Judges and Saints

James 4, 1-2 teaches us about the root of all conflict.

It says,

What causes quarrels and what causes fights among you?

Is it not this, that your passions are at war within you?

You desire and do not have, so you murder.

You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel.

So we like to blame our circumstances and situations

when we get into conflict or when we're offended by someone.

However, Scripture teaches that the root of all conflict is our own desires, passions.

The circumstances, situations present an occasion for those desires to surface

and to manifest in disappointment and anger.

But those are just occasions, context for that desire to be expressed.

And that desire, whether it's for love, respect, or profit,

when it's unfulfilled, it leads to disappointment and disagreement.

So desire leads to disappointment.

And when our sinful pride, at this point,

it leads us to believe that we deserve whatever we didn't get.

So it's that desire to disappointment to a sense of deserving.

And then after that, this sinful downward spiral diverges into two paths.

Either we go to denial, where we, at this point, say,

act as if nothing happened, nothing's wrong, there's no conflict, it doesn't exist,

or you simply flee the situation by either ending a relationship,

quitting a job, or changing churches.

The other path is to demand it, whatever you did not get, to demand it of others.

And you do it by fighting to get it.

You lead to at least verbal abuse.

It leads to intimidation, threat of violence, or even litigation.

So that's really the trajectory of all conflict, really.

It starts from desire, goes to disappointment, and then you demand it or you deny it.

Now, in the Corinthian church, there was a believer who desired fair treatment

and an equitable transaction that he wanted some kind of profit with the fellow believer.

But this desire was disappointed when he was defrauded by the other believer.

And believing that he deserved better, he proceeded to demand restitution

by suing the other believer within the Roman legal system.

And so the biblical, Paul addresses this messy situation here in 1 Corinthians 6, 1-11.

But instead of taking us toward the downward spiral of sin,

he points us to a better biblical approach to resolving such a situation.

And his main point in this passage is this,

is that justified saints ought to live justly and judge disputes among themselves.

So justified saints ought to live justly and judge disputes among themselves.

The first point will be about the saints' judgment in verses 1-6.

Second, about the saints' justice in verses 7-10.

And lastly, about the saints' justification in verse 11.

So look with me at verse 1-6 first about the saints' judgment.

So Paul concluded the previous chapter in chapter 5 about,

he was commanding the Corinthian church to expel the incestuous man from their fellowship

because he was teaching that they are supposed to not judge those who are outside,

but judge those who are inside.

But in the same way Christians are not to judge those who are outside,

they are also not to be judged by outsiders regarding its internal affairs.

And so he says in this passage that judging the internal matters of the church

is a saint's prerogative.

And that's the first point, the saint's judgment.

And right from verse 1, Paul voices indignation at the situation that was reported to him.

He says,

When one of you has a grievance against another,

does he dare to go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints?

So in the Greek, the verb dare is the very first word of that sentence for emphasis.

It goes, dare do you have grievance against another

to go to the law before the unrighteous instead of the saints?

So Paul's kind of horrified by what he's heard of happening.

And the unrighteous are contrasted with the word saints in verse 1, right?

So the word saint means holy one, someone who is set apart or consecrated.

It's the designation of Christians who have been consecrated to belong to God.

So by referring to the Roman courts as unrighteous,

Paul's not necessarily commenting on their corruption,

that they're corrupt legal authorities,

but rather he's designating their status as people who do not follow God and don't belong to God.

So this is confirmed by verse 6,

where the unrighteous people are referred to as unbelievers.

That's really what Paul is essentially saying.

But by choosing the word unrighteous,

he is kind of highlighting the irony of what the Corinthians are doing here,

because he's basically asking,

do you, because the word unrighteous also means unjust,

he's basically asking them,

do you seek justice from the unjust, right?

Do you seek righteousness from those who do not know true righteousness?

That's what Paul is asking here.

And Paul gives two parallel reasons why taking a case between two believers

to an unbeliever for judgment is so unthinkable in verses 2 to 3.

Or do you not know that the saints, follow with me, verses 2 to 3.

Do you not know that the saints will judge the world?

And if the world is to be judged by you,

are you incompetent to try trivial cases?

Do you not know that we are to judge angels?

How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life?

So first reason that is given in verse 2,

the saints will judge the world, right?

So now, at this point, if you have been with us for the whole series,

you're wondering, wait, didn't you just tell us in the last chapter

that we're not supposed to judge the world?

And so the key to answering that contradiction is looking at the tense,

because he says the saints will judge the world.

The saints do not judge the world here and now.

That's not our prerogative.

But it is God's prerogative at the end time,

at the day of judgment, to judge the world.

But at that time of God's judgment,

the saints will partake in God's judgment over the world.

And we don't know to what extent or detail,

but we do know that saints will partake in that judgment.

And then, this is kind of the Old Testament background for this,

is in Daniel 7.22,

where it teaches that when God comes for judgment,

it says the judgment will be given for the saints of the Most High.

And so Paul is kind of referring to the reality

that he taught about in chapter 2,

where he said this natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God,

for they are folly to him,

and he is not able to understand them

because they are spiritually discerned.

The spiritual person judges all things,

but he is himself to be judged by no one.

So Christians are indwelled by the Spirit of God

and endowed with the privilege of rendering God's judgment

on the final day of judgment.

So if that's the case,

then how backwards is it for these believers

to seek judgment from unbelievers

who do not have the Spirit of God

and therefore are unable to discern spiritual things?

And how senseless for a church

that will be entrusted with judging the whole world

to be deemed incompetent to try such a trivial case?

That's what Paul is saying.

And he gives a second parallel reason in verse 2.

He says,

Do you not know that we are to judge angels?

How much more than matters pertaining to this life?

Paul's reasoning is identical to the first one, right?

The church will even judge the angels,

the heavenly beings.

How much more than are we qualified to judge earthly matters, right?

And then he continues in verse 4.

So if you have such cases,

why do you lay them before those

who have no standing in the church?

So there are two problems

with what the Corinthians are doing

in this current situation.

First, they are making such a fuss

about what Paul deems a trivial matter.

To him, this is not a big deal.

So this is a small problem,

but you're making such a big deal

that you're even taking it to this court.

So they're making much ado about nothing.

And then secondly,

they are seeking the judgment of outsiders,

people who have no standing in the church, right?

So even though they're foreign to the church

and they don't have a share in God's judgment,

they are going instead to God,

instead of God's community,

going to the outsiders.

So you can kind of think about it this way, right?

When a criminal in the U.S. flees to another country, right?

The laws of the partnership that they have

with other governments and legal systems,

the U.S. will request the extradition

of the foreign government, right?

So the foreign government will send the criminal back to the U.S.

so they can be tried within this legal system

to which they are legally bound, right?

So judgment has to be rendered

by the proper authorities who have jurisdiction,

but the Corinthians are doing exactly the opposite, right?

They have proper jurisdiction.

They should be rendering judgment on this trivial case,

but they are trying to send it over

to someone else for judgment.

They're extraditing this case,

but even though it's their prerogative to judge.

And so earlier, right,

in chapter 4, verse 14,

Paul reminded them that he was writing

some of the things he was writing,

not to shame them,

but to admonish them.

But now their situation is so bad,

Paul resorts directly to shaming them, right?

So he says in verse 5 here,

I say this to your shame.

Can it be that there is no one among you

wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers?

Right, this is about as sharp and sarcastic

as Apostle Paul gets, you know, in his writings.

Because, right, remember the word wisdom

is a key word that recurs

throughout the book of 1 Corinthians.

And the whole, one of the main problems,

the root problem of the Corinthians

was their pride in thinking

that they were so wise

to have advanced beyond

Paul's teaching about the gospel.

So they claimed to be characterized

by this great wisdom.

But they were really turning

to the wisdom of the world.

So when Paul says to them,

is there, there's no one among you

wise enough to settle a dispute

between the brothers?

He's being really sarcastic

and kind of rubbing it in.

You claim to be so wise,

but there's not even anyone,

among you wise enough

to judge this trivial case.

And he continues his rebuke

in verse 6.

Brother goes to law against brother,

and that before unbelievers.

Paul's bringing yet another reason

why this is so inappropriate,

and that's that this is a matter

between two brothers.

Paul's accusing the Corinthians,

basically, of airing out

their dirty household laundry

in front of outsiders.

People who are not part of their family,

and thereby inviting their scorn

and damaging the witness of the church.

In the Roman Empire,

the civil magistrates took judgment seats

at the public marketplace,

at the very heart

of the public marketplace.

So the judgments were quite public.

So really these guys,

these two believers

from the Corinthian church

are making a public spectacle

of a household problem,

of their internal family problem.

And this is in stark contrast

to what Paul's vision

for the church is.

The church is the temple of God,

as Paul was writing before.

It's supposed to be

an alternate community in Corinth,

a contrast community

that showcases God's values

and priorities,

but instead,

they are narrow-mindedly

seeking their personal gain,

and in doing so,

making a public spectacle

of church's own sin and problem.

Now, if you're thinking about this

and thinking about

how this applies to us,

it's important to note

that Paul's not advocating

some sort of extreme separation

of church and state, right?

Where we claim exclusive jurisdiction

over everything that happens

in the church, you know?

I mean, you guys have probably

heard of churches like that.

It's more cult-like to do that, right?

It's like, oh,

if there's anything wrong

happening in the church,

no, don't hide it, hide it.

You know, kind of just put it

under the rug

and try not to let the word

get out about it.

That's not what Paul's talking about

because Paul is here

speaking of a civil lawsuit, right?

Obviously, the distinction

is modern,

but the same concept applies.

He's talking about

a civil lawsuit

which deals with

a private dispute

between persons

and organizations, right?

He's not speaking

of a criminal case

where the offense

is considered harmful

to all of society

so that the charge

is brought not

by a private individual

but by a government prosecutor

or a district attorney.

You guys know the difference

between those two cases?

So this is a civil case.

So, for example,

if one of our members

is charged of conspiracy

and fraud,

that kind of goes beyond

just the two private individuals

but poses a general threat

to the public, right?

Or if one of our members

is perpetrating abuse,

sexual abuse or assault

or possession and distribution

of drugs, for example.

So if our members

are doing things

that are of a public threat

to general society,

that's a criminal case

and yes,

the government has

jurisdiction over that

and they do prosecute that

and we will partner

with them on that regard

because those are actually wrong

and Romans 13 teaches clearly

that we are to be subject

to the governing authorities.

So because of that authority,

they've been instituted by God

to reward good conduct

and punish bad conduct,

that's what Romans 13 says,

as long as the laws of our land

do not violate

the higher law of God,

we will be subject to them.

That's not what Paul

is talking about.

This principle of not going

to law against other believers

does not apply

to criminal cases.

It applies to civil cases

between two believers

where one person

can theoretically

just incur the loss himself

and cover it up

instead of having to go

to get public gain.

With that said though, right,

so when it comes to judging

matters of private offense

between brothers and sisters,

the judgment rightfully

belongs to the church

and that's Paul's first point,

the saints' judgment.

The saints ought to judge

disputes among themselves.

And then in verses 7 to 10,

Paul talks about

the saints' justice.

By justice,

I mean righteousness,

both of which are translations

of the same Greek word.

And not only is it

the saints' prerogative

to judge fellow believers,

the saints' lives

should be characterized

by justice or righteousness.

And so if these two brothers

were pursuing righteousness,

they would have responded

very differently

to this situation.

And so in verse 7,

Paul first addresses

the plaintiff, right,

the brother who is suing

the other brother.

And in verse 8,

Paul turns to address

the defendant,

the brother who defrauded

the other person

and is now being sued, right?

So keep that in mind,

verse 7 and verse 8.

So he says in verse 7,

to have lawsuits at all

with one another

is already a defeat for you.

Why not rather suffer wrong?

Why not rather be defrauded?

Defrauded.

I mean, this mindset

is so foreign

to our culture, right?

It's, our culture,

we're all about

getting our share, right?

We're all about

using our rights.

And in the mindset

of the world,

there are a thousand

good reasons

for why not rather

suffer wrong?

Why not rather be defrauded?

Because, well,

that's not fair, right?

That seems like

a good reason, right?

But why not?

Because I didn't

do anything wrong.

Like, why not?

Because it's all his fault.

Why is it not fair

for me to get my right

and get my share, right?

So they,

but these are not

good enough reasons

for the believer

because we follow

Jesus Christ,

our Savior,

who himself suffered

unjustly

that we might be saved.

And if we claim

to follow him,

then our lives

should follow the pattern

of the suffering

servanthood of Christ.

So the Christian life

is about humility, right?

It's about counting others

better than ourselves,

not equal to ourselves

than we try to get our rights.

No, we're supposed

to count others

better than ourselves.

It's about putting

others' interests

before our own.

So our enthusiastic answer

to Paul's rhetorical question

should be,

why not indeed?

We would much rather

be personally defrauded

than defame Christ's name

and damage

the church's witness.

That should be our answer

to Paul's rhetorical question.

That's the proper

Christian attitude.

Note that the Christian brother

here was really defrauded, right?

I mean, he really was wronged.

He really was defrauded.

But nevertheless, right,

but Paul tells him

that he should have

rather suffered wrong

than to sue.

It's not a question

of whether we can get our right.

It's not a question

of whether you are in the right.

Even if you're 100% in the right,

suffering wrong for Christ's sake

is the distinctively Christian thing to do.

So what if you were cheated

out of a lot of money?

It's all money

you can't take with you to heaven.

Why not rather suffer wrong

for the love of Christ

than out of your forbearing love

for a brother?

As Paul says in Romans 12, 17 to 21,

repay no one evil for evil,

but give thought to do

what is honorable

in the sight of all.

He says,

we are not to be overcome by evil,

but to overcome evil with good.

Of course,

Paul's dealing specifically

with matters between two Christians,

but there is biblical precedent

for assuming a similar posture

even in dealing with unbelievers.

So let me digress for a little bit.

This is digressing a little bit

from our passage,

but to go to 1 Peter 2, 19, 12,

where Paul's,

well, Peter's speaking about suffering

at the hands of unbelievers,

and he writes this,

for this is a gracious thing

when mindful of God,

one endures sorrows

while suffering unjustly.

For what credit is it

if when you sin

and are beaten for it,

you endure?

But if when you do good

and suffer for it,

you endure,

this is a gracious thing

in the sight of God.

For to this,

you have been called

because Christ also suffered for you,

leaving you an example

so that you might follow

in his steps.

He committed no sin,

neither was deceit

found in his mouth.

When he was reviled,

he did not revile in return.

When he suffered,

he did not threaten,

but continued entrusting himself

to him who judges justly.

Christians are to suffer unjustly

in the present,

holding up for their hope

in the future judgment of God,

which will be perfect

and which will be just.

Now, this doesn't mean

that we never stand up

for our legal rights

or that we always should get pushed around

by everybody

because Paul himself

used his Roman citizenship

to escape imprisonment

and he even demanded,

used the legal system

to demand an audience with Caesar.

But the underlying principle

in what Paul did there

is exactly the same

because Paul was appealing

to his legal rights

at those times

for the sake of his witness.

Do you see what the difference is?

He wasn't asking the question

to himself,

do I have a case?

Can I win this?

That's not the question

he was asking.

The question he was asking was,

how can I be a best witness to Christ?

How can I make a greater,

make the best of this opportunity

of unjust suffering

to bring glory to Christ?

And for him,

in those occasions,

it was to appeal

to his legal rights

and other times

he suffered unjustly

all for the same reason

of bringing glory to Christ

and following the pattern

of Christ's suffering servanthood.

And if we are to behave

in that way,

even when wronged

by unbelievers,

how much more then

should we be willing

to suffer wrong

at the hands

of brothers and sisters

in Christ?

Paul says,

to have lawsuits at all

with one another

is already a defeat

for you.

It doesn't matter

what the outcome

of the lawsuit is.

It's already a defeat

for you

because you are repaying

evil for evil

against your own

Christian brother

and thereby perpetuating

the cycle of sin

instead of putting

an end to it

by incurring the loss

yourself

and forbearing

with one another

and loving that brother

who has sinned

against you.

It's already a defeat

for you

because you are destroying

the church's witness

by exposing

the internal affairs

of the church

to the public scrutiny

and judgment.

He would have won

if instead

he had suffered wrong

and been defrauded.

So when a Christian

brother or sister

offends you

let me ask you

this question

by judging you

if they judge you

they look down on you

or if they unfairly

treat you

criticize you

is your impulse

to retaliate

by judging them

looking down on them

criticizing them.

When you incur a loss

because of a Christian

brother or sister

they borrowed money

from you

and never paid you back.

They borrowed your car

and got into an accident

so they drove up

your insurance premium.

These are not

these are things

very possible things

that could happen

because we

use our property

for one another here.

Is your attitude

in those cases

of entitlement

of exacting

your right

from that other person

or is your attitude

that of Christ-like suffering

for the Christian

we win

by losing?

Are you willing

to incur

personal loss

for the sake

of Christ's glory?

Are you willing

to incur

personal loss

for the sake

of corporate

harmony

and unity?

That's what Paul

is calling us to here

and if we don't do that

our church

will not cohere

it will not last

we will be divided

because this is

the only way

that kind of humility

is the only way

Christian community

functions as it's

supposed to.

Then having addressed

the plaintiff

the brother

who was suing

the other brother

in verse 7

Paul

and then he turns

to addressing

the defendant

the one who

defrauded

the other brother

and is now

being sued

in verse 8

but you yourselves

wrong and defraud

even your own brothers

right?

We should be prepared

to suffer wrong

for the sake of Christ

but instead

the man has himself

wronged

and defrauded

another person

and not just

any other person

it says

even his own brother

by defrauding

his brother

this man thought

he could gain

some temporal advantage

maybe get a little bit

more of the profit

from the transaction

than he was supposed to

he thought he was gaining

he thought he was winning

but it's already

a defeat for him

to have defrauded

his own brother

because he's suffering

spiritual loss

on account of

his temporal gain

which is far less significant

and the word wrong

used twice here

in verses 7 to 8

is actually

a different verbal form

of the same word

unrighteous

that was used

in verse 1

which was used

to describe unbelievers

right?

So he's here

saying that

you are by doing this

by wronging your brother

and defrauding him

you are behaving

as an unbeliever

you're behaving

in the same unrighteousness

by which they are characterized

that's what Paul

is accusing them of here

I mean we wouldn't do that

to our biological sibling

right?

or brother or sister

you use things

your property

like it belongs to them

right?

how much worse

is it in your spiritual family

of God

to defraud one another

it's your brother

it's your sister

and using the same word

the unrighteous

the unjust

right?

that he issues

a direct threat now

in verses 9 to 10

to these believers

who are defrauding

one another

or do you not know

that the unrighteous

same word

will not inherit

the kingdom of God

do not be deceived

neither the sexually immoral

nor idolaters

nor adulterers

nor men who practice

homosexuality

nor thieves

nor the greedy

nor drunkards

nor revilers

nor swindlers

will inherit

the kingdom of God

right?

again the word unrighteous

is the same one

that means wrong

that he used twice

in verses 7 to 8

so Paul's warning

that lest any of us

get false sense

of assurance

of salvation

lest any of us

get comfortable

and complacent

with sin

in our lives

Paul warns us

issues a direct thread

in verse 10

do not be deceived

these people

will not inherit

the kingdom of God

and this is essentially

the same vice list

that Paul produced

in chapter 5

to teach that

those who behave

in those ways

have to be disciplined

and expelled

from the church community

if they don't repent

but then now

he kind of

breaks down

the general category

of sexual immorality

and adds two more

specific categories

he adds

adulterers

and men

who practice

homosexuality

and I think

both of those

because they're

quite prevalent

in our day

and have become

to be generally

accepted

I think warrant

further attention

and comment

and I remember

reading

to my horror

and disbelief

last year sometime

a New York Times

article entitled

is an open marriage

a happier marriage

did you guys see that

it was widely shared

whether the author

and in the article

the author

tried to persuade readers

through various profiles

of people

who have open

so-called open marriages

that an open marriage

is a sign of deeper security

and that it leads

to greater relational

and sexual fulfillment

it cannot be further

from the truth

God designed marriage

to be an exclusive

partnership between

one man

and one woman

and the depth

of intimacy

and trust

in that relationship

is directly proportional

to the exclusivity

of it

right

the fact that people

can be happy

with an open marriage

reveals not the depth

of their so-called marriage

but the shallowness

of it

that their relationship

is so superficial

that it can be

freely opened up

and shared with others

without consequence

while God intended

sex and marriage

to be the supreme

the sex to be

a supreme act

of self-giving

to one's partner

adultery

turned sex

into a supreme act

of self-taking

a selfish

and immature

pursuit of one's

sexual fantasies

as unrepentant

and unrepentant

adulterers

will not inherit

the kingdom of God

similarly

homosexual practices

are widely normalized

and glamorized

in our culture today

but it too

is contrary

to God's design

God created marriage

and sex

to be a picture

of complementarity

right

of the diversity

and unity

within the triune

God himself

and of Christ's

sacrificial love

for the church

and for the church

is loving submission

to Christ

that's what marriage

is supposed to be

a picture of

and marriage and sex

are supposed to be

an intimate mingling

of two equal

but different

interdependent

but not interchangeable

parties

yet our world

is marring

the image of God

that was stamped

on the maleness

and femaleness

of our creation

of humanity

and they're rendering

those gender differences

moot

and I want to be

sensitive to people

who may have

struggled with this

perhaps you struggle

in your life

with homosexual orientation

or you know

someone who does

I have some dear

friends who do

but if that's you

there is hope for you

because look at

what it says

it does not say

in this verse

that you cannot

inherit the kingdom

of God

because you have

homosexual desires

it says

that you cannot

inherit the kingdom

of God

if you engage

in unrepentant

homosexual practices

it says in verse 10

nor men who practice

homosexuality

in the Greek

it's actually two nouns

that refer to

the passive

and the active partners

in a homosexual

relationship

so it's referring

to homosexual acts

not desires

it might feel like

for you

that you were born

that way

it might feel like

for you

that you have

been that way

for as long

as you can remember

and that may be true

but that does not mean

that that's how

God created you

to be

there are now

over a half dozen

studies

there are longitudinal

studies

and national studies

and international studies

with a large

body sample

that show

that the sexual

orientation

is

the determining factor

for sexual orientation

is not biological

they studied

hundreds of

identical twins

the same genetic makeup

and if

one of them

turns out to be

have a homosexual orientation

then it should be

almost 100%

predictive

for the other person

to have a homosexual orientation

but it has turned out

that it is not predictive

so it shows

that it's not

the determining factor

is not genetics

it's not biology

but even more importantly

your desire for something

that you desire something

doesn't prove

that you should indulge

in that desire

the fact that a man

or woman

has a desire

to have multiple spouses

does not make

polygamy okay

the fact that

God's ideal for monogamy

still remains

in spite of it

the fact that a husband

or wife has a desire

to have sexual relationships

with another man

or another woman

does not prove

that adultery

is okay

God's ideal

for marital fidelity

remains

so mortifying

killing the desires

of our hearts

the sinful desires

of our hearts

so that we can conform

our desires

and our lives

to God's standard

and design

that's what every

Christian is called

to do every single day

that's what it means

to be a Christian

to die to ourselves

to follow Christ

and people who

have experienced

same-sist attraction

there are examples

of this in Christians

they can have

a fulfilling

intergendered marriage

or they can have

a life

of God honoring life

and fulfilling life

of celibacy

so in addition

to the additional

categories of adultery

and homosexual practices

Paul adds a category

of thieves

to go with the greedy

and swindlers

and he's obviously

thinking of the

defrauding brother here

he's emphasizing

the fact that

those who do this

in an unrepentant way

and continue to wrong

one another

will prove

after all

that they are not

among the righteous

that they are not

among the saints

but they are among

the unrighteous

some people

some Christians

are complacent

and completely secure

in their salvation

in spite of

unrepentant

and persistent sin

in their lives

and just because

they have professed

faith in Jesus Christ

and if you don't feel

if that's you

and if you don't feel

the force of Paul's

warning here

because you're complacent

and secure in your salvation

and you use your theology

to neutralize the warnings

and threats of the Bible

then there's no

there's no excuse for that

let me tell you a story

that I read from a book

written by Pastor John Piper

in his book

Future Grace

he said a few years ago

you see him writing

in quote

when I confronted a man

about the adultery

he was living in

I pled with him

to return to his wife

then I said

you know

Jesus says

that if you don't

fight this sin

with the kind of seriousness

that is willing to gouge

out your own eye

you will go to hell

as a professing Christian

he looked at me

in utter disbelief

as though he had never

heard anything like this

in his life

and he said

you mean you think

a person can lose

his salvation?

so I have learned

again and again

from first hand experience

that there are many

professing Christians

who have a view

of salvation

that disconnects it

from real life

and that nullifies

the threats of the Bible

and puts the sinning person

who claims to be a Christian

beyond the reach

of biblical warnings

I believe

this view

of the Christian life

is comforting thousands

who are on the broad way

that leads to destruction

hear Paul's warning

one more time

do not be deceived

neither the sexually immoral

nor idolaters

nor adulterers

nor men who practice

homosexuality

nor thieves

nor the greedy

nor drunkards

nor revilers

nor swindlers

will inherit

the kingdom of God

yes

I affirm wholeheartedly

that we are saved

by faith alone

but we are never saved

by a faith

that is alone

true saving faith

is always accompanied

by good works

true faith

is always accompanied

by good works

it's never alone

so if you

are taking

false assurance

of salvation

if you are taking

comfort in your

so called faith

that is not born out

by your works

then take Paul's warning

seriously this morning

the unrighteous

will not inherit

the kingdom of God

the saints instead

ought to live justly

that's the saints

justice

but Paul can't

get himself

to conclude

this section

on such a pessimistic

note

it's unlike

apostle Paul

his intention

is not to cast

into doubt

your salvation

if you are truly

saved

but his intention

is to galvanize

you into justice

into right living

that befit

your identity

as saints

so in verse 11

Paul reiterates

the spiritual reality

that they have been

justified by Christ

already

and that's my third

and final point

the saints

justification

Paul writes

in verse 11

and such were

some of you

but you were

washed

you were

sanctified

you were

justified

in the name

of the Lord

Jesus Christ

and by the spirit

of our God

that's the true reality

the spiritual reality

that characterizes

you were

sexually immoral

you were

idolaters

adulterers

and men who practice

homosexuality

and thieves

and greedy

drunkards

and reviled

and swindlers

but now

you have been

washed

sanctified

and justified

notice Paul

does not say

wash

sanctify

and justify

yourself

so that you

can be saved

it says

you were

already

happened

and in the

in the Greek

the adversity

of conjunction

but

is actually

repeated

three times

even the ESV

is only written

once here

for emphasis

so it says

literally

and such

were some

of you

but you

were washed

but you

were sanctified

but you

were justified

that's not

who you are

anymore

that's who

you once

were

but now

you are

saints

so Christian

morality

is always

rooted

and first

and foremost

in the Christian

identity

who we are

in Christ

as saints

of God

and Paul

just told us

this is the same

pattern

that over and over

again we see

in the Apostle Paul

he said last week

right in chapter 5

verse 7

cleanse out the old

leaven

that you may be

a new lump

as you really

are unleavened

for Christ

our Passover

lamb has been

sacrificed

so now he tells

them that they

should live

in purity

and sanctity

and justice

because they

have already

been washed

sanctified

and justified

through Jesus

Christ

and by the

Holy Spirit

once again

Paul's telling

them how

they should

live

on the basis

of who

they are

in Jesus

Christ

become

what you

are

act

the miracle

live

as the new

creation

that you

already

are

because

you have

been born

again

in Jesus

Christ

and wonderful

words of assurance

here

right

the first

thing

that Paul

reminds us

of is that

we have

already been

washed

right

the word

washed

refers to

spiritual

cleansing

right

that takes

place

when we

are regenerated

made new

born again

by the

Holy Spirit

Paul puts

it this way

in Titus

3 5 to 7

God saved

us

not because

of works

done by

us in

righteousness

but according

to his

own mercy

by the

washing

of regeneration

and renewal

of the

Holy Spirit

right

sometimes

as Christians

we mistakenly

think that

you know

we are still

our old

sinful

selves

and that

God loves

us in

spite of

our sins

yes God

did love

us while

we were

still sinners

but God

didn't leave

us as

sinners

he cleansed

us

he made

us

he didn't

just accept

us

he made

us

acceptable

he cleansed

us and

washed us

by the

Holy Spirit

and in

God's sight

we are

not

currently

wallowing

in our

sin

and guilt

whether we

haven't

cleansed

sometimes

as Christians

we act

like

children

who

don't

understand

they don't

have a

concept

of

washing

this

drives

me

crazy

with my

kids

over and

over again

right

I just

brushed

their teeth

and they're

like oh

can I

have this

cookie

hey we

just

brushed

your teeth

that's

not the

point

right

of the

washing

or

we

just

took

a

shower

and

they'll

go

jump

in a

mud

puddle

with

the

fresh

clothes

on

right

we

have

been

washed

we

have

been

cleansed

that's

who

we

are

why

return

to

the

filth

of

sin

second

Paul

reminds us

that we

were

sanctified

right

this is

a verbal

form of

the word

saint

which Paul

has already

used to

describe

the

Corinthian

believers

and as I

said before

to be

sanctified

means to

be made

holy

which in

turn means

to be

set

apart

to be

holy

is to

be set

apart

or consecrated

we often

think the

opposite

the

antonym

of the

word

holy

is

wicked

which is

true

by implication

but the

bible when it

contrasts the

word holy

the word that

usually contrasts

the word holy

is not

wicked

but it's

common

what's

opposite of

what is

holy

is what

is

common

so you

see that

in

Leviticus

10

10

1

Samuel

21

4

Ezekiel

22

26

so to

be

holy

actually

is to

be

uncommon

and to

be

sanctified

means to

be set

apart

for a

special

purpose

and so

do you

understand

that you

are a

special

vessel

of God

as believers

in Jesus

Christ

that you

have been

set apart

by him

for a

special

purpose

do you

put on

your

nicest

dress

or your

nicest

suit

to go

to the

grocery

store

or to

the fish

market

of course

not

it's for

a special

purpose

that's what

you wear

to go

to a

wedding

why

should

we

who

have

been

sanctified

set

apart

for

God's

special

purposes

as the

bride

of

Christ

Christ

the

righteous

son

of

God

why

should

we

live

like

we

belong

to

some

common

sinner

why

should

we

who

have

been

sanctified

for

the

eternal

purposes

of

God

and

the

joys

of

heaven

live

for

the

temporal

purposes

of

man

and

the

pleasures

of

earth

we've

been

sanctified

we've

been

set

apart

third

Paul

says

that

we

have

been

justified

to

be

justified

means

to

be

declared

righteous

from

a

judicial

standpoint

it's

a

declaration

of

right

standing

with

God

who

is

our

ultimate

judge

we

were

not

righteous

but

God

nevertheless

declared

us

righteous

on the

basis

of

his

son's

death

on

the

cross

as

2nd

Corinthians

521

says

for

our

sake

God

made

Christ

to be

no

sin

so

that

in

him

we

might

become

the

righteousness

of

God

because

Jesus

paid

the

penalty

for

our

sins

because

he

satisfied

fully

the

demands

the

righteous

demands

of

God's

law

we

are

declared

righteous

by

God

our

judge

and

that

was

brothers

and

sisters

the

correct

ruling

that

was

the

correct

ruling

because

Christ

satisfied

it

sometimes

we

as