Discipline in the
kingdom of God is a topic that is not very popular and understandably so. However, it is a topic that is woefully under
taught and/or underutilized. Too often,
Christians overlook for many years, or perhaps forever, the sin in a brother or
sister’s life and view it as “compassion” or “mercy” to do so. Frequently, John 8:1-11 (or other correlating
Gospel accounts) is misapplied to establish this very shaky perspective, and
mostly because Christians find “church discipline” to be distasteful. The question becomes, then, is it true “mercy”
and “compassion” to be “longsuffering” with a brother or sister living in sin,
or is it actually doing them spiritual harm?
As Solomon stated in
the book of Ecclesiastes, there is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes
1:9-10). The perspective that Christians
take today is the same perspective that some first-century Christians took and
were reprimanded by the Apostles for. Throughout
the first letter to the Corinthians, Paul continually reprimands the pride that
he saw in the brethren there. Matters of
church discipline were no different, as can be seen by an examination of 1
Corinthians 5. In this section of the
letter, Paul deals with at least three interconnected concepts: 1.) fornication
must be dealt with; 2.) the reasons that sin must be dealt with; and 3.) the
differences between sin in the world and sin in the church. In this manner, Paul teaches us about the
concept of “withdraw,” the purposes of it, the proper application of it, and
how to live righteously in a wicked world.
The Feast of Unleavened Bread
Throughout his
discussion of disciplining an erring brother or sister, Paul refers to the Old
Testament Feast of Unleavened Bread. In
order to fully understand his teachings on withdraw, we must first understand
the references that he makes to this feast.
Under the Old Law, the
Israelites were to conduct a feast that commemorated the departure of the
Israelites from Egypt through the providence of God (Exodus 12:17). This feast was intended to be observed by the
Israelites from the 14th day of the first month of the Jewish year
(the month of Abib as instituted by God in Exodus 13:4) until the 21st
(Exodus 12:18). For the duration of this
feast, the Israelites were not to eat any leavened bread and should an
individual do so, they were to be cut off from the camp of Israel (Exodus
12:15). Additionally, leaven was not
even allowed to be in their homes during the time of the feast (Exodus
12:19-20). This feast was of great
importance under the Old Law and was intended to be taught and passed down to
future generations (Exodus 13:8-10).
Here are some
comparisons to make as we study through 1 Corinthians 5:
i)
The
Israelites were delivered from Egypt by God
(a) Christians are delivered from sin by
Christ
(b) Note also the similarities not only
in our deliverance, but also in the fact that we are to use unleavened bread for
the Lord’s Supper
ii)
The
Israelites were brought out and made separate from the Egyptians (and all other
Gentiles)
(a) Christians are brought out and made
separate from the world, albeit in a spiritual sense rather than physically
iii)
The
Israelites were to cast out or reject an individual who partook of leavened
bread during the feast
(a) That meant that they could have no
interaction with that person
(b) Leaven was against God’s law during
the period of the feast and was therefore a sin
1.
For
Christians, sin separates us from both God and our brethren
2.
We
are to cast out or reject an individual who partakes in the leaven (sin)
Leaven in the Church – 1 Corinthians 5:1
In the first few verses
of chapter 5, we learn that some had reported the “leaven” in the church in
Corinth to Paul. There was fornication
in the church; a Christian brother had his father’s wife! Paul almost immediately
makes a comparison for the Corinthians in that he says that such sin is not
even known among the Gentiles. Now, it
is important to note that Paul is not talking about literal Gentiles (meaning
those of non-Jewish birth) since the congregation at Corinth was composed of
more than just Jewish brethren. Rather,
Paul is saying that the Corinthians were Christians and that made them God’s
chosen people as the Israelites had once been.
In this manner, Paul is likening the Corinthian brethren to the Israelites
and non-Christians to the Gentiles.
There are many
assumptions concerning the father of this erring brother; it is possible and
even probable that the woman in question was the father’s second wife and thus
a “step-mother” to the erring brother. Some
suppose that the father was a Christian at the Corinthian congregation, but it
seems unlikely that he would be ok with his son having his wife. Some also propagate that the father was dead
and that this son had married the woman, but the text says that the son had his
father’s wife using present tense language.
While there was overwhelming debauchery in Corinth, Paul says that such
sin was not even noted among those outside of the body of Christ, and so many
of the presented suppositions are but attempts at justification for the man’s
sinful activities.
The Pride of the Church – 1 Corinthians 5:2-3
Once again, this issue
was a matter of pride for the Corinthian brethren. They were puffed up in their “longsuffering”
concerning this erring brother (the language of the text makes it seem that the
woman involved was not a Christian, but that is not a known fact). Rather than being puffed up, Paul informs
them that they ought to have mourned because, like the Israelites who had to
cast someone from their midst, they needed to have dealt with the matter
properly.
While many today claim
that we are not to judge someone as being in sin, Paul does so while not even
being present. Paul could easily see
that this activity was nothing but sin and had judged not only the erring
brother, but the congregation for not having dealt with it appropriately. Although we must be careful concerning church
autonomy, this should teach modern Christians that even if a congregation does
not properly deal with an erring brother or sister, we are not to treat that
brother or sister as though nothing is wrong.
Commanded to Deal with the Problem – 1 Corinthians 5:4-5
Now that the problem
had been made known, Paul had judged both the one in error and the
congregation, he now commanded the Corinthians to deal appropriately with the
sin. He commands (note that this is a
command and not a suggestion) them that when they are gathered together they
are to “deliver such a one to Satan” (NKJV).
The verbiage expresses two things to the reader; 1.) all unrepented of
sins were to be addressed in like manner (“…such a one…”); and 2.) that this
was to be a unanimous congregational act.
Justifiably, many
people are confused or at least question what Paul means by “for the
destruction of the flesh” and “that his spirit may be saved” in this passage,
and so it is appropriate to address this as well. Throughout the New Testament, and especially
in the writings of the Apostle Paul, sin is referred to as being carnal or
fleshly (Galatians 5:16-21; 1 John 2:15-17), and so Paul is talking about
destroying the sin and the desire for it.
However, is this man’s soul to be saved in spite of his unwillingness to
repent? Absolutely not; Paul is holding out hope that the individual in sin
will repent, will put to death the sin in his life, and that through this manner
of church discipline his soul will be saved.
Glorying is Not Good
Application of the Feast of Unleavened Bread – 1 Corinthians 5:6-8
Paul warns the
Corinthians that their glorying is not good in this matter because they should
not have been puffed up in their tolerance of sin. This seems to be an issue just as much today
as it was in the first-century; too many today are “longsuffering” when it
comes to sin to the point that sin is often NEVER addressed!
So what is the application of the Feast of Unleavened Bread? Paul tells them that a little leaven leavens the whole lump; leaven cannot affect only a small part of the bread in which it resides. If there was even a little leaven, the bread of the Israelites was no longer unleavened. Likewise, the Corinthian congregation could not tolerate a little sin (leaven) in the church and remain pure (unleavened). The old leaven had to be purged out, become once again unleavened, and thus keep the feast in purity.
The Difference Between Jews and Christians – 1 Corinthians 5:9-10
As with any analogy,
this breaks down if you take it too far.
However, Paul notes and deals with the “break down” of his analogy
within the text by noting that the kingdom of Israel was a physical, earthly
kingdom, but the kingdom of God is of a spiritual nature. The Israelites were brought out physically
from the Egyptians and were to remain separate from other nations, but
Christians are brought out spiritually and must still participate with the
people in the world around them. As part
of a spiritual kingdom, Christians are still expected by God to interact in a
limited way with the world through business interactions, going to school,
work, etc. Additionally, we are to
interact with the world in order to spread the gospel and convert more people
in order to expand the borders of the kingdom, which is something the
Israelites were not expected to do. Paul
notes these differences and tells the Corinthians that there is a difference
between rejecting evil from among them (such as the erring brother) and not
keeping company with the wicked of the world; to not keep company with the
wicked of the world at all, we would have to go out of the world completely.
The Meaning of Withdraw – 1 Corinthians 5:11-13
Paul wrote concerning
this erring brother, but makes a distinction between those who are outside of
Christ and those inside the kingdom. Anyone
named a brother who is involved in sin and does not repent is to be withdrawn
from. It is even commanded that such a
one is not to even been eaten with.
There are two possible applications of this principle of not eating with
an erring brother, but they both end up at the same point; 1.) Paul is either
talking about a social mean and we are not to eat with them socially; or 2.)
Paul is talking about partaking of the Lord’s Supper and we are not to eat that
with such a person. Consider it this
way: If Paul is referring to a social meal, then why would we think it to be
acceptable to partake of the Lord’s Supper with such a one if we aren’t even
allowed to eat with them socially? Isn’t the Lord’s Supper meant to commemorate
the death of Christ and isn’t it meant to be a communion with one another and
with Christ? And if Paul is referring to the Lord’s Supper, then why would we
assume that it is both acceptable and appropriate to socialize with such a one?
If someone partook of
leavened bread during the Feast of Unleavened Bread, they were to be put out of
and cut off from the camp of the Israelites.
Could anyone socialize or eat the Feast of Unleavened Bread with such a
one? Paul commands that we are to put away from among ourselves the evil person
and in this he refers yet again to the Old Testament Law. Under the Old Law, “put away an evil person”
most often meant the physical death of the trespasser. Consider these passages: Deuteronomy 13:5;
17:7, 12; 21:21; 22:21; and 24:7. In
every one of these instances, God commands that the offender be put to death, which
should make us wonder why Paul quotes this term when dealing with the concept
of withdraw.
Under the New Testament law, we are obviously
not a physical kingdom and we are not commanded to physically put to death any
offender of God’s commands. However, we
are to cut them off from among us as Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians 5 and we are
to deliver them to a spiritual death (1 Corinthians 5:5). Can we continue to worship next to someone
and in communion with someone who does such evil? Remember, the Israelites were
to remove the leaven COMPLETELY from their house and NOT keep it until the
feast was over. Thus, Paul is telling us
that we are to cut off an unrepentant brother or sister and they are to be as
dead to us unless they repent of their sin.
Conclusion
Often, Christians are
proud of their “longsuffering” concerning those that need to be withdrawn from
and claim that they are simply showing “compassion” and “mercy.” While we obviously need to be careful in our
approach and realize that people do struggle with certain kinds of sins, we
also need to realize those that simply refuse to repent and adjust their lives
to fit God’s will. We are not showing
compassion by allowing someone to live in sin without acknowledging it and
dealing with it according to the Scriptures.
We also need to realize
that God’s methods work much better than ours and that they always work. Too many times, we see Christians that will
not uphold “withdraw” because they claim that it either does not work or that
they have seen “withdraw” abused. What
would have happened in Israel if an individual decided not to uphold the
casting out of an individual who disobeyed God? They would have been cast out
as well, and there is a very practical application to be made for us as
Christians; if we do not uphold the withdraw of an individual, then we are to
be withdrawn from ourselves. This
concept is discussed by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 3:10-15; in the context, Paul
is again talking about withdraw, and then he commands that those who refuse to
commit to the withdraw are to be withdrawn from as well.
Often we assume that
the main purpose of withdraw is the restore the erring soul, and of course that should always be our hope. However, that
is not the main purpose of withdraw! Will withdraw always restore an erring
soul? Unfortunately, no it does not.
Does that mean that “withdraw” has failed? No, it does not mean that it
has failed. God’s method always works;
if the person in sin repents, then they are saved and the purity of the church
is maintained. If the person refuses to
repent, then they are removed from the church and the purity of the church is
thus maintained. As Paul notes so often
throughout this section of the first Corinthian letter, we are to remain
unleavened and this is vital to our salvation!
No comments:
Post a Comment