Lessons #169 and 170
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ 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. +
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Settlement of disputes among believers (1 Cor 6:1-11)
... 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! 7The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers. 9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
The primary message of 1 Corinthians 6:1-11 that we have been considering is that Disputes between believers in a local church should be settled by the church through carefully selected members. So far, we have considered the fundamental principle of handling disputes between believers in a local church, which is, that they should not be adjudicated by unbelievers but by believers. We also considered the two reasons for this fundamental principle the apostle gave in verses 2 and 3. This was followed in our last study by the consideration of the apostle’s instruction regarding the implementation of the message of the passage as given in verses 4 and 5. We considered these two verses as being concerned with qualifications of those the local church in Corinth should appoint to help settle disputes between believers to avoid going to court before unbelievers. There are two qualifications we considered for appointment of judges in the local church that would settle disputes between believers. The first is that the one appointed, must be a male believer regardless of his social standing as judged by the world. The second is that such a person must be considered wise. Between the consideration of these two qualifications, we considered the sentence of verse 5 I say this to shame you that we interpreted the pronoun this refers to believers taking their disputes to the court to be settled by unbelievers. We supported this interpretation by saying that it is because the apostle continued to rebuke the Corinthians in verse 6 to 8. Therefore, our study today focuses on the primary failure of believers in Corinth regarding how they settle disputes among them.
It is true that the apostle did not explicitly state that verses 4 and 5 involved the solution to the problem he was concerned regarding disputes among believers, but we had argued that the two verses were concerned with solution to the problem. The apostle expected believers in Corinth to have known that they ought to settle disputes among them by appointing fellow believers to handle disputes. This expectation would have been due to the fact that those who were acquainted with the OT knew that Moses appointed Israelites to judge cases between their fellow Israelites. Furthermore, the Corinthians would have known how the early church handled disputes that arose because of failure of some to portion food fairly among them. These two facts imply, as we have indicated previously, that what the apostle wrote in verses 4 and 5 was intended to be taken as remedy for their problem. The point is that the apostle expected the Corinthians to have applied the facts we mentioned to the situation they faced about disputes among them.
Apostle Paul was surprised that the Corinthians did not correctly apply the information they should have possessed as how believers in the past have handled disputes among them instead of failing the way they did. It is this surprise that he introduced with the phrase in the NIV of 1 Corinthians 6:6 But instead although most English versions used the word “but” or “instead” as that is a common meaning of the Greek particle (alla) the apostle used when a contrast is intended. The Greek particle may be translated “and” as a marker of a series of coordinate relations which are contrastive with a previously identified event or state. This is the meaning reflected by the translators of the NJB, implying that what follows explains the failure the apostle stated in verse 6. Anyway, the particle is used in with the meaning “instead” or “but rather” to convey that the failure of the Corinthians in the matter of dealing with disputes among them is contrary to what the apostle expected to take place.
There is a problem of how to translate the failure of the Corinthians that the apostle stated in verse 6. The problem is whether it should be translated as a statement or a question as reflected in our English versions. The NIV and a handful of our English versions translated it as statement while majority translated it as a question. Truly, it really does not make much difference because a question here is rhetorical so that in effect, it could be translated as a statement.
The problem of how to translate verse 6 notwithstanding, a more difficult problem is how to relate the failure the apostle stated in verse 6 to the last question of verse 5 Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? There are two approaches to the problem depending on how an implied answer to the question is given. On the one hand, if the answer is taken to be positive with implied answer of “yes there is no one then,” the apostle in verse 6 would be explaining that the result of such answer is that the Corinthians were taking their fellow believers to court. On the other hand, if the implied answer is “no there is,” then the apostle in verse 6 would have expressed surprise that not only the Corinthians failed to appoint judges among them, but they went ahead to use the court of unbelievers to settle the disputes among them. Both answers make sense in the passage, but it is the answer that is given in the negative that the apostle probably had in mind. In other wise, the apostle believed that there were wise believers among the Corinthians since there must have been believers with the gift of discernment among them. The apostle had indicated that the Corinthians did not lack any spiritual gifts necessary for the church to function, as implied in 1 Corinthians 1:7:
Therefore you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed.
Thus, it is inconceivable that the apostle would have believed that there was no wise person among the Corinthians. It is because he believed there were those who are wise that he was surprised in their failure that he stated in 1 Corinthians 6:6 that we are considering.
The failure of the Corinthians that the apostle underscored is given in 1 Corinthians 6:6 one brother goes to law against another—and this in front of unbelievers! The failure the apostle charged the Corinthians of being guilty is that a believer takes a fellow believer to court. We use the word “fellow believer” because of the word “brother” that is used twice in the Greek since the sentence one brother goes to law against another is literally a brother goes to court with a brother. The word “another” of the NIV may be misinterpreted to mean another person, believer or unbeliever but that is not the intended meaning of the Greek word used. The word “brother” is translated from a Greek word (adelphos) that may mean “brother” in the sense of a male from the same womb as the referenced person. However, in the first usage of the Greek word it means “a believer” and in the second usage it means “a fellow believer/Christian.” That the intended meaning of our Greek word is “believer” is supported by the word “unbelievers” used in the verse that we will get to shortly.
The failure of the Corinthians that the apostle states is that a believer brings another believer to court so that the offender would be held responsible for the individual’s action. We say this because the verbal phrase goes to law is translated from a Greek word (krinō) that may mean “to judge, pass judgment upon, express an opinion about.” The word may mean “to punish” or even “to criticize, find fault with, condemn” as it is used in the instruction of a proper attitude a believer should have 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.
These other meanings notwithstanding, the meaning in 1 Corinthians 6:6 is “to be judged” in the sense of to be brought to account for one’s actions in a courthouse setting and before a judge and be sentenced accordingly.
The apostle identified a failure that was taking place in Corinth among believers. It does not seem that the failure was something that happened once and stopped but that such failure was going on since the apostle used a present tense in the Greek. The situation is probably that the Corinthian believers who, as unbelievers, were used to going to court to settle their disputes have not come to the awareness that because they are now believers they should act differently. In effect, they were in the position where many of us Christians are today. I mean that often we fail to recognize that as believers we should take another look at whatever practice that is common in our society to ensure that we are proving to be different from unbelievers. Thus, the Corinthians who were accustomed to going to the court as unbelievers continued that practice even as believers, but the apostle implies that that should not be the case.
Believers in Corinth on hearing the charge of the apostle regarding their taking their fellow believers to court would wonder if the apostle was being realistic regarding his charge of how they failed. Therefore, to ensure that there is no misunderstanding of what the apostle meant, he explained himself. It is not that believers who have disputes should not have them adjudicated but his concern was that unbelievers should not be the ones to handle disputes between believers. It is this explanation that is given in the last phrase of 1 Corinthians 6:6 and this in front of unbelievers. The pronoun this refers to the process of holding an offender accountable for the person’s action by those who are authorized to do so. The apostle did not want that to take place before unbelievers, that is, those who do not believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. It is true that the verbal phrase and this in front of unbelievers involves an explanation of what the apostle was concerned when he charged the Corinthians of taking each other to court but there is also an element of surprise that believers should do this sort of thing. You see, the word “unbelievers” is translated from a Greek word (apistos) that may mean “unbelievable, incredible” as the word is used in Apostle Paul’s question to King Agrippa regarding his teaching about resurrection of Jesus Christ in Acts 26:8:
Why should any of you consider it incredible that God raises the dead?
The word may mean “without faith, disbelieving, unbelieving” and so it is with the meaning “unbelieving” that the word is used in Jesus’ rebuke of people of His generation in Luke 9:41:
“O unbelieving and perverse generation,” Jesus replied, “how long shall I stay with you and put up with you? Bring your son here.”
The word may mean “unbeliever,” that is, a person who does not believe in Jesus Christ presented in the gospel message, as it is used to compare the state of a believer who fails to take care of his/her immediate family to one who does not believe in Christ in 1 Timothy 5:8:
If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 6:6, it is used in the sense of “unbeliever,” that is, a person characterized by lack of trust in Jesus as Messiah and disobedience to His revealed way of life. Thus, it is lack of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ that causes a person to be identified as an “unbeliever.” Although the apostle did not state his reason for indicating that believers should not take their dispute to the courts in the verse we are considering, he did not need to repeat himself since he has already given reasons for believers not to take their dispute to unbelieving judges. Recall, the apostle provided two reasons. Believers will judge unbelievers and believers will judge angels. But there is another reason that believers should not take their disputes of the type that the apostle had already identified to unbelieving judges; it is that unbelievers cannot be trusted to be just. Furthermore, believers have nothing in common with unbelievers as the apostle stated in another of his epistle to the Corinthians, that is, 2 Corinthians 6:15:
What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?
If believers have nothing in common with unbelievers, it would be shameful for believers to solicit the help of such individuals since that would impact negatively on their witnessing to unbelievers as we will comment later.
The apostle not only explained himself about believers taking each other to courts presided by unbelieving judges but he also explained in an emphatic manner the result of such actions in the first sentence of 1 Corinthians 6:7 The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. The phrase the very fact of the NIV is how its translators rendered a part of a Greek phrase that consists of a Greek particle and a conjunction that are the second and third words in the Greek of this verse although it is possible that this phrase in the NIV may have included the conjunction used. The Greek particle (men) that is translated the very fact in the NIV may often not be translated but when it is translated it has several usages. It can be used as a marker of linkage in a discourse and so may be translated “and, so.” It may also be used as a marker of emphasis with the meaning “indeed.” The Greek conjunction (oun) used in our verse may be used as a marker of a continuation of a narrative and so may be translated “so, now, then.” It may be used as a marker of emphasis with the meaning “certainly, really, indeed.” It may also be used as a marker of inference, denoting that what it introduces is the result of or an inference from what precedes with the meaning “so, therefore, then, consequently, accordingly.” When the Greek particle and conjunction are used together, as in our passage, at the beginning of a Greek sentence in the apostle’s writings, it seems that they are used to indicate a continuation in a narrative where there is the implication that what is stated results from what preceded and so may be simply be translated “so, therefore.” We illustrated this usage in our last study but for completeness, let me repeat the example in Philippians 2:23:
I hope, therefore, to send him as soon as I see how things go with me.
The apostle’s hope of sending Timothy to the Philippians is because of what he had previously stated about his faithfulness in Philippians 2:22:
But you know that Timothy has proved himself, because as a son with his father he has served with me in the work of the gospel.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 6:7 the combination of the Greek particle and conjunction is intended to state in an emphatic manner the result of believers taking their fellow believers to court where unbelievers are the judges.
The emphatic result of believers taking their fellow believers to court is that they are failures or losers as given in 1 Corinthians 6:7 The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. The use of the phrase the very fact is not the only way the apostle emphasized what he wrote but also the word already. Although the translators of the NIV placed the word “already” as the last word in the first sentence of the verse but it is the first word in the Greek of our verse. The word “already” is translated from a Greek adverb (ēdē) that may mean “now, already, by this time,” that is, a point of time prior to another point of time, with implication of completion and so it is with the meaning “by this time” that the word is used in Martha’s explanation regarding her brother’s body in the grave in John 11:39:
“Take away the stone,” he said. “But, Lord,” said Martha, the sister of the dead man, “by this time there is a bad odor, for he has been there four days.”
It is with the meaning already that it is used to convey the existence of antichrists in 1 John 4:3:
but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.
In some context, the word may mean “now at last, now at length” as Apostle Paul used it in connection with his prayer stated in Romans 1:10:
in my prayers at all times; and I pray that now at last by God’s will the way may be opened for me to come to you.
In our passage of 1 Corinthian 6:7 it means “already” but with the sense of intensification of what is communicated. Thus, its usage is another indicator that the apostle was emphatic in what he wrote in the verse we are considering.
That those who take their fellow believers to court before unbelievers are failures or losers, again, is conveyed in the clause of verse 7 that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Literally, the Greek reads already it is a complete loss to you that you have lawsuits with each other. The word “means” of the NIV is a good interpretation of the Greek verb used. This is because in the Greek we have a Greek verb (eimi) that basically means “to be” with several nuances. It may mean “to live”, that is, to be alive in a period of time, as it is used by the Lord Jesus to put words in the mouth of the Jews of His time regarding their attitude towards the prophets of the past in Matthew 23:30:
And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our forefathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’
The clause If we had lived in the days of our forefathers is more literally If we had been in the days of our forefathers. The word may mean “to be, to come from somewhere” as it is used in questioning if anything good could originate from Nazareth in John 1:46:
“Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” Nathanael asked. “Come and see,” said Philip.
The question Nazareth! Can anything good come from there? is literally Out of Nazareth is any good thing able to be? The Greek word may mean to exist in the sense of “to be present, available, provided” as it is used in Acts 7:12:
When Jacob heard that there was grain in Egypt, he sent our fathers on their first visit.
The clause there was grain in Egypt may be fully translated as that grain was available. The meaning “provided” probably fits the use of our Greek verb in John 7:39:
By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.
The sentence the Spirit had not been given is more literally the Spirit was not yet since the word “given” is probably not in the original although some few Greek manuscripts have it but it is supplied in many of our English versions to avoid creating the impression that the Spirit did not exist prior to the point in view in the passage. The problem of it appearing that the Spirit was not in existence at the time involved may be avoided if the Greek word is translated “provided” so that the sentence will read the Spirit not provided yet in the sense of living in the believer as today. The word may mean “means” as it is used in the explanation of the titles given to Melchizedek in Hebrews 7:2:
and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, his name means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.”
In 1 Corinthians 6:7, the sense of the word is “to be” although the meaning “means” is possible depending on how the rest of the literal Greek is translated.
Be that as it may, we contend that the apostle implies those believers in Corinth that take their fellow believers to court before unbelieving judges are failures/losers as that is implied in the clause in the NIV of 1 Corinth 6:7 means you have been completely defeated already or literally it is a complete loss to you. There is no verb “to defeat” in the Greek but the translators of the NIV changed a Greek noun used into a verb. The Greek noun (hēttēma) used may mean “loss, failure, defeat” as it is used in Romans 11:12:
But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!
It is used in the sense of “failure, loss, defeat” that it is used in our passage of 1 Corinthians 6:7. Thus, those believers in Corinth who take their fellow believers to court are failures, that is, they have actually failed. By the way the word “completely” is translate from a Greek adverb (holōs) that is used as a marker of highest degree on a scale of extent hence means “completely, wholly, everywhere, at all,” as it is used in the prohibition of swearing by the Lord Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount where it is translated “at all” in Matthew 5:34:
But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne;
The word may pertain to being really so, with the implication of being generally known and so means “actually, in fact.” It is in the sense of “actually, in fact” that it is used in 1 Corinthians 6:7 although the meaning “completely” is also possible.
The apostle did not specify what he meant that these individuals who take their fellow believers to court are actually failures, but he implies that they have indeed sinned by such an act. This is supported by the questions that the apostle posed to such individuals that we will consider shortly but we could speculate that the failures of these individuals could first be due to their being quick to take a matter to court contra the instruction given in Proverbs 25:8:
do not bring hastily to court, for what will you do in the end if your neighbor puts you to shame?
This passage of Proverbs contains useful information regarding suing someone. The instruction indicates that a person should not be too quick to go to court. For one thing, a person could lose and be put to shame. The loss an individual could suffer may be because the litigant being hasty did not properly check out all the facts to ensure that what the individual perceived to be a wrong done to the individual is really true. If a person did not check out facts carefully, it is possible that the defendant may produce a witness that will testify contrary to the litigant’s case. It is this fact that is probably meant in the question for what will you do in the end if your neighbor puts you to shame? Anyway, a failure attributed to the believer who takes a fellow believer to court before unbelievers may not only be due to being hasty but it could also be that the individual did not carefully examine the person’s motives to be sure that they are right since the Holy Spirit through James informs us that quarrels are often related to wrong motives in James 4:1–3:
1 What causes fights and quarrels among you? Don’t they come from your desires that battle within you? 2 You want something but don’t get it. You kill and covet, but you cannot have what you want. You quarrel and fight. You do not have, because you do not ask God. 3 When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.
This passage in James suggests the importance of being careful with one’s motives before picking a fight with another or accusing someone of wrongdoing.
Apostle Paul indicates that those who take their fellow believers to courts were already losers or failures even before the outcome of the litigation is known. This is because of the impact of going to court of unbelievers on the church and on the individual believer that takes a fellow believer to court. We, believers, often do not recognize that unbelievers are watching us to see how true we are to our faith. How can we witness to unbelievers when we take our disputes to them? Do we expect them to have regard for us when we tell them that they can receive forgiveness of their sins through faith in Christ? Truly, we should be careful that we do not do anything that would undermine our testimony before the world of unbelievers. Our attitude in seeking help from unbelieves should parallel that of Ezra who was ashamed to ask for military escort from King Artaxerxes because of what he had told him about his God, as stated in Ezra 8:22:
I was ashamed to ask the king for soldiers and horsemen to protect us from enemies on the road, because we had told the king, “The gracious hand of our God is on everyone who looks to him, but his great anger is against all who forsake him.”
Thus, when a believer takes another believer to court that indicates a failure on the part of the local church for not being able to handle the matter within the church family. This is the first sense in which Corinthians taking the dispute to the court of unbelievers have failed or become losers even before their cases are decided by the court. There is a second aspect to this failure or being a loser with the individual believer involved. It is that such a person is a failure in not living as a believer in Christ in that the individual did not carefully consider the Lord’s teaching or did not understand the teaching of our Lord in His Sermon on the Mount regarding how to deal with those who wrong us. This fact is revealed in the two rhetorical questions of Apostle Paul.
The first question is in 1 Corinthian 6:7 is Why not rather be wronged? The word “wronged” is translated from a Greek word (adikeō) that may mean “to do wrong,” that is, to act in an unjust manner as it is used in Colossians 3:25:
Anyone who does wrong will be repaid for his wrong, and there is no favoritism.
The word may mean “to injure,” that is, to cause damage to or mistreat someone as the word is used in 2 Peter 2:13:
They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done. Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, reveling in their pleasures while they feast with you.
The sentence They will be paid back with harm for the harm they have done is literally being harmed as the wages of unrighteousness. It is in the sense of “to injure” or “to harm” that the word is used in the promise of the Lord to believers in the church in Smyrna, as recorded in Revelation 2:11:
He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt at all by the second death.
The verbal phrase will not be hurt at all is literally will not be injured. Our Greek word in our passage of 1 Corinthians 6:7 has the sense of “to be wronged,” that is, to be treated unjustly. Hence, the first rhetorical question implies that the believer should accept being treated unjustly than take another believer to court before unbelievers.
The second rhetorical question is given in the last part of 1 Corinthians 6:7 Why not rather be cheated? The word “cheated” is translated from a Greek word (apostereō) that may mean to cause another to suffer loss by taking away something through illicit means hence means “to rob, steal, despoil, defraud” as it is used to charge the wealthy of not paying workers their rightful wages in James 5:4:
Look! The wages you failed to pay the workmen who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty.
The sentence The wages you failed to pay is literally the wages that were held back by you. The word may mean to prevent someone from having the benefit of something, that is, “to deprive” as it is used to encourage husbands and wives not to deprive each other of marital right as stipulated in 1 Corinthians 7:5:
Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 6:7, it is used in the sense of “to be cheated out,” that is, to be deprived of something by deceit. Thus, the question of the apostle implies that a believer should accept being cheated or deprived of something by deceit by a fellow believer than to take such a person to court.
In any case, the two rhetorical questions of the apostle addressed to the Corinthians imply that the Holy Spirit through Apostle Paul is saying to us as believers that instead of taking fellow believers to court before unbelievers that we should accept being treated unjustly and being deprived of something by deceit or cheated. In other words, we should be willing to give up our rights before taking a fellow believer to court. This instruction requires further comments as it implies a difficult demand on believers.
First, this is an instruction that requires that a person be controlled by the Holy Spirit or that a person should be spiritual in order to carry out. This teaching falls into what the apostle described as part of spiritual truths in 1 Corinthians 2:13:
This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words.
Furthermore, it is a kind of teaching that are to be understood by those who are spiritual as we may deduce from what the apostle stated in 1 Corinthians 2:14:
The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.
Of course, that the Corinthians failed regarding taking fellow believers to court before unbelievers bolsters the apostle’s charge of them being worldly instead of spiritual, as we may gather from the apostle’s assertion in 1 Corinthians 3:1:
Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual but as worldly—mere infants in Christ.
Believers who are spiritual would recognize that whatever wrong a fellow believer has done to the person should, if it is indeed a sin, be interpreted to mean that such a believer has sinned so the believer who is spiritual would be in a position to help a fellow believer who has wronged the individual and so would be involved in restoration ministry the Holy Spirit advocates to be carried out by those who are spiritual, according to Galatians 6:1:
Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted.
The point is that it requires that a believer be spiritual to be able to endure unjust treatment by another believer or even from an unbeliever. You see, to accept being wronged or cheated, that is, to give up one’s right requires humility that is a result of the filling of the Holy Spirit since no natural human being could willingly forfeit the person’s right in order to accept being cheated. The only person that ever did this is the Son of God who willingly accepted to be wronged when He humbled Himself to take on human nature as the Holy Spirit states through Apostle Paul in Philippians 2:5–7:
5 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
The only way we can have the attitude of the Lord Jesus that will enable us to accept being wronged without insisting on our rights is to be controlled by the Holy Spirit. It is for this reason we assert that only a spiritual believer could carry out the instruction of the passage we are considering.
Second, the instruction to accept unjust treatment instead of taking someone to court is to be understood within the context of the instruction. As we have been considering, the context concerns believers and not unbelievers. This implies the Holy Spirit is not saying that a believer who is wronged should never seek redress of the wrong done to the individual. Such understanding would conflict the instruction of the Holy Spirit through Moses to Israel that required bringing wrongs done to an individual to judges in Israel. Instead, the concern is that believers should not take their problems to judges outside the church. Furthermore, the context implies that the kind of wrong the Holy Spirit is concerned is nothing criminal that requires the government.
Third, the instruction to accept being treated unjustly and being deprived of something by deceit or cheated instead of taking a believer to court, in principle is concerned with application of the requirement of avoiding retaliation. The principle of avoiding retaliation is one that is given clearly in both the OT and NT. Consider, for example, the instruction given in Proverbs 20:22:
Do not say, “I’ll pay you back for this wrong!” Wait for the LORD, and he will deliver you.
A believer is cautioned against getting even with someone that has wronged the individual. If a believer does not get even with a wrongdoer, that could lead to accepting the wrong without further action on the person’s part. So, if the wrongdoer is a fellow believer and the victim accepts being wronged then the person would not take the wrongdoer to court. Of course, as we indicated, to implement this requires that a person be spiritual. It is only a spiritual believer that would fulfill the second part of this verse, which is Wait for the LORD, that is, to trust in the Lord to take care of the wrong done by the wrongdoer. Anyway, when we come to the NT, we find the Lord Jesus give the same instruction as given in Proverbs that we cited although that is not quite easy to see but that was what Jesus taught during His sermon on Mount, as recorded in in Matthew 5:39–41:
39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.
The instruction Do not resist an evil person means not to retaliate against an evil person for a personal wrong. Turning the other cheek means that once a person wrongs the believer, he should be so composed that he is unwilling to retaliate. It is not a command to literally turn the other cheek as demonstrated by the Lord who protested being struck during His trial and did not turn the other cheek, as we may gather from John 18:22–23:
22 When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby struck him in the face. “Is this the way you answer the high priest?” he demanded. 23 “If I said something wrong,” Jesus replied, “testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?”
That aside, it is not only the turning of cheek that conveys the principle of avoiding retaliation in the teaching of the Lord Jesus during His sermon on the Mount but also the instruction of giving one’s inner clothes to someone who wants to sue the individual for his outer coat. The fact our Lord says that if a person is threatening a lawsuit that the believer should allow the person to have both the inner and outer garment is simply a way of saying that a believer must be so self-controlled that he must do everything in his power to avoid personal conflict or retaliation against wrong done to him. The point is that Jesus’ teaching on His sermon on the Mount is concerned with avoiding retaliation. The Holy Spirit through Apostle Paul makes the same point to believers in Rome, as we may gather from Romans 12:17–19:
17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord.
The same truth is conveyed by the Holy Spirit through Apostle Peter in 1 Peter 3:9:
Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing.
If a believer does not repay evil with evil, the implication is that such a believer is willing to be cheated or deprived of something that belongs to the person through deception. Likewise, if a believer does not return insult with insult the implication is that a person is willing to accept being wronged. Hence, we contend that the instruction for believers to accept being wronged and being cheated instead of taking a believer to court is implied in the principle of avoiding retaliation.
Be that as it may, the apostle’s surprise was not only that some believers were taking fellow believers to court before unbelieving judges but the fact that there are believers whose conduct would lead such an act. It is because the apostle was surprised at some of the conduct of some in Corinth that he stated something that was contrary to what should be expected of those who are believers in 1 Corinthians 6:8 Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers. The Greek used the present tense for the words, “cheat” and “do wrong” to describe what was taking place among the Corinthians. You see, it is not in keeping with the spiritual life to be involved in sinful conduct of cheating and wronging other people. The Scripture is clear that it is sinful to cheat or defraud others since that is a violation of the command in Leviticus 19:13:
“‘Do not defraud your neighbor or rob him. “‘Do not hold back the wages of a hired man overnight.
The sin of cheating anyone or wronging anyway is awful but to the apostle it is even worse when the victim is a fellow believer. That is what the apostle meant to convey in the last clause of verse 8 of 1 Corinthians 6 and you do this to your brothers. The Greek is emphatic as evident in the apostle being elliptical in what he wrote since he did not use any verb for the Greek simply reads and this with reference to brothers. Of course, “brothers” here refers to fellow believers. So, the apostle was appalled that believers should behave in way that is unfitting of those in Christ towards their fellow Christians. What the apostle stated here is still occurring today. There are those who are involved in scheming others that claim to be Christians and their victims are their fellow Christians in the same local church. This is appalling. Those who take advantage of their fellow believers to cheat them of their money or who take advantage of their fellow believers in a bad way should know that the Lord would punish them as the Holy Spirit states through Apostle Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4:6:
and that in this matter no one should wrong his brother or take advantage of him. The Lord will punish men for all such sins, as we have already told you and warned you.
Anyway, the passage we have considered implies that we should be ready to forgo our rights so as not to take a fellow believer or anyone for that matter to court in matters that are not criminal. We admit that this is requirement that necessitates being spiritual but that is what the Lord requires of us.
10/04/19