Reflections From 1 Corinthians Chapter 5: HOW IS ADULTERY AN EXPRESSION OF ARROGANCE RATHER THAN LOVE? (Vvs.1-5)

 

1-corinthians

When it comes to any subject today, we either ground it ultimately on the creature or the Creator.  That is, someone’s “world-view” finally influences the way what is true, beautiful, and good is determined.  Today, the “same-sex marriage” is a case in point.  Two contradictory views are affirmed with this idea.  It boldly denies design on the one hand (i.e., marriage is what I the creature say it is a-la-moral relativism) but simultaneously invokes an immaterial “ought” of live and let live with those that disagree with said position.  This is problematic so I’ll try to explain.

First, “same-sex marriage” affirms that there’s no ultimate design to marriage, thus we make of it what the creature says and by implication affirm naturalism/materialsim which holds that human beings are nothing more than a body, not a mind/soul.  If humans are merely physical entities, than we have no meaning in life, since meaning is not physical, but immaterial.

Second, if one opposes the “same-sex marriage” position, they are labeled as haters, bigots, non-progressive idiots, etc.  The situation now slides into the world of “ought” of right and wrong, the immaterial world from where meaning comes.  Here in is the dilemma, on the one hand naturalism (i.e., physicalism) is affirmed which opposes any notion of mind, spirit, etcetera and simultaneously there’s the affirmation of an immaterial reality, which affirms humans are both mind and body (i.e., dualism, or substance dualism).  Whenever a contradiction arises, as in this case, we know there’s a falsehood and the “buyer” should beware.

In this world of ideas precious human beings are entangled, this is the field where life is lived and rules have far reaching consequences.  For example, naturalism affirms that there’s no God or gods, no design, and our existence is accidental and thus purposeless.  It’s the worldview that supports Darwinian evolutionary thought and the perch on which atheism rests.  If this is true why all the fuss over whether or not there’s any agreement over someone’s sexual orientation?

Again, there’s Monism which affirms among other things that everything is one, mind is core, distinctions are eradicated, and life is essentially illusory or “maya”.  This is the worldview under which Buddhism and much of Hinduism exists.  If this existence is illusory, then our experiences are essentially meaningless.  If this is true why all the fuss over whether or not there’s any agreement over someone’s sexual orientation?

Then there’s monotheism and specifically Christian Trinitarian theism that affirms a designer “God” the creator, sustainer, and author of life who grounds the meaning of what is good, beautiful and true.  This worldview affirms the physical and immaterial, it understands that we are body and soul, and it also affirms the world of “ought” of what is right and wrong, all of which are based on the Creator, not the creature.   If this is true, then all the fuss over whether or not there’s any agreement over someone’s sexual orientation is warranted.

I say these things because from the biblical standpoint, love is grounded in the Creator, never the creature.  Thus, the designer determines what real love is, not a culture that is seriously broken because of its arrogance.

In Paul’s day, he had to deal with a similar issue of making the creature the measure of all things and by default the Creator is pushed aside, slighted, minimized, scorned and belittled by the creature’s “arrogance” “pride”.  This human trait sets itself up against God, becomes his judge, and shamelessly spits on the brow of He who gives us life.  Consider what the apostle says:

“It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father’s wife. You have become arrogant and have not mourned instead, so that the one who had done this deed would be removed from your midst. For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”

Like Israel, the Corinthian church had crossed a line of sexual immorality that even the pagans (i.e., Gentiles) in their day would not, that is, a son had sexual relations with his fathers’ wife.  This could be a step-mother or actual, the text does not say.  The moral compass here is shattered as God’s design of sexuality is ignored and shamefully the church did nothing.

The church failed to discipline the perpetrators and thus allowed the situation to continue.  Paul says this is a lamentable occasion fueled by the Corinthians apathy caused by their pride.  This is a recurring theme in the first letter where false knowledge actually produces death in the practitioners, not life.  And this false knowledge (i.e., which is contra Christ, the gospel, and held to be true), is fueled by human pride.

Church discipline while painful to receive and weighty to administer is absolutely necessary for the health of the church, the individuals involved in the transgression, and mostly God’s honor and glory.  Several thoughts to consider:

First, the text does not say whether or not the father is alive when this act occurred, but for Paul (i.e., God’s authoritative spokesman) it seems to not matter because he passed judgment on the action and ordered the man to be removed from the assembly.  This stroke of discipline illustrates the urgency needed to act on behalf of the transgressor, for the sin reveals the grave rift that obtains between he and God.

Second, not only is the man to be removed from the local church, his body is to be “delivered over to Satan” for the destruction of his flesh (v.5), this is severe, yet the purpose has final salvation in view, not momentary grief.  The “flesh” is what needs to be destroyed so that his spirit may be saved.

Does he mean by “flesh” his sinful nature as in other places in Paul’s writings, or his physical body, or perhaps both his body and sinful nature?  It seems that it’s his body which is what Satan is to work on destroying so that he won’t be lost.  Perhaps this may be akin to the pummeling Job received from Satan.  The difference though is that Job was a humble upright and righteous man, whereas this man is immoral revealed by his arrogance and wickedness.  What we today take so lightly and as a right of self-expression Paul’s attitude is that it will damn the perpetrator, sexual immorality is lethal to the soul.

Third, Paul says that he has “decided to deliver” this man to Satan, but how is that accomplished?  Is this something only the apostle has the authority to do or for the church as well?  Contextually, I would say the latter not the former.  Could it be that ex-communicating someone from the church actually makes them vulnerable to Satanic attack and destruction?  Sometimes it seems to be the case.

This hearkens back to Romans chapter 1 where God gave over rebellious mankind to their lusts and passions because they exchanged the truth of God’s glory as Creator for a lie and worshipped the creature instead.  This state of affairs came from humanity’s futile speculations which darkened their hearts evidenced in this church goers adultery with his mother.  It’s not according to God’s design, but a perversion of His good gifts.

Fourth, note that this discipline is to be done in Paul’s absence and in the power and name of the Lord Jesus Christ.  This is a sobering solemn act, not one where song and rejoicing is expressed.  It is Jesus who is brought to center attention since it’s His church which He has purchased with his blood and is continuously building.

We have here a model for church discipline done by the church, the Body of Christ Jesus, so that the Head of the Body (Christ Jesus) may be honored through His people’s holiness, rather than ravaged by its wickedness.

It’s not loving to commit adultery but arrogant because its contra God’s design and plan for human flourishing.  What we believe is either grounded on what the Creator has revealed or what the creature says.  Thus, if God has spoken, how then shall we live?

(SDG)

Advertisements

Reflections From ROMANS 12:1-2 “GOD’S MERCIES GROUNDS HOLY LIVING & HOLY THINKING”

book-of-romans

In this chapter Paul makes an inference to the previous chapter specifically (“therefore”) and I think generally to the entirety of the book going back to Romans 1:1 where God chose Paul to be an apostle of the Gospel of Christ.  Paul starts with:

Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.

Many years ago I practiced praying these texts over myself and others.  They were and still are “go-to-prayers” for power to walk with God.  Paul now makes a break in this letter that can be missed but hurts the readers understanding when it occurs.

In his letters, Paul has a habit of going from the indicative to the imperative which means that he explains the revelation of the gospel first (indicative=facts) and secondly he gives the implications of the gospel (imperative=command) where believers are to live in accordance to that message.

A quick recap of Romans up to this point will be helpful.  Chapter 1&2 shows Paul being eager to preach the Gospel of Christ (God’s Son) because both Jew and Gentile are under God’s just wrath (1:1-2:29).  In chapter’s 3&4 Paul argues that the true Jew is not the one circumcised in the flesh but the one who has Abraham’s faith.  In chapter 5 the two Adam’s are compared where the 1st one brought death resulting from his rebellion, and the 2nd Adam (Christ) through his obedience and death brought life.

Then in chapter 6 we see that believers are dead to sin but alive to God because of Christ’s resurrection, yet in chapter 7 Paul considers the battle of sin within believers still fight, a battle that Christ alone can/does help us win.  In chapter 8 Paul then assures believers that in spite of this battle with sin, God’s condemnation passes over them—working in them to be more like Christ.

Finally, in chapters 9-11 Paul argues for the election of both Jew and Gentile alike (9), that this salvation and election is accomplished through the preached word of God (10), and finally that God has not rejected Israel, but has a plan for them to also be rescued (11).  The bow around these three chapters is the grandeur of God’s being which includes His wisdom and knowledge which are unsearchable.  The proper response to all of this is doxology—praise, worship and adoration.

It’s these gospel truths to which Paul is inferring when he now commands believers to live a certain way.  Here’s a powerful lesson in the proper use of authority to bless people rather than manipulating and controlling them for selfish means.  Paul grounds his “urging” or “appeal” on God’s mercies to vessels of mercy, which formerly were objects of wrath, to live and to think in a certain way.

Both living and thinking are to be impacted by Christ’s Gospel already revealed in this letter.  This mystery revealed must now be evidenced in how believers relate to each other and to the observant world (both enemies and the state.)  Unlike Monists who deny the reality of the physical realm by denying real distinctions and claiming they are mere illusion, or those who claim that the body is bad and the spirit is good (thus what one does in the body is inconsequential), the Gospel of Christ says no!  God says that, “My people are to be holy as I Am holy”:

 Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.”       

The sacrifices offered on the altar in the Old Testament, for example, were dead so they could not feel any pain of being burnt.  But here “somewhat like the Master” on Calvary’s cross, his followers are expected to in one degree or another suffer.  Minimally, when we are tempted to misuse our bodies (as in chapter 1:18-32 with illicit sexual acts) and we don’t succumb to it, we truly suffer hardship because of our love for God.  This is evidenced not only through a chaste life, but also by denying homosexual tendencies overall.

But our bodies also are involved with other degrading passions such as gossip with the tongue, murder with our hands, etc.  Our bodies house our soul and while they are decaying these bodies will one day be resurrected to immortality.   For Paul, the body is the tool believers are to use to honor God, but it’s just not our bodies, it’s also our minds which engage this worship:

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.”   

             Here, Paul not only affirms our bodies but also our minds (i.e., not the brain which is physical, but the mind which is an immaterial substance) as the means to worship God.  These two are gifts from God and should be used in accordance to their design.  An atheistic worldview denies any such notion of immateriality or spirit, this is called physicalism.  But according to God’s revelation such a view is an example of “suppressing the truth of God in unrighteousness”.  The point here is that our thinking in light of the gospel must be disciplined so that foreign ideas to it are not adopted and thus dishonor God.  Instead, our thought life is to align with God’s thoughts as revealed in this letter of Romans.

One thing is certain in light of election (Chapters 9-11) all human pride is crushed, boasting before God is eliminated because only sovereign grace can rescue anyone from God’s wrath.  This means that any “works of the Law” righteousness people rely on in order to be acceptable before God will utterly disappoint because that foundation of “sand” can’t save from Holy wrath, but actually assures it on the participant.

Note that to prove or to know God’s good, acceptable, and perfect will our thinking must change, it must be transformed from the way this present evil age thinks.  The application here is massive.  The point is that our bodies and minds, what makes us image bearers, are included in the true worship of God (see Mt.22:34-40).  Thus, how we think and how we live demonstrates our understanding of reality in light of the gospel of Christ.  LORD, have mercy on us!  (SDG)          

Summary of Chapter 7: JOURNEY TO THE EAST—EASTERN PANTHEISTIC MONISM (Pgs.118-135)

51WMWG0MWVL._SX315_BO1,204,203,200_

            Sire begins by pointing out the disparity of thought that obtains between the West and East and the problems which arise as a result.  Many events, including the Vietnam War, caused many Westerners to look to the East for meaning in life.   This shift of thinking in the West was evidenced by the Hippy movement of the 1960’s.

Eastern thought is both pantheistic and monistic where all is god and God is all, thus the One is Atman and Brahman are true reality.  First, it is held that every soul is the Cosmos where distinctions are eradicated.  Thus, God is each person and each person is God so whatever distinctions appear to be the case, are a mere illusion.

Second, some things are more than others which means that pure being is unity with the One.  Third, many if not all roads lead to the One, thus Hicks view of salvation obtains here.  One can meditate a mandala, chant a mantra, or chant the OM where solitude and silence are necessary.  Here it is where non-rational content has meaning and for one to become one with Atman, it is necessary for the waking, dreaming, sleeping and awakening which result in enlightenment.

The word OM is multifaceted in meaning (Pgs.125-126).

Fourth, one must realize their oneness with the Cosmos in order to pass beyond personality which equals the acquisition of pure being, which is nonconsciousness (Pg.127).

Fifth, realizing one’s oneness with the Cosmos means one has gone past knowledge where the law of non-contradiction does not apply.  Here’s where many Westerners get tripped up and rightly so.

Sixth, oneness means going beyond good and evil.  This view makes it impossible for one to have moral outrage much less a moral position (Pgs.128-129).

Seventh, death terminates the individual but really changes nothing and history is cyclical (See how West must engage East with their W.V.).  At the end of the day, the Eastern mentality denies reality as it truly is, thus evil and good are denied (point out this problem mannishly).  Mostly, the law of non-contradiction must be championed in order to address this position.