us consider how Christians seldom, if ever, take any matter against a brother to the church. Let us consider also how the church makes no provision for such cases to be considered.

The Word of God seems to have but little weight with followers of God, save in those things which have to do with certain great and outstanding doctrines of grace. In the realm of Christian conduct, the believer seems to feel himself at liberty to live as he pleases; or according, at least, to the dictations of his own conscience. Is the Bible authoritative upon the churches, and upon saints?

II. CHRISTIANS SHALL JUDGE ANGELS (1Co 6:3)

1. The ministry of angels is intimately connected with saints in this life. It is written: “Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?” What then? The angels of God concern themselves with those things which have to do with the benefactions of the children of God.

Have you not read how the angels encompass the saints, to deliver them? The angels opened the prison for Peter’s escape. The angels warned Joseph, husband of Mary, in a dream, relative to the safeguarding of the infant Christ. As to the children, “In heaven their angels do always behold the face of My Father which is in Heaven.”

2. The conduct of fallen angels is also a matter for our consideration. There are principalities and powers, who are the world-rulers of this present darkness. There are angels among these. They kept not their first estate. Many such angels are kept in everlasting chains under darkness, unto the judgment of the great day.

3. The superiority of saints to angels. We speak not, so much, of saints in this life, as of saints in the life to come. The redeemed are destined to rule and reign with their Lord. He shall judge the world in righteousness; they shall judge with Him. The Lord, for the time, was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death; He is now far above them, crowned with glory and honor; and set over all things.

When Christ comes the second time, we read of the edict of God, “Let all the angels of God worship Him.” The superiority of Christ to angels is assured. What then; are we not His brethren? Are we not like Him? Do we not partake of His glory, and of His power? We do.

4. Therefore we shall judge angels. They are now our servants in the glory of the Gospel; we shall then be their judges, in the glory of the coming life.

III. ARE THERE STILL FAULTS AMONG SAINTS? (1Co 6:7)

1. Are there no wise men among the saints? If not, why not? Is not God the author of wisdom? Behold, it is written, “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.”

Certainly the church should not major in folly. We serve a God of all wisdom. By Him, we are made wiser than the ancients. The entrance of His Word giveth us light, and understanding, and wisdom. Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world? Is not Christ made unto us, both the power and the wisdom of God?

2. If saints are given the wisdom of God, can they not judge in the matters of men? Shall a brother go to law with his brother, and that before unbelievers, when his own brethren are panoplied to judge a matter with the wisdom of God? Paul said, “I speak to your shame.”

There is one thing we do not want to do, and that is this: We would not, for the world, shame our Lord, and drag down His holy Name by our cavilings.

3. The fault among saints. The Apostle put it this way, “There is utterly a fault among you.” What was that fault? “Because ye go to law one with another,” “and that before the unbelievers.” Then is added this significant expression: “Why do ye not rather take wrong?” This phase we will treat in our fourth division. Just now let us press home the fact that wrong among believers, defames the Name of our Lord.

God is judged among men by our acts. If we are His children, His representatives, His ambassadors, surely the world will think of Him in the light of our words and our deeds. We must walk carefully because we are His witnesses, bearing His Name, and holding His honor and glory at stake.

Is it not still true that there is utterly a fault among us? Yea, are there not many faults? Do saints not live, in many things, far below the dignity and honor of their position? Others may do many things that we may not do.

IV. WHY NOT THE RATHER SUFFER LOSS? (1Co 6:7-8)

The portion of the verse that we wish to emphasize is this: “Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?”

1. It is given unto saints to suffer. It is written; “In the world ye shall have tribulation.” Again, It is written, “Unto you it is given * * to suffer.” Why then should not the Christian suffer gladly? “Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for My sake, Rejoice, and be exceeding glad.”

Yes, there is something worth while when we are buffeted, and we take it patiently; for then the Spirit of God and of glory resteth on us.

2. We are not to avenge ourselves. God will take care of us, and vindicate us in His own time and way. Therefore, even if we have been defrauded, why should we go to law before unbelievers? God is able to make all things abound toward us. Shall we not take our care to Him, and cast it down at His feet? Truly He careth for us.

Perhaps God sent to you, your loss,

Your bitter cross,

That you, His wondrous grace might learn,

His love discern;

That you might look to Him the more,

Tilt life is o’er.

Perhaps God seeks to turn your eyes,

Up to the skies:

Perhaps He would your life refine,

Until you shine

With new-found peace, and faith, and power

Through trial’s hour.

3. Remember how Christ was smitten. When He was buffeted, He buffeted not again. He went as a lamb to the slaughter, and like a sheep before its shearers is dumb, so He opened not His mouth. Let us do likewise.

V. THE UNRIGHTEOUS SHALL NOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM (1Co 6:9)

1. Shall we who are inheritors with the saints in light begrudge an earthly loss? Suppose we are defrauded-the things of earth last only for the night. We are taught several things:

(1) We are to set our affections on the things above, not on the things on the earth. We lay our treasures up on high, where moth and rust cannot enter and corrupt, nor thieves break through and steal. If we lay our treasures up down here, we will the more quickly want to go to law, when defrauded, to reclaim our loss.

(2) We are to look at the things which are not seen, and not at the things which are seen. The bird in hand is of far less value than two birds in the Divine bush, for the two are sure; while the one in hand, is sure to fly away.

2. Those who are defrauding us, along with other unrighteous men, will be losers in the kingdom. Think you that fornicators, and idolators, and adulterers, and thieves shall inherit the Kingdom of God?

Thus, those who steal our purse, not only steal trash; but they heap to themselves sorrows, and rob themselves of the Kingdom for which we gladly suffer.

To the wicked is reserved the blackness of darkness forever. For a while they may seem to prosper, and to enjoy the works of their hands, but they will suddenly be cut off and that without remedy.

3. How saints may safeguard their possessions. Suppose we, down here, do suffer loss? Paul suffered the loss of all things, in order that he might win Christ. We who lose all things for Him, will find our all things laid up for us in Heaven. We can use the ungodly mammon, to make unto us friends, who shall welcome us into everlasting habitation.

VI. WHAT WE ARE AS CONTRASTED WITH WHAT WE WERE (1Co 6:11)

1. What we were. 1Co 6:9 and 1Co 6:10 speak of fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, effeminate, self-abusers, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers, and extortioners. Then it says, “such were some of you.”

All believers have not gone into such depths of sin; but all believers had, in their unregenerate days, the possibilities of such sin. The human heart is corrupt according to deceitful lusts.

2. What we are. Our key text says: “But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” Here is a wonderful standing which we have in grace. Here is a wonderful threefold present condition of all believers:

(1) We are washed. That is, we have been cleansed from our sins. We remember how the outcomers from the great tribulation had been washed, and made white in the Blood of the Lamb. We likewise remember the promise made in the Old Testament: “Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow.”

(2) We are sanctified. The word here suggests to us sanctification, made real unto us, in the Lord Jesus Christ and by the power of the Spirit. It carries with it the included fact of our having been washed and made clean; however, our Scripture is particularly emphasizing that we have been separated from the things in which we walked of old, on the one hand; and dedicated unto Christ, our Saviour, on the other hand.

(3) We are justified. Justification means that we are pronounced just. God has laid our condemnation upon Christ, and neither Satan, nor the world can condemn us, for we stand justified in Christ, before God.

The three things above are all ours in the Name of the Lord Jesus. That is, they are ours by virtue of what He is, and what He has accomplished, in our behalf.

These three things are also by the Spirit of God, that is, the Spirit is acclaimed as the agency through which our washing, our sanctification, and our justification are accomplished.

Would that all Christians might live up to their standing in Christ Jesus!

VII. THE PRACTICAL CONCLUSION OF THE CHRISTIAN’S DELIVERANCE (1Co 6:13)

1. The body is not for fornication. Shall we take the body which the Lord hath bought, and in which the Spirit dwells, and make it unclean? Shall we take our bodies which have been bought with a price, and make those bodies the members of a harlot? Shall we take our bodies into which the Lord hath placed His Spirit, and allow them to be used in evil practices of any kind? Nay, we will present our bodies unto our Lord as a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is our rational service.

2. The body is for the Lord. The body is for the Lord, because He needs it in His service. He has no hands but our hands, no feet but our feet, no lips but our lips with which to work, or walk, or speak. He wants our hearts that He may love through them.

3. The Lord is for the body. There is a great deal suggested in these words. There is the suggestion of Divine watch-care over our body. He provides for its needs. He gives it food for nourishment, and raiment for protection.

The Lord is for the body, in the case of its sickness. Indeed He stands ready to quicken it, by His Spirit who dwells within us. We have seen how the body takes on a new value as it becomes a member of Christ.

4. The body is the temple of the Holy Ghost. Here is a wonderful thing. God not only bought ourselves with a price, but, in His purchase, He included our body. He tells us that our body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, who is in us, and that we are not our own.

In the old days there was but one inhabitant in our bodies, and that was our sinful self. Now that we are born again, we have not only a new man begotten in Christ Jesus, who dwells in our body, but we have that new man enforced by the indwelling Spirit. Here is the blessed result of it all. The final great consummation: “Therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.

AN ILLUSTRATION

I had the privilege of being shown through an up-to-date hospital recently, and while in the operating room my attention was drawn to the system by which the instruments are kept in a solution which renders them absolutely free from germs, so that they are ready for use at any moment without fear of giving infection. Germs may well be used as a type of sin, and the only way to be kept free from the germs of sin is to dwell in the presence of the Holy Spirit, for the Holy Spirit is a perfect antiseptic against sin. If we are filled with the Holy Spirit sin cannot have any power to harm us. It is only when we grieve the Holy Spirit and wander away that sin has a chance to work its deadly work in us.

Surely when once we learn this we ought to dwell where there is safety.

-Young People.

Fuente: Neighbour’s Wells of Living Water

1Co 6:1. Matter is from PRAGMA and Thayer defines it at this place, “a matter at law, case, suit.” The word does not pertain to questions of morals or religion, but to temporal interests between man and man. That is why it is called things pertaining to this life in verse 4. Paul tells the brethren they do not have the right to take such disputes to the secular courts.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

1Co 6:1. Dare any of you, having a matter against his neighbour, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? Excellently, says Bengel here, by this grand word Dare does the apostle mark the injured majesty of the Christian name, thus caused. Not without a special design is the contrast here so sharply drawn between Christians and heathens; for the Jews themselves made it a rule never to carry their disputes before heathen tribunals. Yet let it not be thought that there is any condemnation here of the general principle of having recourse to law for the settlement of differences. For civil government is a Divine ordinance, of which law is an essential department; and our apostle himself once and again claimed the protection of law, heathen though the empire then was. Indeed, there are cases, in the best conditioned Christian countries, where nice and intricate points can be satisfactorily and peacefully settled only by a legal tribunal. What is here so sharply rebuked is, exposing before eyes that ought to see in Christians only that which is lovely and of good report, what was the opposite of this, as if (by a cruel satire on our Lords words) to invite those heathens to ask, What do ye more than others? (Mat 5:47).

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Section 2. (1Co 6:1-7.)

But with no exaction, even of one’s right’s.

We come, now to matters between the saints. The Corinthians were going to law with one another, bringing in the world to witness their sad condition and to set right amongst them the things which it was a shame should be wrong. He asks them if they do not know that the saints shall judge the world. That is, of course, in the coming day of the Lord’s rule over it, but it is for this that we are being trained and educated now, and how could it be possible that those who were on their way to such a place as this could be unfit or unworthy to judge these small matters, matters in the apostle’s estimation of such very small account? Do ye not know, he asks, that we shall judge angels, how much more then matters of this kind? Still, i f judgments were needed as to the things of this life, those practically of no account in the assembly were sufficient for such things as that. He does not, of course, literally mean that they were to choose persons of that character, but that these were matters that did not require even any extraordinary spirituality and were of too little importance to require any great ability of this sort to decide them; but they were exposing their shame before the world. They had better suffer wrong; they had better suffer themselves to be defrauded. There was to be no exaction even of their rights. Grace does not exact. One may say, can we suffer the wrong to go on in the assembly? That is another matter. The question here is entirely of seeking our own things. If the matter is grave enough to touch the assembly, Mat 18:1-35 has given us the rule with regard to it. There the first effort is that which is to be characteristic of our whole course; it is to gain one’s brother. That is, as already said, that which discipline aims at. It may be, in fact, for the moment, impossible to be attained; and then we have the steps needed to place any matter that requires it in the hands of the assembly. Put in their hands, it is to be left there. It is for them, to say as to what will set things straight. Just because they are our own things, we are not to be judges of them. No man was ever thought to be a rightful judge in his own cause, or could take the law, as people say, into his own hands. These are principles which are surely as good for us as they can be in the world at large. They are the result simply of the knowledge, alas, of our poor fallen nature.

Fuente: Grant’s Numerical Bible Notes and Commentary

Observe here, 1. That it was not simply and absolutely their going to law which the apostle condemns, but their impleading one another at pagan tribunals, and before heathen judges; the law is good, if used lawfully; but the best thing may be abused; so is oft the law itself. Most evident it is, that the apostle, who was offended at their using the law before infidels, allows it before Christians, as the first verse implies.

Observe, 2. The title given to the Corinthian converts: they are all called saints, because they were all so by outward profession, and many of them so by inward sanctification.

Whence learn, (1) That all those who take upon them the profession of Christianity, are obliged to be saints, and may be so called, being such by visible profession.

(2) That the true and real Christian is a true and real saint: his heart is inwardly renewed and sanctified, his life thoroughly reformed and changed.

Observe, 3. The several errors enumerated by our apostle in the Corinthians, going to law,

(1.) In regard of the adversary, Brother goeth to the law with brother; not infidel with infidel, nor infidel with Christian; but Christian with Christian, brother with brother: which seems both unnatural and unchristian.

(2.) In regard of the judges chosen to decide and umpire their controversies; they were infidels and unbelievers, not saints. If brother will go to law with brother, let them make choice of Christian judges; but for Christians to refuse Christians, and to choose to be judged by infidels, was highly scandalous! What will heathens say, when Christians are together by the ears, and infidels live in unity.

Observe, 4. The great argument used by the apostle to dissuade them from this practice; he argues a majore ad minus, from the greater to the less. The saints shall judge the world, the wicked world; yea, the apostate angels in another world: are they not fit then to judge and determine trivial matters between man and man, between one Christian and another, here in this world?

Learn hence, That the saints, as assessors with Christ, and approvers of his righteous judgment, shall at the great day judge the wicked world, and the apostate angels.

O ye wicked world! you that now revile and scorn, that injure and wrong the saints and servants of the most high God, know, that they shall one day be your judges.

O ye saints! who shall be judges of the world, know that your time of judging in this world is not yet: do not anticipate your work, nor antedate your commission: Judge nothing before the time, till the Lord comes.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Judging Matters Between Brethren

Jesus instructed his followers to go to the brother who sinned against them and tell him privately in the hope he would be restored. “But if he will not hear you, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’ And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and tax collector” ( Mat 18:15-17 ). The Corinthian brethren were ignoring the Lord’s instruction. They had thereby placed the church in a bad light before unbelievers ( 1Co 6:1 ).

Christians will judge the world representatively through Christ, their head. Since they were already joined together with the Lord’s mind ( 1Co 2:16 ), Paul reasoned, they should have been able to handle small problems among themselves. Paul even said Christians will judge angels representatively through Christ. Through Christ’s instruction, therefore, brethren ought to be able to settle differences between themselves ( 1Co 6:2-3 ).

Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books

1Co 6:1-6. The apostle, having mentioned one very great irregularity among the professors of Christianity at Corinth, proceeds now to animadvert upon another, namely, their entering into suits of law with each other in heathen courts: Dare any of you Have you so little regard for the glory of God, and the credit of Christianity, that, having a matter against another Any controversy about civil affairs; you go to law before the unjust Heathen judges, who generally were very corrupt, and from whom a Christian could expect no justice: and not before the saints Who might easily decide these smaller differences in a private and friendly manner. Do ye not know This expression occurs six times in this single chapter, and that with a peculiar force: for the Corinthians knew, and gloried in their knowledge, but their conduct was not consistent therewith. That the saints After having been judged themselves; shall judge the world Shall be assessors with Christ in the judgment wherein he shall condemn all the wicked, as well angels as men, Mat 19:28; Rev 20:4. And if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy Unfit, unable for such a work; to judge the smallest matters Differences about worldly affairs, which are of small moment, in comparison of spiritual and heavenly matters. Know ye not that we shall judge angels? Namely, evil angels: as Christ is their judge, we shall be honoured to join with him in that judgment also, when all his enemies shall be put under his feet and ours. How much more are ye fit to decide in these low and transitory secular affairs? If then ye have judgments Differences to be decided; of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church Even the weakest among you might be adequate to that work, and certainly fitter for it than unjust heathen. I speak to your shame To make you ashamed of your proceedings. The apostle certainly did not seriously design that they should set persons to judge in these matters, (though of little importance, in comparison of spiritual things,) who were the weakest and of least esteem among them, as appears from the next clause; but he spoke ironically. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you Among you who are such admirers of wisdom, who is wise enough to decide in such causes? Not one able to judge between his brethren In those disputes which they have about earthly things? But brother goeth to law with brother One Christian with another; and that before the unbelievers To the great discredit of the Christian name; yea, to the scandal of the whole Christian institution; for they cannot but take occasion, from your mutual quarrels and accusations, to brand the whole body of you as injurious and avaricious; who, while you pretend to be so far superior to secular views, are yet so strongly attached to them, that, with all your professions of universal benevolence and brotherly love, you cannot forbear wronging one another.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

III. Lawsuits. 6:1-11

The subject of discipline, though connected with the domain of ecclesiastical life, trenched on the sphere of moral questions. We come now to the subjects which belong exclusively to the latter sphere.

As the apostle had dealt with discipline, first from the standpoint of the special case which had raised the question, then, more generally, he acts in a similar way in regard to the subject which is now to follow. He treats of lawsuits between Christians,1. in 1Co 6:1-6, from the special standpoint of recourse had to heathen tribunals; and 2. in 1Co 6:7-11, from the more general viewpoint of the lack of righteousness and charity which such conflicts between brethren imply.

Meyer alleges that there is no logical relation between this subject and the preceding; he founds on the asyndeton between the last verse of chap. 5 and our 1Co 6:1. But the absence of any particle fitted to connect these two verses is much rather the evidence of a very profound bond of feeling between the two passages. For by this form the second becomes, as it were, a reaffirmation of the ideas expounded in the first. And, in point of fact, does not Paul here, as in the former passage, combat in this proud Church the total lack of care for its own dignity before God and men? Not only do ye not judge those whom you have a mission to judge (them that are within); but, moreover, ye go to have yourselves judged by those who are beneath you (them that are without)! The basis of these two passages is therefore the same: it is the idea of the judicial competency of the Church in relation to its own members, but applied to two wholly different sins. Edwards understands the thing nearly in the same way. He has just expounded the greatness and power of the Church; and now he asks if one could be found among them who would dare to do violence to the majesty of Christ who dwells in it.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

Dare any of you, having a matter against his neighbor, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? [1. Division, 2. Incest, 3. Litigation: such is the order of Paul’s rebukes. With reckless audacity the Corinthians, by indulging in litigation and submitting their causes to pagan tribunals, were not only disobeying the Lord’s command (Mat 18:15-17), but were also committing treason against their present brotherhood and their future status as judges. It appears that even the Jews refused to sue each other before pagan tribunals–Josephus Ant. 14:10-17.]

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

1 Corinthians Chapter 6

Chapter 6:1-11 treats the subject of wrongs. It was shameful that those who were to judge the world and the angels should be incapable of judging the paltry affairs of this world. Let the least esteemed in the assembly be employed in this service. Rather should they bear the wrong, whereas they did wrong themselves. But the wicked and the unrighteous would assuredly not inherit the kingdom. What a wonderful mixture we have here of astonishing revelations, of a morality that is unchangeable whatever may be the divine supremacy of grace, and of ecclesiastical order and discipline! The assembly is united to Christ. When He shall judge the world and pronounce the doom of the angels, she will be associated with Him and take part in His judgment, for she has His Spirit and His mind. Nothing however that is unrighteous shall enter into that kingdom, for in effect how could evil be judged by any that took pleasure in it? Christians should not go to a worldly tribunal for justice, but have recourse to the arbitration of the brethren-a service which, as entering so little into Christian spirituality, was suited to the weakest among them. Moreover the proper thing was rather to suffer the wrong. Be it as it might, the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom.

Judaism, which took pleasure in a carnal sanctity of outward regulations, and the spirit of the world with conformity to its ways, were the two dangers that threatened the assembly at Corinth-dangers, indeed, which exist for the heart of man at all times and in all places. With regard to meats the rule is simple: perfect liberty, since all is allowed-true liberty, in that we are in bondage to none of these things. Meats and the belly, as in relationship to each other, should both perish; the body has a higher destiny-it is for the Lord, and the Lord for it. God has raised up Christ from the dead, and He will raise us up again by His power. The body belongs to this and not to meats.

But the doctrine that the body is for Christ decided another question, to which the depraved habits of the Corinthians gave rise. All fornication is forbidden. To us, with our present Christian habits of mind, it is a thing of course-to Pagans, new; but the doctrine exalts every subject. Our bodies are the members of Christ. Another truth connected with this is of great importance: if (by union according to the flesh) two were one body, he who is united to the Lord is one spirit. The Spirit whose fulness is in Christ is the same Spirit who dwells in me and unites me to Him. Our bodies are His temples. What a mighty truth when we think of it!

Moreover we are not our own, but were bought with a price-the blood of Christ offered for us. Therefore we ought to glorify God in our bodies, which are His-powerful and universal motive, governing the whole conduct without exception. Our true liberty is to belong to God. All that is for oneself is stolen from the rights of Him who has bought us for His own. All that a slave was, or gained, was the property of his master; he was not the owner of himself. Thus it was with the Christian. Outside that, he is the wretched slave of sin and of Satan-selfishness his rule, and eternal banishment from the source of love his end. Horrible thought! In Christ we are the special objects and the vessels of that love. We have here two mighty motives for holiness: the value of Christs blood, at which we are purchased; also the fact that we are the temples of the Holy Ghost.

Fuente: John Darby’s Synopsis of the New Testament

THE SAINTS ARE TO RULE THE WORLD, AND EVEN ANGELS

1. Which one of you, having a matter against another, dares to go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? During his three years Asiatic peregrinations, many things transpired in the great infantile church in Corinth; e. g., many new preachers had come and gone, Apollos, Peter and others all right, and of course many who were at least doubtful; not only heresies, but serious apostasies, were making inroads on them. Among other troubles, some of them were involved in law-suits among themselves, which the apostle utterly condemns, castigates severely and anathematizes witheringly, shaming them by his bold irony and ridicule.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

1Co 6:1. Dare any of you go to law before the unjust? He whose cause is just appeals to equity, but he who does his neighbour wrong is vexatious. In England, our judges, after the cause is opened, finding it of small account, refer it frequently to an arbitrator. The litigious pay dear for legal decisions, which they might have had gratis at home; and what is worse, they expose religion to great contempt.

1Co 6:2-3. The saints shall judge the world shall judge angels. The comments on this text are various. Some say ministers are here referred to, being the judges in the christian synagogue. Others say, as in Beza, that this refers to the time when the apostles shall sit on thrones as assessors with Christ, and judge the infidel world and fallen angels. Mat 19:28.

Another comment is, that the apostle is not speaking of any thing future, but of the present, of something already begun, and actually going on; not the saints shall judge, but the saints judge; the world is being judged by you. He does not mean that eminent saints at the end of the world shall sit in judgment on the rest of mankind, for we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ. The believing Corinthians, by embracing the gospel, judged; that is, condemned those who rejected it. Thus Nineveh shall rise up in judgment, and shall condemn the jews for their rejection of one greater than Jonah. The word is used in the same sense in Rom 2:3. Joh 12:31. Now is the judgment of this world; now shall the prince of this world be cast out. It was through the influence of the Holy Spirit accompanying the gospel, that the domination of sin and Satan was condemned. There is much propriety in this, because it is by the church that the world should be illuminated and converted: they stand condemned for not following light so clear, and examples so bright and interesting.

1Co 6:5. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? This text was once cited by lord Kenyon in the court of kings bench, when the aggrieved party in the society of Friends had brought a case before him. Have you no wise man among you to settle these disputes, that you bring them before us?

1Co 6:11. Such were some of you guilty of crimes for which many have suffered by the hand of justice. But ye are washed, ye are justified; and let not such forget what they owe to grace. And even those who have been guilty of them only in heart, have no reason to boast over another. Dr. John Bradford, minister of Lutterworth, a blessed martyr, used to say, on seeing men go to the gallows, There goes John Bradford, had not grace prevented. Ye are washed by the baptism of the new birth, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost; and yet not so but men through life should blush for sins so foul. Yea, they should repair errors to the utmost of their power, and cautiously keep the flesh in subjection.

1Co 6:12. All things are lawful to me, in regard of eating with certain characters when occasion seems to require it, but all things are not expedient. The Corinthian feasts were carnal and profane, and God would destroy both them and their feasts. Self-denial is the hallowed road to glory. How can a christian dine with a profane character, without reminding him of his sin! The Spirit constrained John to reprove Herod.

1Co 6:16. He who is joined to a harlot is one body, as those who are united in matrimony. In like manner, he that is joined to the Lord is one spirit. Here is the distinction: heaven is open to the family of God, while the horrors of darkness await the wicked. See the note on 1Co 3:17.

1Co 6:19-20. Ye are not your own. He that made you, and has fed you as his children, has every claim of grateful obedience. Nay more, the Redeemer who ransomed your life with his own requires that you should henceforth be the temples of the living God. What grace is this to sinners of the gentiles, that they should now be as holy as they had been polluted and profane. This is the only way in which those trophies of mercy can glorify God in body and mind.

REFLECTIONS.

The jewish synagogue, described in Matthew 4., claimed the prerogative to judge of pecuniary disputes by a bench of three. The same prerogative is here conferred on the church, a prerogative which the Romans did not deny the Jews, and consequently the christians, whom the Romans long regarded as a jewish sect. Now, the commencing a suit in a pagan court against a christian brother was reprehensible in many views. It exposed the defects of the church to the contempt of the heathens, and thereby hindered the progress of the gospel. It sought an expensive and vindictive redress, when milder methods would have succeeded. If idols, if devils, if the infidel world is judged by the saints, how easy must it be for them to decide in the simple cases of commercial concerns. They will stoop more than high and worldly judges to the minuti of a case, and give a decision between men which they can face in their own neighbourhood, and at the bar of God.

The persons recommended to this office are wise men, distinguished by probity and experience. But if no such men are found among the Corinthians who boasted of wisdom, the apostle, bantering them to their shame, recommends them to appoint the least esteemed, the lowest in the church to be judges, sooner than go to a tribunal decorated with the emblems of idolatry, and where the pleaders appealed to the gods. Let then the members of religious societies blush for making their inveterate and expensive appeals to courts of justice, and thereby dishonouring the church of God.

But the grand argument prompting to reconciliation and reverence for the church is, that religious strife is joined with nine other foul crimes which exclude men from the kingdom of heaven. Among these, fornication, so rife at Corinth, is most conspicuously noticed. He that committeth fornication, or any kind of uncleanness, sinneth against his own body. Guilt and shame lodge on his conscience, and fever is superinduced on the body. Now the body of a christian is a temple of God; and temples were always classed in sanctity next to heaven itself. To affect communion with Christ, and being at the same time connected with a harlot, is so provoking to the Lord, that he will cast the impenitent into a bed of affliction. Besides, the saints are called to peculiar sanctity because Christ is risen from the dead, that we may walk in newness of life, relish the joys of angels, and shun those licentious gratifications which are joyless, loveless, unendeared. Arguments of chastity may also be deduced from the price of our redemption; and it is no redemption if we are still captivated with fleshly lusts which war against the soul.

Lastly, the method of conquest is judiciously prescribed. Flee fornication. Samson, mighty Samson, fell for want of flight. We must shun the company, despise the books, and combat the habit which would seduce us to sin. Yea, we must take alarm at the slightest glance of the eyes, and emotion of the heart, which would foster foolishness. God is holy, and angels stand at our side.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1Co 6:1-11. The Scandal of Christians Suing each other before Heathen Tribunals.Paul has prepared for his next rebuke by his reference to the function of the church to judge its own members. But alas, Christians are to be found who will go so far as shamelessly to carry their disputes with each other before a tribunal of the unrighteous (what a paradox to appeal for justice to the unjust!) instead of submitting them to their fellow-Christians. They cannot be so ill-instructed as to be unaware that Christians are to judge the world; if so, they cannot be unfit to settle such trumpery squabbles. Yes, if even the angels, the worlds loftiest order, are to stand at their bar, how much more are they competent to judge matters of everyday need! When they have such cases, they actually set heathens to decide them, who as such are of no account in the estimation of the church. The statement of the fact should shame them. Is their case so desperate that there is not one among them wise enough to arbitrate? so that Christian sues Christian, and that before heathens! Indeed, they are to blame not merely for having recourse to heathen judges, but for going to law with each other at all. Better far to be wronged and defrauded. But they practise these things rather than suffer them, and that on their brothers. Then they are unrighteous, and as such disqualified for inheriting the Kingdom of God. Let them beware of deluding themselves with vain hopes; the unchaste, idolaters, thieves, the grasping, the drunkards, the revilers, the extortioners (cf. 1Co 5:11) will not inherit the Kingdom. Such some of them had been, but they had had themselves baptized, had been made holy, been declared righteous in virtue of Christs name and the efficacious working of Gods Spirit.

1Co 6:1. any of you: the singular does not imply that Paul knows only of one case. 1Co 6:7 f. shows there are more.

1Co 6:2. The formula, know ye not. has occurred before (1Co 3:16, 1Co 5:6), but in this chapter it occurs no fewer than six times (1Co 6:2-3; 1Co 6:9; 1Co 6:15-16; 1Co 6:19). With all their boasted knowledge, are they ignorant of such truths as these? (Joh 3:10); one could not have credited such ignorance but for their conduct. That the saints will judge the earth is an article of Jewish belief (Dan 7:22, Wis 3:8, Sir 4:15); in Mat 19:28 the apostles are to judge the twelve tribes; Rev 20:4 supplies a close parallel to our passage.

1Co 6:3. Angels are included in the world (1Co 4:9); the reference is not exclusively or perhaps even primarily to evil angels. There are several passages in the NT which negative the popular doctrine of angelic sinlessness, and in this the writers agree with the contemporary Jewish belief.

1Co 6:4. Difficult. We may take the sentence as interrogative with RV and understand those who are of no account in the church as heathen; do you set heathen, whom as such you hold in no esteem, to judge? Or we may take it as a statement of what actually happens, explaining those of no account either as heathen judges (so above) or the most insignificant members of the church. Or we may take it as imperative (so mg.), the language being sarcastic, the least weighty of your members can deal with such trifles as these.

1Co 6:11. Here again Paul humbles the conceit of the church by recalling the moral degradation from which some of its members had been rescued.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

In this chapter there is another matter raised in which the Corinthians had not been using proper judgment. No individual is singled out here, but the strong reproof of the apostle is for any who had laid charges in the law courts against their own brethren. Did they realize they were relying on the judgment of the unjust in this case? Was it becoming that they should accept the judgment of the ungodly at a time when they might have the fair and properly considered judgment of the saints of God?

Had they not been taught that the saints will judge the world? They will be fully identified with Christ in that discerning judgment that distinguishes between one matter and another that must be faced when the world is brought under judgment. How thoroughly wrong then it is that the world should sit in judgment as regards the saints. If saints are to judge the world, are they not able now to judge as regards the trivial personal matters between believers?

Verse 3 goes still beyond this to assert that we shall judge angels. It is as Man that the Lord Jesus is given authority to execute judgment, and this includes the judgment of angels (Joh 5:22; Joh 5:27). And redeemed mankind will be fully identified with Him in this judgment. Then if so, how much more should a believer be able to judge as to things in this life. Let it be remembered that “he that is spiritual judgeth (or discerneth) all things” (ch. 2:16).

But a striking principle is laid down in verse 4. It is evident that for spiritual matters the discernment of a spiritual person is necessary; but if merely matters of this life, those “who are least esteemed in the assembly” should be expected to be competent for this. Not spirituality, but simple honesty is required for this. These matters are not of sufficient importance to take the time of those who engage themselves in the spiritual welfare of saints of God. Let us guard always against such things assuming an importance that overshadows the infinitely more important spiritual prosperity of the saints.

The matter was so serious that Paul presses them severely: “I speak to your shame.” Among the entire assembly was there not one man able to exercise any discerning judgment in such cases of dissension among brethren over mere material possessions? Going to law before unbelievers was utterly disgraceful, and he allows no excuse for it whatever. In fact, much rather than this, one should allow himself to be defrauded. And if one did take his brother to law, he was himself guilty of defrauding his brother – defrauding him of the right at least to have the matter settled by his brethren.

Verse 9 is no doubt intended to cut two ways. First, the unrighteous to whose judgment they had been appealing would not even themselves inherit the kingdom of God, where authority is maintained in true righteousness. But secondly, let the Corinthians judge in themselves as to the way in which they by their actions were guilty of resembling the unrighteous. For as to the list of evil characters that follows, it is positively declared they shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Some of the Corinthians had themselves been so classified before conversion, but were now washed, sanctified, justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of God. The washing here is riot evidently the cleansing by blood, though of course this was true of them too. But it is the washing by the Spirit, as in Tit 3:5, no doubt through the application of the water of the Word, and therefore having a moral effect in the soul. The sanctification too, being that of the Spirit, would speak of their being set apart not only positionally, but in practical, moral character, from a world of evil, and to the Lord. Justification too, though it is positional in its elementary character, putting the individual into a place of perfect righteousness before God, is yet here shown to have a practical character also attached to it by the fact of the indwelling of the Spirit of God. “In the name of the Lord Jesus” therefore is the positional side of the truth, but “by the Spirit of our God” is the side of the vital work done in the soul to give expression to this. There was no right reason therefore, that fullest expression should not be given to this.

These things are manifestly not accomplished by the law, but by the grace of God; and the apostle will not allow the thought of mere legality entering into this matter. If one insists now that grace has made “all things lawful,” yet grace has a powerful voice to persuade the individual that “all things are not expedient.” Grace teaches us the opposite of self-indulgence (Ti. 2:11,12). And it teaches with living power to the renewed heart. If “all things are lawful,” yet personal faith will not be brought under the power of mere “things.” The believer has a Master who is supreme, and it is only right therefore, that he should allow nothing else to dominate him.

“Meats” are used here as an apt example of the mere temporal things that may too easily get control of a man. One may allow his appetite to make him a virtual slave to food; but God will destroy both the belly and the meats. Should mere temporary things govern us? Should temporal pleasures hold such power over a believer that it should pervert the proper use for which God has given us created things’? Our own body is for the Lord, not for fornication, not for the mere gratification of fleshly lusts. And how precious too, the words, “and the Lord for the body.” He has vital concern for the proper well-being of our bodies, not merely of our spirit and soul; and we may entrust our bodily needs into His own hand with utter confidence, rather than concentrating on taking thought for our life or our body (Mat 6:25).

Indeed, as God raised up the body of the Lord Jesus from among the dead, so will He raise up our bodies. The care of our bodies then is in the power of His own hand, and it is for us now to use them rightly, not to abuse them. In fact, the striking statement is made that “our bodies are the members of Christ.” What a dignity is this given to the body! In its present state, of course, it is subject to decay and death, but this is only temporary, and it is to be honorably and properly treated for the Lord’s sake. How grossly wrong to take the members of Christ and make them the members of an harlot! It is a practical denial of what is actually true. In practice the joining of two bodies together makes them one, as God declared when He created the woman for the man. “But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.” It is a higher, more precious, and eternal unity, and though spiritual, yet the believer’s body is to share in this blessing for eternity.

“Flee fornication.” In this one is not told to fight, but to keep far from it, as Joseph fled from the wife of Potiphar. Other sins may not involve the body in this way, but this is sin against one’s own body. And as well as our bodies being the members of Christ, now we are told, “Your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost.” The Spirit of God dwells within our body in order to display in us the precious reality of His character in our practical lives. Notice that it is not said that our spirits or souls are His temple, but our bodies. So that when we are told, “Ye are not your own,” we cannot regard this as being merely in regard to our spiritual interests, but fully applicable to our bodies. Being bought with a price – a price so infinitely great – certainly we are totally the property of the Living God; and it is only right and becoming that we should glorify God in our body.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

Verse 1

The unjust; heathen tribunals.–The saints; Christian tribunals.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

SECTION 9 SOME OF THEM GO TO LAW, AND THAT BEFORE UNBELIEVERS CH. 6:1-11

Dares any of you, having a matter with another, go to law before the unrighteous ones, and not before the saints? Or, do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if before you the world is judged, are you unworthy of smallest judgments? Do you not know that angels we shall judge? To say nothing of this life. If then touching matters of this life you have judgments, is it those who are despised in the church, is it these whom you appoint? To put you to shame I say it. To this degree is there among you no wise man who will be able to judge between his brother? But brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers.

To go no further indeed, speaking generally, it is a damage to you that you have judgments among yourselves. Why do you not rather suffer injustice? Why do you not suffer fraud? But it is you that practise injustice and practise fraud, and that to brothers. Or, do you not know that unrighteous* (*Or unjust.) men will not inherit God’s kingdom? Be not deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor luxurious men, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous men, no drunken men, no railers, no grasping men, will inherit the kingdom of God. And these things some of you were. But you washed yourselves, but you were sanctified, but you were justified, in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the spirit of our God.

1Co 6:1. A new subject, viz. another disorder among church-members which Paul must deal with before he comes to the matters mentioned in the letter from Corinth. The suddenness and surprise of the question, Dares any one of you etc., suggest the peril of thus insulting the majesty of the Church of Christ. That no one person is mentioned as in 1Co 5:1-5, the earnest appeal to the whole church, the words of 1Co 6:4, you appoint, and perhaps the present tense in 1Co 6:6 noting a general practice goes to law, suggest that there were more cases than one.

Any of you] Even one case would be outrageous.

Go-to-law: same word in Rom 3:4.

Unrighteous: same word as unjust, used often both in this narrower sense, and in the wider sense of not as it ought to be. See note, Rom 1:17.

The unrighteous ones: heathen judges, who doubtless in many cases well merited this description. Cp. Gal 2:15.

The saints: the church-members, whom God had claimed to be His own, and who professed to live for Him. In this contrast an argument lies. Do you seek a settlement of your disputes from those whom you look upon as sinners under the anger of God rather than from those whom God has made specially His Own?

Fuente: Beet’s Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament

1 Corinthians 6.

(V. 1). Having dealt with the unjudged immorality in their midst, the apostle now exposes the inconsistency of Christians going to law before worldly tribunals to settle disputes between brethren in things pertaining to this life. In plain language he reproves any brother, who has a matter against another brother, for daring to seek a legal settlement by the unjust, instead of appealing to the saints. In speaking of the world’s tribunal as that of the unjust, he is viewing the men of this world in relation to God.

(V. 2). To show the inconsistency of this course, the apostle asks them to view their actions in the light of the world to come. They know that in that day the saints will be associated with Christ when He rules over the world and angels. How inconsistent, then, to seek the judgment of those whom we are going to judge.

(Vv. 3, 4). Further, he shows the futility of appealing to the world, for, if the saints are going to judge the world and angels, they must surely be capable of adjudicating in the comparatively small affairs of every-day life. This being so, if matters that pertain to this life arise between brothers, the least esteemed in the assembly are able to settle them, as they call for no great spirituality or gift, but rather common sense and honesty.

(Vv. 5, 6). If the apostle has to speak thus, it is really to their shame, for their going to law before the world would seem to prove that, in spite of all the knowledge and gifts in which they boasted, there was not amongst them a wise man able to settle these little matters, and so brother went to law with brother, and that before unbelievers. It is evident that the apostle is speaking of matters that need not be brought before the assembly, for they can be settled by a wise man.

(Vv. 7, 8). Having condemned this worldly procedure, the apostle now deals with the low moral state that led to such practices. As so often behind wrong practices there exists a wrong spirit and ignorance of divine principles. They were evidently not prepared to take wrong, or suffer wrong, for Christ’s sake. On the contrary, in going to law with one another they did wrong and in result defrauded one another. Where, then, was the patience and suffering for well-doing? As one has said, They came behind in no gift, and they came forward in no grace, and again, If I can keep Christ’s character, I would rather do that than keep my cloak (J.N.D.). We may show a good deal of temper and strong feeling when we fancy someone is over-charging us, and thus prove we are more ready to lose Christ’s character than lose our coppers.

(Vv. 9-11). The apostle passes on to speak of the wrongs that provoked the law suits. He gives a solemn description of evil in its corruption, rather than its violence, which was rampant at Corinth, but which has no place in the kingdom of God. Having given this terrible list of the corruptions of the flesh, he says, Such were some of you. Wonderful grace that can take us up from the lowest place of degradation in the far country and associate us with Christ in the highest place of glory in the Father’s house! Having lived in such conditions, these saints were in special danger of lapsing into old habits unless kept cleaving to Christ.

However sad the evils that needed to be dealt with, the apostle can still say, But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified. In saying they are washed, it is evident that the apostle is not referring to the constant need of the application of the word to remove all the daily defilements that put us out of touch with Christ, and which is set forth in figure by feet-washing. He refers rather to the work of the Spirit in new birth, which is done once for all, and by which is imparted a new nature that shrinks from the filth of the flesh.

Sanctification carries us further, for, if by washing we are set apart from the filth of the flesh, by sanctification we are set apart to God. Other Scriptures, such as Joh 17:19 and 1Th 5:23, speak of the progressive sanctification by which the believer becomes increasingly devoted to the interests of God. Here, however, it is the absolute setting apart of the believer, of which we read in Heb 10:10, By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. The stone, when once cut from the quarry, is set apart from it for ever, though afterwards it may be worked and carved to make it more fitted for the designer’s purpose. By justification the soul has been cleared of all charge before God through the work of Christ. By the Holy Spirit these great truths are made good in our souls.

(Vv. 12-20). As we have a new nature, have been set apart for God, and justified from the guilt of our sins, the apostle, in the remaining verses of the chapter, reminds us that our bodies are for the Lord. On the one hand, therefore, let us beware of using them for the gratification of the flesh; on the other hand, let us use them for the glory of God (verse 20).

All things (and here he speaks of right things – food and natural relations) are lawful for the Christian, but even so we have to beware, for, though all may be lawful, it by no means follows that all things are expedient. There is the danger that in using right things we may come under the power of them. The apostle refers specially to meats. As meats are needed for the body and they are naturally suited the one to the other, we are at liberty to use meats. It is possible, however, to use meats and the body for self-indulgence and become a glutton.

The apostle then passes on to speak of that which is not lawful for the body – actual sin. Here we are reminded that the body is for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. He reminds us, too, that these bodies are destined for high honour, for even as God hath raised up the Lord, so will He also raise up these bodies by His own power. Moreover, our bodies are members of Christ, and he that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit. The apostle learnt something of this great truth at his conversion, for the Lord said to him, Why persecutest thou Me?. To touch the bodies of the saints was to touch Christ. How solemn is all sin, but how specially solemn is sin against the body which is indwelt by the Holy Spirit and belongs to God, and which it is our privilege and responsibility to use for the glory of God. To press upon us the deep importance of holiness, the apostle re-minds us in the course of the chapter that we are washed, sanctified and justified, and, further, that our bodies are for the Lord, joined to the Lord, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, belong to God, and are to be used for the glory of God; and, too, the Lord is for the body, and God will raise it up by His power.

Fuente: Smith’s Writings on 24 Books of the Bible

CHAPTER 6

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

i. The Apostle passes on to the subject of lawsuits and trials, and reproves the Corinthians for instituting proceedings before the heathen judges, and he declares those proceedings to be thereupon unjust and unfair.

ii. Then (ver.9) he declares that the unrighteous, of whom he names several kinds, shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

iii. He passes on (ver.13) to fornication, and condemns it on many grounds, which I will collect at the end of the chapter.

Ver. 1.-Dare any of you . . . go to law? Literally, be judged, i.e., contend in judgment. Cf. 1Sa 12:7; Eze 20:35; and Jer 2:35. The Apostle is not censuring those who were dragged before the heathen tribunals, but those who dragged their brethren before them, or who appeared before them by the consent of both parties.

Before the unjust. The saints here is a name for the faithful, and the unjust, therefore, are Gentile unbelievers. So Chrysostom, Theophylact, Anselm. The heathen are so called as lacking the faith by which the just man lives, and as being therefore unjust, and as often committing injustice strictly so called. In other words, since these unjust men are the judges, justice is not to be looked for from them. As they pervert the faith , so do they justice.

Ver. 2.-If the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? If the saints are to judge the whole world how much more ought they to be able to act as arbiters in composing their own small differences?

Ver. 3.-Know ye not that we shall judge angels? Some think that angels here means priests, and they refer to Mal 2:7, “For he is the angel of the Lord of hosts,” spoken of the priest. But this is foreign to the mind of S. Paul, and therefore the Fathers unanimously take it literally.

Observe that, as Chrysostom, Theodoret, Ambrose, and Anselm say, it is the day of general judgment that is here spoken of.

Hence it follows (1.) that at that day not only men but angels, both good and bad, are to be judged. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Theodoret, Anselm understand this passage to refer to evil angels; for there is one Church of angels and men, and one Head and Judge, even Christ. Such a judgment tends to display publicly the Divine righteousness, and the honour due to the angels.

It follows (2.) that this judgment is not such an one as is spoken of in S. Mat 12:41, where it is said that the Queen of the South and the Ninevites should rise up in the judgment and condemn that generation of Jews, but judgment in the proper sense of the word, inasmuch as it is set side by side with that by which the Corinthians judged their worldly matters. S. Paul says then that Christ and the Saints, by their power and authority, shall judge the angels as well as men: the good by a judgment of approbation, of praise and glory, and the evil by a judgment of condemnation and reprobation. They shall be judges because, when they were frail men in the body, they devoted themselves to the worship of God and perfect purity. The others shall be judged because they refused to do God’s will, though they were incorporeal and pure spirits. So Theophylact and Theodoret. Again, because the Saints were victorious over the devil in this life, they for their reward shall, before the whole world, pass judgment on his malice, pride, and foolishness, and shall exult over him as conquered, mean, and contemptible, cast away by God, and condemned to everlasting punishment. So Christ is said to do in Col 2:15. And this will be to the exquisite pride of the devils a most bitter punishment, as Francis Suarez says beautifully (pt. iii. qu. 69, disp. 57, sect. 8). Add to this that the Apostles and Apostolic men, who left all and followed Christ most closely, will be nearest to the Judge, as the leaders of His kingdom and assessors of their King. And so their sentence will be Christ’s; and as Cardinals are associated with the Pope, so they with Christ shall judge all others.

How much more things that pertain to this life? We are competent and worthy to judge things that belong to man’s ordinary life, if only the office of judging is intrusted to us by the litigating parties, or if we are appointed to it by the Church or by the State. For if we are able to judge angels, why not matters of this world? For angels as far surpass worldly things as heaven is higher than earth.

Ver.4.-Set them to judge who are least esteemed, rather than the heathen.

Ver. 5.-Is it so that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? This is severe irony, and a tacit reproof and condemnation. Sedulius and Gregory (Mor. lib. xix. c. 21) take it a little differently, as if said seriously, as though he meant: Let those who are of lesser merit in the Church, and who have no great gifts of power, judge in matters of worldly business, that so those who cannot do great things may be the means of supplying lesser benefits.

This judging of secular causes was afterwards intrusted amongst Christians to the presbyters and Bishops, as appears from Clement (Constit. lib. i. c. 49-51, and Ep. i. to James the Lord’s brother). He says: “If brethren have any dispute let them not take it for decision before secular magistrates, but, whatever it is, let it be ended by the presbyters of the Church, and let their decision be implicitly obeyed.” “This too was afterwards decreed in the civil law by the Emperor Theodosius, and confirmed by Charlemagne (xi. qu. 1, Can. quicunque and Can. Volumus), who gave permission to any one, whether plaintiff or defendant, to appeal from the secular tribunal to the Ecclesiastical court. Hence it was that Gregory Thaumaturgus, Bishop of Neo-Csarea, discharged among his faithful the office of judge, as is testified by Gregory of Nyssa in the life that he wrote of him; so did S. Ambrose, as appears from Offic. lib. ii.c. 29, where he says that he had brought to nought the unjust judgments of the Emperors; so did S. Augustine (de Opere Monach. c. 26); Synesius (Epp. 57 and 58). But as the number of Christians and lawsuits increased, the Bishops transferred this duty to secular judges, who were, however, Christians. This they did, following the teaching and appointment of S. Peter, who this writes to Clement, and in him to all Bishops, in the letter here cited: “Christ does not wish you to be a judge or decider of worldly affairs, lest being engrossed with the things that are seen you have no leisure for the word of God, or dor severing the good from the bad according to the rule of truth,”

It may be asked, Why then foes not S. Paul intrust this office of judge to the Bishop? Ambrose replies, Because there was no such officer at Corinth as yet: “He had not yet been appointed to rule their Church.” The Corinthians had but recently been converted by S. Paul, and were yet but few in number.

Ver. 7.-Now, therefore, there us utterly a fault among you. Fault Theophylact renders condemnation and shame. It is simpler to take it as a defect of shortcoming, as when a man is overcome by another his strength and courage are thereby diminished. Imperfection, meanness, and feebleness of mind are among you, because you are overcome by anger, avarice, and strife, and can bear nothing. It is the mark of a great mind to be raised high above all these things, to look down upon them as beneath its notice, and to care nothing for injuries. It is littleness of mind and love of gain which make you go to law before heathen tribunals, to the scandal of believers and unbelievers, who are thus led to blaspheme the faith of Christ.

Why do ye not rather take wrong? Or suffer loss, as beseems those that are but newly Christians, who are few in number, and in the first fervour of their profession of peace and perfection.

This passage, however, does not favour the Anabaptists, who hold that it means that all judicial power should be taken from the magistrates. For (1.) as Chrysostom says, the Apostle is not condemning the existence of law-courts, but the impatience of the litigants. (2.) He censures them for inflicting injury on their fellow-Christians (ver. 8); (3.) forgoing for judgment on these matters before the unbelievers and the unjust; (4.) for oppressing the poor among them wrongfully; (5.) for so scandalously disturbing brotherly peace, which is the bond of charity, and thus injuring the faith itself. Cajetan adds that one or other of the parties must always be in the wrong, because one or other favours an unjust cause, unless he can be excused through ignorance. Wherefore S. Augustine (Enchirid. c. 78) says that even lawsuits that are just can hardly be entered into without sin, at all events venial sin, because they generally proceed from a too great love of worldly things, and can scarcely be free from the danger of hatred, ill-will, and injurious dealing. There is added to this loss of time, of peace, and internal tranquillity, which cannot be compensated for except by a still greater good, and therefore even suits that have justice on their side are not undertaken without sin. Hence Christ, in S. Matt. v. 40, enjoins “If any man will sue thee at law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also,” A greater good is the necessity of one’s self, of the public, of ones family, godliness, or the obligations of justice, as when you determine to protect or recover the goods of a monastery, or of the poor, by the public law-courts. So Paul appealed to Csar’s judgment-seat (Act 25:11). In fine, the Apostle is not here blaming judging on the part of the judge, but only on the part of the suitors. And so, even if it were sin to go to law, it would not be sin to pass judgment; for judgments put an end to suits, which is altogether a good thing. S. Clement of Rome supports in this S. Paul, his master and contemporary (Constit. Apost. lib. ii. x. 45), in the words: It is the beautiful boast of a Christian that he goes to law with no one. But if by the doing of others, or by any temptation, it come to pass that he is entangled in a lawsuit, he does all he can to put an end to it, although he have thereby to suffer loss, and to prevent himself from having to appear before the heathen’s judgment-seat. Nay, do not suffer secular magistrates to decide in your causes, for by them the devil endeavours to bring the servants of God into reproach, by making it appear that you have no wise man to do justice between you, or to put an end to controversy.”

Ver. 9, 10.-Neither fornicators nor adulterers, &c. . . . shall inherit the kingdom of God. Hence it appears that not only adultery but also fornication, by which as unmarried man sins with as unmarried woman, is against he law of Christ and of nature. Rabbi Moses gypt, erred shamefully in this respect (More, lib. iii. c. 50) when he excused the intercourse of Judah with Tamar, related in Gen, xxxvii., on the ground that before the law of Moses whoredom was allowable. Our politicians err still more shamefully who, while allowing that fornication is forbidden by the law of Christ, yet deny that it was forbidden by the law of Moses. For Moses includes it, as do the Rabbins always, in Exod. xx., under the sixth commandment, “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” under which not only adultery, but also incest, sodomy, fornication, and all kinds of sexual intercourse and lust outside the limits of matrimony are forbidden. So Tobias (Tobias 4:13) says: “Keep thyself, my son, from all fornication.”

So the Apostle here reckons fornication with adultery, idolatry, and other sins which are against the law of nature and of the Decalogue, and naturally shut out men from the kingdom of heaven. For fornication is at variance with the first creation of man, and with the institution of matrimony, by which the God of nature and the Lord of all things has tied the use of those members which serve for generation to matrimony; and outside that He has taken away all permission to use them. It is opposed also to conjugal fidelity, and to the good of the offspring, who cannot be properly brought up in fornication, but only in matrimony. Hence Deut. xxii. 21 orders a maiden to be stoned who before marriage has committed fornication in her father’s house. And the Wise Man says (Ecclus. 19:3): “He who joins himself to fornication shall be vile.”

Lastly, to pass over other instances, 24,000 of the Israelites were killed for committing fornication with the daughters of Moab.

Effeminate. Those guilty of self-pollution.

Covetous. Those who by fraud, unfair contracts, and legal quibbles get possession of the goods of others. They are distinct from thieves and robbers. Cf. note to ver. 10.

Drunkards. The Greek word here stands both for one that os drunk and one that is given to drunk. Here it denotes rather the act than the habit, as the other words, thieves, revilers, adulterers, do; for one of such acts excludes from the kingdom of heaven. Cf. Gal. v. 21. A single act of drunkenness, if it is perfected, is deadly sim, because it deprives a man of the use of his reason, and makes him like a beast, and exposes him to danger of broils, lust, and many other sins. S. Thomas says, however: “Drunkenness is not a mortal sin if a man is ignorant of the strength of the wine or the weakness of his head,” This excuse, however, is rendered invalid by frequent experience; therefore the Apostle says significantly, “habitual drunkard,” not merely “drunkard.” But the former explanation is the sounder.

Ver. 11.-But ye are washed . . . by the Spirit of our God. Ye were justified in baptism by the Holy Spirit. So Chrysostom, Theophylact, cumenius. S. Cyprian gives a beautiful example of this washing and change of character, produced in his own case by being baptized into Christianity, in Ep. 2, to Donatus, in which he candidly confesses what sort of man he was before his baptism, what a sudden change passed over him through the grace of baptism, and what benefits Christianity conferred upon him, which, as he says, “is the death of vices, the life of virtues.” Nazianzen (Orat. Funebr. in Laudem S. Cypr.) says the same, and relates his wonderful conversion, and the change of heart and life which baptism wrought in him.

Ver. 12.-All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient. All things, say Theodoret and cumenius, are through free-will lawful unto me, are in my power, e.g., to commit fornication, to rob, to be drunken, and all the other sins mentioned above. But they are not expedient for the salvation of my soul, inasmuch as they are sins.

But this rendering is rightly condemned by Ambrose, who says: “How can that be lawful which is forbidden? For surely if all things are lawful there can be nothing unlawful.” In other words he says that that is said to be lawful which no law forbids. The word lawful does not apply to that which it is in the power of the will to do or leave undone. The meaning, therefore, of this passage is, all indifferent things, all not forbidden by any law, are lawful to me. So Chrysostom, who with Theophylact refers these words to the next verse.

Ver. 13-Meats for the belly and the belly for meats. 1. Although it is lawful for me to eat every kind of food, yet I will not allow desire for any food to get the mastery over me, and make me a slave to my belly.

2. Ambrose and S. Thomas understand these words to refer to his personal expenses, and to mean-Though it is lawful for me as a preacher of the Gospel to receive from you means of support, yet I will not receive it, lest I become chargeable to any one and lose my liberty. The Apostle after his manner joins together various disconnected matters, which he knew would by intelligible in other ways to those to whom he was writing.

3. The best rendering is to refer these words, with Anselm and S. Thomas, to what had been said above about judgments: I have said these things against going to law, not because it is unlawful in itself for a man to seek to regain his own at law, but because I am unwilling for you to be brought under the power of any one, whether he be judge, advocate, or procurator, especially when they are of the unbelievers.

S. Bernard (de Consid. lib. iii.) says, moralising: “The spiritual man will, before undertaking any work, ask himself three questions, Is it lawful? Is it becoming? Is it expedient? For although, it is well known in the Christian philosophy, nothing is becoming save what is lawful, and nothing is expedient save what is both lawful and becoming, nevertheless it does not follow that all that is lawful is necessarily also becoming or expedient.”

Why, says S. Paul, do you enter on lawsuits for the sake of worldly good, which for the most part serves only for the belly and its meats? For food is but a perishing and mean thing, made but to be cast into the belly. The belly too is the lowest part of man, made only to cook, digest, cast forth, and corrupt the food, and is a vessel containing all that is disgusting. Both food and belly shall be destroyed, for both shall be food for worms; and though the belly shall rise again, yet it will no linger take in food. Secondly, it should be observed that the Apostle here purposely introduces gluttony, because it is the mother of lust, which he then proceeds to condemn. So Theophylact. Hence in the passage bearing the name of S. Athanasius (qu. 133 ad Antioch,), the belly here is understood to mean gluttony and drunkenness. The belly has its desire to drunkenness, and drunkenness to it; but he who is thus given up to serve his belly cannot serve God, but is the slave of his belly, and therefore shall be destroyed of God. This passage is plainly not the writing of S. Athanasius, for earlier (qu. 23) Athanasius himself is quoted, and differed from; moreover, Epiphanius and Gregory of Nyssa are quoted, who lived after Athanasius.

But God shall destroy both it and them. In death and the resurrection, in such a way that the belly will no longer be for meats, nor will there be meats to fill the belly.

Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. It was not meant, or given us, for such an end, but that with chaste body we should serve the Lord, and follow Him, our Head, with pure and holy lives. So Anselm. So also is Christ given to our body to be its head and crown. Or the Lord is for the body in another sense, according to Ambrose and Anselm, viz., that He is the reward for the body that is chaste and pure, and He will give it incorruption and immortality. The first meaning is the simpler, for S. Paul proceeds to speak of the resurrection.

Ver. 14.-And God . . . will also raise up us by His own power. As He raised up Christ when crucified and dead, so too if with Christ we die to lust and gluttony, and crucify them, will He raise up us.

Ver. 15.-Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? For ye yourselves, and consequently your body and soul, are members of the Church of Christ. S. Augustine (Serm. 18. in hc Verb.) says beautifully: “The life of the body is the soul, the life of the soul is God. The Spirit of God dwells in the soul, and through the soul in the body, so that our bodies also are a temple of the Holy Spirit, whom we have from God.”

Shall I then . . . make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. Take here is not to pluck off and separate from Christ, for a fornicator remains a member of Christ and His Church so long as he retains the true faith. But it means, as S. Thomas says, unjustly to withdraw these members, that were given for generation, from the obedient service of Christ, whose they are. For whoever of the faithful commits fornication filches as it were his body and his organs of generation, which body is a member of Christ, from their lawful owner, and gives them to a harlot. He takes, therefore from Christ, not jurisdiction over his body, but the use of it.

Ver. 16.-Know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? One body by a union and blending of the two bodies. Just as merchants in partnership have but one capital, because it is common to both, so those who join in committing fornication have one body, because their bodies are common to both, as Cajetan says. So two are one flesh: that is, out of two there is made but one human being, and that not spiritual, but carnal-wholly fleshly.

For two, saith He, shall be one flesh. S. Paul is here quoting from Gen. ii. 24, where the words are applied to those married. But he refers them truly enough to fornicators, because the external acts, whether of them or of those married, do not differ in kind, though they differ morally by the whole sky, for the acts of the former are lustful and vicious, but those of the latter are acts of temperance, righteousness, and virtue, as S. Thomas says.

1. Observe that it is said of the married that they too shall be one flesh (1.) by carnal copulation, as the Apostle her takes it; (2.) by synecdoche, they shall be one individual, one person: for the man and the woman civilly are, and are reckoned as one; (3.) because in wedlock each is the master of the other’s body, and so the flesh of one is the flesh of the other (cf. 1Co 8:3); (4.) in the effect produced, for they produce one flesh, that is one offspring.

2. Observe again that Scripture employs this phrase in order to show that of all human relationships the bond of matrimony is the closest and the most inviolable. Hence it was that God made Eve out of the rib of Adam, to show that the man and the woman are not so much two as one, and ought to be one in heart and will, and therefore, if need be, each for the sake of the other ought to leave father and mother, as is said in Gen 2:24. The Apostle quotes this passage to show the fornicator how grievously he lowers and disgraces himself, inasmuch as he so closely joins himself to some abandoned harlot as to become one with her, and as it were he transforms himself into her and himself becomes a harlot.

Ver. 17.-But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. Not one essentially, as Ruisbrochius (de Alta Contempt.) says that Almaric and certain fanatic “illuminati” thought, but one in the way of accidents: one in charity, in the consent of the will, in grace and glory, all which make man like God, so that he is as it were one and the same spirit with God. So Ambrose, Anselm, cumenius. From this passage S. Basil (de Vera Virgin.) shows that the chaste and holy soul is the spouse of God, and is changed into the excellence of the Divine image, so as to become one spirit with God, and from this union with God drinks in all possible purity, virtue, incorruption, peace, and inward calm. “Wherefore,” he says, “the soul which is joined to Christ is, as it were, the bride of the Wisdom or the Word of God; is necessarily wise and prudent, so that every mark of the yoke of brutish folly having been removed by meditation on Divine things, she wears the beauteous ornament of the Wisdom to which she has been joined, until she so thoroughly joins to herself the Eternal Wisdom, so becomes one with It, that of corruptible she is made incorruptible, of ignorant most prudent and wise, like the Word, to whose side she has closely kept, and in short, of mortal man is made immortal God; and so He to whom she has been united is made manifest to all.”

S. Bernard (Serm 7 in Cantic.) beautifully describes this betrothal of God with the soul that clings to Him with pure and holy love, and the communication of all good things that flows from it. He says: “The soul which loves God in called His bride; for the two names, bride and bridegroom, denote the closest affections of the heart; for to them all things are in common: they have one purse, one home, one table, one bed, one flesh. Therefore shall a man leave father and mother, &c., and they twain shall be one flesh. . . . She that loves is called a bride; but one that loves seeks for kisses-not for liberty, or wages, or a settlement of money, but for kisses after the manner of a most chaste bride, whose every breath whispers of her love in all its purity, and who is wholly unable to conceal the fire that is burning her. ‘Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth,’ she says. It is as though she were to say, ‘What have I in heaven, and what do I wish for on earth apart from you?’ Surely this, her love, is chaste, since she seeks to have Him that she loves, and nothing else besides Him. It is a holy love, because it is not in the lust of the flesh, but in the purity of the spirit. It is a burning love, because she is so drunken with her own love that she thinks not of His majesty. Yet is One that looks at the earth and it trembles, He toucheth the mountains and they smoke, and she seeks to be kissed by Him. Is she drunk? Surely so, because she had perchance come forth from the wine-cellar. How great is love’s power! how great is the confidence of the spirit of liberty! Perfect love casteth out fear. She does not say, ‘Let this or that bridegroom, or friend, or king, kiss me,’ but definitely, ‘Let Him kiss me.’ Just so when Mary Magdalene, when she found not her Lord in the tomb, and believed Him to have been taken away, said of Him, ‘If thou have borne Him hence, tell me where thou hast laid Him, and I will take Him away.’ Who is the ‘Him’? She does not reveal it, because she supposes that what is never for a moment absent from her heart must be obvious to all. So too the bride says, ‘Let him kiss me,’ i.e., him who is never absent from my heart; for being on fire with love she thinks that the name of him she loves is well known to all.” More on this betrothal and union to God of the soul that clings to Him will be found in the notes to 2Co 11:2.

Again we find S. Bernard, or the author of the treatise, “On the Solitary Life,” saying towards the end: “The perfection of the will that is moving towards God is to be found in the unity with God of the spirit of the man whose affections are set on things above. When he now no longer merely wills what God wills, but has so far advanced in love that he cannot will save what God wills, the union is complete. For to will what God wills is to be like God; not to be able to will save what God wills is to be what God is, with whom Will and Being are the same. Hence it is well said that then we shall see Him as He is, when we shall be so like Him that we shall be what He is. For to those to whom has been given the power of becoming the sons of God, there has been also given the power of becoming, not indeed God, but what God is.”

S. Bernard goes on to point out a triple similitude that men have to God, and then he adds: “This likeness of man to God is called a unity of spirit, not merely because it is the Holy Spirit that effects it, or because He affects man’s spirit towards it, but because it is itself the Holy Spirit-God who is love. Since He is the bind of love between the Father and the Son, He is unity, and sweetness, and good, and kisses, and embraces, and whatever can be common to Both in that supreme unity of Truth and truth of Unity; and similarly He makes man to become to God after man’s capacity all that by substantial unity the Father is through Him to the Son and the Son to the Father. The blessed consciousness of man has found in some way a means by which it embraces the Father and the Son: in an ineffable and inconceivable manner man merits to become of God, though not God. God, however, is what He is by His own Nature; man becomes what he does by grace.”

Ver. 18.-Flee fornication. Because, as Anselm, Cassian, and the Fathers generally teach, other vices are conquered by resistance, lust alone by flight, viz., by fleeing from women, from the objects and occasions of lust, by turning aside the eyes and the mind to see and think of other things. For if you oppose a temptation to some lewdness, or fight against some impure thought, you only excite the imagination by thinking of such things, and then inflame still more the innate lust of the flesh, that is naturally disposed to such acts as fornication.

Every sin that a man doeth is without the body. Does not stain or pollute the body.

It may be said that if a man kills or mutilates or castrates himself he sins against his body, and therefore it is not a fact that every sin distinct from fornication is without the body.

I reply that every sin, i.e., every kind of sins which men commonly and ordinarily commit is without the body. For there are seven capital sins, which theologians, following S. Paul, divide into spiritual and bodily or carnal. Those that are carnal are two-gluttony and lust; the spiritual are five-pride, covetousness, anger, envy, sloth. Of these anger and envy tend directly of themselves towards murder of one’s neighbour, but not except by accident towards murder of one’s self, and that in few and extraordinary cases. The angry man, therefore, does nor ordinarily and necessarily sin against his body, but against that of another, by assaulting him or killing him. The Apostle’s meaning then is, that all the sins in general which men ordinarily and commonly commit are without the body. “Every sin” therefore does not include mutilation or suicide, which happen rarely, and as it were accidentally; nor does it include gluttony as I will show directly.

But he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. S. Jerome (Ep. ad Amand. tom. iii.) gives two explanations of this passage, of which the first is-the fornicator sins against his wife, who is his own body; the second is-he plants in his body the seeds of sexual passion, which, even after his sin, remain, when he wishes to repent, to spring up into active life. S. Jerome says that “other sins are without, and after being committed are repented of, and though profit urge to them yet conscience rebukes. Lust alone, even in the hour of repentance, suffers under the whips and stings of the past, and under organic irritation, and under incentives to sin, so that material for sin is supplied again by thoughts of the very things which we long to see corrected.” S. Jerome confesses (Ep. 22 ad Eustoch,) that he knew this from own experience. S. Mary of Egypt found the same true in her own case, who endured under penance these whips and stings for as many years as she had formerly given to sexual passion, viz., seventeen, as Sophronius, Patriarch if Jerusalem, related in her life.

cumenius has ten other explanations of this passage, as has also Isidorus Pelusiota (lib. iv. Ep. 129 ). But the true and genuine sense is: Whoever commits fornication does injury to his own body, 1. because he polluted and disgraces his body, as Gregory of Nyssa says in his oration on these words.

2. Because by fornication he weakens and exhausts his body, and often destroys it, by contracting venereal disease. So S. Athanasius, quoted by cumenius. In both these ways the glutton and drunkard sin against their body, because the first disgraces it by subjecting it to unhealthy humours, to vomiting, and other disgusting things, while the latter weakens, injures, and finally ruins its natural heat and strength. Hence under the name of fornication, here gluttony and drunkenness, as being akin to it, or rather its mother, may be understood. It was for this reason that the Apostle, in ver. 13, spoke of gluttony. For these two sins, gluttony and lust, are vices peculiar to the body, and are thence called sins of the flesh: other sins belong to the spirit alone, as I have just said.

3. The fornicator dies injury to his own body, inasmuch as he alone brings his body, which was created free, pure, and noble, under the jurisdiction, service, and power of the mist degraded harlot, so that he becomes as one thing with her. In the same way that, if any one were to bind his own body, that was noble, healthy, and beautiful, to the body of some loathsome leper, he would be said to do his body a great wrong, so does he who unites to a common, base, and infamous harlot his body, that was created by God pure, noble, and free, and redeemed and washed by the blood of Christ, do to it grievous injury. In all these verses the Apostle lays stress upon this wrong.

4. The fornicator does injury to his body, because he excites in it a foul and shameful lust, which so absorbs the mind that in carrying it out into action the man can think of nothing else. He makes his body, therefore, the slave of his lust, in such a way that he is wholly ruled by it. Neither gluttony nor any other sin in the body excites such shameful and vehement lust as this is. Impurity alone then holds sway over the body, and by its lust and outward action stains, subjugates, and destroys it.

Ver. 19.-Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost? They, therefore, who pollute their bodies by impurity are guilty of sacrilege, for they sin against the Holy Ghost. They do Him wrong by robbing Him of the body dedicated to Him, and 120 transferring it to the demon of lust. Further, the bodies of the faithful are the temple of the Spirit of Christ, because they themselves are members of Christ, and because the faithful are one spirit with God. (See notes to vers. 16, 17, and 2Co 6:16. ) Tertullian cleverly and beautifully says (de Cultu Femin. c. i.) that the guardian and high-priestess of this temple is chastity. He says: “Since we are all the temple of God, because endowed and consecrated with the Holy Spirit, the guardian and high-priestess of His temple is chastity, who suffers nothing unclean, nothing unholy to be carried in, lest God, who inhabits it, be offended, and leave His polluted shrine.” The faithful and just is therefore a temple in which by grace dwells and is worshipped the Holy Spirit, whom God hath given us, to work in us all holy thoughts, affections, words, and works. Wherefore it is altogether unseemly that His soul and body should by fornication become the temple of Venus and Priapus: this is a grievous wrong done to God and the Holy Spirit. Hence it was that S. Seraphia, virgin and martyr, when asked by the judge, “Where is the temple of the Christ whom you adore, where you sacrifice?” replied, “I, by cultivating chastity, am the temple of Christ, and to Him I offer myself a sacrifice.” The judge retorted, “If your chastity, then, were taken from you, you would, I suppose, cease to be a temple of Christ?” The virgin rejoined: “If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy.” The judge then sent two young men to violate her, but at her prayer an earthquake took place, and the young men fell down dead: they were, however, at her prayers restored to life. This is to be found in her life by Surius, under the 3rd of September.

Ver. 20.-For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body. Value highly your bodies, though the devil bids for them with a shameful and brief bodily delight. Do not despise your bodies, do not sell them for nothing-rather think them of the highest possible worth; for it is to the glory of God if these bodies, which God bought at a great price, even with His own blood, become of great importance in our eyes. Hence the well-known proud name of a Christian is, “Bought and Redeemed,” viz., from sin and heathenism, by the precious blood of Christ. So in olden times the children of Christians were bought by the Turks, and became, instead of Christians, Mahometans, and were called Mamelukes, or “the bought;” for when the Tartars had subdued Armenia they sold the children of the Christians. Melech-Sala, Sultan of Egypt, bought them in great numbers, and had them trained as soldiers, and called Mamelukes. After the death of Melech-Sala the Mamelukes began to appoint a king for themselves, A.D. 1252, out of their own society of apostate Christians. As they took their rise under the Emperor Frederick II., so under Solyman, who filled the Egyptian throne, they were exterminated, A.D. 1516. Then their reign and existence ceased together. Glorify God in your body, by keeping it pure in obedience to the Spirit and to God.

The Latin has, “Glorify and carry God,” but the carry is not in the Greek. “As a horse,” says S. Thomas, “carries its lord and rider, and moves as he wills, so does the body serve the will of God.” The Greek also adds, and in your spirit, which are God’s.

Observe that the Corinthians were greatly given to impurity, and consequently to gluttony. This is evident from Suidas, who, under the word “Cothys,” says: “Cothys is a devil worshipped by the Corinthians as the ruler of effeminate and unclean persons.” Herodotus says the same thing (Clio), and Strabo (lib.viii.). The latter says: “The temple of Venus at Corinth was so wealthy that it had mire than a thousand harlots as priestesses, whom men and women dedicated to the goddess.” Thus became a common word for lasciviousness, self-indulgence, and impurity generally. Hence it is that the Apostle takes such pains to warn the Corinthians against their common sin of fornication; and he does this by various reasons drawn from different sources: (1.) from creation, (2.) from the resurrection of the body, (3.) from the shamefulness of impurity, and the injury it does to the body, (4.) from the dignity of the body.

From these we may collect six arguments by which he seeks to save them from fornication: (1.) Because our body is not our own but the Lord’s (ver.13); (2.) Because, if it is pure, it shall rise again with glory (ver. 14); (3.) Because our body is a member of Christ. (ver. 15); (4.) Because the body is a pure temple of the Holy Spirit, in order that by clinging to God in chastity it may become one spirit with Him (ver. 17); (5.) Because our body has been bought with the blood of Christ, and therefore it is an unworthy thing, and an injury to God, to Christ, and the Holy Spirit, to give it to a harlot (ver. 20). See Chrysostom (in Morali.).

S. Bernard (Serm. 7 in Ps.xci.) moralises thus: “Glorify, dearly beloved, and bear meanwhile Christ in your body, as a delightful burden, a pleasant weight, a wholesome load, even though He seem sometimes to weigh heavily, even though sometimes He use the spur and whip on the laggard, even though sometimes He hold in the jaws with bit and bridle, and curb us wholly for our good. Be as a beast of burden in the patience with which you bear the load, and yet not as a beast, heedless of the honour that its rider gives. Think wisely and sweetly both of the nature of the load you bear, as well as of your own future benefit.” So S. Ignatius, the martyr, was called “God-bearer” and “Christ-bearer,” and he salutes the Blessed Virgin by the same name, “Christ-bearer,” in his letters to her, as S. Bernard says.

Fuente: Cornelius Lapide Commentary

6:1 Dare {1} {a} any of you, having a matter against another, go to law {b} before the unjust, {2} and not before the saints?

(1) The third question is of civil judgments. Whether it is lawful for one of the faithful to draw another of the faithful before the judgment seat of an infidel? He answers that is not lawful because it is an offence for the faithful to do this, for it is not evil in itself that a matter be brought before the judgment seat, even of an infidel.

(a) As if he said, “Have you become so impudent, that you are not ashamed to make the Gospel a laughing stock to profane men?”

(b) Before the unjust.

(2) He adds that he does not forbid that one neighbour may go to law with another, if need so require, but yet under holy judges.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

2. Litigation in the church 6:1-11

The apostle continued to deal with the general subject of discipline in the church that he began in 1Co 5:1. He proceeded to point out some other glaring instances of inconsistency that had their roots in the Corinthians’ lax view of sin. Rather than looking to unsaved judges to solve their internal conflicts, they should have exercised discipline among themselves in these cases. Gallio had refused to get involved in Jewish controversies in Corinth and had told the Jews to deal with these matters themselves (Act 18:14-16). Paul now counseled a similar approach for the Christians.

"In this section Paul is dealing with a problem which specially affected the Greeks. The Jews did not ordinarily go to law in the public law-courts at all; they settled things before the elders of the village or the elders of the Synagogue; to them justice was far more a thing to be settled in a family spirit than in a legal spirit. . . . The Greeks were in fact famous, or notorious, for their love of going to law." [Note: Barclay, The Letters . . ., pp. 55, 56.]

"Roman society was notoriously litigious, and Corinth, with its rising class of nouveau riche, was even more so." [Note: Keener, p. 52.]

". . . the congregation’s root problem lies in its lack of theological depth. It shames itself by not understanding itself as an eschatological community (’Do you not know that we are to judge angels?’) and as a community redeemed by Christ." [Note: Cousar, "The Theological . . .," pp. 98-99.]

"Paul has not finished with the theme of church discipline in regard to sexual life; see vi. 12 and chapter vii; but in 1Co 6:12 f. he had spoken of judgement [sic], and this brings to his mind another feature of Corinthian life of which he had heard . . ." [Note: Barrett, p. 134.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

The shame on the church 6:1-6

The failure of the two men who were suing each other was another evidence that the Corinthian church was not functioning properly. It indicated how lacking in true wisdom these Christians were. Paul argued with a series of rhetorical questions in this pericope.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Again Paul used a rhetorical question to make a point (cf. 1Co 3:16; 1Co 4:21). The answer was self-evident to him.

In view of the context the "neighbor" (NASB) must be a fellow Christian. The "unrighteous" or "ungodly" (NIV) contrasts with the "saints" and refers to an unbeliever (1Co 6:6). When people had disputes with each other in Corinth and wanted official arbitration, they went to the bema (judgment seat) in the center of town.

"The phrase translated ’has a dispute’ is a technical term for a lawsuit, or legal action; and the verb krino (’judge’) in the middle voice can carry the sense of ’going to law,’ or ’bringing something for judgment,’ as it does here." [Note: Fee, The First . . ., p. 231.]

"He does not mean that Christian courts ought to be instituted, but that Christian disputants should submit to Christian arbitration." [Note: Robertson and Plummer, p. 111.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 9

ON GOING TO LAW

ST. PAUL here gives his judgment on the litigiousness of the Corinthians. The Greeks, in general, were fond of going to law. They were not only quarrelsome, but they seemed to derive an excitement pleasant to their frivolous nature in the suspense and uncertainty of cases before the courts. The converts to Christianity seemed not to have discarded this taste, and as a habit of going to law not merely involved great loss of time, but was also dangerous to the feeling of brotherhood which should exist among Christians, St. Paul takes the opportunity to throw in some advice on the subject. He has been telling them they have nothing to do with judging the heathen; he now proceeds to remind them that they ought not to go to law before the heathen. He feared that an unseemly wrangling among Christians might convey to the heathen quite an erroneous impression of the nature of their religion. There was, to his mind, something incongruous, something monstrous, in brother going to law with brother. What was that brotherhood worth that could not bear a little wrong? How could he continue to speak of Christian love, if Christians were to bite and devour one another? How could he preach the superiority of Christianity to heathenism if Christians had so little common sense, so little esprit de corps, so little mutual forbearance, that they must call in a heathen to settle their disputes for them? It seemed to Paul to be a losing of caste for Christians to proclaim their insufficiency to carry on their own affairs without the aid of heathen. It seemed to him a public confession that Christianity was not sufficient for the needs of its adherents.

The reasons which St. Paul adduces to give weight to his rebuke are important.

I. The saints are destined to judge the world, to judge angels; that is to say, to judge persons in separation from earthly interests, to judge unclothed detached spirits, to ascertain what is spiritually good and spiritually evil. Shall they not then be considered fit to judge little worldly matters, matters of s. d., matters of property and of bargain? This statement that the saints shall judge the world is one of those broad widely-suggestive statements with which St. Paul from time to time surprises us, making them casually, as if he had many more equally astounding facts in his knowledge which he might also reveal if he had leisure. It is difficult to grasp the statements which he makes in this style; it is also difficult to link a truth so revealed to the truths amid which we are now living; it is difficult even to ascertain with precision the bearing and significance of it.

It seems plain, however, that whatever else may be implied in this statement, and in whatever way it is to be fulfilled, St. Paul meant that ultimately, in that final state of things towards which all present things are growing and travelling, the men who are holy shall be at the head of affairs, acknowledged as the fittest to discern between right and wrong; and also that the germ and first principles of this final state of things are already implanted in the world by the Christian religion-two very important truths, certainly, to those who believe them. The precise form of the final judgment and future government of the world we cannot predict: but from this statement a bright ray of light shoots into the darkness, and shows us that the saints, i.e., the servants of Christ, are to have the responsibility of pronouncing judgment on character, and of allotting destiny, reward or punishment. We shrink from such a thought; not, indeed, that we are slow to pronounce judgment upon our fellow men, but to do so officially, and in connection with definite results, seems a responsibility too heavy for merely human judges to sustain. But why men should not judge men hereafter as they do judge them now, we do not see. If we, in this present world, submit ourselves to those who have knowledge of law and ordinary justice, we may well be content to be judged in the world to come by those whose holiness has been matured by personal strife against evil, by sustained efforts to cleanse their souls from bias, from envy, from haste, from harshness, from all that hinders them from seeing and loving the truth. Holiness, or likeness to God, assimilation to His mind, formed by the constant desire to judge of things in this world as He judges, and to love truly all that He loves, this quality is surely worthy to be at the head. In that future kingdom of God in which all things are to have their proper place, and are to be ranked according to their real worth, holiness must come to the supremacy.

But equally worthy of remark is St. Pauls inference from the fact that holiness shall eventually be supreme. His inference is that it ought now to be regarded as competent to settle the petty disputes which arise among us. “If we are to judge angels, much more the things that pertain to this life.” We can only arrive at any dignity by perseveringly seeking it. If the future kingdom of God is to be a perfect kingdom, it can only be as its subjects carry into it characters which have been strongly tending towards perfection. It is not the future that is to make us, but we who are to make the future. The kingdom of God is within us; if not there, in our own dispositions and likings, it is nowhere. Heaven will be what its inhabitants make it. Earth is not heaven only because men decline to make it so. We do not know the forms which society will assume in the world to come, when men will be grouped, not by families and blood relationships, and the necessary requirements of physical life, but according to their character and moral value, their spiritual affinities and capacities for usefulness. But though we cannot say exactly how men will be grouped, nor how they will find expression for all that intense emotion and eager activity which in this life creates adventure, war, politics, speculation, inventions of all kinds, we do know that wherever there are men there must be society, there must be men not isolated and solitary, but working together and depending one on the other; and that there will therefore be difficult complications of interest and obscure relations of man to man very similar to those which arise in this world; but that those difficulties will be removed without passion and wrangling and the interference of force. A heaven and an earth there will be; but “a new heaven and a new earth.” The outer framework will be very much the same, but the inner spirit and life very different. But it is not the altered place or time that is to produce in us this change of spirit; we are to find it there only if we carry it with us. St. Paul takes for granted that the principles which are to be perfectly and exclusively manifested in the world to come, are now cherished by Christians. And as there will be no differences in heaven which cannot be adjusted without appeal to an authority which can silence and reconcile the disputants, so there ought to be, among the heirs of heaven, no going to law now.

St. Paul, therefore, while he contrasts the subjects in which a lawyer like mind will find employment in this world and the next, reminds us that those who are here trained to understand character, and to discern where right and justice lie, will be in no want of employment in the world to come. The matters which come before our courts, or which are referred privately to lawyers, may often be in themselves very paltry. A vast proportion of legal business is created by changes from which the future life is exempt: changes consequent on death, on marriage, on pecuniary disasters. But underneath such suits as these the keenest of human feelings are at work, and it is often in the power of a lawyer to give a man advice which will save his conscience from a life-long stain, or which will bring comfort into a family instead of heart burning, and plenty in place of penury. The physician keeps us in life; the minister of Christ tells us on what principles we ought to live; but the lawyer takes our hand at every great practical step in life, and it is his function (and surely there is none higher) to insist on a conscientious use of money, to point out the just claims which others have upon us, to show us the right and the wrong in all our ordinary affairs, and thus to bring justice and mercy down from heaven and make them familiar to the marketplace. And therefore many of the finest characters and best intellects have devoted themselves, and always will devote themselves, to this profession. It may attract many from less lofty motives; but it always will attract those who are concerned to save men from practical folly, and who wish to see the highest principles brought into direct contact with human affairs. If the legal mind degenerates into a mere memory for technicalities and acuteness in applying forms, nothing can be more contemptible or dangerous to the character; but if it takes to do with real things, and not with forms only, and tries to see what equity requires, and not merely what the letter of the law enjoins, and seeks to forward the well-being of men, then surely there is no profession in which there is such abundant opportunity of earning the beatitude which says, “Blessed are the peacemakers,” none in which the senses can better be exercised to discern between good and evil, none in which men may better be prepared for the higher requirements of a heavenly society in which some are made rulers over ten cities.

II. The second confirmation of his rebuke St. Paul brings forward in the fifth verse: “Is there not a wise man among yourselves?” “A wise man” was the technical term for a judge in the Hebrew courts.

To understand Pauls position we must bear in mind that among the Jews there was no distinction between Church and State. The courts appointed for the determination of the minor causes in each locality were composed of the same persons who constituted the eldership of the synagogue. In the synagogue and by the eldership offenders were both tried and punished. The Rabbis said, “He who brings lawsuits of Israel before a heathen tribunal profanes the Name, and does homage to idolatry; for when our enemies are judges {Deu 32:31} it is a testimony to the superiority of their religion.” This idea passed over from Judaism to Christianity; and Paul considers it a scandal that “brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.” And even a century after Pauls time the rule of the Christian Church was “Let not those who have disputes go to law before the civil powers, but let them by all means be reconciled by the elders of the Church, and let them readily yield to their decision.” And as late as our own day we find an Arab sheikh complaining that Christian Copts come to him, a Mohammedan, to settle their disputes and “wont go and be settled by the priest out of the Gospels.”

Did Paul then mean that such legal cases as are now tried in our civil courts should be settled by non-professional men? Did he mean that ecclesiastical courts should take out of the hands of the civil magistrate all pleas regarding property, all disputes about commercial transactions? Did he foresee none of the great evils that have arisen wherever Church or State has not respected the province of the other, and was he prepared to put the power of the sword into the hands of the ecclesiastics? We think no one can read either his life or his writings without seeing that this was not his meaning. He taught men to submit themselves to the powers that then were – i.e., to the heathen magistrates of Rome-and he himself appealed to Caesar. He had no notion of subverting the ordinary legal procedure and civil courts, but he would fain have deprived them of much of their practice. He thought it might be expected that Christians would never be so determinedly rancorous or so blindly covetous but that their disputes might be settled by private and friendly advice. He gives no orders about constituting new courts and appointing new statutes and forms of procedure; he has no idea of transferring into the Church all the paraphernalia of civil courts: but he maintains that if a Christian community be in a healthy state, few quarrels will be referred for settlement to a court of law. Courts of law are necessary evils, which will be less and less patronised in proportion as Christian feeling and principle prevail.

This rebuke is applicable even to a community like our own, in which the courts of law are not heathen, but Christian; and the principle on which the rebuke is based is one that has gradually worked its way into the heart of the community. It is felt, felt now even by nations as well as by individuals, that if a dispute can he settled by arbitration, this is not only cheaper, quicker, and equally satisfactory, but that it is a more generous and Christian way of getting justice done. Those who hold office in the Church may not always happen to be suitable arbitrators; they may not have the technical and special knowledge requisite: but Pauls counsel is acted on if disputes among Christians be somehow adjusted in a friendly way, and without the interference of an external authority. Christian people may need legal advice; they may not know what the right and wrong of a complicated case are; they may be truly at a loss to understand how much is justly theirs and how much their neighbours; they may often need professional aid to shed light on a transaction: but when two Christians go to law in a spirit of rancour, resolved to make good their own just claims, and to enforce by the authority of law what they cannot compass by right feeling, this only proves that their worldliness is stronger than their Christianity. St. Paul thinks it a scandal and a degradation when Christians need to appeal to law against one another. It is a confession that Christian principle is in their case insufficient by itself to carry them through the practical difficulties of life.

But some one will say to this, as to every unworldly, truly Christian, and therefore novel and difficult counsel, “It savours of theory and of romance; a man cannot act it out unless he is prepared to be duped, and cheated, and imposed upon. It is a theory that, if carried out, must end in beggary.” Just as if the world could be regenerated by anything that is not apparently romantic! If a greater good is to be reached, it must be by some way that men have not tried before. The kingdoms of this world will not become the kingdom of Christ by the admission into our conduct of only that which men have tried and found to be practicable, and void of all risk, and requiring no devotion or sacrifice. If then, anyone says, “But if there is to be no going to law, if we are not to force a man to give us our own, we must continually be losers,” the reply of a well-known Kincardineshire lawyer might suffice: “Dont go to law if yielding does not cost you more than forty shillings in the pound.” And from a different point of view St. Paul replies, “Well, and what though you be losers? The kingdom you belong to is not meat and drink, but righteousness.” If a man says, “We must have some redress, some authority to extort the dues that are not freely given; we must strike when we are struck; when a man takes our coat, we must summon him, or he will take our cloak next,” St. Paul replies, “Well, if this be the alternative, if you must either push your own claims and insist upon your rights, or suffer by assuming the meekness and gentleness of your Master, why do you not rather take wrong? why do you not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? It may be quite true that if you turn the other cheek, it also will be smitten. It may be very likely that a greedy competitor will be so little abashed by your meekness, and so little struck by your magnanimity in giving way to some of his demands, that he will even be encouraged to greater extortions. It is quite probable that if you act as your Master did, you will be as ill off in this world as He was. But is that any reason why you should at once call Him your Master and refuse to obey His precepts and follow His example?” One thing is certain: that so long as men honestly accepted Christs words in their plain meaning, and followed Him in His own way, making light of worldly loss, Christianity was believed in and rapidly extended. It was seen to be a new moral power among men, and was welcomed as such, until a large part of the world received it; but its victory was its defeat. Once it became the fashion, once it became popular, the heart of it was eaten out. As soon as it became a religion without hardship, it became a religion without vitality.

St. Paul then shows no hesitation about pushing his doctrine to its consequences. He sees that the real cure of wrangling, and of fraud, and of war is not litigation, nor any outward restraint that can be laid on the wrong-doer, but meekness, and unselfishness, and unworldliness on the part of those who suffer wrong. The world has laughed at this theory of social regeneration all along; a few men in each generation have believed in it, and have been ridiculed for their belief. At the same time, the world itself is aware, or should be aware, that its own remedies have utterly failed. Has war taught nations moderation in their ambition? Has it saved the world from the calamities which it is said would ensue were anyone nation to prefer submitting to injustice rather than going to war? Have the outward restraints of law made men more just or less avaricious? There has been time to test the power of law to repress crime, and to compel men to honesty and justice. Can anyone say it has been so successful that it must be looked to as the great means of regenerating society, of bringing society into that healthy and ideal state which statesmen work for, and for which the people inarticulately sigh? Does not St. James come nearer the mark when he says, “Whence come wars and fightings? Come they not hence, even of the lusts that war in your members?”-i.e., from the restless ambitions, and appetites, and longings of men who seek their all in this world? And if that is their source, it is to that we must apply the remedy. Law is necessary for restraining the expressions of a vicious nature, but law is insufficient to remove the possibility of these expressions by healing the nature. This can only be done by the diffusion of unworldliness and unselfishness. And it is Christians who are responsible for diffusing this unworldly spirit, and who must diffuse it, not by talk and advice, but by practice and example, by themselves showing what unselfishness is, rebuking covetousness by yielding to its demands, shaming all wrong doing by refusing to retaliate while they expose its guilt.

While therefore it is a mistake to suppose that all the laws which are to rule in the perfected kingdom of God can find immediate and unmodified expression in this present world, it is our part to find for them an introduction into the world in every case in which it is possible to apply them. Those laws which are to be our sole rule when we are perfect cannot always be immediately applied now. For example, we all believe that ultimately love will be the only motive, that all service of God and of one another will eventually spring solely from our desire to serve because we love. And because this is so, some persons have thought that love should be the only motive now, and that obedience which is procured by fear is useless; that preachers ought to appeal only to the highest parts of mans nature, and not at all to those which are lower; and that parents should never threaten punishment nor enforce obedience. But the testimony of one of the most genial and successful of preachers is that “of all the persons to whom his ministry had been efficacious only one had received the first effectual impressions from the gentle and attractive aspects of religion, all the rest from the awful and alarming ones-the appeals to fear.” Take, again, the testimony of one of the wisest and most successful of our schoolmasters. “I cant rule my boys,” he says, “by the law of love. If they were angels or professors, I might; but as they are only boys, I find it necessary to make them fear me first, and then take nay chance of their love afterwards. By this plan I find that I generally get both; by reversing the process I should in most cases get neither.” And God, though slow to anger and not easily provoked, scourgeth every son whom He receiveth, not dealing with us now as He will deal with us when perfect love has cast out its preparative fear. So, in regard to the matter before us, there must be an aim and striving towards the perfect state in which there shall be no going to law, no settling of matters by appeal to anything outside the heart of the persons interested. But while we aim at this, and seek to give it prevalence, we shall also be occasionally forced back upon the severer and more external means of self-defence. The members of Christs Church are those on whom the burden falls of giving prevalence to these Christian principles. It is incumbent upon them to straw, even at cost to themselves, that there are higher, better, and more enduring principles than law, and the customs of trade, and the ways of the world. And however difficult it may be theoretically to hold the balance between justice and mercy, between worldly sharpness and Christian meekness, we all know that there are some who practically exhibit a large measure of this Christian temper, who prefer to take wrong and to suffer quietly rather than to expose the wickedness of others, or to resent their unjust claims, or to complain of their unfair usage. And whatever the most worldly of us may think of such conduct, however we may smile at it as weak, there is no one of us but also pays his tribute of respect to those who suffer wrong, loss, detraction, with a meek and cheerful patience; and whatever be the lot of such sufferers in a world where men are too busy in pushing their worldly prospects to understand those who are not of this world, we have no doubt in what esteem they will be held and what reward they will receive in a world where the Lamb is on the throne, and meek self-sacrifice is honestly worshipped as the highest quality, whether in God or in man.

Paul knows that the Christian conscience is with him when he declares that men should rather suffer wrong than bring reproach on the Christian name: “Know ye not that wrongdoers shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived; neither covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners shall inherit the kingdom of God.” And yet how little do men seem to take to heart the great fact that they are travelling forward to a state in which nothing uncongenial to the Spirit of Christ can possibly find place. Do they think of the future at all? Do they believe that a state of things ruled by the Spirit of Christ is to follow this? And what preparation do they make? Is it not the height of folly to suppose that the selfishness and greed, the indolence and frivolity, the dreamy unreality and worldliness, which we suffer to grow upon us here, will give us entrance into the kingdom of God? The seaman who means to winter in the Arctic circle might as reasonably go with a single mouths provisions and clothes suited to the tropics. There are a reason and a law in things; and if we are not assimilated to the Spirit of Christ now, we can have no part in His kingdom. If now our interest, and pursuits, and pleasures are all found in what gratifies selfishness and worldliness, it is impossible we can find a place in that kingdom which is all unselfishness and unworldliness. “Be not deceived.” The spiritual world is a reality, and the godliness and Christlikeness that compose it must also be realities. Put away from you the fatuous idea that things will somehow come all right, and that your character will adapt itself to changed surroundings. It is not so; nothing that defiles can find entrance into the kingdom of God, but only those who are “sanctified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.”

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary