LAWSUITS, INJURIES
AND
EXCLUSION
1 Dare any of you, having a matter against his neighbour, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? 2 Or know ye not that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world is judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more, things that pertain to this life? 4 If then ye have to judge things pertaining to this
life, do ye set them to judge who are of
no account in the church? 5 I say this to move you to shame. Is it so, that there cannot be found
among you one wise man, who shall be able to
decide between his brethren, 6 but brother goeth to law with brother, and that before unbelievers? 7 Nay, already it is altogether a defect in
you, that ye have lawsuits one with another. Why not rather take
wrong? why not rather be defrauded? 8 Nay, but ye yourselves
do wrong, and defraud, and that your
brethren. 9 Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not
inherit the
1 Corinthians 6: 1-11, (Revised Version 1881).
-------
Perhaps no
passage is more clear and full in its testimony to the exclusion of some
believers from the millennial kingdom, than the sixth chapter of the first of
Corinthians. Let us, with the blessing
of the Holy Spirit, consider it!
1. “Dare any of you, having a matter with the other, be judged before the unjust,
and not before the saints?”
The apostle here gives directions
relative to the contentions of Christians concerning worldly goods and rights.
The Corinthians brought their suits against one another into the world’s
courts. Against this the apostle was inspired
to utter his strong condemnation.
He calls such an act, “daring.”
It manifested a want either of a right fear, or of a right shame. (1)
It was contrary to the fear of God. He, by
His Son Jesus, had appointed the mode in which contentions of this kind should
be adjudged, and ended: Matt. 18:
15-17. To take the matter out of God’s appointed
court into another, not designed for that purpose, argued a want of reverence
for God. (2) They might well have been deterred from such a proceeding by
the fear of the ungodly. ‘When
you have the option of having a cause tried before a just judge, or before an
unjust one, are you so daring as to prefer the unjust?’ “Behold,
I send you forth as sheep in the midst wolves.” Had the sheep become so
foolhardy as to ask for arbitration from the wolf? (3) Or
were they not deterred from such a course by shame? The effect of such conduct upon the world
could not but be mischievous. It brought
disgrace upon the cause of Christ from a twofold point of view. (a)
It exposed to the unbeliever and scoffer the nakedness of believers. There is no greater triumph to the rebellious
world than to find Christians conducting themselves unworthily of the Holy Name
which they profess. And few cases of
misconduct are worse than open strifes amidst the family of God. Discord, where love should reign, is joy to
the world at enmity with the Most High.
It hardens their hearts against the gospel, it
opens their mouths to blaspheme. ‘These saints, as they call themselves, are
after all not so meek and lamb-like as they would have us believe them, and as
they profess themselves to be!’ (b) But, still further, this
reference of their strifes to the worldly implied, that they could not trust
their fellow-Christians. It
asserted in act, which is the strongest mode of assertion, that the
They went “to be judged before the unjust.” It is assumed by the Holy
Spirit that all the worldly are unjust. (1)
They withhold from God his dues - love, thankfulness, obedience, and worship. (2)
And though some pride themselves on their honesty and honour before men, yet
here, also, God holds them to be unjust.
None ceases to belong to this fraternity of evil, whatever name he
takes, whatever he may think of himself, or others may think of him, until he
is justified and sanctified before God.
Foolishly did the just look for
justice amidst “the unjust.” “Why seek ye the living among the dead?” “Do men gather grapes
of thorns, or figs of thistles?” Thus they helped to overturn
God’s testimony against the worldly, that they are wholly evil, and condemned
in God’s sight.
From this it follows, that no
Christian ought to be a judge or magistrate of the world. He is thereby putting himself out from the
place of the just, amidst those whom God accounts unjust. If he acts out their laws he is held to be
guilty of the injustice which in many respects is found in them. It is evident that no Christian was then a
judge, nor was it anticipated that he could rightly become one. So long as God holds the world to be the
company of the unjust, and its judges to be part of that company, it cannot be
right for a Christian to be a magistrate or judge. The
church’s judges are to be distinct from the world’s. On this the whole argument hinges.
To the minds of very many,
indeed, this passage is not binding upon us of the present day. ‘Is not
this a Christian land? Are not the judges Christian men?’ To those who hold a national church, this
appeal is conclusive. The world with
such is the church, the church is the world.
This is the true meaning of the ‘Union
of Church and State.’
There is no world in
In this point of view it is very
worthy of remark that the apostle says not - “ye
go to be judged before the heathen,” but, “before the unjust,” “before the unbelievers.” The teaching
of this passage is rested on moral and enduring grounds. Till the reign of the saints shall come, when
the [millennial]
In every country, as long as the
characteristics of the dispensation shall last, there should be two modes of
deciding civil causes - (1) one by
the world, in the courts of the unjust: (2)
the other by the saints, in each local church: see Matt. 18: 15-17. And hence it follows that the church should
consist of those who in faith and practice, justify to human eyes, the term “saint.”
Such only as deny, that any nation is a church, can carry out the Holy
Spirit’s teaching in this place.
“And not before the saints.” With the true method of procedure sketched
for them, they chose the wrong. The saints are by God accounted fit to
judge. In all questions of worldly gain
or loss, the sanctified and upright heart is the main requirement in a
judge. This they by their actions
denied: running counter to God’s expressed estimate of the case.
2. “Know ye not that the saints shall
judge the world? And if the world is to be judged* by you, are
ye unworthy of the least judgments?
3. Know
ye not that we shall judge angels?
how much more things
pertaining to this life?”
* The use of the present between two futures, and having
apparently a future signification, does not seem easily accounted for.
The Gentiles seek after
wisdom. The Corinthians
were intoxicated with the thought of the intelligence they possessed. But they knew nothing yet as they should. The apostle, therefore, frequently
administers to them, in this epistle, rebuke for their ignorance of first
principles.
The saints are to judge the
world. In what sense is the word “Judge” taken? The most reasonable plan of explaining it
would be to take the word throughout the passage in the same sense, if
possible. And to this reasonable
procedure there is no objection arising from the passage itself. 1.
The saints went to be judged in the world’s courts of justice: 5: 1, 6. 2. In that sense the arbitrators of
the saints ought to have heard the cause, and pronounced sentence. 3.
In this same sense, then, the saints are to judge the world. They are to exercise subordinate power, in
trying and determining causes. The
judicial power is a part of the supreme authority belonging to a king, and will
be bestowed by Christ on his servants at last.
How then, and when, are the saints to exercise this power? The common view asserts, that at the general
judgment of the dead, the saints, after being themselves judged, will sit with
Christ, and own his sentence on the wicked to be just. Thus Barnes -
“Perhaps
the idea is not that they shall pronounce sentence, which will be done by the Lord Jesus, but that they
shall then be qualified to see the justice of the condemnation passed on the wicked;
they shall have a clear and distinct view of the case; they shall even see the
propriety of their everlasting punishment, and shall not only approve it, but
be qualified to enter into the subject, and to pronounce upon it intelligently.”
But this sentence the believer
does even now approve. And the approval
of a just sentence is not judging, in the sense used above. It was in an active sense that the world’s courts
judged. It was in an active sense that
the Corinthians should have judged their brethren’s causes. A magistrate’s decision is not the approval
of another’s sentence of condemnation.
And that is the sense here supposed.
The Tract Society’s Commentary
takes a yet more decided stand against the true sense.
“By
judging the world and angels, 5: 2, 3, some think is understood their being assessors to Christ
in the judgment: Matt. 19: 28; Jude 14, 15; 1 Thes. 3: 13. They themselves are
to be judged, that they may then approve and applaud the righteous judgment of
Christ. In no other sense can they be judges. They
are not partners in the Lord’s commission, but they will see his proceeding
against the wicked world, and approve it. Shall Christians sit with the Sovereign Judge
at the last day, while he passes judgment on sinful men and evil angels, and
are they not worthy to judge the trifles about which brethren contend before
heathen magistrates? Cannot they make up
these mutual differences?”
As the common view owns no
judgment of the world, but the judgment of the dead before
the great white throne, (Rev. 20: 11, 15) while it omits the previous
judgment of living men for the thousand years which precede, (Rev. 20: 4, 6) it says
boldly, that the saints can judge in no other sense than as seated with Christ
in judgment on the dead. But to this
idea the former objection applies. The
apostle did not call the Corinthians to passive approval of a sentence already
delivered, but to leave the world’s active decision of their causes, and
actively to decide them themselves. Nor
does it appear very clear, how the future approval of Christ’s sentence on the
wicked would prove them worthy to decide actively on cases now. The being able to enter into a palace and
admire it, is small proof that such a one could build
a house! When Solomon, in his capacity
of king, gave the memorable judicial decision concerning the two harlots, we
learn that his subjects approved and wondered at the decision. But it is not said or supposed, that
therefore all
The same observation also
overturns another interpretation proposed for this place. It is supposed that it means, - “We saints, by our holy conduct, shall afford matter for the
world’s and for angels’ condemnation, by comparison with us.” But any who will carry this sense through the
verses before us will see that in some cases it will make nonsense. This is also another passive mode of judging. All unwittingly on our parts, we condemn the
world and angels. Not only we shall condemn, we do already. But by no such unwitting and passive judgment
could the world settle the church’s disputes; nor could the saints themselves
determine them, according to the precepts here supposed. “Know
ye not that we shall, by our holy lives, condemn angels; how much more things
that pertain to this life?” - is a specimen of the nonsense
that would follow, on such a passive meaning being given to the apostle’s
words.
There is no real connexion
between the two things conjoined by the apostle, on this supposition. ‘Christians,’
says Paul, on this hypothesis, ‘shall
hereafter approve the sentence previously passed by Christ. Therefore they can frame and enforce a just
sentence themselves independently of his decision now!’
The fulfilment of these words will be in the Saviour’s millennial
kingdom, which is put out of sight and denied by so many [of the Lord’s redeemed people].
The denial of this compels the
commentator to force upon many passages a sense which God never designed, and
against which the reluctant words themselves afford evidence. It is
that time of which the Saviour spoke more than once as the “day of judgement,” to be ushered in by his appearing. It is a day of judgment which is
to prevail for a thousand years.
“Ye that have followed me in the
regeneration, when the Son of Man shall sit on the
throne of his glory, ye also shall sit
on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of
It is supposed by Paul, that this doctrine is a first truth which every
intelligent [and regenerate Spirit-taught] christian ought to know. “Know ye
not that the saints shall judge the world?” Without this knowledge he will act in a
manner unbecoming his dignity, and the calling wherewith the Lord has called
him.
The saint [if “accounted worthy”*] shall
be a ruler and a judge, but not yet. “Man, who made me a judge, or a divider
over you?” was our Lord’s question: and it points out our position, till
“judgment is given” by God “to the saints of the heavenlies.” “The
saints shall judge the world” by and
bye. “We shall judge angels” when the [messianic, ‘one thousand
years’**]
[* See Luke 20: 35, R.V. ** Rev. 20: 3, 4, 5, 6, R.V.]
Daniel, the first to speak of ‘the
kingdom of heaven’ by that name, discovers to us the four Gentile empires, which
were to succeed the overturning of
If the government of the world, and its greatest affairs are one day to be committed
to the administration of the saints, the trifles of present worldly goods may
safely be committed to their verdict.
It may admit of a question, in
what sense the word “unworthy” is to
be received. Does it intend the want of external
dignity? Were the Corinthian saints stumbled at
having to bring their causes before shoemakers, tailors and slaves? Or does it mean ‘unfit,’ devoid of internal qualifications? Perhaps
both ideas are included. The despised in
the church might be rejected for both reasons.
But the inquiry whether there was not one “wise man” able to decide, shows that
intellectual qualities are included.
Questions about present property are, when seen in the light
of the future, trifles. “Thou hast been faithful in a very little.” The
money which makes so much stir and noise now, is only the false mammon, the
shadow of the true riches. It is not
ours, it is only committed in trust. It
is not to abide, it cannot be detained by us.
In the same sense that we shall
judge the world, we are also to judge angels.
The article in the Greek occurs before “world,” but not
before angels. The world as a
whole is to be given up to the judgment of
saints; but only, it would appear, some of the angels. Who
these angels are, may be gathered from what is said of their being reserved to “the judgment of the great day:” Jude 6; 2 Peter 2:
4.
They are the angels who, coveting man’s standing and abode, came and
dwelt on earth about the time of the flood, and were swept way by it. Since
that time, God in his displeasure has consigned them to a place called
Tartarus, where they await the sentence to be passed at our Lord’s appearing.* They are not
the same with the evil angels of Satan, who, with their leader, are free till
that day.
* For a
full discussion of the subject, see “The Spirits in
Prison.”
If we shall pass sentence on
these superior beings hereafter, we may well determine now about the things of
this life. As, in the eye of God, our
condemnation and our degradation are deeper than we are ready to admit; so, far
loftier too, are the heights of exaltation to which his promises point us!
It is evident that this judgment
of angels is no feature of our present lot. It is clear too, that, whenever it takes
effect, there must be miraculous intervention on the part of God. The
4. “If, then,
ye have causes pertaining to this life, set them to judge
who are least esteemed in the church.”
Our view of this verse will
undergo some little modification, according as we read the sentiment as an
imperative or indicative; as an assertion of what occurred, or as a question.
1. If we regard the words “set ye,” as an
imperative, then the sense will be - ‘Your
estimate of the qualifications of the saints has been too low. To correct the mischief, I must remind you of
the lofty destiny prepared for them in relation to this very thing. As God’s judges-elect, the very least and
lowest of them is better than the highest and most intelligent of the worldly
or unjust. Of so little value should you
account the world’s pounds, shillings, and pence, as to consider the lowest of
saints capable of giving a right verdict on these.’
2. If we take it as indicative,
and a question, the meaning will be, ‘When
the adjudication of property occurs, do you set those of little repute in the
church to judge? I am ashamed of you!’ But the previous reading gives a sense more
agreeable to the context.
Some
interpret the heathen magistrates to be the parties intended as “the least esteemed in the church.” This is very strange and erroneous. Magistrates are not to be despised, or lightly
esteemed by the church, but honoured as God’s ministers:
It follows, as the natural
conclusion from the principles here asserted that in God’s eye, the point of
chief importance in a judge, is a right heart. Let that
be honest before God and man, and questions which would perplex or mislead the
partial, melt away. Hence in the day of
the [millennial] kingdom,
not the loftiest of intellect, the world’s admired children of genius, are to
rule, but the sanctified in Spirit. How
preferable to the plans of men! The
expanded and profound intellect carries no guarantee for right rule. Its possessor may rather hinder the government
of which he is a member, than advance it.
Selfishness can find ample cover under the wings of the brightest understanding.
“The saints
of the heavenlies shall take the kingdom, and possess it.”
5. “I speak to shame you. Is it so, that there is not a single wise man among you,
who shall be able to
judge between his brethren?”
The first words of this verse
may be connected either with what precedes, or with what follows. I take it as referring to what precedes. As though the apostle said - ‘The advice just given is meant to make you ashamed of
yourselves, rather than to be your standing rule. It is not desirable that the arbitrators of
differences should be those despised by their brethren, for want of
intelligence or impartiality. To secure
a peaceful result, it is highly proper that the arbitrator should be trusted by
his fellow-believers, and owned to be competent in all respects to the task. But it were better to
set the least of the saints to decide such cases, than to go before the most
skilled of the unjust. How absurd in the eye of God, and of the enlightened, to go to the
unjust for grace not to be found among the holy!’
But if any should say, that they
did not distrust the grace of their brethren, but only their intelligence, the apostle meets this evasion also. They could not make such a plea without
throwing the utmost disgrace upon themselves. This was to affirm, that among them all there
was not one competent to settle worldly affairs: not one of those destined of
God ultimately to regulate these things! And that, too, in a church that boasted of its
wisdom and enlightenment! Either, then,
they must confess that their previous estimate of themselves was false, or that
their practice in this matter could not be sustained.
6. “But brother goeth to be judged* with brother, and that before unbelievers.”
* Literally “is judged.”
As the consequence of the
falsely assumed incompetency of the church, the affair was carried before the
world. Again the disgrace drawn down on the cause of Christ by the quarrels of believers, is offered to our notice. But the worldly are, in the Spirit’s wisdom,
now described by a different word. This
gives another defect of the ungodly. They
were within the sound of the gospel, yet credited it not. They made God a liar, as not trusting the
testimony he has given of his Son.
Brethren should not quarrel. Or, if one be guilty of conduct contrary the
gospel, the strife should be settled within the family. To go to
the unbeliever for judgment,
is sinful. It is calculated to
hinder the cause of Christ to confirm them in their unbelief, to make them
persuaded that there is no real difference between themselves and the godly. They may not be attracted to hear, indeed,
even if love rule among the saints, for the heart is slow to admit truths which
condemn. But to find the saints at
strife is sure to shut up the heart. ‘If this religion of yours cannot keep you at peace among
yourselves I will have nothing to say to it!’
7. “At an earlier point,* therefore,
there is, under all
circumstances, a defect in you, that ye
have judgments among
yourselves. Why do ye not rather suffer injustice?
Why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?”
* Literally, “already.”
In the previous verses Paul had
assumed the existence of disputes; and taught how they were to be settled. But here he goes farther. He lays axe to the root of the whole question.
There ought not to be such trials
at all. Causes
for trial in every court suppose a plaintiff and a defendant. There must be two parties, therefore; and,
says the apostle, fault lies on one or the other, or on both, in all cases. If
the thing claimed by the plaintiff be acknowledged, and satisfaction made,
there will be no trial. Or, if the
plaintiff gives up his charge, the suit will be at an end. So, then, says the apostle, without entering
into any details, it may be assumed, as an universal truth, that disputes about property and rights manifest
a low state of grace in churches where they exist.
The Holy Spirit then addresses
the plaintiff, and tells him that it were
better to give un his charge. That
would be according to the higher standard which Christ has set in the Sermon on
the Mount. Endurance of wrong is there taught as the right conduct for those who
would enter the [coming millennial] kingdom. In that discourse, indeed, the
Saviour mainly instructs his disciples how to behave themselves towards the
worldly. Justice may be expected from
brethren, as being “the just:” Matt. 18. But even with them suits are rather to be given up than brought before the world.
The apostle in the two words he uses, marks the two classes of trials which naturally arise.
They might suffer themselves rather to
be injured, in regard of personal rights; bearing affronts and wrongs with
patience. They might also give up their
claims as to property, though unjustly
sued. Into these two classes Jesus divides
causes of complaint, in the Sermon on the Mount. “Whosoever
shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” That is personal affront. “And if
any will sue thee at the law and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.” Here is the surrender of property: Matt. 5: 39, 40. This
spirit of patient endurance was the very spirit taught by our Lord, as fitting
us for the [millennial] kingdom. Those
are to be accounted worthy of the kingdom, who suffer
for it. 2 Thess. 1: 5. God will visit such things; leave them to
him. “Vengeance
is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.”
8. “But ye do wrong, and defraud, and that brethren.”
The “ye” is emphatic. It were to be
expected, from the known sinfulness of men, that the ungodly should defraud and
injure. And Christ taught the saints
under such treatment to be passive. But you believers are, I
am grieved to say, the men that inflict injury, and defraud!
Thus the apostle takes up the
other cause of disputes. He has before rebuked
the impatience of the plaintiff. He now reproves the guilt of the defendant. Such
persons were the real causes of many of the lawsuits, and these, therefore, he
addresses most solemnly. From false
notions of christian liberty, the Corinthian believers
were acting grossly contrary to the Christian’s rule of love. The apostle therefore is obliged in this epistle
to shew the limits of Christian liberty, to prove that it was designed to give
no occasion to the flesh, that it
offered no sanction to licentiousness or immorality; that offences against
these would assuredly be punished by God.
The gospel brings saints
together in the endearing character of brethren, as members of one family,
children of one father. To violate our brethren’s rights or
property, then, is very evil. To sin
against the worldly is bad: against those whom we own
as such near relatives in Christ, is worse.
9. “Know ye not, that, unjust persons shall not inherit the
covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers,
nor extortioners,
shall inherit the
In order to feel the full force
of this passage, it is necessary to be satisfied of the meaning of that oft-recurring
phrase, “the
1. It is evident, that it
does not here mean the
2. It does not mean “eternal
life.” That is promised
absolutely to faith as God’s gracious gift: Rom.
6: 23.
And these were already believers, as the whole tenor of the passage proves; and
as will be manifested presently. Beside,
the kingdom here spoken of is temporary; eternal life, as the word imports, is
endless. Jesus is to reign [over His promised inheritance (Psa. 2: 8. cf. Isa. 9: 6; 27: 6; 65: 18-25; Jer. 23: 5, 6) for “a thousand years”
(Rev. 20:
4)], till
every enemy and death itself is subdued. Then he delivers up the [messianic] kingdom.
1 Cor. 15: 24-28.
3. It means then in this, as in other places, the millennial
The knowledge of this is a FIRST TRUTH. “Know ye not?” Twice does the apostle rest his
argument on it. Twice in these few verses does he appeal to it,
as necessary to be known, in order to the saints’ right conduct. He uses it, when he would deter the believer
by a sense of this his high destiny from offending the world. He
appeals to this, as the great loss which the saints may sustain from sinful
misconduct. If then the millennium has long been forgotten, and now is by many
denied, it cannot be marvelled, if we have not the true christian
conduct in its fulness. “Fruits” of the
kingdom (Matt. 21:
43) wait upon the belief of the doctrine of the kingdom. The hope of entrance into it is to keep us
aloof from the world; the fear of exclusion from it is to restrain the saint
from [wilful]* sin.
[* Heb. 10:
26.]
‘But is
it so sure that this threat is addressed to believers?’ Yes; it is as sure as any conclusion can be. But one body, the church at
‘You
commit fraud. Forbear; it is against
your interest. Know ye not that the
fraudulent shall be excluded from the kingdom?’
To whom
is the call to endure wrong, uttered in the seventh verse, addressed?
To [regenerate] believers, - it is granted. Then it is [regenerate] believers of whom the apostle says in the eighth verse, that in place of enduring evil they inflicted it. And if so, the threat which follows in the ninth verse, must
belong to them. Consider the absurdity
which follows on any other supposition. Believers
sin; unbelievers are
threatened! One party commits the
trespass: to check it, another party which did not commit it, is menaced! Says the apostle on this supposition, the
unconverted, who are guilty of injustice, will be excluded the kingdom! Would not the Corinthian offenders reply, ‘What is it to us, that the
unconverted will be excluded? ‘We
are converted!’ Might they not say, - ‘We go further, Paul, than you. The unconverted will be excluded, simply
as unconverted, even though
not guilty of injustice.’ This is distinctly affirmed by
our Lord. ‘None,
except born again, can see the
What, again, means that solemn
exclamation, with which the repetition of the sentence of exclusion is
reinforced? - “Be not deceived.” If the warning does not affect believers, then
it would imply, that the Corinthians imagined, that some
unconverted thieves would enter the kingdom! And Paul wrote, to assure them, that no
unconverted thieves would! But of what
practical consequence was it to them, even if they had been wrong? What reply did it furnish to the saints’ sin,
what check did it introduce to that?
This then cannot be. They who committed this, the worst sin of the
two which are rebuked, are most severely reprimanded, as was fitting. Common sense requires,
that the check shall be administered to the guilty parties.
To evidence so clear
illustration can hardly be needed. Yet,
as it may assist some of my readers, I will give one. The Duke of Wellington has come over to defend
That
word - “Be not deceived.” - tells
us of the secret imagination of some, that God was partial, that his elect would
escape, let them act as they might. Offences
which in the ungodly would draw down the wrath of God, in them, - the favourites
of heaven, - would be winked at and passed by. Hence the solemn caution - “Be not deceived!” False doctrine may gloss over sin. Evil examples hold out lures, and God may seem
to overlook. But “Be not deceived!” You are under no necessity of being led
astray. The word of God is plain. Only he who will not own the truth can stumble
here. It is of vast importance to your
interests that you be not led astray. To disregard the warning will bring terrible
damages. While, then, something may be said against
this doctrine to flatter your lusts, and make you secure in sin, distrust it! Put no confidence in him who whispers – “Ye shall not surely die.” God’s threats shall surely be fulfilled,
whether they point at the ungodly, or at the saints. As such conduct is contrary to duty, so is it
a loss of reward, a gain of woe. Gain
seems at present to attend the path of transgression. But here is the loss of reward for believers
who offend. ‘Not standing, but fruits,’ is
the maxim which God will apply to every enterer into the [millennial] kingdom.
So said John the
Baptist, when he heralded the reign of God to the Jew: Matt. 3: 7-10. And with the history of the favoured people’s
exclusion from the land, as an evident fact, does the Holy Spirit point the
arrow of his exhortation.
‘Unjust persons’ shall not enter the kingdom, be
they converted or unconverted. It is
very worthy of notice, that there is no article used here, as in verse one. There ‘the unjust’ meant the worldly, or
unconverted. Lest then any should
imagine, that the same class is intended here, the article is omitted. “The
saints” and “the unjust” ought
indeed to be opposite in fact, as they are in standing. But, as the sons of Abraham through faith
might lose the inheritance, by a falling away from grace to law, so the renewed
might, by openly criminal conduct, be shut out as unjust and unholy. Those who enjoy the kingdom, are, as Daniel
affirmed, “the saints.” This excludes, then, any of un-saintly
character. And now the Lord is trying each, whether his walk is such as becomes a
saint, preparatory to the day of entrance into, or exclusion from, the [coming
millennial] kingdom.
There are two exclusions noticed
in this epistle; one of which is a type and token of the other. 1.
There is a commanded exclusion of certain converted transgressors from the
The church is the body of saints
now owned of God. If all professors were
genuine disciples, and their discipline were perfect, the church would
represent those of this dispensation, who will inherit the kingdom. But in
neither of these points is perfection to be found; and hence God’s decision
must come in, to determine who shall partake of it. Exclusion from the church on the grounds
assigned of God, is a proof of the exclusion of such from the [coming messianic] kingdom. And again, the re-admission of the offender on
repentance, is a token of the possibility of the
forgiveness of the saints’ offences against the kingdom, after their repentance
is accepted before God. These two things
are connected in the epistle before us. Chapter 5 presents us with a saint excluded now from the church, because of fornication. Chapter 6: 9, assures
us, that the same sin will exclude also from the kingdom hereafter. And nearly the same
list is given of those to be shut out from the communion of the saints below, and from their joys in the millennial reign: 5: 11; 6: 9, 10.
It appears, too, that capital
punishment administered by authority of the kings of earth, is a token and
warning of the final judgment of the ungodly for eternal life or death, by the
Most High.
The list of offences does not
mention all sins which will exclude; but those which the Corinthians
were most liable to fall into, are specified. Various modes of injustice and unholiness are
mentioned; those which bear on the previous discussion being, “the thief,” “the covetous,” and “the rapacious,” or “extortioner.”
11. “And such were some of you, but ye were washed
clean, but ye were sanctified, but ye
were justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”
“Ye were washed, ye
were sanctified, ye were justified.” The past tense is here essential to the true
sense. To the English reader
it might seem as if the apostle contrasted what they were before faith with
what they were at the moment of his writing.
“Ye were” openly
immoral. “But ye are sanctified.”* And hence some
have read it [in the N.I.V.], as if the previous assertion of their injustice and fraud were hereby
contradicted. But a glance at the
original destroys any such idea. The
verbs are [all] in the indefinite past (Aorist); and the
apostle contrasts what they were before
conversion, with what they
became at conversion. Hence he brings to view the bath
of baptism as the symbol of the justification and of the sanctification of the
believer.
* A look at the Vulgate explains how this translation arose.
“And
such were some of you.” Up
to the moment of their conversion, many of the Corinthian saints had been the
evil characters described; unfitted, therefore, were they, both by past acts
and former tempers, for the kingdom.
But these former barriers were
removed, by the work of Christ and of the Holy Ghost upon them. The means employed are then specified.
“Ye were washed clean.” This is doubtless a
reference to baptism [after conversion]. That
emblematic cleansing was commanded, after their universal spiritual defilement.
It was a bathing their bodies in pure
water: Heb. 10:
22; John 13:
10. “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash
away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord:” Acts 22: 16. Baptism represented
the removal of the leprosy of sin. Its
outer manifestations, or its inward ravages, are afterwards distinguished. The washing is immediately connected in this
passage with the agency of the Holy Ghost. So is it in another place. “We ourselves
were once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living
in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another. But after the kindness and philanthropy of our
Saviour-God appeared, not by works that are in
righteousness which we did, did he save us, but according
to his own mercy, by the bath of regeneration* and renewal of the Holy
Spirit:” Titus 3: 3-5. This washing was God’s type of his inward
cleansing by his Spirit, and of the forgiveness by the work of Jesus, which are
next noticed.
* “The bath of regeneration” is not “the regeneration
of the bath,” or of baptism.
It
is the bath which belongs to the regenerate; and is to follow on
regeneration as its attendant, as
also does the daily renewal of the Holy Ghost.
“Ye were
sanctified.” We must connect with
these words the concluding clause of the verse, ‘by,’
or ‘in the Spirit of our God.’ The work of the Spirit is put first, as being
the direct opposite to their unholy conduct at that time. The renewal then began, which ought to issue in their being saints, fit for the [entrance into* the coming millennial]
[* Matt. 5:
20. cf. 7:
21; Rev. 2: 26, 27, R.V.]
“Ye were
justified in the name of Christ Jesus.” Baptism carries with it an emblem, both of the
work of the Spirit, and of the work of Christ. Immersion and emersion represent the entire
cleansing of the man; or in another point of view, the death of the flesh, the
birth of the spirit. The same actions represent also burial with
Christ into death, as the just penalty of sin; and the rising, as justified,
out of the sentence of the law. The baptized
is emblematically one with Christ, both death to sin,
and in resurrection life. They were “justified in the name of Christ.” The expression is remarkable. As one with him, one person in the eye of the
law, they took his “name.” All means necessary to their obtaining the
kingdom, therefore, were then granted. The
past was washed away. Former sins should
not avail to exclude. They were
forgiven. But the return to sins left at conversion, and to which they
emblematically died in baptism, would surely [if
repentance was not forthcoming] shut them out from the proffered [millennial] bliss.
Here then we obtain the final
proof, that this threat is addressed to [regenerate] believers. There are, indeed, different classes of
objections made, but every one seems, in this passage, to meet its refutation.
1. Some deny, that the threat is
addressed to saints. Such an idea labours under the
evident absurdity, that one party is guilty of the sin, and another party not
guilty of it, is menanced.
2. But others admit that the threat applies to saints. They affirm only, that such
acts are never committed by them. This is refuted by the
passage before us. If put logically,
Paul’s argument would stand as follows: - 1.
No unjust person shall obtain the future kingdom. 2.
But you are unjust. 3. Therefore you shall not inherit the kingdom.
3. There is yet a third mode of escape. It is said, ‘Such
of the Corinthians as were guilty of these sins were not saints. The
acts are such as no converted person can commit. Only a few
hypocrites, that had crept in unawares, were the offenders. Such will be found in all churches.’ Now undoubtedly, this is the way in which most
Christians and teachers of the present day would deal with the question. They would urge such offenders to examine
themselves, whether they were really believers. For it was incredible, that truly converted persons
could so conduct themselves. But the Holy Spirit takes the very opposite
course. He assumes
throughout, and distinctly asserts in this verse, that the essentials of
saintship belonged to the offenders. Were they hypocrites, who
were justified, sanctified, baptized.
They had more evidence of acceptance
than any believer has now: for they had the baptism of the Spirit, and the
miraculous gifts which that baptism left behind it. “Ye come behind in no
gift:” 1 Cor. 1: 7. “In one Spirit were we
all baptized into one body:” 12: 13.
The same “ye” who are
charged as guilty of injustice and fraud, were justified and sanctified!
But
while they were believers, and, as such, sure, on the promise of God, of
attaining [receiving] eternal
life; God yet had room to punish offenders. The
millennial day is the day of recompence for our works, whether good or evil. A
thousand years is time enough to mark God’s pleasure in our works, or his
displeasure against them. As eternal
life shews his pleasure in the work of Christ, and in, those who by faith are
one with him, so will the recompence of the millennial day, for good or for
evil, display his sentiments concerning the special work of each believer.
The worldly often cry out
against professors of religion, as guilty of cheating, and taking unfair
advantage in business. It is doubtless
too often true. Not a few converted persons offend thus. Here then is the threatened justice of God
against such. If his saints sin, they shall not go unpunished. He hates the offence in them, as truly as in
the worldly. He has devised a way, whereby
he will make his displeasure visible to all intelligent beings, and felt by themselves.
Let all believers then keep this
first truth clearly before their eye. “Say ye to the
righteous that it shall be well with him, for
they shall eat the fruit of their doings:” Isa.
3: 10.
ROBERT GOVETT, M.A.
* *
*
POLITICS
“Forbidden territory to one who belongs to the Father.”
-------
In the long
history of the Church we have a literal and terrible fulfilment of the prophesied
activity of Satan. We are told that he
goes about “as a
roaring lion seeking whom he may devour.” His determination to tear to
pieces the Church of Christ, and destroy the living testimony to the Redeemer
of lost and sinful men, found expression in the diabolical activity of Nero and
the unrestrained cruelty of Diocletian.
The public
slaughter of believers throughout the ages, whether the human instrument be a
rope or a military dictator, and the means employed be a fire or a sword, or
the horror of rotting in a rat-infested dungeon, the fact that all this has
happened to men, women, and even children professing the name of Christ is
undeniable evidence that what Scripture foretold would come to pass has indeed
come to pass. When it has not been
expedient to devour openly, then has Satan transformed himself into an angel of
light in order to deceive.
The manner of this
deception at once suggests some form of false teaching; a teaching that, while
it contains some element of truth, is still not in accordance with the written
word. In this connection there is no
greater chaos in the channels of human thought than that which prevails as a
result of attempting to
Christianize modern society; to impregnate the existing order with what passes
for the Christian Religion,
and by that means build the
We know of course
that Scripture teaches us that until a set time the earth would remain under
the curse, due to the disobedience of our first parents.* There
has been no later revelation of any description to tell us that the curse
pronounced in Eden has been lifted. Consequently a
cursed earth and a creature in controversy with his Creator are conditions
entirely consistent with the revelation given to us in God’s word, and indeed
are the only adequate and logical explanation of what we see around us. Believers,
leaving the plain statements of God’s word, are being enticed into all manner
of worldly activity in an attempt to impose the Sermon on the Mount upon an unregenerate society. This preoccupation with the affairs of this
life [or evil age] is producing the choked spiritual life the Saviour
warned against in the parable of the Sower. “And that which
fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and
are choked with cares of this life - and
bring no fruit to perfection.”
[*
Gen. 3: 17, R.V.]
Satan knew that
the vanity of men exults in the fascinating glory of a worldly kingdom. Consequently he took Jesus up into an
exceeding high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a
moment of time. This temptation is
remarkable for the insight we have given us of the depth of cunning to which
Satan can descend. He attracts in order
to deceive. The kingdoms of this world
are a very real attraction to a mind alienated from God.
A
civilization enlightened by its own education and philosophies of life, spurred
on by the impetus of its own inventions, and moving through a series of social
revolutions towards some fancied golden age or new world-order is the mirage in
the desert that captivates the worldly-minded. Its attainment is accepted by the greatest
political thinkers of the day as being merely a matter of time. They make their speeches ring out the surety
of attaining this goal: but
Jesus, who knew the end from the beginning, in startling contrast to mere man
who knows not what a day brings forth, refused to accept Satan’s offer of world
rulership, though the offer was made at the time when the Son of Man had no
where to lay His head.
Hence, politics,
which broadly speaking is the
collective activity and expedient administration of earthly governments, are by their very nature forbidden territory to one who belongs to the Father. The strife
and clash of opposing opinions among men seeking to rule without God clearly
forbid the interference of one separated by Christ from the wisdom of this
world. The political
arena is the breeding ground for the secret diplomacy that periodically hurls
one nation at another. It is an
established fact that politics are a career, yet who would dare, nay who is
competent, to say just what
particular motive is driving a politician along a certain line of thought?
It is generally
accepted that the aim of the politician is a healthier state of society. But the lessons of history, one’s personal
experience, and the decidedly
unhealthy and dangerous conditions of the political arena of our own day do not
support that view. The determination to satisfy personal vanity
and the wielding of personal power in the realm of power-politics seem to be
much nearer the truth. The
gilded lie was never so much in evidence as in our own day. Continental political giants have been
striped naked and exposed as careerists and cowards, vultures living on the
people.
It cannot be too
strongly pointed out that the social
righteousness advocated by the politician is a righteousness
without God. At best it is humanism that is wholly detached
from the purity of God’s Righteousness as revealed in Jesus Christ. Frankly considered, the case against the believer becoming enmeshed in the
political confusion that so substantially contributes to the prevailing
perplexity has been proved conclusively. This inability to diagnose the
cause of the human tragedy made up as it is of lawlessness and suffering, the
latter following the former as night follows day, is effectively demonstrated
by the desperate and hopeless resort to a new league of nations; a new league
of nations fortified by an international police force, with the addition of the
resources of modern scientific research in the field of high-powered
destructives.
It is a fact that,
continually faced with the destructive power of evil, the most cultured and
educated civilization attainable by men is literally forced to protect itself
by a more scientific and a more powerful arm of law. This age-long
struggle for supremacy between good and evil, culminating as it has done in the
nearly complete and continual victory of evil over good, even though temporary,
must sooner or later give birth to the final crisis of the nations.
There is an
impassable gulf between the imaginations of unregenerate men and the
purposes of God according to His foreknowledge. One illustration will suffice. According to men the cause of all world chaos
and individual stress is either unsound politics,
mismanaged industry, biased education, or perverted economics. All this they say produces a world-crisis
resulting in war, which can only be averted in the future by a truly organized
distribution of the resources of the earth. It will be seen at once that while such a
superficial explanation is made a basis for starting another new order of any
kind whatever, the real issue will never be fought out. It is simply a tinkering with the symptoms to
the fatal neglect of the disease. Jesus
left no room for doubt that in fully accepting the implications of the death of
the Cross, He was personally dealing with the controversy that God has with the
creature He made. And not only so, but
when He said, “It
is finished,” that was a plain
declaration that the conflict of the ages had passed its greatest crisis. The righteousness of God had been revealed in
a display of love and power so unique that a perfect remedy was provided in the
death and resurrection of Jesus for the disease that has cursed humanity, namely,
sin. Can it be wondered at that the
ablest and most sincere politician only adds to the confusion and misery when
he seeks a solution of the world’s troubles by deliberately ignoring the fact
of
From this it is
clear that any attempt to build a new world order
is simply another way of saying, “We will not have this Man to reign over us.” It follows
that if the world has rejected Christ, then all its activity is Godless, and
doomed to failure for that very reason. No doubt men are baffled by the presumption of
ministers of religion blessing the schemes and plans for a new world order when
it is remembered that the vital international council chambers God is never
even named, let alone consulted.
OWEN VOSS
-------
FOOTNOTES
1. It is
remarkable how symptoms ripen of the Advent, and how convincing they are to the
watchful eyes of those who know and believe the prophetic Scriptures. The establishment of the ‘golden age’ is much nearer than many Christians today
suppose. No
matter in which direction we turn, we see a rapid deterioration in morality; a
disregard for those in authority; an increase in the misuse of drugs: there is
an uncomfortable feeling abroad, a distress of nations, men’s hearts failing
them for fear.
An important
question for every Christian is: Where
does my loyalty lie? Am I supporting the
present system which God has rejected?
G. H. LANG has
highlighted the ever present danger for every regenerate believer:-
“A king must needs have a body of
superior officers to serve him in administering his kingdom. King David had administrators and priests, men
who had served and suffered
with him in the long
years of his rejection (2
Sam. 8: 15-18) but
Jonathan, though he loved David as his own soul and willingly resigned to him
the throne, seeking only to be second only in the Kingdom though himself the
heir apparent (1 Sam. 23: 17), DID NOT
EVEN ENTER David’s
Kingdom, for he did not share his rejection. This is the moral warning - [applicable to every regenerate believer today] - the narrative seems to give. Through filial loyalty he supported the king AND THE SYSTEM WHICH
GOD HAD REJECTED, and lost his life in its collapse. It was the natural course
not the spiritual; the latter, the path of faith, would have been judged
unnatural. Jesus had said: ‘He that loveth father ... more than Me, is not worthy of Me’ (Matt. 10: 37). ‘Ye are they who have continued with Me in my trials; and I appoint unto you a Kingdom ... that you may eat and drink at My table in MY
KINGDOM; and ye shall sit on thrones
judging ...” (Luke 22: 28-30). This special grant was on account of these men having gone
through with Christ to the end of His rejection. He would forgive their failings, even the
severe failure of that night. He would
have regard to the
dominant fact that they
had stuck to His person and cause through thick and thin and would do so
unto the end of life.”
-------