In Chapter 5 we move from pride of surface appearance over internal substance to pride over major sin in the body. It's issue two on Paul's mind as he writes to the Corinthians. It's a tough subject—sin in the church. This chapter can easily be misconstrued in several ways and I want to try to help us understand 1) who we are in Christ 2) how are we to act in Christ 3) how are we to treat sin and 4) how are we to treat sinners. It would be easy to move to extremes in two directions here, so I'll try to walk a tight rope, or is it walking the plank?
Possible questions you may have in reading this chapter:
• Aren't we supposed to hate the sin and love the sinner?
• Should we go around identifying sin in each other and cast out those who do wrong?
• Was the man in chapter 5 actually handed over to Lucifer to be punished?
• Does Paul's exhortation in verses 9 – 13 contradict verses 1 – 8?
The way I'd like to look at it is the difference between going to doctor as a sick patient to get well and going to the hospital as a carrier to spread disease.
1
"It is widely reported" – there really is no hiding sin, certainly not from God and sin doesn't stay secret for long even among humans. So pretending there isn't a problem will only cause people on the outside to wonder why we are so daft or, worse yet, they might conclude that the sin must be okay if we aren't doing anything about it.
The second thing Paul points out is the character of the sin. The man was apparently sleeping with his step mother. This was not only against Jewish law (Lev 18:8 ) but the Romans also had laws against it. As awful and sexually perverse as the Corinthian culture was, not even they would condone this. It's really the elephant in the room. I'm sure when this letter was read many faces turned red, and especially the man who was doing it and his followers. Why? Because of pride.
2
There are least three reasons why pride would keep the Corinthians from dealing with the situation. 1. They may have been too proud of how "mature" they were to admit that there was a problem 2. They were proud of the man's accomplishments or place in the body and didn't want to call attention to a fault (because that would mean admitting their "guy" wasn't so perfect after all and thus they weren't as perfect as they would like to think). 3. The Corinthians may have been puffed up due to their tolerance. This is a big problem today. We either become overly judgmental or overly tolerant—Paul will explain how to maneuver the difference a little later.
Their response should have been grief. God is grieved at rebellion (Isaiah 63:10 ) which is what this is—not a brother caught in sin, but a brother openly rebelling against God—and there is the huge difference.
Grief over sin itself is sometimes all it takes. Our human flesh is always wanting to reassert itself. If the discovery of a sin is met with a yawn or worse a smile, it will grow. But if there is shock and concern, even grief—it can wake a person up from the deceitfulness of that sin. The Corinthians experienced this later, where they learned the "godly grief produces a repentance not to be regretted." (2 Corinthians 7:9 ).
In this case, Paul calls for much more definite action. This situation has gone beyond "working it out" and must be dealt with strongly or the fabric of the church could unravel.
3 – 5
Paul is demanding action. This is very different than a similar situation in Galatia.
Galatians 6:1 Brothers, if someone is caught in any wrongdoing, you who are spiritual should restore such a person with a gentle spirit, watching out for yourselves so you won't be tempted also.
This was like gangrene or sepsis. If not addressed it would kill the patient. It was too late for medicine; surgery had become necessary to save the church!
Three things had to be in place: the entire church must be present and take responsibility; they had the authority of an apostle; and the presence of the Lord Jesus (I think both in terms of His ultimate headship of the church but also His ultimate redemptive purposes).
"Handing over to Satan" was not literally having Lucifer there at the door to receive him. It probably simply meant he was dis-fellowshiped. This would leave him at the mercy of Satan, who owns the world. Paul did something similar with two men who Timothy had to deal with:
1 Timothy 1:18-20 Timothy, my child, I am giving you this instruction in keeping with the prophecies previously made about you, so that by them you may strongly engage in battle, 19 having faith and a good conscience. Some have rejected these and have suffered the shipwreck of their faith. 20 Hymenaeus and Alexander are among them, and I have delivered them to Satan, so that they may be taught not to blaspheme.
The idea was that the man would hopefully come to his senses and crucify the flesh (also Romans 6:6 ):
Romans 8:13-14 For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. ESV
Note: Even the severest church discipline should be redemptive, not punitive.
Why such drastic action? Again, the very life of the church was at stake.
6 – 8
Why isn't it okay to let sin go? It's because left unaddressed, sin spreads. Paul uses the analogy of the Passover, where God instructed the Israelites to go through their homes and get rid of all leaven, which is a type of sin, prior to the Passover (Exodus 13:7 ). I think an important distinction here is that not all sin in a believer is leaven that has spread, or at least not at first. But left unchallenged, sin, like leaven, infects others around it. If someone doesn't care whether they are following God's character, are proud of what they are doing, have no plans to seek forgiveness and healing, and if others are also celebrating their tolerance of the sin—that's a leaven that must be excised. Any sin if not dealt with will eventually spread in yourself and to others.
This isn't an excuse, however, for us to go on a leaven-hunt. We are all broken people who are in the process of being transformed into the image of Christ. Now Paul turns his attention to the situation of sin in pre-Christians.
9 – 13
Dealing with sin in the church is different than dealing with sin in the world. For those who do not know Jesus yet, what do we do—lambast them for the evil in their lives and tell them to do better? No, we tell them that evil pervades the human soul and the only way to be healed and to obtain real goodness is to put their faith trust and reliance on the work Jesus Christ did on their behalf at the cross. It is to get them to repent and put Jesus on the throne of their life.
If every time we encountered sin we didn't associate with a pre-Christian we would be pretty lonely. In fact, I think that is what may have been some of the motivation for monks and nuns who wanted to remove themselves from the filth in the world in order to have full devotion to God. The problem with that is we stop fulfilling our purpose in the world, which is to be transformed so we can actually rub elbows with the world and bring them into the kingdom.
We do this sometimes as Christians as well. We put ourselves in a Christian bubble—only going to church and small groups and Bible studies and going to dinner and out only with other Christians. We think this is healthy, but in reality it causes us to be inbred and not relatable.
But by the same token, if there is blatant, unrepentant sin in the church—if there have been efforts to deal with it Scripturally (think Matthew 18 )—and yet there is not even a hint of heart-change. Then that person is a carrier and we must do everything we can to wake them up and protect ourselves and our church from that cancer.
Conclusions
How do we go so far wrong in the church?
We think freedom from sin is freedom to sin.
1 Peter 2:16-17 As God's slaves, live as free people, but don't use your freedom as a way to conceal evil.
Galatians 5:13-14 For you are called to freedom, brothers; only don't use this freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but serve one another through love.
Romans 6:12-19 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, so that you obey its desires. 13 And do not offer any parts of it to sin as weapons for unrighteousness. But as those who are alive from the dead, offer yourselves to God, and all the parts of yourselves to God as weapons for righteousness. 14 For sin will not rule over you, because you are not under law but under grace. 15 What then? Should we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Absolutely not! 16 Do you not know that if you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of that one you obey—either of sin leading to death or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But thank God that, although you used to be slaves of sin, you obeyed from the heart that pattern of teaching you were entrusted to, 18 and having been liberated from sin, you became enslaved to righteousness.
Pride blinds us to sin by the self-deluding human nature. "Sin in me? Couldn't be"
When to judge, when to be patient and helpful
Is it open rebellion? What is the heart attitude of the sinner? Are they a brother or not? Even what type of sin makes a difference. If someone has swindled millions from a church organization, that's something that ought to come out and depending on the heart of the person, they should be removed from that position.
What if we do nothing?
Today's PC world has done a tremendous disservice to the church. What was shocking has become mildly irritating, then tolerated, then accepted, then appreciated, then advocated, then required!
What about "Judge not lest ye be judged" Matthew 7:1-6 ?
The context does not preclude discernment, it says be ready to apply the same standards to yourself and make sure you have examined your own life before you examine another's.
So ...
Start with examining ourselves
The type of sin matters
The heart attitude matters most
Don't wink at sin, but don't condemn automatically either
The whole church must take responsibility
It must be done with the authority of the Scriptures and in the Spirit of Christ—always looking to redemption as the final outcome, not punishment.
