Christ Teachings

Paul asked, “do you not know that the saints will judge the world?” (1 Corinthians 6:2). The Greek word translated world is “kosmos,” and includes the globe we call earth and everything that inhabits it. By this Paul means that the Gospel of Jesus Christ will ultimately reach the highest courts of the world, and those courts will render judgments in faithfulness to Jesus Christ. He doesn’t mean that you and I (or that every Christian) will be thrust into positions of worldly power. Rather, he simply means that the gospel will eventually reach those in positions of worldly power and that they will exercise their faith faithfully.

However, he asks, “if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases?” (1 Corinthians 6:2). Here, the Greek actually does suggest that Paul said “you,” as in the particular people to whom he was speaking. Does it, then, have any relevance to us today?

Paul brought the Gospel to Rome and to the highest courts of the known world of his time. And some of his friends accompanied him on that journey. So, it is possible that he was speaking only to specific people as he anticipated his journey to Rome.

However, given the context in which he was writing these words, it seems likely that he meant to suggest that it is always the same Holy Spirit who animates all of God’s people. And that the same Holy Spirit, who would judge the world in the fullness of time in the highest world courts through particular regenerate saints (Christians), is certainly able to judge the more trivial cases that would commonly come to church courts through the ordinary saints of the church. He was speaking about the Holy Spirit who would be manifest in all of God’s people throughout history.

He could say this because he knew and he was teaching that Christians are not to judge or evaluate on the basis of personalities or the circumstances of providence, but are to render judgments and evaluations on the basis of Scripture alone. Thus, the same guide, the Holy Spirit through the regeneration of believers in every generation, will always be or should always be the basis for Christian judgments and evaluations.

Paul went on, “Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!” (1 Corinthians 6:3). The Greek word is “aggelos,” and means messengers, in this case messengers of God. Strong’s concordance goes on to say of this word in this context that it suggests by implication pastors, who bring the message of the Gospel. And, indeed, ordinary saints do in fact judge pastors through church courts. Church courts (denominations) license pastors, approve pastors for particular callings and discipline pastors. We don’t need to turn to spiritualized explanations when common explanations exist.

Paul mentioned all of this in order to play upon the shame of the Corinthian church. “I say this to your shame” (1 Corinthians 6:5). Paul was using shame to admonish and teach the Corinthians. This is very interesting. Is shame an acceptable method of instruction? It may be disliked and considered to be impolite, but it appears to be biblical. The shame that Paul brought upon the Corinthians was that they settled disputes in civil courts rather than in church courts. And it was shameful because it neglected — even denied — the presence and power of the Holy Spirit who dwells with God’s people, and who should have been called upon to adjudicate disputes among them. Paul suggested that their neglect of church courts was actually a neglect of the Holy Spirit and of Scripture.

And here’s the rub. If the Corinthians were shamed by Paul for neglecting to use church courts to settle disputes among professing Christians, should we not also be shamed for the same thing? Is it not to the shame of Christianity that Christians regularly neglect church courts and turn to civil courts — or worse, political manipulation — to settle their disputes today? Is it not to the shame of Christianity that the churches have all but abandoned church courts?

It is.

And yet, there is a contemporary movement to reestablish church courts in our time. Peacemakers

Christian unity is not obvious. The unity is invisible or informal. The unity is a function of the Holy Spirit and is, therefore, seen by faith, which is “the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1). Those who are not regenerate do not see the unity. They do not know the unity, and they cannot live in the unity. The diversity is easy. It’s natural. The unity is harder. It’s supernatural.

Paul’s questions sound a bit like chastisement because the obvious answer is no. Are all apostles? No. Are all prophets? No. Are all teachers? No. Do all work miracles? No. Paul is addressing the jealousy that makes us envy those who have different gifts than we do. He is addressing the tendency to think that the grass is always greener on the other side of the hill, to think that other people have it better or easier than we do. And by implication, Paul is calling Christians to spend their time and energy developing their own gifts rather than being jealous or envious of other people who have other gifts. Paul is calling Christians to bloom where God has planted them, to use the talents and resources that God has given them, to not neglect the station to which we each have been called.

Part of our sin state is the “poor me” complex that captures and keeps people feeling trapped by their circumstances. In contrast, the central message of the gospel is that we are not trapped by our circumstances. We are not trapped by sin, not by our own sin, and not by the greater sins of the world that often — usually — appear to dominate our lives. Yes, the sin is there. Yes, the sin is real. Yes, the sin is powerful and pervasive. But “the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death” (Romans 8:2). Christ Jesus has set us free from the tyranny of our circumstances and set us free from those circumstances in the joy of the Lord. And the Spirit of that joy is the Spirit of unity in the body of Christ. The joy of the Lord is supernatural. It supersedes or superimposes or superintends the natural state of sin.

It is this joy in the Lord to which Paul now turns. We all want the joy, but we all feel stuck in the sin. We want the freedom to be all we can be in Christ, but we feel like victims captured by our circumstances. We look at other people and think, “if only I could be like him or like her. If only I could do what he does or what she does, then I’d be happy or rich or free or whatever.”

“No!” said Paul. That is not the way things are. Are all apostles? No. Are all prophets? No. Are all teachers? No Do all work miracles? No. Does everyone have to be this way or that way? No. Is everyone the same? No. And thank God! Indeed, thank God in Jesus Christ for the diversity of the kingdom that gives rise to the division of labor, which in turn is the engine of human culture that drives the development of modern culture, including science and technology.

Joy is not found by trying to be like someone else. Joy is not a function of imitation, except inasmuch as we can imitate Christ. But our imitation of Christ is not a matter of trying to be like Him. Rather, the imitation of Christ is a matter of being who God made us to be. Inasmuch as we can imitate Christ we become genuinely authentic. In Christ we know and celebrate and develop our own unique gifts. Christians are not to pretend to be like other Christians, not at all! Nor are we to pretend to be like Jesus. Christians are not called to pretend at all. Christians are called to be real, to be unique, to be authentic, to be — as the old King James Version reads – peculiar (1 Peter 2:9).

Christianity is not a cookie-cutter religion where people try to match or reach some perfect ideal. Quite the contrary! Christianity is a religion rich in diversity. No two Christians are the same — nor should they be! If you are trying to be like someone else, you are barking up the wrong tree. God does not want you to be like someone else. God wants you to be like He made you. God wants you to use the gifts He gave you in the circumstances in which He planted you. Someone else’s gifts and talents won’t work for you where you are, in your circumstances. When we try to be like someone else, we are driven by envy and jealousy and will experience frustration and sorrow because, no matter how hard we try, it won’t work. I can’t be you, you can’t be me. We can’t be like someone else. Trying to be like someone else is a guaranteed route to failure because we are not them. The feeling of being trapped by our circumstances is the result of trying to be someone that we are not meant to be, or trying to do something we are not meant to do. The feeling of being trapped by our circumstances is always a function of sin. It is the very thing that Christ came to free us from.

We are not victims of our circumstances, though God has certainly bound us to our circumstances. The gift(s) that God has given us are for use in the midst of the circumstances that God has given to us. And as we learn to use our gift(s) we will see that those gifts require our particular circumstances. Our circumstances provide the context in which our gifts make sense. Our circumstances provide the foil that sharpens and strengthens our gift(s), which unleash God’s blessings upon our circumstances, and which in turn give glory to God. Indeed, God has a better way!

There are a lot of mysterious characters mentioned in the Bible we would like to know a lot more about than we do. Apollos, the eloquent evangelist, ranks right up there near the top among such New Testament characters. However, the fact that we know but little about him could be said equally of most of the apostles. The thing that makes Apollos mysterious is what we do know about him.

Here is what we know, Acts 18:24-28 (NAS), “Now a certain Jew named Apollos, an Alexandrian by birth, an eloquent man, came to Ephesus; and he was mighty in the Scriptures. This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus, being acquainted only with the baptism of John; and he began to speak out boldly in the synagogue. But when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately. And when he wanted to go across to Achaia, the brethren encouraged him and wrote to the disciples to welcome him; and when he had arrived, he helped greatly those who had believed through grace; for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.”

The first great mystery is how could this man have been instructed in the way of the Lord and yet not known about the baptism authored by Jesus and knowing only John’s baptism? It is obvious that baptism was the subject he needed to be enlightened on and that it was a part of “the way of God.”

It is certain Apollos was not in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost when Peter preached, among other things, the baptism not of John but that given by Christ in the Great Commission of Matt. 28:18-19 (see also Acts 2:38). Of this baptism the text tells us he was ignorant for he knew only the baptism of John.

We can also conclude Apollos did not spend time in Jerusalem afterwards for the apostles that remained there and the church leaders there knew clearly the differences in the two baptisms and he in close association with them would have soon learned the difference himself.

It can also be safely assumed that he was not possessed of any miraculous spiritual gift that would have conferred this knowledge to him or else he would have known and not needed further instruction from Priscilla and Aquila.

So, one of the big mysteries concerning Apollos is how he failed to come to this knowledge long before meeting up with Priscilla and Aquila. Why did not his earlier instructors in the way of the Lord convey this truth to him? We will never know for the Bible does not tell us.

Was it important that Apollos know this truth? Many today would say no, not at all, for baptism has nothing to do with salvation denying what Peter taught in Acts 2:38. Yet, Priscilla and Aquila felt it was a matter so important that they drew Apollos aside to teach him this fundamental truth. As travelers with Paul they knew the truth and why it was essential that Apollos know it as well. If you are going to be a teacher it is essential you teach the truth meaning you first have to know it. The salvation of the men and women Apollos would be teaching and speaking to was at stake. It was a part of “the way of God.” (Acts 18:26)

Was Apollos lost because he had not been baptized with the baptism Jesus taught in the Great Commission and through Peter on the day of Pentecost? No, nor was he baptized after learning the truth from Priscilla and Aquila.. He had already been baptized with John’s baptism which itself was “for the remission of sins.” (Mark 1:4 NKJV) When one’s sins are remitted they are remitted.

Read Heb. 10:2 from several translations. The passage has reference to sin offerings under the Law of Moses but it also has direct application to the remission of sins under the baptism of John. The writer says, quoting from the original ASV of 1901, “Else would they not have ceased to be offered? because the worshippers, having been once cleansed, would have had no more consciousness of sins.” When your sins have been forgiven they have been forgiven. There is no need for a second baptism and so Apollos having been baptized once with John’s baptism did not need to be baptized again.

When the church first began it already had charter members, those who had believed the preaching of John and of Jesus concerning Jesus and the need for repentance and cleansing of their sins. When they were baptized by John or one of his disciples they were cleansed for Jesus himself said that John’s baptism was from heaven. Listen to the scriptures.

Jesus speaking, Matt. 21:25 (NAS), “‘The baptism of John was from what source, from heaven or from men?’ And they began reasoning among themselves, saying, ‘If we say, ‘From heaven,’ He will say to us, ‘Then why did you not believe him?’” And then Luke says, (Luke 7:30 NAS), “But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected God’s purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John.”

We also have to remember that Jesus preached and baptized during his lifetime. We can be assured that if John’s baptism was for the remission of sins so was that of Jesus. Do we believe that one who obeyed Jesus while he lived on earth and was baptized by him, whether directly or through his disciples, would need to be baptized again after the day of Pentecost? When your sins have been remitted they are remitted. Yes, remission looked forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood on the cross which was yet to come but they were assured of the remission of their sins having believed and obeyed what they had been taught which included baptism for the forgiveness of those sins.

Neither were the apostles baptized again after receiving John’s baptism nor was there a need for them to do so. Jesus said they were “clean.” (John 13:10-11, John 15:3) He says in his prayer to the Father “they have kept thy word” (John 17:6 NAS), “I have been glorified in them” (John 17:10 NAS), “they are not of the world” (John 17:16 NAS), and finally, “not one of them perished but the son of perdition, that the scripture might be fulfilled.” (John 17:12 NAS)

Had they been baptized? Look at John 1:35 and compare it with John 1:40. When you do so you will see that Andrew was a disciple of John before becoming acquainted with Christ. His brother, of course, was Peter. James and John were business partners with Peter and Andrew (see Luke 5:10). It is safe to assume that if Andrew was a disciple of John’s so were the others. Philip, chosen by Jesus personally was from the same city as Andrew and Peter (John 1:44). Nathanael was said by Jesus to be “an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!” (John 1:47 NAS)

It is safe to assume that the men Jesus chose were godly men and men who did not shun John’s preaching. If they had heard John preach we know they were not of that camp that Luke says “rejected God’s purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John.” (Luke 7:30 NAS). Matthew was a tax collector but even so if you read Luke 7:29 you will see that tax gathers were baptized by John. If any of the 12 had not been baptized already, having lacked the knowledge and opportunity, we can be certain the preaching of Jesus soon taught them the truth and they were shortly thereafter baptized.

In the very next set of verses after reading about Apollos we come to an account of twelve men whom Paul finds at Ephesus after Apollos had departed and gone to Corinth. These verses have caused much confusion because of what one has just read in the chapter before about Apollos and has been part of the mystery surrounding the man. Luke says, in Acts 19:1 that Paul found there “some disciples” referring to this group of twelve men.

Because these men know nothing of the Holy Spirit Paul begins to question them concerning their baptism. Something has to be wrong if they have been baptized and yet know nothing about the Holy Spirit, even of his existence. Now why would that necessarily follow? Because the baptism authored by Jesus, the baptism of the Great Commission of Matt. 28:19 is “in (the literal translation is “into”-DS) the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” Furthermore, there is the promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit to those thus baptized (Acts 2:38) which they should have known about.

Now here is the surprise to those who have just read about Apollos in the prior chapter. Paul takes these twelve men and baptizes them “in (the literal translation is “into”-DS) the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Acts 19:5 NAS) Why was it necessary for them to be baptized with the baptism of Jesus, of the Great Commission, but not Apollos?

Some might say that maybe Apollos was baptized too but the text does not say so. That might be a possibility but for one thing. The apostles baptized by John were not baptized a second time either. Why not?

The answer has to be timing. There was a time starting with John the Baptist’s initial preaching up until the time of either his imprisonment, death, or the day of Pentecost when John’s baptism was valid and had God’s full support behind it. This was a short period of time of maybe a year or a year and a half approximately when if one was obedient to John’s preaching and was baptized he was saved having received the remission of sins. Apollos would have been baptized during that time.

The twelve men at Ephesus would have been baptized with John’s baptism after the day of Pentecost when the baptism authored by Jesus, the baptism of the Great Commission, (into the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit for the remission of sins) became effective. At that time and thereafter anyone being baptized with John’s baptism had a baptism that no longer had any validity to it having been completely replaced by the baptism of the Great Commission. The one baptism looked forward to Christ’s death while the other looked back.

In closing I want to leave the reader with some critical thoughts with regards to salvation. Luke says these men whom Paul found were disciples (Acts 19:1) and yet were not baptized? Were they saved already anyway? What is a disciple? A disciple is, according to Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, “a learner.” Vine further says, “it denotes one who follows one’s teaching.” It does not necessarily denote one who is saved as is commonly thought (although it often does).

Please note from Jesus’ own words about who is to be baptized. “And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in (the literal translation is “into” – DS) the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.’” (Mat 28:18-20 NAS)

Disciples are to be baptized. One must be a person who is learning of Christ and who is willing to follow his teaching in order to be scripturally baptized. No one who is not a disciple (dictionary definition) will be baptized for they have no knowledge and/or desire to do so. One must necessarily be a disciple before he can be saved. How can you be saved without first learning of Jesus and being willing to follow him?

And, the final point. If people were commonly saved in those days by faith alone apart from baptism why did Paul bother to take these men and baptize them?

Here is the clincher – why did Paul just assume they had been baptized? He says in Acts 19:3, “Into what then were you baptized?” (NAS) Why assume they had been baptized into anything or anyone if it was not necessary in making Christians, if it was not necessary in obedience to the gospel, if it was not a part of the gospel?

In Acts 19:2 Paul talks of that time “when you believed.” Then in verse 3 immediately following he says, “into what then were you baptized?” He ties belief and baptism together. If you believed you were baptized is what he is saying. All of the conversion accounts in the book of Acts teach the same thing. The question all men and women must ask themselves is what am I personally going to do about it in my own life.

By: Denny Smith

Article Directory: http://www.articledashboard.com

When one enters a denominational church he knows almost beforehand what he will be hearing. Generally, a kind of feel good sermon, maybe a motivational one, a sort of pep talk, or possibly I am okay you are okay type thing. God love us all and would not condemn any of us regardless. For a different kind of preaching try the sermons of Waymon Swain. Highly recommended by your author.

“Various kinds of tongues” is a translation of two Greek words: genos glossa. The first word literally means kin, as in kindred or family. And the second means tongue, by implication a language, and specifically the language of one’s kin (family). The Greek Lexicon expands the definition to mean the language or dialect used by a particular people distinct from that of other nations. So a literal translation might be “kindred languages,” and again it suggests the language of one’s kin or family, the language spoken by one’s parents, one’s native tongue. It is an untenable stretch of the imagination to think that it means unknown languages of any kind.

In the light of our previous discussion of tongues, we find that this gift of “various kinds of tongues” is about speaking the gospel in the native tongue(s) of believers in order to share it with one’s family at home. Remember that the purpose of tongues is to bring the gospel of Jesus Christ to the nations, to the Gentiles, to the people of the world. Through Christ the gospel of the God of the Hebrews was exported to the world in the native tongues of the various nations.

Paul’s mention of this gift is a repetition of 1 Corinthians 12:10, and biblical repetition serves to emphasize importance. Various kinds of tongues would serve the expansion and dissemination of the gospel to the world. Paul was not instructing disciples to speak in languages they didn’t know, nor in forgotten languages, nor to speak in languages known only to God. Rather, he was instructing disciples to take their knowledge, experience and love of the gospel of Jesus Christ and share it with their family and friends at home, in their native countries, in their native tongues, as a means of evangelizing the Gentiles, non-Hebrews.

This gift, rather than being a fanciful flight into realms of so-called higher spirituality, was the most common, ordinary thing imaginable. Because the gift of tongues that was given in Acts 2 was the gift of speaking (and writing) the gospel of Jesus Christ in non-Hebrew languages for the sake of world evangelization, this repetition of that gift simply emphasizes its importance. Paul was acknowledging that foreigners, Gentiles, had indeed received God’s grace of salvation and the power of the Holy Spirit, and was directing and empowering those Gentile Christians to take the gospel to their homelands and to do so in their own native languages.

The application for us is the same now as it was then. Christians everywhere are directed and empowered to share their faith in Jesus Christ in any and every language, but particularly to do so in their most common and familiar language they know. Sharing the gospel in one’s native tongue by a true believer will do much to alleviate the difficulties that accrue to those who try to translate it into a language that is not their own native tongue. In short, the biblical gospel of Jesus Christ escaped the confines of the Hebrew language as Gentile Christians carried it home in their native tongues. And this has been a great gift of the Spirit, a continuing gift. In fact, this gift will continue into eternity because sharing the love of Jesus Christ is at the heart of the gospel.

The problem of finding the oneness in diversity was a primary concern of Plato. Basically stated, the problem of the one and the many begins from the assumption that there is a unifying factor that operates in the background of things, that unity and oneness are real, and that there is a reliable consistency at the center of things. Plato was seeking a philosophical unity or an underlying principle of unity and identity. Paul was identify that unifying factor when he wrote of the body as an example of God’s trinitarian character.

Early Greek philosophers thought the unifying factor might be material, such as fire, or water, or air, or earth, or atoms. Others thought it might be an idea, such as number, or mind. Various Greek philosophers are associated with each of these ideas. Paul, continuing to criticize Greek philosophy in his letter to the Corinthians, was working to establish what that one unifying factor was. It was not air, earth, fire, water or atoms. It was not number or mind. It was — and still is, said Paul, God, manifest in Jesus Christ.

In short, the doctrine of the Trinity tells us that the unifying thing in the universe is God, who exists in three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is God who holds all things together in unity and in diversity. It is God who has created and given definition to all things. It is God who remains constant through time. God gives identity to things just as God creates the parts or elements that things are composed of.

Philosophy in the Western world — Greek Philosophy — begins with this concern (the one and the many). The earliest Greek philosophers mainly concerned themselves with this conundrum, but they could not solve the problem. Philosophy has not been able to solve this problem, not the ancient Greeks, not the Indians or Chinese, not the pagans or Muslims, not the Moderns or Postmoderns. As a result, the problem of the one and the many still dominates our understanding of the universe, including modern physics, which has set for itself the goal of finding the theory that will unify the laws of physics. This was the quest that drove Albert Einstein to continue to delve deeper and deeper into the world of physics. It is not a fluke of an idea, but has played a very important role in the world — and it still does. Perhaps you have heard of String Theory, which is an attempt to solve this very problem at the subatomic level.

But we don’t need to go there. We don’t need to follow the String Theorists. Rather, we will follow Paul. And Paul says two things that relate to this concern. First, he said that God gives differing gifts to His people and that it is the “same Spirit” (1 Corinthians 12:4) that “empowers them all in everyone” (1 Corinthians 12:6). God manifests Himself in His people through various spiritual gifts. And, in spite of the differing gifts that people have, the Lord who manifests them is one. God’s unity is maintained in spite of the different manifestations of gifts.

Those gifts are manifested in the bodies of different believers, yet they are merely different parts or aspects of one Spirit. The gifts are given through our bodies, and yet our bodies are parts of the body of Christ, the greater body to which we belong, in which we have a greater identity, our true identity in Christ.

Paul said that though there are many different bodies that belong to many different people, the different gifts that each body has constitute the unity of the body of Christ. In Christ, those differing gifts are parts of Christ’s body — His church. Do you see it? Christ is the unifying factor. Christ, the Spirit of Christ, the Holy Spirit is the glue that provides Christian unity, that holds all Christians together in the one body of Christ, though composed of different people with different gifts.

We don’t have to work to establish Christian unity. It is not a function of denominational administration. It is simply given. It is given through the differing gifts. It is a function of the Trinity. So, where those gifts are, there is unity. And where those gifts are not, there is no unity. And the one identifying thing about God’s gifts is that they all pull in the same direction, toward the same goal and/or purpose. They are all working together toward the same end, with the same Spirit through the manifestation of the same Lord, who is Jesus Christ. And yet, denominational separation is a reality, but it is not an ultimate reality. It is important, but not ultimately important. It is not as important as the gifts of God, not as important as the manifestation of the Holy Spirit in the lives of believers. Denominations are not as real as the gifts given to God’s people. And where denominations do not pull together toward God’s purposes, the denominational unity they express is less real, less important than the unity of gifts that all pull in the service of God’s purposes. Paul does not speak of denominations as the elements of Christian unity. He speaks of gifts, which are the manifestation of the Holy Spirit.

At the same time Paul warns us of gift envy, of jealousy and opposition among Christians. We don’t all have the same gifts. That’s not the way that God has designed things. We are all different. God has provided for specialization, for the division of labor. The division of labor is an essential element of human society, and particularly for the development and use of science and technology. The division of labor provides for maximum social development because it provides for maximum skill specialization. We can’t all be eyes or ears, hands or feet. Rather, we each must develop our unique gift, which provides for our unique identities as unique individuals. Our individuality, our uniqueness is tied to the gifts that God has given us.

The strength of the chain (church) is dependent upon the weakest link (person). The chain is a whole, a unit, though it is composed of many links. Each link of a chain must be in unity, in relationship with the other links. The strength of the chain is dependent upon the relationship between the links. And so it is with the body, as well. The strength of the body requires that the parts of the body have strong relationships with one another. Each part is in relationship with each other part, some relationships are closer than others, but all must be strong — real, personal, hearty, familiar — in order that “that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another” (1 Corinthians 12:25). This mutual care and concern is a critical issue that Paul will address in 1 Corinthians 13..

The unity of the body, as the unity of the universe, is a function of love. God loves the world and His love holds the world together. God’s love is the unifying factor in the laws of physics. Similarly, in like fashion, inasmuch as we are created in the image of God, we must love one another because our mutual love — our mutual concern, our mutual attachment, our mutual bond — helps hold the body of Christ together. In an ultimate sense, Christ alone holds it together. But in a practical, relative sense, the glue of God’s church is the bond of love and fellowship between the members.

Friends love each other, but when they argue and fight, the friendship is ruined. Friends fight and walk away from each other. In contrast, family members also love each other, but when families argue and fight, the family relationship remains in tact. Families find it much more difficult to walk away from each other. And even when they do, the family relationship remains for life. Family relationships cannot be undone.

Christian fellowship is more like family relationships than friendships in this regard, except stronger. The bonds of Christian fellowship are stronger and more durable than friendships, even more durable than family relationships. Relationships in Christ are as strong and durable as Christ Himself. Our relationship with Christ is as strong and as eternal as Christ because we are held in that relationship by the love of Christ for us, and not merely by our own love for Christ. Our love is weak and fickle, Christ’s is not. Our love is temporal, worldly. Christ’s is eternal, heavenly.

When Paul wrote to the Romans he said that nothing can separate us from the love of Christ. Nothing, not “tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword” (Romans 8:35). This is the bond that holds Christ’s church together in unity.

Paul has established that the Spirit of God dwells with believers. He makes an analogy to the Old Testament Temple by saying that believers are the Temple. It is important that we understand who Paul refers to here. The Greek word translated as “you” is a second person plural present indicative. That means that the best translation is y’all. It is a plural term and indicates that the people of God are the temple, not simply an individual believer.

Peter built upon this theme when he said, “you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 2:5). Yes, the Spirit of God inhabits believers as they are born again, and each believer must protect the purity (or health) of his or her own body as part of the discipline of faithfulness. But the analogy primarily applies to the corporate nature of the church as the body of Christ. The purity of the church must also be protected.

Paul speaks of this in 1 Corinthians 12:12-ff, “For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body — Jews or Greeks, slaves or free — and all were made to drink of one Spirit.” Just as individual bodies are not divisible, which is the root meaning of individual, so, the church is also individual — not just specific churches, but the Church Universal is individual — whole, complete, without division. Christians are bound together in a bond of love and fellowship with one another across the face of the globe and throughout the centuries. Christian unity is not something to be achieved, rather it is something to be realized. It is already the fact of the matter in that Christian unity has been decreed and is in the process of realization.

This bond of love and fellowship between believers is not based upon how we feel about one another, or on what we think about each other. How we feel about each other and what we think about each other are secondary concerns or less — minor concerns — because the love of Christ is stronger than whatever appreciation or disdain we may have for other believers. The bond of Christian fellowship is not based on our love or respect for one another, but on Christ’s love for His people — all of His people. Our feelings for each other are not the bonding element of Christian fellowship.

Nor are Christians bound together by their understanding of biblical doctrine. Doctrine is not the bond of Christian fellowship, either. Christ is. Our bond is not doctrinal or denominational, but personal. Jesus Christ is the bond of Christian fellowship. Christians have Christ in common, and all Christians are growing into “the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes,” said Paul in Ephesians 4:13-14.

I am not disparaging the value of right doctrine, nor the importance of the love of the brethren — both of which are biblically mandated. Doctrine is important and we are called to love and honor one another in Christ. We are stewards of the temple of God, which is no longer a building made of stones, but is now in Christ a church made of believers (1 Corinthians 3:16, 1 Peter 2:5).

“If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him. For God’s temple is holy, and you are that temple” (1 Corinthians 3:17). The KJV translates it, “If any man defile the temple of God.” The Greek word translated “defile” means to pine or waste, to shrivel or wither, that is, to spoil or to ruin by moral influences, to deprave, corrupt or destroy. I prefer “defile” to “destroy” because it better suggests the process that leads to destruction. It tells us that contamination of the purity of the church can be lethal. It tells us that moral contamination or moral synthesis produces death.

But is the Church of Jesus Christ morally or doctrinally pure? No, not yet. But it is growing in purity over time as it grows in faithfulness through the sanctification of its individual members, in spite of what it may seem. The growth of the church is like the growth of the stock market in that there are cyclic fluctuations but an overall increase. Because we are not pure, because we are still sinners wrestling with a boatload of sin in our personal and corporate lives, and yet are members of Christ’s body nonetheless, the purity of the church is retarded by our spiritual immaturity. I am equating spiritual immaturity with moral depravity because we are all saved from sin into Christ’s righteousness. We are growing in faithfulness and in understanding in as much as we trust and depend upon Jesus Christ and the Word of God and not on the foolishness of men.

At the same time, we cannot deny the moral demand that Paul lays at our feet in this verse. Inasmuch as we defile the church, God will defile us. It appears that God will give back to us what we give to Him. If we give Him love and honor and praise, He will give us love and honor and praise. But if we give Him hate and dishonor and spite, He will give those very things right back to us. Being made in the image of God means that there is a reflectivity in our relationship with our Creator. The positive side is that we reflect His character inasmuch as we are true to His Word. But the negative side is that our failure to reflect His character results in the defilement of the church, and leads to our own eventual destruction.

By: Phillip Ross

Article Directory: http://www.articledashboard.com

For over 25 years Phillip A. Ross has been leading churches and writing many Christian books. Loaded with information about historic Christianity, Ross founded www.Pilgrim-Platform.org in 1998. His exposition of First Corinthians in 2008 demonstrates the Apostle Paul’s fierce opposition to worldly Christianity. Paul turned the world upside down and Ross captures the action in Arsy Varsy — Reclaiming the Gospel in First Corinthians.

“Do this in remembrance of me,” said Jesus. The purpose of the Lord’s Supper is to re-member, to reconnect with the body of Christ. This remembering is not simply a matter of memory, but a matter of membership. It is a matter of re-membership-ing, of reinforcing the bonds of membership.

“In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’” (1 Corinthians 11:25). Where the bread represents the body of Christ, the wine represents the life of the Spirit of Christ. Where the bread suggests body life (action), the cup suggests covenant life (promise). As a cup holds liquid together, so the covenant holds life together. The New Covenant is none other than the final covenant of the God of Scripture through the resurrection of Jesus Christ to the glory of God the Father.

There are two elements in the Lord’s Supper — bread and wine, body and spirit. And these two elements are Trinitarian in character. “There is one body and one Spirit — just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call — one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all” (Ephesians 4:4-6); one God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The bread represents the body, and the wine represents Christ’s blood, Christ’s Spirit, Christ’s covenant. As the blood is the life of the individual body (Leviticus 17:11), so the covenant is the life of the corporate body, the church.

Why equate spirit and covenant? Because the Spirit is the glue of God’s promises that holds all things together. God’s promise (His Word enfleshed in Jesus Christ and through regeneration in the lives of His people) “is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1). Christian faith is faith in God’s promises, in the veracity and reliability of God’s Word.

Paul goes on to say that “as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (1 Corinthians 11:26). Participating in the Lord’s Supper is a kind of proclamation. It is an announcement that Jesus Christ is Lord and that you are His servant. It is a ceremony of covenant renewal, a reaffirmation of our commitment to God, to His truth and to His people. And it is a public proclamation in that it is made publicly in the light of day before a watching world. It is an intensely personal matter, but it is not private.

Paul said that it is a proclamation of the “Lord’s death until he comes” (1 Corinthians 11:26). Why did Paul call it a proclamation of Christ’s death? Why not a proclamation of Christ’s resurrection? In truth it is both, but Christ’s death was the necessary condition for His resurrection. Paul’s phrasing tells us that we currently live between the time of Christ’s death and His return in glory. The phrase is descriptive of the most important element of the time in which we live, the time of “travail until Christ should be formed in you,” as Paul said in Galatians 4:19. “We know that the whole creation groans and travails in pain together until now. And not only so, but ourselves also, who have the firstfruit of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, awaiting adoption, the redemption of our body” (Romans 8:23). The guiding paradigm of the history of this world began with Christ’s death and will culminate in His return in glory.

Having set the markers for all history — Christ’s death and return, Paul sets forth a caution. “Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 11:27). The caution applies to whoever, suggesting that it doesn’t matter who you are or who you think you are, the caution is for you.

To suggest that the Lord’s Supper can be engaged improperly means that there is a proper way to participate in it, a correct way to celebrate it. The issue is about worthiness, and Paul has set the caution in the negative — unworthily, irreverently, without respect. It is significant that Paul has told us how not to do it, rather than telling us how to do it. The negative caution provides maximum freedom of expression. If he had told us how to do it, there would only be one way to do it. But by telling us how not to do it, we are free to do it however we choose, as long as we don’t do it that one certain way — unworthily. The Ten Commandments are set negatively in the same way for the same reason — to provide maximum human freedom.

In order to follow Paul’s admonition, we must know the difference between being worthy and being unworthy to receive the sacrament. At first glance it would appear that we must find or provide our own worthiness, that we must do something or accomplish something that will provide our own worthiness, that we must be worthy of the sacrament in ourselves.

But nothing could be farther from the truth. Rather, Paul is pointing to our unworthiness. Paul knows that we are unworthy, that we cannot provide any personal worthiness in and of ourselves. As long as we look to ourselves for worthiness we will be unworthy. Paul has set the bar of communion participation out of human reach, and he has done so intentionally.

If we could reach the bar ourselves, we could take communion. But we cannot take it ourselves. Rather, we must receive it. It must be given. We have no worthiness in and of ourselves, so any worthiness that may accrue to us must come from without. It must come from Christ alone who is alone worthy. It is only the power and presence of the Holy Spirit in us through regeneration that provides our worthiness for participation in the Lord’s Supper. To participate in the Supper apart from personal regeneration is to participate unworthily, and to invite — to call down — the consequences of “profaning the body and blood of the Lord” (1 Corinthians 11:27). To profane the name of the Lord is a violation of the Third Commandment, and constitutes serious sin with serious consequences.

The simple act of participating in the Lord’s Supper brings about the separation of the saved and the lost by distinguishing the difference between them, that difference being regeneration or Christ-given worthiness. Participating in the Lord’s Supper is not neutral. It is not irrelevant. Rather, it is efficacious. It has the power to bring about an effect.

Paul was not against eating and drinking. He was not opposed to feasting or wine. Rather, he was interested in the sanctification of the Lord’s Supper — separating the Lord’s Supper from common eating. The Lord’s Supper had a special purpose and was to be differentiated from other eating and drinking. And secondly, it was a church ordinance not a household ordinance. It was officiated by the elders of the church, not simply the head of the household. It was a communal meal that was centered around the church community, not merely the household community.

To miss the church-centered aspects of the Lord’s Supper is equivalent to despising the church of God because it failed to provide proper honor to the structures of authority established by Jesus Christ. Part of true worship involves caring for God’s people, and when the needs of poor and hungry worshipers were ignored the poor and hungry were shamed by their lack in the face of the abundance of God’s provision in the midst of the community. Poor people often feel out of place in a wealthy congregation, and the Corinthian church was wealthy.

God is not against wealth, but insists that wealth be used according to His dictates. God cares for His people. He provides for them by insisting that His people provide for their own, for God’s people. God’s church is not a place for the wealthy to hobnob. Rather, it is a place for service, for everyone’s service, including — and perhaps even, especially — the wealthy.

What have we learned in this section of First Corinthians? First, Paul was not always encouraging, but would chastise people when they needed it.

Second, that God uses people who think differently to sharpen each other; “Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another” (Proverbs 27:17). Thus, theological discussion is not about winning arguments, but about learning God’s truth. And when we are committed to God’s truth, we are free to learn in every circumstance. The wisest Christian is never so wise that he cannot learn something from the dullest Christian. Paul’s teaching about factions in the churches is about the distance between wise Christians and dull Christians, and growing together in corporate unity through personal sanctification.

Thirdly, that true worship is not about the worshipers who gather together, but about the God who gathers them.

And fourthly, we are all in continual need of God’s grace and mercy because we continually get things wrong on our way towards perfect sanctification — and more so because we do not reach perfect sanctification in this life.

What exactly did Paul receive from the Lord? What did he deliver to the Corinthians? Paul has been addressing this concern throughout this letter, and in particular here in the eleventh chapter. Paul received from the Lord and delivered unto the saints the “way” of Christ. He reinforced this idea in 1 Corinthians 12:31, where he speaks of the greatest gift that Christ has given to His people. “But earnestly desire the higher gifts. I will show you a still more excellent way.” The spiritual gifts listed in chapter twelve are secondary to the way described in chapter thirteen. The gifts listed in chapter twelve serve to introduce what has become known as the Great Love Chapter, 1 Corinthians 13.

We will speak more about this when we come to it. But note that Paul is setting up that discussion here. And it is significant that part and parcel of that set up is the institution of the Lord’s Supper.

Paul received from the Lord the “way” of Christ. Isaiah prophesied about this. John the Baptist, hearkening back to Isaiah, when he cried “in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord; make his paths straight.’” (Matthew 3:3). Paul spoke of the Way when he witnessed to Felix in Rome: “Neither can they prove to you what they now bring up against me. But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets, having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust” (Acts 24:13-15).

What Paul calls the Way, they called a sect. The Way of Christ refers to the entire cultural structure of Christianity in its wholeness, its totality. The Way of Christ is a way of life, a lifestyle. Paul received from Christ a vision of Christian society or culture and it was that vision, that cultural practice, that way of life, that Paul was passing on to the Corinthians. It was more than a mere vision. It was an institution, a cultural apparatus, a way of being human in the light of Christ.

The capstone of that Way is Communion or the Lord’s Supper. The Lord’s Supper represents and communicates the entire cultural structure of Christianity in its wholeness. At the center of that cultural apparatus is a story, the story of Jesus Christ, the story of His betrayal, death and resurrection. But that story must be seen in its context, the context of Christ’s birth as the long-awaited Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament. Thus, the entire edifice of Scripture — all of its various stories and histories — are implicated as Paul referred to the night when Jesus was betrayed. Understanding Christ’s betrayal and death requires understanding the Bible, God’s story — His-story — from Creation to Redemption.

And at the center of God’s redemption is the body and blood of Jesus Christ. On that night Jesus “took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, ‘This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me’” (1 Corinthians 11:24-25). Luke also recorded the story, “And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me’” (Luke 22:19). The Lord’s Supper is, among other things, a mnemonic device to aid the memory. It helps us remember the Way of Christ. And yet the Lord’s Supper is more than simply words, more than a mnemonic device. It also elicits action — eating and drinking, taking in sustenance to sustain life. So, the Supper calls us to action and not merely the remembering of old stories. It calls us to our place in God’s Story of redemption, and to our various duties and responsibilities, joys and freedoms in Christ.

The bread is broken and given to us to remind us that Christ was given and broken for us, for our sins, not His own. People sometimes mistakenly say that they “take” communion, but such language is not biblical and conveys the wrong perspective regarding the Lord’s Supper. To take something implies that we are the central actors, that the initiative and impetus are ours to take. Thus, it gives the wrong understanding of communion. We do not take it. Rather, it is given to us. It is a gift. Just as we do not take salvation from Christ, we do not take Communion. We receive everything as gifts from God. Everything.

Many believe the church at Ephesus (the church being the membership) was cleansed from sin by faith based on the teachings of their denomination and the famous Ephesian passage found in chapter 2 verses 8 and 9, “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast.” (NAS)  Many, many passages of the New Testament teach that salvation is a matter of God’s grace (Acts 15:11, Rom. 3:24, Gal. 2:21, 5:4, Eph. 1:7, 2:5, 2 Thess. 2:16, 2 Tim. 1:9, Titus 2:11, Titus 3:7, 1 Peter 1:10, 1 Peter 1:13).  I have listed most of them here so the reader will know I am well aware of them.

I might also add here I am thankful it is that way.  If salvation was of works a man might well come up short (the Bible teaches he would – see Gal. 3:21).  He would need worry continually about what works (do I know all of them I am to do), have I done enough, did I do those I did well enough to pass the test.  Just about all of us have been involved in working endeavors in our life where we gave it our best, worked as hard as we could, and yet failed in the end.  Every time you watch a ballgame someone who has worked hard falls short and loses.  Many a man or woman has given their all on a job and then been let go.  Many a student has worked hard in preparing for a test and failed it.  How many more examples could be given?  So, yes, I think we are all glad salvation is a matter of God’s grace.

God’s grace is granted to us as a result of faith we possess.  “Therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand.” (Rom. 5:1-2 NAS)  “For by grace you have been saved through faith.” (Eph. 2:8 NAS)  There are many other passages teaching we are saved by faith.  Here are quite a number of them:  John 3:14-16, John 8:24, John 11:25-26, John 20:31, Acts 16:31, Rom. 10:9, 1 Cor. 1:21, Gal. 3:22, 1 Tim. 1:16, Heb. 11:6, 1 John 5:13, Rom. 3:26, 28, 30, 5:1, 11:20, Gal. 2:16, 3:24, 26,  Eph. 2:8, Philippians 3:9, 1 Peter 1:9.  These were again listed that the reader might know I am fully aware of them.

The question that arises, however, is what is this faith that justifies?  I am not asking what the object of the faith is for we know that and agree upon it.  I am asking what is the nature of this faith.  Most are persuaded today (and have been since the Reformation) that it is merely a state of the mind regarding a belief one has in Jesus, who he is, and what he has accomplished for us.  It is mental assent to the teachings of the scriptures about him.  This is the faith that it is said saves.  I certainly agree with that as far as it goes but it stops short, too short.  The demons believed (make that knew) who Jesus was (Matt. 8:29, Mark 1:34, Luke 4:41).

One must not only believe what the scriptures teach about Jesus, who he was, what he accomplished for us, but faith also commits us to believe the man himself, believe what he said, and act on it.  If faith does not lead to action it is dead faith (James 2:17).  James says it is “useless.” (James 2:20 NAS)  Even in this world as regards worldly matters how can we say we have faith in a man when we will not take the man at his word?

The faith the Ephesians had that resulted in their cleansing from sin was the faith they had in what Jesus taught them.  Paul was an inspired man but the Holy Spirit whether speaking through Paul or through any other apostle or first century prophet did not speak on his own initiative.  “He will not speak on his own initiative, but whatever he hears, he will speak…he shall take of mine, and shall disclose it to you.” (John 16:13-14 NAS – the words of Jesus referring to the Holy Spirit)  Thus the Holy Spirit spoke the words of Jesus.  No one knows who first brought the gospel to Ephesus but we can be certain in view of the fact that Paul addresses those to whom he writes the book as “saints” that they were taught the truth and obeyed it.  Who was their teacher?  Jesus, “But you did not learn Christ in this way, if indeed you heard him.” (Eph. 4:20-21 NAS)  Him, the teacher, was Christ.  

Paul said later in the book of Ephesians that Jesus cleansed the church, “by the washing of water with the word.” (Eph. 5:25 NAS)  Who was cleansed that way?  Those Paul said earlier had been saved by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8).  The washing of water with the word is clearly a reference to baptism.  What did Jesus teach about baptism?  “He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved.” (Mark 16:16 NAS)  “Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5 NAS)

John 3:5 and Eph. 5:25 teach basically the same thing.  The Spirit gave the word.  The Spirit working through the word works on our spirit if we will allow it changing our thinking, our attitudes, our desires, our will bringing us to the point where we are ready to put the old man that was us to death and be baptized to arise in “newness of life.” (Rom. 6:4 NAS)  To be cleansed by the washing of water with the word is the same as to be born of water and the Spirit.  Furthermore in scripture the church and the kingdom generally, not always but generally, are interchangeable terms.  Peter was given the keys of the kingdom.  When he used those keys by preaching the gospel on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2 when people believed and obeyed they were added to the church – one and the same. 

Were the Ephesians saved by grace through faith “before” they were cleansed?  Let me quote that passage in its entirety.  “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave himself up for her; that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word.” (Eph. 5:25-26 NAS)  What was the church (the church being the members) cleansed of if not sin?  Can you be saved without first being cleansed of sin?  They were saved by grace through faith when cleansed by the washing of water with the word.  That washing was done by “the obedience of faith.” (Rom. 1:5 NAS)  Paul said he had received grace and apostleship, “to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles.” (Rom. 1:5 NAS)

Paul himself, obviously a church member, was told at his own conversion, “Why do you delay?  Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.” (Acts 22:16 NAS)  Paul had experienced the same washing and for the same reason as the church had at Ephesus.  No, water itself cannot wash away sins, that is not in and of itself, but it can if God has made the decision that that is the time and place where he will act in response to man’s faith.  Some have said it is a test of faith and I do not argue with them.

Naaman in the Old Testament “became furious” (2 Kings 5:11 NKJV) when told he needed to go wash in the Jordan 7 times to be healed of his leprosy.  He did not want to do it that way.  His faith had brought him thus far to Elisha and he felt that should be good enough.  Elisha should just come out and “stand and call on the name of the Lord his God, and wave his hand over the place, and heal the leprosy.” (2 Kings 5:11 NKJV)  Obedience of faith had no place in his thinking.  One is reminded of today.

No, the water of the Jordan had no magic powers but faith in what God told Naaman through God’s prophet Elisha to do, a faith strong enough to get him to act simply because God said to do it, was the faith that made the difference.  Naaman is an excellent example of a man who experienced two types of faith.  The first failed him in obtaining his objective.  The second led him on his journey home a cleansed man.  So it is today in the spiritual realm with baptism.

There are two types of faith in what is commonly referred to as Christendom as it relates to our salvation.  The one says we will stop here (at the point of faith – mental assent) and do it this way, we have gone far enough, let God do the rest, while the other says God said to do it (be baptized) for this reason (the remission of sins – Acts 2:38), I believe him, and I will do what he says because I do believe.  Both have faith but clearly the faith is not the same.

One also has to ask the question if Paul did not consider baptism to be salvation by works why should we?  I do not know that I have ever heard a direct answer to that question?  Paul tells the Ephesians they have been saved by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8) and then tells them at the same time they have been cleansed by the washing of water through the word (Eph. 5:26).  He doesn’t miss a beat, doesn’t seem in the least to feel he has contradicted himself, so why should we feel that the two passages are contradictory and feel we have to try and explain it away, one way or another, that the washing of water is not baptism?

But there is much more in proof of the point I am making.  In Eph. 1:7 Paul says, “In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace.” (NAS)  In him is a reference, obviously, to Jesus who shed his blood for us.  How does one get into him, into Christ?  Gal. 3:27 says we were “baptized into Christ” and so does Rom. 6:3, “do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus.”  I know of no passage in the New Testament anywhere that tells one how to get into Christ other than through baptism. 

If you were to start through the book of Ephesians and start marking about every passage you come to that talks about different things that are found “in him,” “in Christ,” “in the Beloved,” here is some of what you would come up with:  (1) every spiritual blessing – Eph. 1:3, (2) grace – Eph. 1:6, (3) redemption – Eph. 1:7, (4) an inheritance – Eph. 1:10-11, (5) sealed with the Holy Spirit – Eph. 1:13, (6) seated us in heavenly places – Eph. 2:6, (7) kindness toward us – Eph. 2:7, (8) his workmanship  – Eph. 2:10, (9) brought near by the blood of Christ – Eph. 2:13, (10) partakers of the promise – Eph. 3:6.  But one must note that all of these blessings are in, not outside of but in, Christ.  “For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.” (Gal. 3:27 NAS)  How does one enter Christ?  By baptism.  If one is clothed with Christ (baptism again) are you in Christ?    

Paul says elsewhere in the book of Ephesians, “we are members of his body.” (Eph. 5:30 NAS)  But, then Paul tells us in 1 Cor. 12:13 how we get into that body, “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.” (NAS)  What is Christ the Savior of according to Paul in Ephesians?  “For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, he himself being the Savior of the body.” (Eph. 5: 23 NAS)  This is same body we are baptized into, that is if we are in it, for that is the only way the scriptures give of entering into it – not by baptism alone but by the obedience of faith that results in baptism.

Where is grace found?  “Be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.” (2 Tim. 2:1 NAS)  Paul tells the Ephesians that this grace is “bestowed on us in the Beloved.” (Eph. 1:6 NAS)  Again, how does one get into Christ, the Beloved, according to the scriptures?  We have already answered that above.  When one is led by faith to believe Jesus and obey him in baptism for the remission of sins he enters into Christ, into the realm of grace by which he is saved.

In the book of Acts chapter 19 Paul comes to Ephesus and finds 12 men there who are disciples.  He asks them this question:  “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (Acts 19:2 NAS)  They respond no and that they had not even heard of the Holy Spirit.  Paul then says, “Into what then were you baptized?” (Acts 19:3 NAS)  Please note this one thing – Paul takes it for granted that if they were Christians they had been baptized.  He doesn’t ask them if they have been baptized.  Why not?  Paul doesn’t ask them because he knows what it takes to become a Christian and be saved.  “Why tarriest thou?  Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins.” (Acts 22:16 KJV, Ananias speaking to Saul, a believer, prior to Saul’s baptism)

One also ought to note the first thing Paul did with these 12 men after learning their situation was to have them “baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Acts 19:5 NAS)  Yes, Paul taught baptism at Ephesus.  Paul stayed in Ephesus at least 2 years (see Acts 19:10) after this event so when Paul said later in Ephesians that the church was cleansed by the washing of water with the word there is no doubt he knew from personal experience all about baptism at Ephesus.  There is no such thing as an unbaptized Christian for Jesus commanded in the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19) that all disciples be baptized.  Paul either baptized them personally or saw to it that they were baptized by one or more of those who helped with the work.  Either that or he disobeyed Christ for which disciple was it that Christ said need not be baptized?

Faith is not just something to be believed but also obeyed.  One must obey the gospel to be saved (2 Thess. 1:7-8).  In a sense the gospel is the faith (Jude 3), it is that body of doctrine that is to be believed, but within that body of doctrine that constitutes the faith there are things that must be obeyed as well as believed.  In addition to mental assent to the truth about Jesus as revealed in the scripture one must repent of sins (Acts 17:30), one must confess with the mouth the Lord Jesus (Rom. 10:9-10), and one must be baptized into Christ, baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38, Gal. 3:27).  Faith, the faith that saves, is not a dead faith but active.  It is by faith that a man does these things, by faith because he heard the words of God and believed them enough to take them to heart and obey them.

Do not allow yourself to be misled.  A person who does not believe Jesus who said, “He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16 NAS) but rather believes man who says, “He who has believed and has not been baptized shall be saved” is not a man of faith.  He may think he is but if so then one can clearly disregard the words of Jesus as being essential to faith.  I have asked this question before but never gotten an answer.  If Jesus wanted man to know that baptism was essential to the remission of sins how would he say it in a way to get man to understand it?  He could not say “repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38 KJV) for he already said that and men will not accept it.  How would he say it in order to make it plain and simple enough so all could understand it?  No one has yet answered that question.  The truth is Jesus has stated it as clearly as it can be stated by mere words alone.  Men will either accept it or reject it and thereby be judged.

Have you been cleansed with the washing of water by the word?  Will you be one with those saints in Ephesus Paul wrote to or are you going to be another kind of Christian unknown to the church at Ephesus and fearfully unknown to God in the last day?   

Many believe the church at Ephesus (the church being the membership) was cleansed from sin by faith based on the teachings of their denomination and the famous Ephesian passage found in chapter 2 verses 8 and 9,

Paul went on to specify one special kind or group of sinners that are particularly harmful to the body of Christ, and whom Christians should avoid. “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 a one” (1 Corinthians 5:11). The problem is not unconverted sinners, not those who are merely unsaved. It is not a problem to associate or fellowship with heathens. Rather, Paul tells us that the real danger is associating or fellowshipping with people who identify themselves as Christian, but who continue sinning — hypocrites. Those who say they believe one thing but live as if they believe another.

The real danger to Christianity is not sinners, but hypocrites, people who identify themselves as Christian but who disregard the practice or essence of Christianity, which is submission to Jesus Christ and the avoidance of sin as it is described in the Bible. Again, we must note that no one is ever completely free from sin in this life. The difference between a Christian and a hypocrite is that a Christian repents of his sin — daily, whereas the hypocrite does not repent. He wallows or stagnates in sin. He makes no effort to resist or avoid it.

Christians struggle against sin. Christians make a serious effort to avoid sin. They don’t wallow in it. They don’t excuse themselves from the difficulties of sanctification or spiritual growth, which necessarily involves ongoing moral improvement. They understand that Christ has called His people away from sin and into perfect righteousness. Christians are engaged in the struggle to avoid or resist sin.

The Corinthian leaders were hypocrites. They were proud of themselves, proud that they had been able to lead such a large, dynamic and powerful church — even while engaging in the sexual shenanigans that Paul had previously mentioned. What did it matter? The church grew anyway. The success of the church made them think that their own sin was irrelevant.

To the contrary, Paul suggested that if the Corinthians continued to fellowship with proud and sinful leaders, they would become increasingly infected with pride and sin themselves. This is an absolutely crucial verse for understanding how Christians are to relate to each other and to the wider culture, to any culture that is not Christian, not biblical. It means that we are to avoid sin, to avoid those elements of culture that promote or celebrate sin.

That does not mean avoiding all people who are sinners, but it means avoiding people who disregard the subtly and seriousness of sin. We are to avoid those who don’t use sin as an opportunity to personally repent and turn to Christ for forgiveness, to avoid those who are not thrown to their knees when they find themselves (again or still) entangled in sin. Christians cannot be hypocritical with regard to sin because people cannot disregard or celebrate sin and be genuinely Christian. A hypocrite is someone who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives.

Think of cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonance involves believing two or more completely incompatible things to be true at the same time. Believing that one can freely engage in known sin and still be a Christian is an example of cognitive dissonance or hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is going to church, but not being faithful, not practicing the discipline of the faith, not doing all you can to avoid sin. Hypocrites wink at sin. They don’t take it seriously. Paul said in verse 11 that we are not to fellowship — or even to eat — with such a person.

We cannot avoid all hypocrites because we cannot avoid ourselves. Yes, we are all hypocrites to some extent because no Christian can be fully Christian apart from living in a Christian culture, and there is no such thing at this time. The critical issue seems to revolve around pride. Are we haughty hypocrites who make light of our lapses into sin? Or are we humble hypocrites who repent and turn away from sin by turning to the gospel of grace and freely — even enthusiastically — embrace the burden of Christ’s discipline? Do we turn away from sin wherever we encounter it? Do we actively expose it as sin in order to warn our brothers and sisters of the danger?

Paul goes on to say that Christians are to judge one another, and that we are not to judge those outside of the church. “God judges those outside” (1 Corinthians 5:13). Don’t miss the caustic damnation that is in Paul’s voice and in his meaning here. He means that those outside of the church are subject to the judgment and damnation of God apart from Christ. God’s mercy is directed to those who are covered by the blood of Christ, those who are in the church — Christians. All others are subject to God’s judgment without regard to the propitiation of Jesus Christ. He means that God’s grace comes only through Jesus Christ and His church.

Those in the church are to submit themselves to Jesus Christ and to His representatives — to the judgments of the leaders of the church, of whom Paul is included. However, Christians understand submission to the authority of the church to be a good thing because Christians have the well-being of other Christians as a top priority. It is by submitting to Jesus Christ through the church that Christians are spared exposure to the judgment and damnation of God. In the effort to help one another avoid sin Christians enjoy the benefits of spiritual growth and sanctification. Subjection to Christ is the only alternative to subjection to the Old Testament judgment of God, the judgment that destroyed Israel in A.D. 70.

Paul concludes by citing the command given many times in Deuteronomy to “Purge the evil person from among you” (v. 13). Paul says here that the heart or intent of the Deuteronomic law still applies to the church. Jesus said,

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:17-20).

This is the good news of the gospel of grace because it has already been accomplished, and yet is still to be fully accomplished by Jesus Christ in the future.

By: Phillip Ross

Article Directory: http://www.articledashboard.com

For over 25 years Phillip A. Ross has been leading churches and writing many Christian books. He founded www.Pilgrim-Platform.org in 1998, which is loaded with information about historic Christianity. His exposition of First Corinthians in 2008 demonstrates the Apostle Paul’s fierce opposition to worldly Christianity. Ross’s book, Arsy Varsy — Reclaiming the Gospel in First Corinthians, shows how Paul turned the world upside down.

This psychological process of accommodation is the basis of the long strategy to make sin acceptable. The first time a Christian encounters sexual sin he is repulsed. It is dismissed without consideration because of the biblical prejudice against it.

Make no mistake that the Bible is prejudiced against all forms of sin, as it should be. Prejudice is not a bad thing. I am prejudiced against getting run over by a truck, and against drinking poison, against theft and against extortion, and a host of other things. I don’t have to experience such things to know about them.

The Bible is not a balanced and objective philosophical treatise, it is simply true. Truth is not balanced and objective, where balanced means taking into consideration many perspectives and objective means not having a particular point of view. God does not have many perspectives, though we must not neglect the diversity of the Trinity. God has a particular point of view, and what is more, He wants us to share that particular point of view because it provides the only means of having a sustainable relationship with Him. God is not interested in examining the various points of view about a thing. He already knows what is right and what is wrong. God does not want us considering or thinking about things are are wrong (evil) in order to make some objective evaluation of them. God has already evaluated everything, and we are to follow God’s determinations provided in Scripture.

Paul raises two questions that must be kept together. “For why should my liberty be determined by someone else’s conscience? If I partake with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of that for which I give thanks?” (1 Corinthians 10:29-30). They are actually the same question phrased differently in order to make a particular point. Again, Paul is not just asking questions as if he expects an answer. He is raising questions to make a point.

The point is that the relationship that Christians have with one another is more important than the exercise of our right to do whatever we want. If I give thanks to God for some food that has been dedicated to idols, knowing that I am free in Christ to eat it without fear of the contamination of idolatry, then why does that freedom lead to my condemnation by others who are equally free in Christ, but who are still fearful of being contaminated by sin. Clearly, these weaker Christians are at fault for not believing or trusting in the power and authority of Jesus Christ to protect them from the false power of false gods.

And yet, while all of this is true, Paul makes the point that we must forgo our personal freedom in order to maintain a relationship of trust and unity with those whose faith is not as strong as ours. Paul’s point is that the bond of fellowship in the church is more important than our individual freedoms in Christ. The freedom to eat a particular food or to exercise a momentary pleasure pales in comparison with our responsibility to maintain the bond of fellowship with others who are not as far along as we are. Our greater responsibility is to help teach them the fullness of God’s truth. But we cannot do that if people do not trust us. Our freedom in Christ cannot be used to disrupt the solidarity or unity of the church.

The point is that Christian freedom is not simply the freedom to do whatever you want, but is the freedom to do what Christ wants you to do. The point is not that Christians are free from God to follow their own hearts or the cultural expectations of their society, but (arsy varsy) that Christians are free from the cultural expectations of their society to follow the dictates of God.

Why would Christians want to be free from God or free from doing what pleases God? Why would you not want to do what pleases God? We love God. We honor the Lord. We are followers of Jesus Christ, obedient to the will of Jesus Christ, whose ministry enabled and enforced the will of God in Scripture without changing a jot or tittle of God’s law (Matthew 5:18). In Christ Christians want to live in obedience to Scripture. If you don’t want to live in such obedience, you need to reevaluate your love for Jesus Christ and your understanding of the gospel. If you are not willing to forsake a meal for the sake of your brothers and sisters in Christ, how could you possibly be willing to take up your cross and follow Jesus into persecution?

“These things I command you, so that you will love one another. If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: A servant is not greater than his master. If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. But all these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me (John 15:17-21).”

Paul was saying that Christians who are hell-bent on exercising their own freedom in Christ without regard for its effect upon others — even if they are ultimately theologically correct, even if those effected are wrong in their understanding of Christian freedom, should not be viewed as leaders because their leadership is self-centered rather than other-centered. Christian leadership is not self-centered. Freedom without regard for others is divisive and is not in harmony with God’s call for Christian unity and service. Again, service trumps freedom.

In summary of this section on Christian freedom that began in chapter eight, Paul says, “So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God, just as I try to please everyone in everything I do, not seeking my own advantage, but that of many, that they may be saved” (1 Corinthians 10:31-33).

We are to give God glory in everything that we say and do. God is the first priority of a Christian. Pleasing God and serving God are our first priorities. Jesus said, “do not be anxious, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.” (Matthew 6:31-34). Whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.

Keep this in mind because the next thing that Paul said can come into conflict with the idea of pleasing and serving God. What did he say? “Give no offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God” (1 Corinthians 10:32). But the Jews were terribly offended by Jesus and by Paul. Paul offended the Greeks on Mars Hill, and just about everywhere he went. And now Paul was in the midst of offending the church at Corinth as he called them from apostasy to faithfulness. So how are we to understand this? How can we put God first without offending the world? We can’t.

Phillip A. Ross has been a pastor for over 25 years and is the author of many Christian books. Ross founded http://www.Pilgrim-Platform.org in 1998, and in 2008 he published a exposition First Corinthians that demonstrates the Apostle Paul’s opposition to worldly Christianity. Paul turned the world upside down and Ross captures the action in Arsy Varsy -Reclaiming the Gospel in First Corinthians.

Paul had raised the ante of his accusations against the Corinthian leaders from sexual immorality to idolatry. Note that Paul did not recommend that the faithful Corinthian Christians make the effort to save those who had been captured by idolatry. He did not recommend that they maintain fellowship and try to convince the idolaters about the truth of the gospel. Rather, he told them to “flee from idolatry” (1 Corinthians 10:14) They were to separate themselves from the idolaters.

He knew that not all of the Corinthians would hear him. Not all had “ears to hear” (Matthew 11:15). Some of those who had been baptized would not hear, would not heed his words, and would not be saved. He was speaking “as to sensible people” (1 Corinthians 10:15) — “wise men” in other translations. But the wisdom of those to whom he spoke was not the wisdom of intelligence. He was not speaking of intellectual or academic wisdom. Rather, he had in mind the wisdom of Christ, which he had been preaching from the beginning of this letter. He was speaking to those who had ears to hear, to those who had the ears of the Holy Spirit, to those who had been regenerated by the Holy Spirit. He was not speaking to all who were listening, but only to those who were actively and actually in Christ, to those who could hear him.

But Paul did not know exactly who that was. He didn’t know who was really born again and who wasn’t. He didn’t know who would be able to hear him. That knowledge belongs to God alone. We don’t have access to the hearts and minds of others. Knowing this, Paul told them to “judge for (them)selves” (1 Corinthians 10:15) what he had to say. Each person would have to judge — distinguish or decide — for himself whether Paul spoke the truth, and whether or not to heed the truth that Paul spoke. Understanding was not sufficient, Paul called them to action, to flee from idolatry.

Was Paul asking them to rely upon their own resources to make such a determination? Was he assuming that they had sufficient ability in-and-of-themselves to be able to hear him, to be able to correctly understand him, and to be able to make the right decision?

No. Paul knew that they would not be able to do any such thing because he knew that he had not been able to do it on his own, and he knew that he was much smarter, much more committed and better trained in religious disciplines than they were. He couldn’t do it himself — and he didn’t do it himself. Neither could they.

Actually, Paul had been saved against his own will, at least initially. He had been blinded and thrown in the dust while he still hated Christ. Once the Lord had his attention, Paul willingly conceded, of course. But the point was that Paul had not been called to rely upon himself or his own abilities in order to be saved — no Christian is. Rather, we are called to rely upon the ability and the reliability of God’s Holy Spirit. We are called to rely upon Jesus Christ, not ourselves. We are called to regeneration, to rebirth. People do not cause their own birth, nor their rebirth. It is the power of God through the Holy Spirit who regenerates people, and it is upon that power that we must rely — before, during and after, 24/7.

When Paul said, “judge for yourselves” (1 Corinthians 10:15) he meant that he was teaching them how to make determinations about faithfulness and faithlessness — and that the principle application would always be to themselves first and foremost. His purpose was to teach the Corinthians about the characteristics of faithfulness. He would lay out the characteristics of faithfulness and contrast them with the characteristics of faithlessness. We will watch for this pattern as his letters to the Corinthians unfold. By laying out the characteristics of faithfulness he would teach them how to judge themselves, and how to grow in faithfulness. His intention was that Christians should judge themselves against the characteristics of faithfulness, and make necessary adjustments by the presence and power of the Holy Spirit.

A better translation of this phrase is “you judge what I say” (Modern King James Bible). He was asking them to rely upon the Holy Spirit, who indwells believers. The Holy Spirit would evaluate the gospel that Paul taught and apply it to each believer’s own life. With that in mind Paul immediately turned his attention to the sacrament of Communion. What has Communion to do with all of this? Everything.

Paul called upon the sacrament of Communion to illustrate what makes Christians Christian. At the heart of Communion and of Paul’s illustration is the mystery of the Trinity. Paul’s purpose in this letter to the Corinthians was to teach the difference between the wisdom of the world and the wisdom of Christ. That is the theme that he now illustrates with the sacrament — the mystery of the trinitarian nature — of Communion.

He mentioned earlier in this chapter about the role of baptism as a distinguishing mark of a Christian. Christians are baptized people, he said. But not all baptized people are faithful Christians. We discussed that previously. Now Paul turns his attention to the other mark of a Christian — Communion. Christians are baptized people who participate in the Lord’s Supper. By speaking about these two things — Baptism and Communion — Paul was identifying the central characteristics of Christians, the building blocks of the church. A Christian is a person who has a new identity in Jesus Christ. And the Trinity is at the heart of our Christian identity.

Phillip A. Ross has authored many Christian books. In 1998 he founded http://www.Pilgrim-Platform.org , which is about historic Christianity. Demonstrating the Apostle Paul’s opposition to worldly Christianity, he published an exposition First Corinthians in 2008. Arsy Varsy — Reclaiming the Gospel in First Corinthians, Ross’s book, shows how Paul turned the world upside down.

“And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn?” (1 Corinthians 5:2). The Greek word literally means to inflate or puff up, and is often translated as “proud.” The clear implication is that they were proud or arrogant with regard to their sin, when they should have been humiliated and in mourning about it — and that is the greater problem here. Pride is worse than their sexual sins because it is more subtle, more difficult to identify as sin.

But the sin itself was not the main problem. All of God’s people are sinners, to a person. No one is condemned because of some particular sin. Sin is the natural condition of humanity since the Fall. We are all condemned by Adam’s sin. Paul says in Romans 3:10, “None is righteous, no, not one.” So, in the light of Jesus Christ people are condemned, not by their sin, but by their refusal to repent of their sin, by their refusal to turn away from sin, by their refusal to acknowledge it as sin and to turn to Jesus Christ for forgiveness and salvation from the eternal consequences of sin. No, sin is not the problem. God can forgive any sin through Jesus Christ. But God will not forgive any sin apart from Christ, and Christ demands repentance. “From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand’” (Matthew 4:17).

There is a difference between the ongoing struggle against sin by repentant Christians and the celebration of sin as a God-given right by the unfaithful. The faithful are humbled by their sin and moved to repentance, but the unfaithful are proud of their sin because they believe they have a right to it. In fact, all unrepentant sin thrives on pride. Pride is what keeps people from repentance. Pride is what keeps people from Jesus Christ, and from salvation.

John wrote, “Do not love the world, nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him, because all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passes away, and the lust of it, but he who does the will of God abides forever” (1 John 2:15-17). The lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, these are the enemies of the gospel, the enemies of truth, and the stumbling blocks to salvation. Where pride leads sin follows.

Paul went on, “Let him who has done this be removed from among you” (1 Corinthians 5:2). John Gill said of this verse that the guilty parties should be removed, “not by excommunication, for that they could and ought to have done themselves; but by the immediate hand of God, inflicting some visible punishment, and taking him away by an untimely death, which the Jews call “cutting off,” by the hand of God; and such a punishment, they say, this crime deserved.” Ouch! John Gill provides the traditional interpretation of this verse, which was that it deserved excommunication by the church and judgment by God. The Apostle Paul called the wrath of God down upon down upon these unrepentant sinners, these leaders of the Corinthian church.

Had they repented, he would have called the mercy of God down upon them. Jesus said, “‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ For I did not come to call righteous ones, but sinners to repentance” (Matthew 9:13). Jesus didn’t just come to call sinners, He came to call sinners to repentance. Big difference! To the Pharisees Jesus said, “Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance” (Matthew 3:8). Jesus is always after our repentance.

Paul goes on, “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” (1 Corinthians 5:3). Wait a minute! Doesn’t the Bible teach that we should be nonjudgmental? Yes, we ought not judge a repentant person on the basis of their sin because God’s mercy is grater than any sin. The grace of God through the propitiation of Jesus Christ trumps all sin. There is no sin so great that it cannot be forgiven by the grace and mercy of God through Jesus Christ — save one (Matthew 12:31).

But, on the other hand, the churches are called to judge those who are unrepentant. Jesus said, “Do not judge according to sight, but judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24). We should not evaluate things on their appearance, but on the basis of God’s righteousness, on the basis of Scripture alone. We are not to judge according to our own values, our own ideas, but according to God’s standards of righteousness, according to Scripture. It is not the standards of the community that are to prevail, not the standards of the civil government, or the standards of the press, or TV, or popular opinion, but the standards of Scripture by which Christians are to judge (or evaluate) everything.

So, Paul could say to the Romans, “We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who do such things. Do you suppose, O man — you who judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself (note the lack of repentance) — that you will escape the judgment of God? Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?” (Romans 2:2-4). God’s kindness, His grace and mercy are linked to repentance. God is kind and merciful in order to allow people the time and opportunity for repentance. God does not rush to judgment, but provides ample time for repentance. But at some point the opportunity for repentance comes to an end, and judgment follows.

We confuse ourselves when we neglect the fact that Scripture treats repentant sinners differently than it treats unrepentant sinners. Repentant sinners have the protection of Jesus Christ the advocate, where unrepentant sinners face the full consequences of God’s law on their own. Repentant sinners have been pardoned, unrepentant sinners have not. Judgment for repentant sinners has been suspended by the propitiation of Jesus Christ, but judgment for unrepentant sinners remains.

By: Phillip Ross

Article Directory: http://www.articledashboard.com

For over 25 years Phillip A. Ross has been leading churches and writing many Christian books. Loaded with information about historic Christianity, Ross founded www.Pilgrim-Platform.org in 1998. His profound exposition of First Corinthians in 2008 demonstrates the Apostle Paul’s fierce opposition to worldly Christianity. Arsy Varsy—Reclaiming the Gospel in First Corinthians, Ross’s book, shows how Paul turned the world upside down.