Lessons #157 and 158
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ 1. It is best to use this note after you have listened to the lessons because there are +
+ comments given in the actual delivery not in the note. +
+ 2. The Bible abbreviations are as follows: CEV =Contemporary English version, +
+ CEB = Common English Bible, ESV= English Standard Version, +
+ GW = God’s Word Translation, ISV = International Standard Version, +
+ NAB=New English Bible, NASB= New American Standard Bible, +
+ NEB= New English Bible, NET = New English Translation, +
+ NLT = New Living Translations NJB = New Jerusalem Bible, +
+ NJV = New Jewish Bible, TEV = Today’s English Version. +
+AMP = Amplified Bible, UBS = United Bible Society +
+ 3. Notes have not been edited for grammatical errors. +
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General case of sexual immorality in Corinth (1 Cor 5:9-13)
9 I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.
12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked man from among you.”
In our last study, we began to consider the misunderstanding of the Corinthians regarding Apostle Paul’s previous instruction to them regarding not associating with sexually immoral people. We noted that their misunderstanding of that instruction involves first what the apostle meant with the word “associate.” We noted that the apostle did not mean mere mingling with or even causal interaction with sexually immoral people but the mingling that leads to closeness between Corinthian believers and sexually immoral people. In considering this clarification, we applied it by stating that believers could do business with unbelievers but not to be in partnership with them. A second misunderstanding involved those the apostle meant by sexually immoral people that should be denied close association. He conveyed to them that he did not mean unbelievers who are sexually immoral as that would be impossible or impractical. To bolster this clarification the apostle indicated that the only way for such understanding to be sustained is for the Corinthians to die as that is what he meant in the last sentence of 1 Corinthians 5:10 you would have to leave this world. Since this is also not realistic, the apostle continued to clarify his previous instruction.
To indicate that what the apostle writes next is not only something that contrasts with the misunderstanding of the Corinthians regarding his previous instruction of not associating with sexually immoral people but also to convey the state of affairs as he wrote, he used two Greek particles together translated at the beginning of verse 11 as But now. The word “but” is translated from a Greek particle (de) that has the most common meaning of “but” when used to connect clauses in which it is felt that there is some contrast between them although often the contrast may not be easily discerned. The word may be translated “and” when two clauses are connected without a clear implication of contrast between them although in certain occurrences the word may be left untranslated. The word may be translated “that is” when it is used to provide an explanation. It may be translated “now” as a marker that links narrative segments or to resume a discourse that has been interrupted. In our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:1, it is used as a marker of contrast.
The word “now” is translated from a Greek particle (nyn) that may mean “now” referring to time shortly before or shortly after the immediate present as it is used in the declaration of the high priest during Jesus’ trial in Matthew 26:65:
Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “He has spoken blasphemy! Why do we need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy.
The meaning “now” may be understood as “at the present time” as the word is used to describe the fact that Apostle Paul who once persecuted the Christians, was preaching the gospel at the time he wrote his epistle to the Galatians, as stated in Galatians 1:23:
They only heard the report: “The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.”
The Greek word may mean “as it is, now” where the focus is not so much on present time as the situation that pertains to a given moment so that the full sense is “as things now stand.” It is in this sense that the word is used in the instruction to Cornelius by the angel that appeared to him about sending for Peter, as we read in Acts 10:5:
Now send men to Joppa to bring back a man named Simon who is called Peter.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:11, the particle has the sense of “at the present moment.” Of course, it is possible, to take the particle as a logical reference as some have done. Nonetheless, because the apostle used these two particles to begin verse 11, the verse could begin with the phrase “as it is” since that is the way to translate the combined particles to reflect contrast between what is at the moment from what previously occurred as both particles were used to describe the wrong attitude of the Jews who did not accept Jesus teaching in John 8:40:
As it is, you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things.
Hence, the apostle was concerned to state what the Corinthians should understand when they read this epistle that should clarify any confusion they had regarding his previous letter.
Apostle Paul had taken the step necessary to clarify the misunderstanding of the Corinthians regarding his first epistle as conveyed in the sentence of 1 Corinthians 5:11 I am writing you of the NIV and many of our English versions. The literal Greek reads I wrote to you. The literal translation could cause problem in that it could be referring to a previous letter when that is not the case. It is probably to remove any ambiguity that most of our English versions translated the Greek similar to that of the NIV. The apostle used an aorist tense in the Greek. However, the aorist tense he used is what Greek grammarians describe as “epistolary aorist” to describe a situation where there is a time gap between the writing of a letter and its reading. The author would use it to describe an event that is present for him, but which will be in the past by the time the reader receives the epistle. Since there is no equivalent tense in the English, the Greek idiom is often translated in the English using the present or future tense. It is for this reason that our English versions used the sentence I am writing you as we find in the NIV. Some English versions interpret the literal Greek I wrote to you as referring not to the present letter of the apostle but his previous letter in which case the Greek should be translated as “what I meant” as reflected in the TEV. This is possible but in the final analysis it does not make much difference since the present letter was intended to shed light on what the misunderstanding of his first letter by the Corinthians was.
The focus of the clarification of the apostle is with the description of those the Corinthians, and so all believers, should not mingle with in a way that leads to closeness. This kind of individuals is described first in the instruction you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother. Literally, the Greek reads you not to associate with if anyone is called brother. There are two key words that are necessary in understanding the kind of persons the apostle was concerned in the repeat instruction that is meant to clarify the original instruction.
A first key word is “calls” that is translated from a Greek word (onomazō) that may mean to give a name hence “to call, name” as it is used in giving a name to the Lord Jesus after he was circumcised, as narrated in Luke 2:21:
On the eighth day, when it was time to circumcise him, he was named Jesus, the name the angel had given him before he had been conceived.
The word may mean “to invoke,” that is, to utter a name in a ritual as in the practice of some Jews in their attempts of exorcism, as recorded in Acts 19:13:
Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, “In the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out.”
The word may, when used in the passive voice with the translation “be named,” mean “to be known” as that is the sense of the word when Apostle Paul used it to describe his criterion for the places, he went to preach the gospel as stated in Romans 15:20:
It has always been my ambition to preach the gospel where Christ was not known, so that I would not be building on someone else’s foundation.
The clause where Christ was not known is literally not where Christ was named. The word may mean “to speak about,” that is, to speak of something by mentioning the name of it as it is used to indicate that sexual immorality should not even be hinted among believers in Ephesians 5:3:
But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:11, it has the sense of “to be designated,” that is, to be assigned a name or title.
The second key word is “brother” that is translated from a Greek word (adelphos) that has several meanings in the Greek. The word may mean “a neighbor” as that is the sense of the Greek word in the Lord Jesus’ statement during His sermon on the mount, as given in Matthew 7:3:
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
The word “brother” as used in this passage could refer to a neighbor or a fellow believer. The Greek word may refer to a fellow country man or a compatriot as the apostle used it to refer to fellow Jews in Romans 9:3:
For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race,
The word “brothers” here is used for Jews, male and female. By the way, the phrase those of my own race can be misleading since there is no Greek word that is equivalent to the word “race” as it is used by many people to differentiate one group from another. Truly, the word “race” is a meaningless term in differentiating one human being from another since it is a word that may be used to differentiate humans from animals as belonging to a different species. Thus, the phrase is better translated “kinsmen” as in the NASB or “my people” as in the NCV since it is translated from a Greek word (syngenēs) that may mean “a relative” or “a fellow countryman,” in the sense of belonging to the same people group. The Greek word that is our focus may mean “brother” in the sense of a male from the same womb as the referenced person as Apostle Paul used it to describe James, the half-brother of the Lord Jesus, in Galatians 1:19:
I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother.
It is not only one from the same womb that the word “brother” will apply but also one from the same ancestors as that is the sense Apostle Paul used it to address his fellow Jews in his defense began in Acts 22:1:
“Brothers and fathers, listen now to my defense.”
The Greek word translated “brother” may refer to one who shares beliefs with another. Thus, Jesus Christ calls those who are devoted to Him His brothers in Matthew 12:50:
For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”
Similarly, those who believe in Christ, regardless of gender, are described as “brothers” in their relationship to each other, as Apostle Paul used it to describe fellow believers that resided in Rome in Romans 1:13:
I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that I planned many times to come to you (but have been prevented from doing so until now) in order that I might have a harvest among you, just as I have had among the other Gentiles.
It is in this sense of one who shares the same faith and so belongs to the Christian community that the apostle used the word to describe Timothy to the Thessalonians, who was clearly a Gentile because his father was a Greek, in 1 Thessalonians 3:2:
We sent Timothy, who is our brother and God’s fellow worker in spreading the gospel of Christ, to strengthen and encourage you in your faith,
It is in this sense of one who belong to the family of God in Christ, that is, fellow Christian – male and female – that the apostle used it in our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:11.
There is a problem of how to understand the designation brother since the Greek literally reads if anyone is called brother. The problem is that we have a passive voice so that the subject needs to be supplied. There are two possibilities. The person is the one that designates self with the title “brother” or others designate that person a “brother.” It is difficult to be certain of the subject this may be the reason the standard Greek English lexicon (BDAG) suggests the Greek be translated a so-called member. That aside, it is probably the case that it is the person that designates self as a believer or a Christian. This makes sense in that unless one considered self to be a believer that person at that time would not be a member of the Christian community. The situation is different today in that there are many who associate with the Christian community that are not believers. But we should not interpret the word based on today’s situation. Therefore, it makes more sense to accept that it is the person being described that considered himself a believer in Christ. This point is important in the application of the instruction given in our passage regarding the person, close association should be denied.
The action the Holy Spirit commands believers to take is applicable only if a person claims to be a believer but displays the sinful conduct stated. In other words, believers should not be in close association with an individual that claims to be a Christian but exhibit the sins mentioned in our passage. The apostle repeats four of the sinful conducts in verse 11 he mentioned in verse 10. The first he repeats is sexual immorality as in the verbal phrase but is sexually immoral. The person so described is one that is known for sexual profligacy. In effect, the issue concerns anyone who claims to be a believer but is known to be involved in any sexual relationship outside the marriage bond regardless of the person’s marital status. Of course, the standard Greek English lexicon of BDAG suggest that the Greek word (pornos) used may be given the meaning “fornicator.” A fornicator is an individual who is involved in consensual sexual intercourse with another person to whom the individual is not married. It is difficult for the local churches, especially in the West to be sure that a person is involved in sexual immorality without solid evidence. We could, for example, suspect that two individuals that are involved in the unscriptural practice of dating may be guilty of sexual immorality, but we cannot be certain of this. This makes it difficult for a local church to act based on the instruction in this passage. That notwithstanding, if a local church discovers that two individuals who are not married to each other are living together or they spend the nights together alone but they claim to be Christians then the church should use the fact that they are living together as basis to apply to them the instruction of the passage we are considering since it is humanly impossible for a male and a female to live together in so called love relationship and not be involved in sexual intercourse unless they are old where the man is incapable of sexual intercourse. Even in this later situation, the church would still have to act. This is because of the impression that would be created to others under such living arrangement. In other words, people not knowing the fact that the man is incapable of sexual relationship would assume that there is such a thing between the individuals since not all old men are incapable of sexual intercourse. But more importantly, is that it is necessary for believers not to do anything that would give unbelievers opportunity to slander the Christian faith as in the instruction given to young widows of being careful not to give Satan through unbelievers any opportunity to slander the Christian faith, as we read in 1 Timothy 5:14:
So I counsel younger widows to marry, to have children, to manage their homes and to give the enemy no opportunity for slander.
Therefore, for the conscience sake, it would be necessary for a local church to act in accordance with the instruction of this passage when even individuals that are not married live together. Furthermore, it is important that there should not be a hint of sexual immorality among believers as stated in a passage we cited previously, that is, Ephesians 5:3:
But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people.
Anyway, we will consider in more detail than we did previously the second repeated sin given in our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:11.
The second sin that is a repeat of the list in verse 10 mentioned in verse 11 is greed as in the phrase or greedy. The word “greedy” is translated from a Greek word (pleonektēs) that in Hellenic society was used to describe a person who violated the basic principle of proportion and who was not concerned with what benefits others. Thus, it means “a greedy person,” that is, one who desires to have more than is due a person. This is a person that is obsessed with the desire for things, especially wealth to the extent that the person is not concerned about others but consumed with the desire to have more and more wealth, for example. Because of the instruction of the passage we are considering, it is important that we be certain that a person is guilty of greed. To do this, we need to examine what is greed. So, what is greed? This question may appear simple because the word “greed” is a common word in English so that every English-speaking person seems to know what it is since the Webster Dictionary says it is “a selfish and excessive desire for more of something (as money) than is needed.” This is certainly a good working definition, but we need to explore what is said in the Scripture about greed to elaborate on this basic definition. In other words, it is important to understand its meaning from the perspective of God’s word so we can know how to avoid it and to know to confess it when we become guilty of it.
The word “greed” is translated from a Greek word (pleonexia) that in its more basic sense conveys the idea of having more, receiving more, and wanting more, as it pertains to power and property. So, the word has two meanings that are in fact related although their relationship may not be that apparent. A first meaning of the word then refers to that state of desiring to have more than one is due. It is that strong desire to acquire more and more material possessions or to possess more things than other people have, all irrespective of need, hence the meaning “greediness, avarice, insatiableness, covetousness.” A second meaning is to take advantage of someone hence means “exploitation.” This second meaning is related to the first because exploitation or taking advantage of someone is usually a result of a desire to acquire more material possessions.
According to the meanings of the Greek word that is translated “greed,” there are three important words involved in understanding the concept of greed. These words are desire, more, and need. These three words create a problem in understanding the concept of greed because they are words that define everyday experience of normal existence of human beings. We all want something, and we want more of it because of our varying needs. Thus, the question is when would more desire for something that we need become a sin? It is the answer to this question that enables us to get a grip on the concept of greed. But before we get to the answer, let me make two observations. First, the object of our desires is not limited to material possession but extends to power. Of course, the desire for power is usually related to material possession but we should not think of only material possession when we think of greed; instead, we should recognize that greed extends to the desire of power of control of others. Second, there is nothing wrong with having abundance of things as a concept. You see, abundance of things is related to prosperity. Unless a person has abundance of things, we could not really say that the individual is prosperous in a specific area. But then, it is the Lord that brings prosperity to an individual, as we may deduce from Jacob’s prayer when he reminded God of His promise to prosper him, stated in Genesis 32:9:
Then Jacob prayed, "O God of my father Abraham, God of my father Isaac, O LORD, who said to me, 'Go back to your country and your relatives, and I will make you prosper,'
In addition, Moses in his final address to Israel, assured them that the Lord would prosper them on the ground that they obeyed Him, as he stated in Deuteronomy 30:9:
Then the LORD your God will make you most prosperous in all the work of your hands and in the fruit of your womb, the young of your livestock and the crops of your land. The Lord will again delight in you and make you prosperous, just as he delighted in your fathers,
This may appear to be an indirect assertion that God prospers an individual, so let me mention a more direct assertion that indicates that the Lord brings prosperity. Prophet Isaiah asserts this in Isaiah 45:7:
I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.
If, as we have argued, having abundance of things imply prosperity and that God brings prosperity, then there could be nothing wrong with having more of things. However, the definition of greed as we have noted is that strong desire to acquire more and more material possessions or to possess more things than other people have, often associated with selfishness. Consequently, we must understand clearly when the desire to have more things becomes greed.
The desire to have more things becomes a sin whenever it leads us to ignore God. The idea of ignoring God involves disobedience to His instruction. The Fall of man may be explained in terms of greed. You see, God created all kinds of fruit trees for Adam and Eve to enjoy in the Garden of Eden, but He restricted them from eating just from one tree. However, under the attack of Satan, the woman wanted to expand on the number of trees from which they could eat. She desired to have more trees that would include the tree that God had forbidden for her and the husband to eat of its fruit, so we read in Genesis 3:6:
When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.
The word “desirable” is translated from a Hebrew word (ḥāmǎḏ) that means “to desire,” “to delight.” The word can take both negative and positive senses. In a negative sense, the word refers to inordinate, ungoverned, selfish desire, hence means “to lust.” This word may also be translated as “to covet” as we would note later. In any event, the woman had the desire for wisdom and so she included the tree of the knowledge of good and evil as one more of the trees from which to eat. The consequence of this was disastrous. So, it was greed in the sense of wanting more than God permits that led to the Fall and ever since, greed is a sin that comes from within us as the Lord indicated in Mark 7:22-23:
22 greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. 23 All these evils come from inside and make a man 'unclean.'"
It is our assertion that greed involves that desire to have more at the expense of ignoring God’s word. Therefore, whenever you have the desire to have more of anything that is forbidden by the word of God then you are not only sinning, but you are also guilty of greed. Take for example, if a person has the desire to take what belongs to another that desire is greed. Subsequently, it is not surprising that in the Ten Commandments, we have the prohibition that certainly guards against greed. I am referring to the instruction of Exodus 20:17:
"You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."
The word “covet” is translated from the same Hebrew word (ḥāmǎḏ) that was used in Genesis 3:6 that we indicated means “to desire.” This is the reason some English versions used the word “desire” instead of “covet” in translating Exodus 20:17. According to Hebrew experts, the word focuses not on an external act but on an internal mental activity behind the act, the motivation for it. If a person desires to increase what he has by acquiring through any means something that belongs to another person, such a desire would be greed regardless of whether the desire was met or not. In effect, a man who desires another man’s wife or a woman that desires another’s woman’s husband is guilty not only of the sin of adultery but also that of greed. In this situation, a person may commit the sin of greed but not necessarily that of adultery in a physical sense. By that we mean that a person may desire to have another person’s spouse but fails to do so. Although the person failed but the individual is still guilty of greed since the person has entertained the desire to have what God said is off limits to the individual. Of course, our Lord taught in the Sermon on the Mount that such desire although not realized is still adultery.
There is another situation in which the desire to have more things would lead us to ignore the word of God. It is the situation in which the desire to have more possessions or power keeps a person from being generous to the truly needy. I am saying that you should consider yourself greedy if because of your desire to have more things you neglect to help the poor. It is God’s instruction that we should help the poor or should I say those who are poorer than we are since being poor in a sense is a relative concept. I mean that a poor person in one country may be considered rich by standards of living in some other countries. Therefore, it is better to say that a person is greedy if the individual’s desire to have more material possessions keeps the person from sharing what the individual has with those who are poorer. In any event, the point we are emphasizing is that if your desire to acquire more and more possessions makes it difficult for you to help those in need then you can be certain that you are greedy. God demonstrated this concept in a practical way by the detailed instruction He gave to Israel about harvesting their crop. He instructed them not to harvest everything in their farms or fields but to leave some of their crops to the poor, as demanded in Leviticus 23:22:
"'When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God.'"
A person who obeys this instruction would not be a greedy person. The farmer desires to have more crops harvested but in obeying this instruction, he would have just a little less than he would otherwise have if he harvested his entire field. Thus, we get the concept that it is not that we should not desire to have more things or more possessions, only that we should ensure that such desire does not lead us to ignore those who are needy and poor. Whenever we ignore those who are needy and poor purely because we desire to have more possessions then we are guilty of greed.
Still, there is another dimension to greed. It is having excess of things than one has need of. A person who has more things than he needs is indeed guilty of greed. In other words, when a person has more things in this life than he could possibly use then that person should examine his soul to determine the reason for that state. If it is because he wants simply to be selfish then that person is also guilty of greed. Take for example, a lady who has a closet full of clothes and shoes more than ever wears but continues to buy more is guilty of greed. By the way, if you find yourself exploiting others for your material advantage that also is another form of greed.
We have considered what greed means so the issue is how to identify a greedy person to whom the instruction we have in the passage applies. Since we do not know what a person thinks so we can determine if the person is desiring more material things than the individual has then we should rely on what we observe regarding the person’s action. If we know that a person is obsessed with material things to the point that that is all the person talk about and constantly ignores God’s word because the individual want to have more material things, then we could conclude that such a person is greedy. For example, if we notice that such a person is not interested in helping the less fortunate when the individual has the means to do so, then we could conclude that such a person is greedy.
The third sin that is a repeat of the list in verse 10 of 1 Corinthians 5 mentioned in verse 11 is idolatry as in the phrase an idolater. The word “idolater” as we noted in verse 10 is translated from a Greek word (eidōlolatrēs) that means “image-worshipper, idolater” as the word is used to describe unbelievers in Revelation 21:8:
But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”
We indicated in 1 Corinthians 5:10 that in our time where many people do not worship in pagan temples, it is better, for practical purpose, to consider unbelievers as idolaters. However, in verse 11, we are concerned with someone who claims to be a Christian by being joined to a congregation of believers so how can we identify such a person as an idolater? There are two ways we can do this. The first is by application of the criteria for identifying someone as greedy. A person identified as greedy is certainly an idolater since greed is defined as idolatry in the Scripture in Colossians 3:5:
Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry.
A second way to identify an idolater is to observe if an individual is habitually involved in practices that the Scripture identify as of pagan origin, once such practices have been presented to the individual. In other words, a believer may not know that a given practice is involvement in idolatry but once that person is made aware of it but refuses to abandon the practice then such a person should be classified as an idolater.
The fourth sin that is a repeat of the list in verse 10 of 1 Corinthians 5 mentioned in verse 11 is swindling of others as in the phrase or a swindler. The word “swindler” as we considered in verse 10 is from a Greek word (harpax) that as an adjective means “rapacious (aggressively greedy), ravenous” as it is used to compare false prophets to wolves in Matthew 7:15:
“Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.
The phrase ferocious wolves may alternatively be translated ravenous wolves. As a noun, it means “robber, swindler” as the word is used in the Parable of the Pharisee and Tax collector where the Pharisee touted his righteousness, as we read in Luke 18:11:
The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:11, the word means “rapacious,” that is, aggressively greedy. The word describes a person who robs others through cheating or deceptive means so that the person described with our word may simply be described as a “swindler.” There is no doubt that swindling others or cheating others is a sin because such an act is strictly forbidden in the word of God in Leviticus 19:13:
“‘Do not defraud your neighbor or rob him. “‘Do not hold back the wages of a hired man overnight.
Swindling others also includes extortion and bribery since both are sins that imply subtle pressure applied on others. The Scripture indicates extortion and bribery are wrong, as we read, for example, in Ezekiel 22:12:
In you men accept bribes to shed blood; you take usury and excessive interest and make unjust gain from your neighbors by extortion. And you have forgotten me, declares the Sovereign Lord.
Anyway, we are concerned with how we can know that one who claims to be a believer is a swindler. We can know this by personal experience, that is, if one who claims to be a believer has habitually cheated or defrauded us. Here we have to be careful, because it is possible that a believer may work for an investment company that eventually is found out to defraud people, but this does not mean that the believer associated with them knew of the scheme involved. However, if there is any indication that a believer knew about that but used his/her relationship to a believer to deceive the other believer to invest in the company then the one deceived would know by experience that the believer who deceived the individual is a swindler. Another way we can know if one who claims to be a believer is a swindler is if we receive credible information of such an act on the part of the believer. It is not enough to hear rumors about a person being involved in defrauding others, there must be verification of the allegation before it can be concluded that such a person is a swindler.
We have considered four of the sins given in 1 Corinthians 5:10 that were repeated in verse 11 but the apostle added two more sins to the list he gave in verse 10. The first addition to the previous list is being a slanderer as in the phrase of 1 Corinthians 5:11 or a slanderer. The word “slanderer” is translated from a Greek word (loidoros) that means “slanderer, verbal abuser,” that is, a person who attacks the reputation of another by slander or libel. Because of the action commanded of believers regarding who not to associate, it is important to understand who a slanderer is. I have considered this topic in previous studies but for the benefit of those who were not there when we studied it and to refresh the minds of those who heard its treatment, let me review what slander is. Let me begin with what it is not. It does not mean that we could not report something wrong done by an individual that we have observed to be true to the appropriate person in a position to do something about it. We base this on the fact that there is nothing in the Scripture that forbids one reporting about another person’s misconduct to one’s superior. Several times in the Bible, Apostle Paul refers to receiving a bad report concerning a given congregation. The apostle speaks of hearing reports of quarrels in the local church in Corinth, in 1 Corinthians 1:11:
My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you.
Someone also reported to the apostle concerning the sexual misconduct in the local church in Corinth that we have considered, according to 1 Corinthians 5:1:
It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father's wife.
Similarly, someone reported to the apostle concerning the laziness of some people among the Thessalonians, as we read in 2 Thessalonians 3:11:
We hear that some among you are idle. They are not busy; they are busybodies.
In each of these reports, there is no evidence the apostle rebuked those who gave him the report. If the persons who provided these reports to the apostle did something wrong or were guilty of slander, we would have expected the apostle to rebuke them or at least indicate that it is wrong to bring certain information to the notice of the spiritual leadership of a congregation, but he did not. Furthermore, a believer is required to be truthful in all his dealings, as stated in Ephesians 4:25:
Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor, for we are all members of one body.
If believers are required to tell the truth, it certainly would be a sin for a believer to see something that would harm another person and remain silent. The person who refuses to say something upon observing certain incidents or conduct that would harm someone would be sinning, according to the instruction in James 4:17:
Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins.
Nonetheless, we asserted that slander does not mean we could not report something that we have observed to be true to the appropriate person in a position to do something about it. Furthermore, slander although related to gossip is not the same thing. That the two are not the same may be deduced from the fact that Apostle Paul used both in the same verse where he denounced sins present in Corinthian church in 2 Corinthians 12:20:
For I am afraid that when I come I may not find you as I want you to be, and you may not find me as you want me to be. I fear that there may be quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, factions, slander, gossip, arrogance and disorder.
Thus, because the apostle listed the two together in vices he mentioned regarding the Corinthian church, we contend that slander is different from gossip. Slander is some form of communication that is usually untrue, designed to harm a person’s reputation and carried out usually in public although private communication is possible. On the other hand, gossip is providing information that is true or untrue, most often incomplete, because of lack of knowledge and it is usually done in private. The key factor in gossip is that a person is not usually certain of the information and so it is done in private or in secret. One thing that we can be sure of is that a person who gossips would usually betray someone’s confidence. In other words, a person who gossips easily passes to another some information that has been given to the individual in confidence hence the assertion in Proverbs 11:13:
A gossip betrays a confidence, but a trustworthy man keeps a secret.
We have in a sense defined slander as we distinguished it from gossip and so we need to elaborate on the definition we gave so that there can be no doubt in your mind what constitutes slander since it is a form of communication that requires passing on information to someone. Consequently, there are three factors that if present during the process or period of providing information to another about someone else would turn that information to slander. First, there must be some form of hostility or hatred on the part of the informant. Second, the information given must be untrue. Third, the intention of the informant will be to destroy the reputation of another. If any or all these three are involved in information that one supplies to another then we have the case of slander. You see, believers who love each other and are concerned for the spiritual welfare of their fellow believers could not meet these three elements or any of them that make information to become slander. Because if you love a fellow believer and the individual goes astray, you do not want to make a public display of the person’s failure, but you handle your knowledge of it in such a way as to help the person even if that information is passed on to the spiritual leadership of the congregation. I want to be clear that we understand that these three elements or any one of them must be present in the process of passing information to turn it to slander. So, let me illustrate from the Bible where these three elements are clearly involved in slander. Our illustration is taken from instruction on how to deal with a man who impugns his wife’s virginity at the point of marriage, as we read in Deuteronomy 22:13-19:
13 If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her 14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, "I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity," 15 then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. 16 The girl's father will say to the elders, "I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. 17 Now he has slandered her and said, 'I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.' But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity." Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, 18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him. 19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the girl's father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.
The verbal phrase and slanders her of verse 14 is literally and laid against her actions of words. However, this passage indicates that the man dislikes his wife, lies about her with the intention of destroying her reputation. Therefore, the passage describes an example of slander so that the translators of the NIV are correct in rendering the literal Hebrew with the word “slander.” By the way, we should note that there are consequences for slander. For the man who slandered his wife was not only to be fined but also, he could not possibly divorce his wife as long as he lives. Hence, to some husbands, this could be considered a lifetime jail sentence with hardship as the wife may now take advantage of this fact and mistreat him. There is more we want to say about slander but we are out of time so we will complete our review of the subject of slander in our next study.
08/23/19