Purge the Evil

For those of you who are visiting, my name is Sean.

It's a welcome you here, and I have the privilege of,

I'm one of the pastors here and get to preach God's Word on most weeks.

And the benefit of going through a book of the Bible expositionally,

like we're doing now, going through the book of 1 Corinthians,

is that you don't get to skip difficult topics, right?

So here we are with talking about incest and judgment

and excommunication on this Sunday.

But God's grace will still shine through in this passage.

So let's look at 1 Corinthians 5, 1-13.

And figuring out whether or not we should pass judgment on others as God's people

is, and if we are supposed to do it, then what is appropriate judgment?

What is an appropriate judgment?

That's a very complex biblical issue.

So, for example, look at Matthew 7, 1-5, where Jesus says,

Judge not that you be not judged,

for with judgment you pronounce, you will be judged.

And with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye,

but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?

Or how can you say to your brother,

Let me take the speck out of your eye,

when there is the log in your own eye?

You hypocrite.

First take the log out of your own eye,

and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

And it's a very famous passage we all know about.

And then in the preceding chapter of this book,

Paul said in chapter 4, verse 3,

But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you,

or by any human court.

In fact, I do not even judge myself.

Right?

So what in the world then,

given all these things that Paul's saying,

does he mean here in verse 3 of chapter 5,

I have already pronounced judgment on the one who is sexually immoral.

So is Paul doing what Jesus told him not to do?

Is Paul doing what he himself prohibit the church from doing in the previous chapter?

And so the question, this is a complex question,

and the question of whether or not we are to judge

is further complicated by our own sinfulness.

Because on the one hand, in our sinful pride,

we hastily pass judgment on people

while simultaneously thinking ourselves to be above judgment.

And so we're to say things like,

Who are you to judge me?

Right?

On the other hand, in our sinful fear,

we neglect to confront persistent willful sins

in our brothers and sisters

who need our loving admonishment.

So our passage for today is one of the most helpful

and clear passages for navigating these complex issues

that we face in our life together as a church.

So Paul's main point in this passage is this,

is that the church that has been purified by Christ's sacrifice

must purge the evil from their mist.

That's the main point.

The church that has been purified by Christ's sacrifice

must purge the evil from their mist.

And we will talk in turn about whom we should purge,

verses 1 to 2 and 9 to 13,

and then about how we should purge evil,

and then finally about why we should purge evil from our mist.

And they'll be my three main points.

So first, let's look at whom we should purge

in verses 1 to 2 and 9 to 13.

So having addressed the Corinthian believers'

inappropriate boasting in human leaders

and their worldly wisdom up to this point in the letter,

Paul turns his attention to the related

but more specific issues that beset the Corinthian church.

So here it begins in verse 1.

It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you

and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans.

For a man has his father's wife.

The word actually conveys Paul's disbelief, right?

It's actually reported that there's sexual immorality among you, right?

And according to Genesis 2.24,

the only appropriate context for sexual relations

is intergendered and monogamous relationship

in the context of marriage.

So in the word sexual immorality,

that includes all forms of sexual relations

outside of that biblical vision.

And sexual immorality is often featured prominently

in the list of vices throughout the New Testament.

And it's not because, you know,

Christians are particularly prudish or squeamish

when it comes to the topic of sex.

In fact, Christians are the only ones

that truly know how to enjoy sex

within the God-given proper bounds.

But the reason why sexual immorality

is so frequently condemned in the New Testament

is because it was one of the most prevalent

and persistent sins in the Greco-Roman culture

in which the New Testament was written.

There was a widespread saying among the Greeks.

It went like this.

Mistresses we keep for the sake of pleasure,

concubines for the daily care of the body,

but wives to bear us legitimate children.

That was a prevalent attitude among men

in the Greco-Roman culture.

No wonder the New Testament vehemently condemned

sexual immorality and repeatedly it does so.

And so, furthermore, we know for certain

that from chapter 6 in the next chapter,

that the Corinthian believers,

Corinthian believers before their conversion

were in fact guilty of sexual immorality.

And in fact, some of them were still persisting

in sexual immorality after.

And so this is definitely a very pertinent issue.

And that's why it's often mentioned throughout Scripture.

But it wasn't merely the case that they were engaging

in the kinds of sexual immorality

that seemingly everyone around us seemed to engage in.

Their offense was even more flagrant

because Paul says in verse 1,

So it's been reported that this is a kind of sexual immorality

that even the non-Christians in their culture condemn.

But yet that has been reported to be existing

in this Corinthian church.

And the phrase father's wife is taken from Leviticus 18, 7-8.

And in that passage, uncovering, the language is used,

uncovering the nakedness of one's father

is distinguished from uncovering the nakedness of one's mother.

And both are condemned.

So the fact that those two things are distinguished

shows us that the father's wife is not a reference

to someone's mom, but rather to probably his concubine

or a woman that's sexually related to his father

but not his biological mother.

But both were condemned nonetheless.

And here it seems that because only the man is addressed,

the man who is sexually immoral,

it seems that the issue is the woman is not a member of the church,

but the man is.

And so the man is the one that's being addressed here.

But it wasn't...

So Paul uses the language of possession here

to refer to the crime.

This is a man has his father's wife

and the language of possession is a euphemism

for sexual immorality, sexual relations.

And the present tense of the verb has

implies ongoing, enduring relationship.

So that means this has been happening

out in the open for everyone to see

and it has been ongoing.

It's something...

It wasn't a one-off thing.

It was not a one-night stand.

And Paul is shocked that such a thing is happening

in the Corinthian church.

And so he continues in verse 2,

And you are arrogant.

Ought you not rather to mourn?

Let him who has done this be removed from among you.

What's even more shocking than the egregious sin

that the Corinthians were tolerating

is the fact that while harboring such sin in their midst,

they were arrogant.

This is the same word that Paul used in chapter 4

to describe the Corinthians.

They were puffed up.

It's the same word, right?

In their boasting in worldly wisdom and human leaders,

the Corinthians were puffed up.

And now, even now,

instead of humbling themselves in repentance,

they are boasting.

They're puffed up in their own superior spirituality.

And this is helpful for us

because nowadays when we think about

church disciplining its members,

we assume that it's because of...

When the church refuses to discipline its members,

we think that that's because of humility, right?

I mean, that's the common way to think about it.

We think, oh, who are we to judge, right?

Oh, who are we to cast the first stone, right?

And so we think that it's humility

that prevents the church from disciplining its members.

And on the other hand,

we think that it's pride

that leads to judgment of its members

and discipline of its members.

We think it's characterized

by a holier-than-thou attitude.

But according to Paul in this word of God here,

the Corinthian church refused to discipline

its erring member,

not because of their humility,

but because of their arrogance.

If they were humble

and they mourned the sin in their midst,

they would have addressed it.

But because they were arrogant,

they presumed upon God's grace

and they were content

not to do anything about it.

So we're wrong to think

that it's the humble church

that doesn't discipline its church.

It's the arrogant church

that refuses to discipline its members.

And the problem was not merely

that the Corinthian was returning a blind eye

and just saying, okay, let that be.

I mean, it's not right,

but just let it be.

That's not what they were doing.

We know this because Paul uses

the language of puffed up again

in 1 Corinthians 8.1,

where the Corinthians say things like,

all of us possess knowledge, they said.

And because of that,

they were eating food offered

sacrificed to idols.

And in that, Paul says,

they were puffed up.

And so they were using

their spiritual freedom

and their really pretext

that they have all this knowledge,

knowing that all these idols are nothing,

that there was only one true God.

They were like, it's okay

to eat food sacrificed to idols.

I mean, it's true to an extent,

but they were doing so

at the expense of other believers' conscience.

They're violating the other believers' conscience

and making them stumble.

And in that, Paul says,

you're abusing your spiritual freedom

to harm other believers,

and that was wrong.

And in that, that was their arrogance.

And we find an even closer example of this

in chapter 6, verse 12,

where Paul describes another one

of the Corinthian slogans.

And this one, it goes this way.

They said,

all things are lawful for me.

So the Corinthians were saying this,

repeating the slogan to themselves

to justify certain sinful behaviors.

And in chapter 6,

specifically to justify sleeping with prostitutes.

They were saying,

all things are lawful for me,

so it's okay for us to sleep with prostitutes.

And on the surface,

it sounds,

that phrase sounds like

one of Paul's hallmark teachings,

doesn't it?

Because Paul says here,

in Galatians 5, 18,

but if you are led by the Spirit,

you are not under the law, right?

And then,

but they're, of course,

abusing Paul's teaching

because Paul anticipates

the Corinthian response

and addresses it in Galatians 5, 13,

where he says,

for you were called to freedom,

brothers,

only do not use your freedom

as an opportunity for the flesh,

but through love serve one another.

Similarly, Paul says in Romans 6, 14 to 16,

for sin will have no dominion over you

since you are not under law,

but under grace.

What then?

Are we to sin

because we are not under law,

but under grace?

By no means.

Do you not know

that if you present yourselves

to anyone as obedient slaves,

you are slaves of the one whom you obey,

either of sin,

which leads to death,

or of obedience,

which leads to righteousness?

So while it is true

that those who are in Christ

and therefore,

and because Christ perfectly fulfilled the law

and his righteousness is ours,

we are no longer under the law.

That is true.

But the fact that we are no longer under the law

does not mean that we can go on sinning

because to do so would mean

that we remain slaves to sin

when, in fact,

we have been freed from slavery to sin.

So for Paul,

Christian freedom in Christ

was supposed to lead to greater obedience.

It was an opportunity

to follow the Holy Spirit,

not the flesh,

but the Corinthians were abusing

their spiritual freedom

to say,

all things are lawful for me,

and they were living in sin.

And so they were twisting Paul's teaching

really to suit their fancies

and indulge their sinful flesh.

They considered themselves

to be so preeminently spiritual

that they believed

that they were above the law

and saying,

all things are lawful for me.

And so Paul says to them

and rebukes them in verse 2,

and you are arrogant.

I should not rather to mourn.

So Paul prescribes this in verse 2,

let him who has done this

be removed from among you.

The only proper way

to deal with this kind of sin

in this situation

is to remove

the sexually immoral person

from their midst.

That's the final stage,

really the last resort

of the process of church discipline,

which some people call excommunication.

But wait,

that's probably,

some of you guys are the wrong way, right?

Because isn't this the case

that a church

is not a museum for saints,

it's a hospital for sinners.

You guys have probably

heard that phrase, right?

It's a popular quote

from Pauline Phillips

who ran an advice column

entitled Dear Abby

in the 1950s.

But it was adapted

and popularized

by this viral

Christian spoken word video.

I'm sure you guys have seen it.

But the statement

is only half true.

Because yes,

it is true

that a church

is a hospital for sinners,

but it is also true

that the church

is a home for saints.

Christians are simultaneously

saint and sinner

with the biblical accent

actually falling on saint

because for the Christians,

sin is an ever-decreasing reality

while our holiness

is an ever-increasing reality

as we conform

to the image of Christ.

So the church,

yes,

it is a hospital for sinners

in a sense

that all sinners

of all strife,

no matter what kind

of sinner you are,

you are welcome here

to come and receive

the grace of God

and to find the healing

of Jesus Christ.

But it is not

a hospital for sinners

in the sense

that you can come here

and keep sinning,

that you can come here

and remain a sinner.

The problem here

is not that a sinner

is sinning,

but that a so-called saint,

a person who claims

to have renounced

his sinful ways

is persisting

presumptuously

in his sins.

That's the problem.

So don't misunderstand me here

because Paul's not saying

that only sinless people

can be members

of the church

because if that's the case,

we'd have exactly zero members

in our church,

right?

And that's not

what he's saying.

But a Christian,

and if you're a Christian

who is struggling

with certain besetting sins

during your life,

whether it's sexual immorality

or something else,

and you repented of them

and you've been trying

to reform your ways,

then this passage

should not be something

that makes you insecure

about your salvation

or make you worry

that you're going to get

kicked out of the church.

What Paul's addressing here

is unrepentant sin,

right?

What Paul's addressing here

is of a public

and egregious nature.

And the sexually immoral

Corinthian brother

was brazenly

and unapologetically

persisting

in this incestuous relationship

and that's why Paul's teaching

that we must judge

such a brother.

And that's why

this teaching

to judge one another

in the church

doesn't contradict

Jesus' teaching

about not judging

in Matthew chapter 7

Matthew 7 · chapter mention

because there

Jesus is disallowing

hypocritical judging,

right?

When you have,

we point out

a minor shortcoming

or fault

in a brother or sister

while ignoring

a much greater fault

of your own

that's clouding

your judgment,

right?

So Jesus is condemning

that kind of hypocritical judgment.

And also,

it doesn't contradict

what Paul said earlier

in chapter 4 verse 3

when he said,

but with me

it is a very small thing

that I should be judged

by you or by any human court.

Because in that case

there was no sin involved,

right?

Paul didn't sin,

that's why he added,

for I am not aware

of anything against myself.

So the Corinthians

were not judging Paul

because of his sin,

rather they were

passing judgment

on his ministry

saying that that's

a poor way

to do ministry,

it's not fruitful,

we know a better way,

a better way

that's in addition to,

that supplements

the gospel.

And so there,

Corinthians were arrogantly

and prematurely

judging the quality

of Paul's ministry,

they weren't judging

his sin.

And so here,

it's a different case.

So then whom are we

called to judge

as a church?

Skip ahead with me

for a little bit

to verses 9 to 13.

There Paul mentions

a previous letter

that he had written

to the Corinthians

instructing them

not to associate

with sexually immoral people.

So this wasn't actually

the first Corinthian letter,

but by God's providence,

we don't have access

to that letter.

And apparently

in that letter,

he had told them

not to associate

with sexually immoral people,

but the Corinthians

misunderstood what he meant

or deliberately distorted it.

And so Paul clarifies himself

in verses 9 to 13.

He says,

I wrote to you in my letter

not to associate

with sexually immoral people,

not at all meaning

the sexually immoral

of this world

or the greedy

and swindlers

or idolaters.

Since then,

you would need

to go out of the world.

But now I am writing

to you not to associate

with anyone

who bears the name

of brother

if he is guilty

of sexual immorality

or greed

or is an idolater,

reviler,

drunkard,

or swindler,

not even to eat

with such one.

For what have I to do

with judging outsiders?

Is it not those

inside the church

whom you are to judge?

God judges those outside,

purge the evil person

from among you.

This passage

is so helpful

for clarifying

whom the church

is called to judge

because we are not

called to judge

the immoral people

of this world.

They don't accept

God's authority

and they are not

accountable to the church.

So it's futile

and inappropriate

to pass judgment

on them now.

Rather,

Paul's concern

is with someone

who claims to be

a member

of the family of God

who nevertheless

is guilty

of sexual immorality

or greed

or is an idolater,

reviler,

drunkard,

or swindler.

And this list of sin

that's mentioned here,

it's probably not exhaustive

because Paul lists

other vices

in different parts

of his epistles

and they overlap some

but they also differ

in some ways.

But while these are

not exhaustive

but they are probably

representative

of the ones

that were most flagrant

and common

in the Greco-Roman culture.

And it's amazing

as we look at this list

how representative

it is of the current sins

in 2018 as well.

First,

look at sexual immorality

as I mentioned earlier.

It includes all kinds

of sexual relations

outside of intergendered

and monogamous marriage.

And nowadays,

sexual aberrations

are normalized

and sexual transgressions

are glamorized

but the church

must observe

a different standard.

This doesn't mean,

however,

that the church

should expel

all members

who have ever been

guilty of sexual immorality

or currently struggle

with immoral sexual desires.

Being tempted

by sexual desires

and indulging

those sexual desires

in an unrepentant

and persistent way

are two different things.

Second vice listed

is greed,

which is everywhere

in our day,

right?

But perhaps seeing it

next to sexual immorality

surprises us a little bit,

right?

Because we tend to think,

ah, greed,

I mean,

everybody's greedy.

You know,

we think of it

as a lesser sin.

But Paul,

listen here,

right next to sexual immorality.

And it's because

we live in an economy,

right,

where profit

is the bottom line,

right?

And for generations

and generations,

we have leveraged

people's greed

to build our society,

right?

So hundreds of years

of this has desensitized

us to the evil of greed.

But that's why

it's helpful

to have the unchanging

word of God

critique our culture

rather than vice versa,

having our church

critique the word of God.

And so the word greed

is usually translated

as covetousness,

which is a form of idolatry

according to Colossians 3, 5.

And it refers to desiring

and scheming

to acquire

what belongs

to someone else.

So a person

who is guilty of greed

is someone

who seeks

to enrich himself

for herself

at the expense

of other people

and whose greed

manifests itself

in a harmful way

in his or her

regular interactions

with others.

And the third term

is idolatry.

Our pluralistic society

tells us that

all religions

are essentially the same

and all the gods

are different manifestations

or aspects

of the same thing

that all human beings

long for.

And this is not

dissimilar to the idolatry

that was common

in the Roman Empire

because the people

in those days

thought it expedient

to worship

all forms of gods

and appease

all the gods

so that they can

have their favor

and so that their

society can flourish.

And because of that

when Christians

refuse to worship

their gods

and only claim

to worship one god

they call them

Christians atheists

people who don't

believe in God.

And for a similar reason

Christians are denounced

today as exclusive

because if we acknowledge

a god other than

the one true god

we become an idolater.

Fourth item

is reviler.

Reviling includes

all forms of

verbal abuse

such as demeaning

insults

and damaging

slander.

But the person

in view is not

someone who

slips up once in a

while and repents

of it.

Rather the person

in view is someone

who is known

as a reviler.

Someone who is

consistently verbally

abusive

and who consistently

slanders others.

A drunkard

is pretty self-exponent

but refers to a

person who is

regularly given

to drunkenness

and the disorderly

conduct associated

with drunkenness.

And then swindler

is someone who

steals from

or defrauds

others for his

own gain.

Money laundering

tax evasion

pyramid schemes

false advertising

graft

all types of

scams would fall

under swindling.

And Paul instructs

the Corinthian church

not to associate

with such a person

not even to eat

with such a one.

And the phrase

associate with

literally means

to mix up

together with.

So it implies

some kind of

reciprocal relationship

some kind of

joint activity.

And Paul is saying

that as a community

you should not do

that with such people.

And he also says

it's in a similar way

not even to eat

with such a one

and there's some

debate about what

that means

and it's possible

that this is a

reference to the

Lord's Supper

of communion together

but I think it's

unlikely since the

word eat with

in the Bible

is never used

to refer to

the Lord's Supper.

This will be

the only occasion

if that's the case.

And also

so I think Paul

is referring to

and also kind of

Christian expulsion

from the church

would assume

I mean you would

assume that that

excludes the Lord's

Supper because

Lord's Supper implies

partaking in the church.

And so I don't think

that's what he's

referring to.

I think he's referring

to table fellowship

right?

And he's saying

don't have table fellowship

with such a person

because even today

right if you think

about it when you

have someone over

to your house

for a meal

it implies that

you are going

beyond mere

acquaintance to

actual acceptance

right?

It's a relationship

you're saying

acknowledging some

form of trust

but in the ancient

world table fellowship

was even more

meaningful and

significant than

it is today for us.

So now at this

point you're probably

wondering as I did

as I was studying

this passage

isn't that a little

harsh?

You know?

Like I mean

after all didn't

Jesus eat

eat with sinners?

Right?

Luke 15

Luke 15:2

verse 2

Pharisees and

the scribes

grumble against

Jesus

they say this

this man

receives sinners

and eats with

them.

That's the exact

same word that's

used here

Jesus ate with

sinners.

So if Jesus

ate with sinners

because he said

he came not to

you know

not to heal the

healthy but to

heal the sick

then why can we

as his followers

eat with sinners

in order to

minister to them

and bring them

to Jesus?

What's so wrong

about that?

Right?

And I think the

solution to this

seeming contradiction

lies in the context

in look at the

following verses

in verses 12 to 13.

For, right?

Meaning this is the

reason, this is the

grounds for this

command.

For, what have I to

do with judging

outsiders?

Is it not those

inside the church

whom you are to

judge?

God judges those

outside, purge the

evil person from

among you.

So these two verses

follow a neat kind

of A, B,

A, B kind of

formula.

So A, right here,

he's speaking of

how we shouldn't

judge outsiders.

And then B, he

talks about how we

should judge

insiders.

And then A, again,

about how God

will judge

outsiders.

And then B, how

church ought to

judge insiders and

purge the evil

from among them.

That's a quotation

from Deuteronomy 13.5.

And Paul's point

is this, we're not

supposed to judge

outsiders in this

way by dissociating

with them and

refusing to eat

with them because

they're not claiming

to share in our

Christian fellowship

in the first place.

And moreover, it's

God who will judge

them on the day of

judgment.

But we are supposed

to judge those who

claim to be

Christians and

therefore members of

the church yet

simultaneously live in

an unrepentant,

persistently sinful

manner, living a

double life because

by doing so they are

besmirching the name

of Christ and they're

damaging the corporate

witness of the church.

You guys follow what

I'm saying?

The unbelievers are

not accountable to

the church, but

believers are

accountable to the

church.

The behavior of

unbelievers does not

affect the credibility

of the church, but

the behavior of

believers does affect

the credibility of

the church's witness.

So while we can

tolerate unbelievers

as Jesus did and

freely welcome them,

eat with them and

minister to them, but

we must exercise

strict discipline

inside the church.

That's what Paul's

saying.

Because if we let an

unrepentant believer

continue to associate

with the church, we're

sending mixed signals

and wrong message to

the world about who

Christ is and what

the church is.

Because a church that

represents the God

whom we sang about

holy, holy, holy

must itself be holy

and set apart for him.

Because in order for

the church to be a

city on a hill, in

order for the church to

be a light in the

darkness, in order for

us to be an alternate

community, a contrast

community, we have to

be in the world but

not of the world.

Our values, beliefs,

and priorities have to

reflect heaven, not

earth.

Now, I don't think that

means that the church

shouldn't speak out

against the evils in

the culture and society

at large at all.

I do think that there

is a place for a

prophetic voice in

society, especially

since we live in a

democratic republic where

our discussions and

discourse shapes the

trajectory of our

nation.

However, we shouldn't

judge and condemn

unbelievers by

dissociating with them

here and now because

that's not our

prerogative, but God's.

And there are two

extremes to avoid as

we seek to apply this

biblical principle.

And the first pitfall is

fundamentalism, right?

Where we hold the

world accountable to

the same strict standards

as the church.

So we pass judgment on

unbelievers and refuse

to associate with them

and we create this

insular kind of

separatist community.

That's fundamentalism.

And the other pitfall is

libertinism, right?

Where we hold the

church to the same

loose standards as the

world.

So we refuse to pass

judgment on fellow

believers and neglect

church discipline, right?

We blend in with the

world and create a so-called

tolerant, inclusive community

community that is

indistinguishable from

the world.

Both of these are errors

that violate this

biblical principle and

we find in this passage

a good balance where we

do not judge those

outside but judge those

inside.

Unfortunately, however,

the modern church has

done both the

fundamentalism and the

libertinism and actually

the exact opposite of

what's commanded here,

which is to be quick to

judge outsiders but slow

to judge insiders.

We have been intolerant

and dismissive toward

outsiders while indulgent

and permissive toward

insiders.

No wonder then that we

are charged by the world

sometimes with hypocrisy.

We are not to judge those

who are inside, or to be

outside, but we are to

judge those who are

inside, right?

That's whom we should

purge from our midst.

So scripture commands us

to purge the evil person

from among us, but how do

we do this?

And that brings us to my

second point.

How should we purge evil?

How should we purge evil?

Paul's not telling us to

simply, you know, ghost them.

You guys know what that

means?

I learned that recently.

It's a terrible thing to

do to anyone.

But basically, ghosting is

where you suddenly just,

you know, without

explanation, you just

disappear from their life

and don't communicate with

them in any way, right?

I mean, that's like the

worst thing you can do.

Like, why would you,

that's not what Paul is

saying.

Oh, don't just say, oh,

dissociate with them.

Okay, don't acknowledge

them when they say hi to

you.

Don't return their phone

calls or texts.

That's not what he's

telling you to do.

That would be so hurtful.

The process that Paul

delineates is much more

careful and intentional

and loving because he

says in verses 3 to 5,

for though absent in body,

I am present in spirit.

And as if present, I have

already pronounced judgment

on the one who did such a

thing.

And when you're assembled

in the name of the Lord

Jesus and my spirit is

present with the power of

our Lord Jesus, you are to

deliver this man to Satan

for the destruction of the

flesh so that his spirit may

be saved in the day of the

Lord.

God, right?

In Matthew 18, 15 to 20,

right, Jesus teaches us how

to deal with sin in the

church community.

And in case of personal

offense, the first step that

Jesus teaches us is that it

should be handled one-on-one

on a personal basis.

If someone offends you, then

you need to approach that

offending brother or sister

and talk to them.

And this ensures that there's

no gossip or slander that

destroys the church.

It ensures that people are not

hiding behind, you know, in a

cowardly fashion and talking

about someone's offense.

And instead, it calls for

courage to go up to that

person to talk to that

person about their offense.

However, if he does not

listen, Jesus continues.

He gives the second step.

Take one or two others along

with you that every charge

may be established by the

evidence of two or three

witnesses.

This next step involves

mediation.

And by involving one or two

others in the process, it

ensures objectivity and

fairness.

And if the second step also

doesn't work, Jesus says a

third step.

He says, if he refuses to

listen to them, tell it to

the church.

And if he refuses to listen

even to the church, let him

be to you as a Gentile and a

tax collector.

That's excommunication.

It's the last step that Paul's

talking about here.

And since the offense of the

sexually immoral man in

Corinth was already public

knowledge, and because the

church was arrogantly really

kind of embracing the sin in

their midst, as opposed to

mourning it and repenting of

it, Paul kind of skips to the

final step when he tells them

Corinthian church to expel the

man from the church community

because those first two steps

effectively have already been

taken, effectively have been

nullified already.

And so the Corinthians have

neglected to judge this man,

but Paul says he has already

judged in verse 3.

For though absent in body, I am

present in spirit, and as if

present, I have already

pronounced judgment on the one

who did such a thing.

And I think Paul's, in the back

of his mind, he's thinking

about Matthew 18 as he writes

this, because in Matthew 18,

after delineating the steps of

church discipline, Jesus says

this,

Truly I say to you,

whatever you bind on earth

shall be bound in heaven, and

whatever you lose on earth

shall be loosed in heaven.

Again, I say to you, if two of

you agree on earth about

anything they ask, it will be

done for them by my Father in

heaven.

For where two or three are

gathered in my name, there am I

among them.

So this passage is often quoted

out of context, as if, like, you

know, if two or three believers

agree in prayer about anything,

then God will grant it to us.

If that's the case, I mean,

there's no prayer that I pray

that shouldn't be answered,

because I usually pray with

people, right?

But that's not what he's

talking about, because this

passage is given in the context

of church discipline, right?

He's saying that the church is

given the authority, with

Christ's authority, to bind and

loose, right?

To pronounce someone an

unbeliever, to excommunicate

them from the church, right?

So what he's saying here, and so

what he's, the reason why I think

Paul has this in mind is

because he says, for the absent

in body, I'm present in spirit,

and as present, I have already

pronounced judgment on the one

who did such a thing.

Paul knows, based on Jesus'

teaching, that it's not the

individual person, or the

individual member, or a pastor,

or even an apostle that can

pronounce judgment on a member

like this, but it has to be the

church community that pronounces

this judgment, because Jesus said,

when two or three are gathered.

So because of that, Paul, knowing

that he's now not there, he's

absent, he's kind of casting an

absentee ballot of sorts, right?

He's saying, you know what, I'm

not there, but as if present with

you, I am pronouncing judgment

over this person, and you as a

church community must now do

that, and that's what Paul is

enjoining them to do.

As your leader, do I'm not

physically present?

I have pronounced judgment with

my spiritual presence among you,

and no one, I think, knows

exactly what he means that he's

with them in spirit.

I think it means a little more

than what we say when we say,

like, oh, I'm with you in spirit.

You know, I think we say that,

we just mean, okay, my thoughts

are with you, right?

But I think Paul is here thinking

of a little more vital, real

spiritual communion that exists

through the Holy Spirit, and he

thinks in some way, because he's

a member of this church, he's a

founding member of this church,

he sees himself as a part of

this church through the Spirit.

And so he says in verse 4,

when you are assembled in the

name of the Lord Jesus, and my

spirit is present, that's when he

says you are gathered, pronounced

judgment on this man.

So he's saying, when you are

gathered, pronounce judgment, and

know that I am agreeing with you

in the Holy Spirit.

So this is one of the ways how we

are to exercise discipline and to

purge evil, not as some lone

rangers, one person condemning

another, but the church community

gathered in the name of the Lord

Jesus, with the power of the Lord

Jesus, we pronounce judgment in

this way.

And Paul describes the act of

excommunication in verse 5, he

says, delivering this man to Satan

for the destruction of the flesh, so

that his spirit may be saved in the

day of the Lord.

This language of delivering someone

over to Satan does not mean like

selling his soul to the devil or

anything remotely similar to that, but

it's a technical way of referring to

excommunication, of putting them

outside the church.

And it occurs again in 1 Timothy 1, 19

to 20.

So the church, the people of God, are

the people who are under Christ's

reign, but the unbelieving world

remains under the sway of the rulers,

quote, authorities, cosmic powers, and

spiritual forces of evil, right?

We know this from Ephesians 6.

And Ephesians 2, 2 to 3 tells us that

all unbelievers are following the prince

of the power of the air, which is Satan,

and living in the passions of their

flesh.

This is from Ephesians 2.

So to excommunicate a member from the

fellowship of the church is, in effect,

to consign the person to Satan's realm

and rule.

That's why to deliver someone over to

Satan is the technical way of referring

to excommunication.

And this also explains what destruction

of the flesh means, which is

conceptually related to deliverance to

Satan.

So if you look at verse 5 carefully

again, it says, deliver this man to

Satan for the destruction of the flesh.

So the destruction of the flesh is the

immediate result of deliverance to

Satan.

So it's something that Satan probably

does.

And then the ultimate purpose of that

is so that his spirit may be saved in

the day of the Lord.

So what does it mean, the destruction of

the flesh?

I think it can refer to two things,

possibly.

This was really hard to wrestle with and

study all week, but I think it's most

likely to be one of these two things.

And the first thing is that, for

example, it could refer to physical

suffering, an illness of some sorts

wrought by the devil that's supposed to

produce some kind of spiritual

sanctifying, have some kind of

spiritually sanctifying effect.

For example, in Job 2.6, Satan, God

says to Satan, behold, Job is in your

hand.

That's the same word as deliver right

here and only spare his life.

And so, and then what happens after

that is Job's flesh is afflicted by

Satan.

But the end result of that at the end

of Job is he says, now my eyes see you,

therefore I despise myself and repent in

dust and ashes.

Ultimately, it's his redemption and

salvation that happens, right?

So that could be one way that is what

destruction of flesh means.

And second, I think the destruction of

the flesh, so it's for the destruction

of the flesh.

You could also just read as unto or into

the destruction of the flesh.

That's the literal translation.

And I think it could refer to the

death-like existence of fleshly living.

And so when the word destruction can

also mean ruin, and that's, if you

look at 1 Timothy 6, 9-10, where the

word is used, it says, but those who

desire to be rich fall into temptation,

into a snare, into many senseless and

harmful desires that plunge people into

ruin and destruction.

It's the same word.

For the love of money is the root of

all kinds of evils.

It is through the craving, this craving,

that some have wandered away from the

faith and pierced themselves with many

pangs.

So by destruction of the flesh, or

ruin of the flesh then, I think Paul's

referring to the ruin and destruction

that characterize the life in the

flesh.

And by wandering from the faith, there

will be pierced with many pangs.

That kind of pain, the destruction that

characterized the life in the flesh,

might be what Paul is referring to here.

And Paul said in Ephesians 2 that

living in the flesh is, the passions

of the flesh is a sign of spiritual death.

So that would make sense too.

Both of these are acceptable views, and

you guys can hold either one.

But I think the second one is more

likely for several reasons.

And that's because in Job 2, while it's

a suggested parallel, there's no

reference to destruction of the flesh.

And then, and I think particularly in

Paul's writings, whenever he uses the

word flesh as contrasted to the spirit,

he's not referring to the body and the

soul.

He's referring to the sinful flesh and

referring to the part of the human being

that's oriented away from God to the

spirit, the part of us that's oriented

toward God, right?

And that's why I think he used the word

flesh here instead of using the more

neutral word body, which he used earlier

in this passage to contrast that he is

absent in body but present in spirit.

But here, I think he intentionally used the

word flesh.

And so, and he used that, he contrasted flesh

from the spirit earlier in chapter 3, verse 1,

in a similar way because the Corinthians

were living in a fleshly way instead of

being in spirit.

And so, that's what I think he's referring

to here.

And so, then he's saying by be delivered to

Satan and to the destruction of the flesh,

they're really referring to one and the

same thing, right?

Being handed over to Satan's realm and

being living in really the flesh and the

sin that's associated with it.

Now, that sounds extremely harsh, right?

On the surface.

And because it almost sounds like Paul's

condemning the sexually immoral man to

damnation, right?

It's like, oh, give him word to Satan and

let him flesh in the destruction of the

flesh.

But the next clause shows us that that's

not what Paul means.

Get it with me.

Deliver this man to Satan for the

destruction of the flesh, and here's the

purpose, so that his spirit may be saved

in the day of the Lord.

That's so comforting, right?

The purpose of delivering this man to

Satan is not his damnation, but his

salvation.

In other words, the spirit of church

discipline and excommunication is

redemptive, not punitive.

The goal of the church discipline is

reconciliation, not separation.

Paul's expressing his hope that through

excommunication, through the tough love

of the church, the man would be led to

repentance and faith, trusting that if he

has truly tasted of the life and the

spirit, that he would turn from his

distaste of the destruction of the

flesh back to the Lord.

That's his hope here.

And that's why it's so wrong for us to

say, you know, like, oh, like, I don't

want to judge these people, because by

refusing to judge one another, we're

condemning one another to judgment on

that ultimate day of judgment.

By obeying this passage and judging one

another in a loving way, we help each

other so that we can be saved on that

ultimate day of judgment.

And I hope our church really gets this,

understands this, because Dietrich Bonhoeffer

writes about this in his book, Life

Together.

He says, quote, nothing can be more cruel

than that leniency which abandons others

to sin.

Nothing can be more compassionate than that

severe reprimand which calls another

Christian in one's community back from the

path of sin.

A church that tolerates all manners of sin

among its members because it claims to be

quote, unquote, tolerant, open, inclusive, and

affirming is not practicing compassion.

They're practicing cruel indifference.

It's people we care nothing about that we

leave alone to do and live however they wish.

Is that not true?

It's phony friends that are content to

watch us ruin our lives with vices and bad

decisions.

The true friends confront us, chide us,

even get angry with us when we make bad

decisions that jeopardize our present and

future well-being.

That's what we are called to be.

That's the family of God, the true friends

that we are called to be for one another.

And this, by the way, is why our church

emphasizes membership so much, right?

It's because the New Testament church

assumed this kind of commitment among

believers and assumed this kind of

mutual accountability.

But Christians nowadays do not assume that

kind of mutual accountability and

commitment.

That's why we have to formalize membership

in order to teach our members explicitly of

this kind of mutual accountability and

commitment so that we can pursue this kind of

vision of a church together.

And note well that the church discipline that

Paul's talking about here will only work if

we buy in together as a community.

Only when we truly understand ourselves to

be accountable to one another will we submit

to church discipline.

Only if we humble ourselves and recognize that

we really need each other will we esteem

others' judgments more highly than our own.

Nowadays, right, people who are disciplined by

the church can simply leave and say, oh, I'll just

drive over to the next church in town, right?

And that reveals just how much the modern

church is characterized by the same pride of the

Corinthians of thinking oneself above judgment.

If we really saw each other as family and if we really valued each other's love and

investment in our lives and their judgment of where we are spiritually, we would be

fearful to leave like that.

So we are to purge the evil person from our midst in the context of the

gathered church community, in the name and power of the Lord Jesus Christ for the purpose of

restoration and reconciliation of the sinner.

That's how we should purge, right?

That brings us to my final point.

It's a shorter point.

Why we should purge, right?

The evil person from our, why should we purge?

One of the reasons I have already given, which is to restore the sinner, correct the sinner,

but there are more reasons that Paul specifies in verses 6 to 8.

Your boasting is not good.

Do you not know that a little leaven,

leavens the whole lump, cleanses out the old leaven,

that you may be a new lump as you really are on leaven.

For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.

Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven,

the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

Nowadays, the word leaven can refer to, more generally, to all kinds of leavening agents,

like baking soda or yeast.

And if you have the NIV translation, it actually says yeast, but that's a mistranslation,

because here the word, it has a more restricted definition.

It's referring to leaven, and leaven is actually like a fermented,

when you ferment a dough to make it light and fluffy, right,

and you save a part of that old batch of dough in order to use it for the baking of a new batch

so that you can make it, again, light and fluffy without having access to yeast,

that's what leaven is.

So it's the old part of the fermented bread that's kept reserved for the next batch

so you could use it for fermenting other breads.

And so yeast was very rare in the ancient world.

I mean, yeast is also wholesome, so it doesn't really make sense.

And it's an ingenious way to really ferment bread,

but of course the danger is that every time you do that, right,

the chance of harmful bacteria growing grows every time,

because you're taking the old one and you're probably preserving some of the really old one

as you take a piece of the old bread and use it for the new one.

And so that's the dangerous baking method if you preserve it over the long period of time.

And that's one of the reasons probably why God commanded in Exodus 12, 14, 20

to purge their homes of all leaven during the annual feast of unleavened bread.

I mean, that's not the main reason.

That's the secondary reason.

But I think that may have been one of the reasons.

Because for seven days they only eat unleavened bread,

and then because of that they start up the leavening process all over again

from the fresh batch, right, that they have.

And so in this way the word leaven for the Jews came to represent

how sin and evil insidiously spread among God's people

and grow until the whole bread is contaminated, right?

I mean, it's not a powerful picture.

So it's saying a little leaven leavens the whole lump is similar to our English saying

one bad apple spoils the whole barrel, right?

So using a familiar analogy, Paul enjoins the Corinthian church

to purge the leaven from among them, lest the whole batch be contaminated.

Because unrepentant sin in the context of the church, it's like cancer.

It spreads. It doesn't stay where it is, right?

You can't sweep it under the rug.

You can't just cover it up like this and manage sin like that.

It has to be, like cancer, eradicated.

It's the only way to deal with the sin in a proper way,

this kind of egregious sin, unrepentant sin.

And so that's why he says,

cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, right?

So that's the reason Paul commends the exclamation of the sexually immoral remains,

the preservation of the purity of the church.

Because Ephesians 5, 25-27 tells us that Christ saved us.

He's to cleanse us, right?

To sanctify us.

That's what he did, right?

He sanctified us, set us apart as his bride, right?

And if we are to be betrothed to Christ,

if the church is to be free of spot or wrinkle or any such thing,

as Ephesians 5 says,

then we have to cleanse out the old leaven.

How can we, the bride who is betrothed to Christ, the righteous one,

the holy one, tolerate filth and stain on ourselves?

But that sounds a little bit like works righteousness, doesn't it?

Right?

When Paul says,

cleanse out the old leavens that you may be a new lump.

Doesn't it sound like,

yeah, make yourself a new lump by cleansing out the old leavens.

Doesn't it sound like that?

I think Paul's aware that it sounds like that.

So he immediately adds a qualifier in verse 7.

Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump,

as you really are unleavened.

For Christ, the Passover lamb, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.

So what he's saying here is this.

We do not cleanse ourselves of old leaven in order to be clean and gain favor with God.

Rather, we cleanse ourselves because we have already been cleansed by Christ.

For Paul, the imperative to obey is always preceded and grounded in the indicative of what God has already done.

And so what he's saying is this.

It's really a concise summary of Christian discipleship and sanctification.

Become what you are, is what Paul is saying.

Live as the new creation that you are because you have been born again in Christ.

John Piper puts it this way.

Act the miracle.

Through Christ, we have experienced the miracle of salvation and new life.

Now act it out.

Live it out because Christ has already done it for us.

And since Passover is the first and the greatest day of the feast of unleavened bread,

he continues that imagery by giving the reason why we are truly unleavened bread.

He says,

For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.

Right?

When Israel was enslaved to Egypt and God delivered them through the Passover,

he told them to take a lamb and to slaughter it

and put Dabit's blood on the two doorposts and the lintel of the house

and then to eat the lamb in their house.

And when God went throughout Egypt to judge,

bring judgment on the Egyptian slaveholders and the nation of Egypt,

he killed the firstborn and brought judgment upon the household,

of every household except for the homes that had the blood of the lamb on the door.

He's saying the Passover lamb that's been sacrificed

so that we can be spared is Jesus Christ.

And because Jesus was not spared,

we can be spared from the judgment of our sins.

Because Jesus was excluded,

we can be received in fellowship with God,

communion with him.

That's the reason why we are clean.

That's the reason why we're unleavened bread.

And as such, we must cleanse the old leaven from our mist.

And Paul concludes this passage with verse 7,

Let us therefore celebrate the festival,

not with the old leaven,

the leaven of malice and evil,

but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

David Brainerd was an 18th century missionary,

American missionary to the Native Americans.

He used to serve actually in Stockbridge, Massachusetts,

and then he went over to New Jersey,

and he wrote this in his diary.

He said,

I never got away from Jesus and him crucified.

And I found that when my people were gripped

by this great evangelical doctrine of Christ and him crucified,

I had no need to give them instructions about morality.

I found that one followed as the sure and inevitable fruit of the other.

I find my Indians begin to put on the garments of holiness

and their common life begins to be sanctified,

even in small matters,

when they are possessed by the doctrine of Christ and him crucified.

The church that has been purified by Christ's sacrifice

must purge the evil from their mist.

And note, this is not a chore.

This is not something we do reluctantly.

The image that Paul uses is of celebrating the festival,

not literally the festival of unleavened bread,

but to celebrate the festival of what Christ has done for us,

in dying for us,

in sparing us from sin and judgment.

And because of that,

our life is a perpetual party,

a perpetual celebration of what Christ has done for us.

That's the image Paul has here.

So let's do that joyfully together.

Because of Christ's sacrifice,

purge the evil from our mist,

as the sure and inevitable expression

of that glorious reality of Christ crucified.

Let's pray together.

God, we know that this is hard for many people.

But we know,

because of the love that you demonstrated

in an unforgettable and unmistakable way

in Jesus Christ,

in his death and resurrection on our behalf,

that it comes from the Father's heart of love.

And we know it is true.

So help us to model that,

follow that,

for your glory and our good.

In Jesus' name we pray.

Amen.