LAWSUITS, INJURIES, AND EXCLUSION
By
ROBERT GOBETT, M. A.
[The following exposition can be found in the author’s
book, Entrance into the Kingdom, pp. 194-207.]
Perhaps
no passage is more clear and full in its testimony to the exclusion of some believers
from the millennium 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 judged, 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 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 of 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, were 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 counts unjust. If he
acts out of 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
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" to be
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: v. 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 cases. The judical power is a part of the supreme
authority 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 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, v. 2, 3, some think is
understood their being assessors to Christ in the judgment: Matt. 19: 28; Jude 14, 15; 1 Thess.
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 that 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 place and admire it, is small proof that such a one could build a house! When Solomon, in his capacity as king, gave
the memorable judical 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 of the world’s and for angel’s 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 connection between the two things conjoined by the apostle, on this
supposition. ‘Christians.’ Says Paul, on the hypothesis, ‘shall hereafter approve the sentence
previously passed by Christ.
Therefore they can frame and enforce a just sentence themselves
independently of the 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. 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 judgment," 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 shall also sit on twelve thrones judging
the twelve tribes of
It
is supposed by Paul, that this doctrine is a first truth which every
intelligent 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 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 [millennial]
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, tailers, 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 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
Pet. 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 away by it.
Since that time, God in his displeasure has consigned them to a place
called Tartarus, were 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.
¹
[*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 statement 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 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 of 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 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, 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 were not to 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 has 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 the 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 up his charge.
That would be according to the
highest 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
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 the 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 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 show 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; yea, 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 we own as such near relatives in Christ, is
worse.
9. "Know ye not, that unjust persons
shall not inherit the
In
order to feel the full force of this passage, it is necessary to be satisfied
of the meaning of the 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 [regenerate] 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, till every enemy and death itself is subdued. Then he delivers up the 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, when he should 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 sin.
‘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 believers,
- it is granted. Then it is 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 unconverterd 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 [regenerate] believers, then it would imply, that Corinthians
imagined, that some unconverted thieves [and deceivers] 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 favorites 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 wispers - "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
prepared for [regenerate] believers who offend. ‘Not standing, but fruits,’
is the maxim which God will apply to every enterer into the 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 [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 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: 6: 9,
10.
It
appears, too, that capital punishment administered by authority of the kings of
the 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, as if the previous assertion of their injustice and fraud where hereby
contradicted. But a glance at the original destroys any such idea. The
verbs are 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 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. 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 it is 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* [*
"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.] and renewal of the
Holy Spirit:" Titus iii, 3-5. This washing was God’s type of his inward
cleansing by his Spirit, and the forgiveness by the work of Jesus, which are
next noticed.
"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
"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 action represent also burial with Christ into death, as the just penalty
of sin; and the raising, 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, they were 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 shut them out from the proffered bliss.
Here
then we obtain the final proof, that this threat is addressed to 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 menaced.
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 ye 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 [regenerate] believers, and, as such, sure, on the promise of
God, of attaining [obtaining] eternal life; God
yet had room to punish offenders. The millennial day is the day of recompense
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 shows his pleasure
in the work of Christ, and in those who by faith are one with him, so will
the recompense 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
pleasure 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 [they that do what is right] that it shall be well with
him, for they shall eat the fruit of their doings:" Isa. 3: 10.
--------