Sermon series: When Relationships Collide (Theme-based)

  1. A Fractured Family - 1 Corinthians 1

  2. The Cure for the Common Self - 1 Corinthians 1

  3. My Way or the Highway? - 1 Corinthians 8

  4. For the Sake of the Body - 1 Corinthians 5

  5. Identity Theft - 1 Corinthians 6

  6. Body Building - 1 Corinthians 12

To be used with: Session Four: Stand Your Ground
Alternate title: A Hill on Which to Die
Scriptures: 1 Corinthians 5:1-13

Connection to unit theme

The small group session this week is called "Stand Your Ground" and the main point is, "Never compromise when the issue is a matter of right and wrong." This sermon can really serve as a bookend to Session 3's sermon. Last week we talked about how to give ground on an issue that was not of primary importance (whether or not it was acceptable to eat meat that had been sacrificed to idols). But there were other issues in the church in Corinth that were clear-cut and absolute. We'll look at one of them today.

Introduction

We've been going through 1 Corinthians pretty much in order, but today, I want to go back to a passage we skipped last week, but hopefully it will make sense to you why we went out of order.

Last week we talked about how we don't have to get our own way to solve a conflict. We might have strong opinions on certain issues. We might even be completely convinced we are right. Last week, we studied how Paul knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was nothing wrong with eating meat sacrificed to idols. He was secure in his Christian liberty. However, he was very aware that exercising his liberty could cause a younger Christian or less mature Christian to stumble into sin. So we talked last week about responding in love when we have differing opinions on areas the Bible is not explicitly clear on.

But what do we do about issues on which the Bible is explicitly clear? Well, the answer is the same. We still respond in love. However, the way that love is expressed is very different when there is a clear-cut, explicit, absolute word from God that a certain behavior is wrong. So today, we are going to skip back to 1 Corinthians 5 and see how Paul responded when he was faced with such an issue.

[Read 1 Corinthians 5:1-13]

I. A scandal with two sides (1 Cor. 5: 1-5)

A. The scandalous behavior (v. 1)

Paul was horrified to hear that a man "had his father's wife." This probably meant his stepmother, since the woman is not referred to as his mother. She was most likely not a church member, since Paul says only to expel him and not her as well (V. 5, 13)

As permissive as Corinthian culture was, incest was taboo even for them. For God's people, it should have been unthinkable (see Lev. 18:8;Dt. 22:30)

The verb tense in the phrase "has his father's wife" suggests an ongoing relationship, not a one time thing; and no hint of repentance.

B. The scandalous reaction (v. 2)

Paul seemed to be less shocked by the incest itself than he was by the church's reaction to it. They were proud. Verse 6 suggests they even boasted about it. They might have been boasting about their open-mindedness. Or their forgiving spirit. This doesn't seem too far-fetched today, as we think about "tolerance" being one of the most celebrated virtues of out modern society.

Paul is shocked that the church wasn't filled with grief over this situation. As we talked about last week, since we are all members of Christ's body, the actions of one person impact the entire body.

The Holman New Testament Commentary points out that sorrow for the sins of others is an appropriate biblical response (see Gen. 6:5-6; Ezra 10:1; Rom. 9:2-3) (Pratt, 74)

C. The redemptive response (v. 3-5)

Paul was clear that the church was to hand this man over to Satan "for the destruction of his flesh" (HCSB, ESV, NIV 2011). Exactly what this means is less clear. NIV 1984 translates the phrase "so that the sinful nature may be destroyed." There have been two interpretations to this:

  • "Hand over to Satan" meant the death of the man's physical body, similar to Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11); with the confidence that his spirit would be saved on Judgment Day. According to the NIV Application Commentary, "the severe discipline is to prevent the man from committing full-fledged apostasy and to ensure that he still will be saved in eternity" (Blomberg, 105).

  • It could also mean the destruction of the flesh, or sinful nature. Blomberg points out that when Paul teaches on the conflict between flesh and spirit (the two words used in verse 5), he usually isn't talking about body/soul but to old nature/new nature. Compare 1 Timothy 1:20, where Paul talks about two believers being handed over to Satan in order "to be taught not to blaspheme." This would imply expulsion from the body (the church) for a limited period of time, with a view toward reconciliation at a later point. Many scholars suggest that the repentant sinner in 2 Corinthians 2:5-11; 7:8-13 is the same guy that was expelled here (Blomberg 105-106).

Application Idea: Help the church understand that compassion and tolerance may seem admirable on the surface, and may actually be admirable in situations where there is godly sorrow that leads to repentance. But looking the other way when there is known immoral behavior is nothing to be proud of. Celebrating such behavior as evidence of your freedom in Christ is even worse.

II. Explaining the expulsion (vv. 6-8)

Paul compared tolerance for ongoing sin within the body of Christ to "yeast" (HCSB, NIV) or "leaven" (ESV) working its way through a whole batch of dough. Pratt, in HNTC, helps us understand why this was a bad thing (especially those of us who happen to like big puffy loaves of bread!):

In ancient times, yeast was scarce and leaven was the popular alternative. Leaven was actually just an old piece of dough that had begun to ferment. When added to a new batch of dough, it spread its fermentation throughout the whole loaf, making the bread lighter. The longer the process continued, the greater the danger that the dough would become spoiled and poisonous. When the dough became bad, it all needed to be thrown away, and the process begun again (Pratt, 80).

Paul's audience in Corinth may or may not have picked up on all the connections of unleavened bread to the Jewish Passover. But they did understand that Christ, their Passover, had been sacrificed for them. So for the sake of the purity of the body, the old leaven of immorality, malice and wickedness had to be removed.

Application idea: We may still not completely get the idea of not letting a batch of dough become spoiled by a little bit of yeast. But most of us have had some experience somewhere among our family or friends with cancer. And we wouldn't want a doctor who said, "It's just a little tumor. It will be a long time before this spreads to anything really important." Or, "We should all try to be a little more understanding of tumors. After all, they're cells, too." Surgery might be painful, but it is necessary for the health of the body that the malignancy be removed.

III. Clarifying some confusion (vv. 9-13)

Paul clarifies that his command "not to associate with sexually immoral people" did not mean the church was to separate itself from the world. Until we leave the world completely (when Christ returns and takes us home), we will be surrounded by sinful people. Separating from immoral people might make us safer, but it also keeps us from being salt and light to a dark and thirsty world. Instead, Paul made it clear that we are not to associate with, or even eat with, anyone who calls himself a brother but persists in a lifestyle of habitual sin. He also made it clear that sexual immorality was not the only area that required a measure of church discipline. His list included the greedy, the idolatrous (think about what that one looks like today!), slanderers, drunkards, and swindlers.

Conclusion

So what do we do with this passage today? Lots of churches choose to ignore it, because the issue of how to exercise church discipline in the 21st century is too complicated. But we have to ask ourselves, "For the sake of the body, what would we not tolerate in the body?" How do we remain (or become) a church that reaches out to the lost but at the same time holds the saved to high standards? Is it really loving to a brother or sister who is engaged in sinful patterns to pretend you don't know about them, to tolerate them, or even to celebrate them? These are questions we have to address if we are going to be a healthy body of Christ. But there are a few things we can and must keep in mind:

  • Sin is to be grieved over, not celebrated. Pray that we will see sin as God sees it. And not primarily the sin we see in other people, but the sin we see in ourselves.

  • Discipline is to be redemptive, not punitive. However our church practices church discipline [Pastor, you may choose to educate your people on how your church does this], the goal is always to help bring a fallen brother or sister to conviction and repentance.

James Jackson is the digital content editor for Bible Studies For Life. He is a frequent youth camp speaker and itinerant preacher. He lives in Nashville, Tennessee with his wife, Trish, and their two sons, Caleb and Joshua.