Lessons #159 and 160
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ 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.”
We have been considering sins if present with one who claims to be a believer would cause us not to associate with the person. Consequently, 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. In our last study, we started to review what slander is. Slander, we noted, 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. Subsequently, 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 would be to destroy the reputation of another. If all these three are involved in information that one supplies or even any of them, then we have the case of slander. So, we illustrated these factors by considering a case of slander specified in Deuteronomy 22:13-19. We ended by stating there is more to slander that we will consider in our present study. It is with this we begin our study today.
It is important we recognize that there are consequences for slander. Therefore, before you pass information to the appropriate individual, you must be certain that it is true; for, if you lie because of your hatred for that individual you are indeed asking for trouble. You will be disciplined of the Lord as implied in Psalm 101:5:
Whoever slanders his neighbor in secret, him will I put to silence; whoever has haughty eyes and a proud heart, him will I not endure.
Hence it is advisable to pay heed to the instruction of Proverbs 30:10:
"Do not slander a servant to his master, or he will curse you, and you will pay for it.
Only a fool after recognizing that there would be consequences to slander would go ahead and slander someone. No wonder a slanderer is described as a fool in Proverbs 10:18:
He who conceals his hatred has lying lips, and whoever spreads slander is a fool.
Thus, it is spiritually beneficial not to become involved in slander.
Our consideration of what slander is enables us to be able to identify a slanderer. If a person who claims to be a Christian is constantly talking about others and saying things that are untruthful and exhibiting bitterness or hatred towards those maligned, then we should recognize the person as a slanderer. In any case, a first addition of sins to the list of sins the apostle gave in 1 Corinthians 5:10 in verse 11 is slander.
The second addition to the previous list of sins Apostle Paul gave in 1 Corinthians 5:10 in verse 11 is drunkenness as in the phrase a drunkard. The word “drunkard” is translated from a Greek word (methysos) that is used twice in the NT both in 1 Corinthians, here and in the tenth verse of the sixth chapter; it means a drunkard, that is, a person who habitually drinks alcohol to excess, especially to the state of intoxication. A person described as a drunkard may not be difficult to recognize since there are some physical evidences that may give such a person a way. The individual may be recognized because such an individual is constantly staggering, as described in Job 12:25:
They grope in darkness with no light; he makes them stagger like drunkards.
Of course, we have to be careful to recognize that a person could stagger because of health condition or because of the effect of legal prescription of drugs. Nonetheless, there may be other signs that give away a drunkard such as bloodshot eyes as we may gather from the description of a drunkard that are given in form of rhetorical questions in Proverbs 23:29:
Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has strife? Who has complaints? Who has needless bruises? Who has bloodshot eyes?
A drunkard may be unnecessarily argumentative and so verbally abusive to others. The point is that it may not be difficult to determine that a person is a drunkard although people could use perfume to camouflage the smell of alcohol on them. Anyway, drunkenness completes the list the apostle gave that contain criteria for not associating with anyone who claims to be a believer but exhibits the sins in the list he gave.
The seriousness of the instruction about not associating with a believer that is guilty of the sins listed in verse 11 is evident in the fact that the Holy Spirit through the apostle forbids the most basic function of life, that is, eating with such a person. Hence, the clause of 1 Corinthians 5:11With such a man do not even eat. The negation involved in this instruction is in the phrase not even which is translated from a Greek particle (mēde) that may mean “and not, not” as it is used in the statement of the Lord Jesus to those who rejected resurrection because they thought they came out with a smart illustration to disprove resurrection by raising a case of a woman who married seven brothers before her death. Hence, they wondered whose wife she would be at resurrection. The Lord told them they are mistaken because they do not know the Scripture, as recorded in Matthew 22:29:
Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.
The Greek particle may be translated “not even” as Apostle Paul used it to indicate there should not be a hint of sexual immorality among those who are believers as we read in a passage we cited previously, that is, Ephesians 5:3:
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:11, the particle is used in an emphatic manner to convey that believers should not have association of close type with the one guilty of the sins listed by the apostle. They are not to be involved with the person in such basic function of life as eating as in the instruction we are considering With such a man do not even eat. Literally Greek reads not even to eat with such a one.
The word “eat” is translated from a Greek word (synesthiō) that means “to eat with, eat together” implying association. Thus, the Pharisees and Teachers of the law complained about Jesus eating and welcoming sinners in Luke 15:2:
But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law muttered, “This man welcomes sinners and eats with them.”
It is the word some in the early church used to indicate that Peter associated with the Gentiles in such a way as to eat together with them in Acts 11:3:
and said, “You went into the house of uncircumcised men and ate with them.”
The word is used by Apostle Paul to indicate the association of Peter with Gentiles as evident in his eating together with them for some time before withdrawing from them due to fear of a group of Jews in Jerusalem, as we read in Galatians 2:12:
Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group.
Thus, the Greek word in our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:11 means “to eat meal with someone.” There is more to eating food with someone as we will note.
We indicated that eating is a basic human function but in the ancient world eating with someone or sharing a meal may signify reconciliation or agreement reached with someone, as was the case between Jacob and his father-in-law in Genesis 31:54:
He offered a sacrifice there in the hill country and invited his relatives to a meal. After they had eaten, they spent the night there.
Although eating is a physical phenomenon, but it is also used figuratively in the Scripture. Take for example, eating is used figuratively to describe faith in Christ for eternal life, as recorded in John 6:50:
But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die.
Eating is used figuratively to describe fellowship with Christ in Revelation 3:20:
Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.
For the Lord Jesus to eat with a person simply means to have fellowship with that individual. This should not surprise us if we remember that in the ancient world sharing a meal with someone was often an expression of mutual fellowship and trust. Thus, eating with someone may mean having fellowship with that person.
Be that as it may, the instruction given to believers regarding one who claims to be a believer but guilty of sins listed in 1 Corinthians 5:11 is simply not to eat food with such a person. The instruction involves something physical with figurative meaning. In effect, the instruction is that believers should not literally eat with such a person but also conveys that there should be no fellowship with such a person. In practice, this instruction means that in a local church such a person should not be allowed to participate in the Lord’s Supper, nor the love feasts mentioned in Jude 12:
These men are blemishes at your love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm—shepherds who feed only themselves. They are clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted—twice dead.
Anyway, the instruction not to eat with a person who claims to be a believer but reflects the sins the apostle listed is a serious one although most Christians do not practice it either because of ignorance of the instruction or because they simply do not want to obey God’s word, especially if it concerns a family member or because they are convinced that the instruction is limited to Christian meeting.
I recall many years ago when a young man who takes his spiritual life seriously applied this passage during a thanksgiving dinner. The mother had invited her daughter (an unbeliever) and her boyfriend who claimed to be a Christian. The woman’s son protested that he would not eat on the same table with the sister’s boyfriend because he claims to be a believer, but he is having sexual relationship with the sister. The mother that claims to be a believer was upset and, in a sense, charged the son of attempting to destroy the family. She went further to ask his son’s pastor about the validity of the son’s action. To my understanding, the pastor was evasive implying that the young man did not understand that the instruction is for the church to execute not an individual. The pastor’s declaration is not only misleading but a sign of not having courage to stand on God’s word. For who is the church? Does it not consist of believers? So, if the church applies the instruction that we are considering, does it not mean that individual believers would apply it? To do otherwise will be hypocritical or applying double standard. In other words, a believer denies eating together with such a person in public but does it privately. I realize that some commentators are not sure that it can be applied to private meals, but it seems hypocritical to limit the prohibition to public situation, especially as the apostle advocates of believers, not just pastors, of not having anything to do with a believer who is divisive after a second warning as stated in Titus 3:10:
Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.
The point is that it is important for believers who are serious in their spiritual life to obey this instruction no matter how painful and who is involved. By the way, we should recognize that the idea of not eating with someone guilty of the sins listed should be extended to every situation in which a believer is instructed not to associate with one who claims to be a believer but rejects the word of God. For example, believers should not eat with anyone who claims to be a believer but is constantly causing division in the local church as well as doing things that would cause other believers to fail in their spiritual life, such as belittling the truth a pastor has taught or questioning it in such a way that others may be led astray so that believers would not obey God’s word, as stated in Romans 16:17:
I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.
Of course, a person who argues against the word of God taught would not obey it hence such a person should also be avoided, as indicated in 2 Thessalonians 3:14:
If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed.
The instruction of not eating with someone should also be extended to anyone that claims to be a believer but is known to refuse to work when there is no health problem or there is available job, but the person refuses to work as stated in 2 Thessalonians 3:6:
In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers, to keep away from every brother who is idle and does not live according to the teaching you received from us.
A person may argue that we have extended the instruction regarding not eating food to situations where the apostle did not say such things. But two facts support our application to the examples we cited. First, the sins given in 1 Corinthians 5:11 are not exhaustive but simply are those that are easily perceived by others as the conducts mentioned in these other three passages we cited. Second, keeping away from someone implies avoidance of the person. Therefore, to eat with such a person would violate the concept of keeping away or not associating with someone. Hence, we are justified in the application of the instruction regarding not eating with someone to the kind of believer that we are to keep away from or deny association. In any event, the Holy Spirit has indicated that believers should not associate with anyone that claims to be a believer but lives consistently in the sins mentioned in the passage of 1 Corinthians 5: 11.
Be that as it may, the clarification of the apostle regarding his first letter as it relates to not associating with sexually immoral people requires further explanation. In effect, because the apostle has narrowed the applicability of his instruction regarding association with sexually immoral people, he needs to provide an explanation or a justification for the limitation of the applicability of the instruction of not associating with sexually immoral people to only those who claim to be believers but are immoral as he stated. That the apostle is concerned with justification of the limits he has put on the instruction regarding association with immoral persons is conveyed in a Greek conjunction he used that is not translated in the NIV and majority of our English versions but translated “for” in a handful of English versions such as the NET and the NASB. The word “for” used in 1 Corinthians 5:12 of such English translations as the NASB is translated from a Greek conjunction (gar) that is used in different ways in the Greek. The Greek conjunction may be used as a marker of cause or reason so that it may be translated “for” or “because” in the English. It may be used as a marker of clarification or explanation so that it may be translated in the English with the word “for” or “you see.” Under this second usage, the Greek word may be used as a narrative marker to express continuation or connection in which case the Greek word may be left untranslated in the English translation. There are more nuances of the Greek conjunction under this second usage. The Greek conjunction may be used to signal an important point or transition to another topic, leading to the translation “well, then, you see.” It can also be translated “yes, indeed, certainly, surely,” especially when the Greek conjunction is used in replies, confirming what has been asked. Still another usage of the Greek conjunction is as a marker of inference so that it may be translated “certainly, by all means, so, then.” In our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:12, it is implied the Greek conjunction is used to provide explanation or justification for the clarification of the apostle’s instruction regarding refusal of association with anyone who claims to be a Christian but lives in the way described in verse 11. We use the word “implied” because its translation in our passage may be affected by a Greek interrogative pronoun used in our passage that we will get to shortly.
The explanation or justification the apostle provided is simply that believers can only judge fellow believers not unbelievers, regarding conduct although the apostle used himself in the explanation. It is this justification that is given in the two questions of 1 Corinthians 5:12. The fact that believers are not to judge unbelievers is reflected in the first question What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Literally, the Greek reads For what to me to judge outsiders?
The word “what” is translated from a Greek interrogative pronoun (ti) that may mean “what?” The word may be used as an exclamatory expression of extent or degree with the meaning “how!” as it is used to describe the Lord’s expression of what He wished was true during His earthly ministry in Luke 12:49:
“I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!
This aside, when our Greek word is used with the Greek conjunction, we considered previously that has the meaning “for,” it may be translated differently depending on the context. For example, the combination of our Greek word with the Greek word that means “for” is used to introduce an absurd inference with the translation “what then?” as it is used in Apostle Paul’s question that implies that living under the guise of grace is misapplication of it in Romans 6:15:
What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!
The same combination fully means “what does it matter?” as it is used in Paul’s argument that what is important is the preaching of the gospel regardless of people’s motive in preaching it, as he stated in Philippians 1:18:
But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice. Yes, and I will continue to rejoice,
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:12, the combination may mean “is it any business of mine?” as reflected in the NIV. The problem with this translation is that it may make it difficult for an English reader to understand that the rhetorical questions that follow are intended to provide justification for the apostle’s instruction regarding how believers should treat those who claim to be believers but live a certain lifestyle.
All the same, the apostle provides a justification for the clarification of the limit of association of believers as not involving unbelievers who are guilty of the sins he listed. A justification, as we have stated, is that believers do not have the right to judge unbelievers. It is this justification that is given in the verbal phrase of 1 Corinthians 5:12 to judge those outside the church that literally reads to judge outsiders. This is because of the Greek words used. The expression “those outside the church” of the NIV is translated from a Greek preposition (exō) that may mean “out, away” as it is used in Jesus’ promise in John 6:37:
All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away.
The word may mean “outside,” as it pertains to a position beyond an enclosure or boundary as it is used to describe the location of Peter when Jesus was brought before the priests during His trial that resulted in His death on the cross, as recorded in John 18:16
but Peter had to wait outside at the door. The other disciple, who was known to the high priest, came back, spoke to the girl on duty there and brought Peter in.
The word may be used as a noun to refer to an outsider that is not included in a group, as the word is used to describe unbelievers that believers should gain their respect because they conduct themselves in ways that are fitting for those in Christ, as we read in 1 Thessalonians 4:12:
so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so that you will not be dependent on anybody.
It is in the sense of an “outsider” that the word is used in our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:12. It is to help the English reader to understand that an “outsider” in the context refers to unbelievers that is probably the reason the translators of the NIV introduced the word “church.”
The action the apostle indicates he or any believer has no business regarding unbelievers is that of judgment as in the verbal phrase to judge those outside the church. The word “judge” is translated from a Greek word (krinō) that may mean “to judge, pass judgment upon, express an opinion about” as it is used in the Lord’s instruction concerning looking down on others in a condemning way in Luke 6:37:
“Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.
The word may mean “to judge as guilty, condemn” as in Nicodemus’ question to Jewish leaders in John 7:51:
“Does our law condemn anyone without first hearing him to find out what he is doing?”
The word may mean “to punish” as in Stephen’s sermon as he referred to God’s promise to Abraham of punishing those who would enslave his descendants in Acts 7:7:
But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves,’ God said, ‘and afterward they will come out of that country and worship me in this place.’
The word may mean to make a judgment based on taking various factors into account, hence means “to judge, think, consider, look upon,” as in Apostle Paul’s statement to the Jews who rejected the gospel message, as stated in Acts 13:46:
Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: “We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles.
The word may mean “to criticize, find fault with, condemn” as in the instruction of proper attitude of a believer towards the matter of food in Romans 14:3:
The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him.
The word may mean “to prefer, select” as it is used to describe the preference of believers regarding day of worship in Romans 14:5:
One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.
The word may mean to come to a conclusion after a cognitive process and so means “to reach a decision, decide, propose, intend,” as it is used in Apostle Paul’s instruction to Titus because of his decision, as stated in Titus 3:12:
As soon as I send Artemas or Tychicus to you, do your best to come to me at Nicopolis, because I have decided to winter there.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 5:12, the sense of the word is “to judge,” that is, to hear and be the judge of a legal case. Thus, the apostle indicates that it is not the right of believers to decide on the moral failures of unbelievers with the implication of punishment. We have to be careful that we understand that punishment we mean has nothing to do with the court but that inflicted by the church of Christ on an individual. We mean that the thing denied believers here does not extend to the court system. For example, if a believer is a judge in the court system, that individual must operate according to the law. The person is not wrong in passing judgment on unbelievers and prescribing the proper punishment for the wrongdoing. That aside, what we are saying is that the Holy Spirit through the apostle teaches the church does not have the right to judge and prescribe punishment to unbelievers because of moral failure that does not involve the court system.
In contrast to judging unbelievers regarding the sins listed in 1 Corinthians 5:11 with the implication of punishment, believers are to judge their fellow believers with implication of punishment. It is this responsibility that is expressed in the second rhetorical question of 1 Corinthians 5:12 Are you not to judge those inside? This is a rhetorical question that here has the sense of stating that believers have the responsibility to judge fellow believers as they are the ones meant in the phrase of the NIV those inside. The rhetorical question indicates that the church of Christ is expected to judge believers with punishment to follow. We say this because the pronoun “you” as used in the Greek is in the plural indicating that the responsibility implied in the rhetorical question is directed to the body of Christ not an individual.
Our interpretation that the rhetorical question implies that the church has the responsibility of judging believers who live the lifestyle described in 1 Corinthians 5:11 may seem to conflict with instruction of our Lord given in the passage we cited previously where the pronoun “you” is also in the plural, that is, Luke 6:37:
“Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.
Because of the apparent conflict, it is necessary to understand what it is that the Lord Jesus taught in this passage of Luke 6.
What is Jesus forbidding in this command not to judge? This question is important because many, Christians and even unbelievers, have distorted this command. Therefore, it is important to understand what Jesus forbids. To begin with, it does not mean that you could not think critically, express opinion or make a conclusion about the rightness or wrongness of a given action. You see, there are many who do not want you to point to them that their action is wrong; so if you do, they quote this passage to you and say something like “does not the Bible say you should not judge.” Of course, they ignore that love involves helping to prevent what will eventually hurt a person. In effect, they mean that if you indicate that their action is wrong then you must be judging them. When in truth, you are trying to prevent the person from harming self by pointing to the individual’s wrongdoing that has the potential of bringing harm to the person. You are being kind to that person as implied in Psalm 141:5:
Let a righteous man strike me — it is a kindness; let him rebuke me — it is oil on my head. My head will not refuse it. Yet my prayer is ever against the deeds of evildoers;
So, pointing out a failure to someone, which is really some form of rebuke, is good. Certainly, that is not what Jesus means here for if that was the case, we would have a conflict in the teachings of the NT. For example, Lord Jesus instructed that believers should watch out for the false prophets in Matthew 7:15:
"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.
To obey this command requires that a person should have an informed opinion based on truth so that the individual could judge a prophet to be false. Furthermore, Apostle Paul himself under the control of God the Holy Spirit judged the action of the incestuous believer in Corinth to be wrong and passed judgment on the individual involved as stated in 1 Corinthians 5:1-3:
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. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn't you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? 3 Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present.
Since the apostle wrote under the control of the Holy Spirit, he could not have violated the teaching of the Lord Jesus stated in Luke 6:37. Still, not judging others does not mean that a person should not evaluate others either as a supervisor or even as a judge or jury in a legal situation. No! There is nothing wrong in evaluating others based on a set of criteria. For example, a local church is to accept or reject a person as a pastor based on certain criteria given in the third chapter of the first epistle of Apostle Paul to Timothy. In doing this, the congregation would be evaluating the individual to see how he satisfies the standard given in God’s word for being an overseer. Thus, there is nothing wrong in evaluating others but only that if you are in a position to do so then you must do it honestly and truthfully.
We have stated what it does not mean to judge others, so what is the judging that Jesus forbids? It is simply that we should not look down on others so as to express bad opinions of them based on a relative standard. It is focusing on the faults of others harshly as to attempt to tear them down that Jesus is prohibiting. This explanation makes sense if we remember the context of the instruction of Luke 6:37. The Lord Jesus encountered the Pharisees who passed judgment in the sense of looking down on others based on rituals and their relative standards and have shown their distaste for certain individuals that they looked down on them, as we read, for example, in Luke 5:30:
But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to their sect complained to his disciples, "Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and 'sinners'?"
Why is it that the Pharisees despise tax collectors? Is it not because of their occupation, which may or may not be wrong? Those they call sinners are those who did not comply with tradition that are not based on the Bible, so their attitude is harsh and baseless as far as the Scripture is concerned. It is this kind of attitude among the Pharisees that Jesus was forbidding. This being the case, the instruction of the Lord Jesus in Luke 6:37 does not conflict what the Holy Spirit indicated is the responsibility of the church, namely, judging with punishment, believers whose lifestyles can be matched to the sins listed in 1 Corinthians 5:11.
The Lord of the church has assigned it the responsibility of self-policing to ensure its purity. It is for this reason that the Holy Spirit through Apostle Paul indicates that the church has that responsibility of judging its members with possible punishment of excommunication. The sad thing today is that our local churches do not take this instruction seriously hence we have local churches that are impotent spiritually. I mean we have local churches that are not empowered by the Holy Spirit. It is important that if we are serious about the purity of the church of Christ that we heed to the instruction of the apostle that demands the church to judge its members in keeping with the Scripture. By the way, it is because the Lord of the church wants the church to do self-policing that the Apostle Paul later rebuked the church in Corinth for not mediating between believers so that they wound up taking each other to court, as we read in 1 Corinthians 6:1–6:
1If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? 2Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church! 5I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6But instead, one brother goes to law against another—and this in front of unbelievers!
In any case, the apostle continued to convey that the church should focus on its members to monitor the spiritual life and not those of unbelievers. It is to emphasize that the church does not have the right to judge unbelievers as that is God’s responsibility that the apostle began 1 Corinthians 5:13 with a Greek particle that was not translated in the NIV and many other English version but it is translated “but” in a handful of our English versions. The word “but” that begins verse 13 in a handful of our English versions is translated from a Greek particle (de) used to connect one clause to another, either to express contrast or simple continuation and so may be translated “and, but.” It may also be used for explanation or to resume a discourse that has been interrupted in which case it may be translated “that is, now.” In our verse, although not translated in the NIV, it is used as a marker of contrast given in an emphatic manner. In other words, the apostle emphasized the contrast between what is expected of the church and what God does.
The church is to recognize that it is God that has the responsibility of judging unbelievers, as stated in 1 Corinthians 5:13 God will judge those outside. The translation of the NIV and majority of our English versions indicate that God’s judgment of unbelievers is an act that will take place in the future. However, some English versions that are often literal in their translation, such as the NASB and the ESV, imply that judgment of unbelievers is an ongoing act of God since they translated our sentence as God judges the outsiders. This translation is a literal rendering of the Greek. Some English versions avoided translating the Greek either as an act of God that is taking place or that would take place but described God as the judge of unbelievers. For example, the Living Bible (LB) translated the Greek as God alone is the Judge of those on the outside. While this translation states what is true it is more of an interpretation than a translation and a way to include both translations of future and present act of God. The translation found in such English versions as the NIV or that found in the NASB or the ESV is more in keeping with the Greek where a present tense is used for the word “judge.” You probably will wonder why the English versions would translate the Greek using present and future tenses. The explanation is this. The Greek actually used the present tense as reflected in the English versions that are literal in their translation, but a Greek present tense is sometimes used for confident assertion about what is going to take place in the future. Thus, although the event has not yet occurred, it is viewed as so certain that it is thought of as already occurring. It is this understanding of the use of the present tense that is reflected in the NIV and most of our English versions.
Be that as it may, the literal translation as found in the NASB or the ESV although not wrong does not seem to convey what the apostle intended. It is unlikely the apostle was thinking of God’s continually judging of unbelievers described in the phrase of 1 Corinthians 5:13 those outside. Instead, he had in mind the final judgment that God would bring upon unbelievers. Strictly speaking, at the present, God judges completely believers than unbelievers. This truth was evident in the OT period. God judged Israel differently from other nations as their exiles to other nations convey. Israel was punished for idolatry not as the other nations around them. This is because God is concerned with the purity of those in covenant relationship with Him than unbelievers. It is because of this that He judged Israel while they were on their way to Canaan as the Lord stated through Prophet Ezekiel in Ezekiel 20:36:
As I judged your fathers in the desert of the land of Egypt, so I will judge you, declares the Sovereign Lord.
It is because the Lord judges the believers only on this planet since they would never face His judgment in eternity that we are told that when believers go astray, He disciplines them to ensure they are not judged with the world, as implied in 1 Corinthians 11:32:
When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world.
The truth or doctrine that we are espousing is that strictly, only believers are judged completely by the Lord on this planet since unbelievers would face final judgment that would send them into eternal suffering. Understanding this doctrine, should help us deal with the apparent situation where unbelievers seem to get away with their sinful conduct or the situation where they harm believers without an apparent punishment from the Lord. If we understand that there is a future judgment and punishment for unbelievers, then we will not fret because they seem to get away with sins on this planet. We should know they would be held accountable at God’s set time. It is this truth that is implied in the comfort given to martyrs who pleaded for the Lord to avenge their death, as stated in Revelation 6:10–11:
10They called out in a loud voice, “How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?” 11Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and brothers who were to be killed as they had been was completed.
Let me be clear. We are not teaching that God never judges an unbeliever on this planet but that such judgment must be considered incomplete. For God’s complete judgment of an unbeliever would be eternal suffering. Furthermore, we are not saying that God never punishes unbelievers for He does but their final judgment with punishment is still in the future as stated in 2 Peter 2:9:
if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.
However, God judges the believers on this planet with punishment because they would never face His punishment once they depart from this life. Anyway, it is because God’s judgment of the unbeliever is still in the future that the literal Greek of 1 Corinthians 5:13 God judges the outsiders is better translated as in the NIV God will judge those outside.
By the way, when the apostle wrote God will judge those outside he indirectly recognized the deity of Jesus Christ. He did not specify the member of the Godhead that is the judge. However, the Lord Jesus had indicated that all future judgment is His as recorded in John 5:22:
Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son,
Apostle Paul was aware of this teaching since the Holy Spirit directed him to state that Jesus Christ is the agent of God’s judgment, as we read in Romans 2:16:
This will take place on the day when God will judge men’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.
The same truth is conveyed by the apostle in 2 Timothy 4:1:
In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge:
The judge of the living and the dead is Christ Jesus that the apostle indicates He is God since the phrase In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus may be better translated In the presence of God, namely, Christ Jesus. The point is that Apostle Paul recognized that deity of Christ in the sentence we are considering God will judge those outside.
In any case, the apostle having established that judging of unbelievers is the responsibility of God, then gives his final instruction to the Corinthians which is to remove from the Christian community the incestuous believer as in the last command of 1 Corinthians 5:13 “Expel the wicked man from among you.” This is a quotation from Deuteronomy 17:7:
The hands of the witnesses must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. You must purge the evil from among you.
The sentence You must purge the evil from among you is what the apostle quoted from the Septuagint. The word “expel” and the word “purge” are from the same Greek word used in 1 Corinthians 5:13 and the Septuagint of Deuteronomy 17:17. This instruction is for the death penalty for idolatry. The apostle quoted it to indicate that believers should exclude the incestuous believer from their midst since he is the one the apostle probably had in mind in the instruction he gave here with an eye towards general application of the command. Anyway, it is based on this command that we know that the local churches of Christ should maintain their moral purity by excommunicating immoral believers that fit the descriptions given in 1 Corinthians 5:11.
As we end our study, let me remind you of the central message of the fifth chapter of 1 Corinthians 5 which is: A local congregation of believers in Christ must not tolerate sexual immorality among its members and so must discipline anyone involved in it. To avoid tolerating sexual immorality, a local church must deal with specific case of it by assuming at least three responsibilities. A first responsibility is being careful to recognize every unauthorized sexual relationship in its midst. A second responsibility is to maintain proper attitude towards anyone involved in unauthorized sexual relation. A third responsibility is the removal from the congregation of a person guilty of such sin by following the proper procedure of doing this given in the passage we have studied. Here is a question we all must answer: Will we be ready to do what we have studied in this passage if we are ever faced with the situation stated in 1 Corinthians 5:11?
08/30/19