In the last post of this series, I offered up 1 Cor 5:9-12 as being of critical importance to the questions posed in earlier posts. And while there have been several comments on these posts since then, nothing has been said about this passage. And I think that demonstrates the truth of my suggestion that this passage is “invisible to us.”
(1Co 5:9-12 ESV) 9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people — 10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 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. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?
Let’s consider the principles that Paul is teaching here. The context is a church member engaging in an incestuous relationship. Paul insists that the church must disfellowship him. But he writes vv. 9 -12 to make clear that his command to disfellowship the sexually immoral Christian does not apply more generally — that is, it doesn’t apply to non-Christians.
Rather, Paul declares “For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?” Paul plainly declares that we are not in the business of judging those outside the church. When was the last time you heard that preached?
Now, as soon as I say that, someone will jump in and point out that the government should certainly judge those guilty of murder — and indeed the government should. But the church is not the government. And one of the truly colossal mistakes the church has made in recent years is to confuse the two. Yes, the government should judge and punish wrongdoers — Christian and non-Christian alike. No, the church is not the government. Indeed, the church is prohibited from judging the lost. That’s what it says.
Next, we must notice that Paul declares that we may associate with “the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters” of the world — because we are not supposed to “go out of the world” — yet. We Christians feel a strong impulse to flee the world. It is, after all, worldly. It’s filled with all sorts of bad people doing all sorts of bad things.
Therefore, we form Christian softball leagues, because it’s more fun to play ball with Christians. We have Christian high schools and Christian coffee shops and Christian book stores. I hear someone wants to put an American Christian Idol program on TV — I guess because Christian talent is too holy to compete against the non-Christians. We strongly feel the urge to separate ourselves from the world — and, trust me, I understand the feeling.
But Paul declares that we should in fact associate with sinners, rather than trying to leave the world too soon. I would add: How will we show the love of Jesus and bring the lost to Christ if we refuse to associate with the lost?
Now, obviously, associating with the unredeemed subjects the Christian to all sorts of temptations. Many Christians flee the world to escape temptation. But the price of flight is even higher.
Answering my own questions from the last post of this series —
Are the tactics used in the two stories sin?
Therefore, I conclude that Story 1 in the first post is an account of a church engaged in sin.
Dunfee and members of his congregation have been protesting in front of the Foxhole North on U.S. 36 in Walhonding almost every weekend for four years. In the past, they have taken photographs and videos showing the license plates of the club patrons and posted them on a now-defunct website and once used an amplifier to shout at the patrons. Their intent has been to deter patrons from entering the club and to introduce the exotic dancers to Christianity.
If that’s not the sort of judging that Paul prohibits, I don’t know what is. Even if the tactics were to be effective (which is unimaginable to me), they’d still be wrong. Yes, they have the right as Americans to protest peaceably. Yes, they have the right to photograph patrons and car tags visible to the general public. No, God does not aprove this behavior.
Why not? Why is it wrong to judge the world? Aren’t we supposed to teach them about Jesus? How can it not be the business of the church — the body of Christ — to announced God’s condemnation on strippers?
Well, because they stand condemned whether they are strippers or truckers or volunteers at the local soup kitchen — so long as they are outside of Jesus. All outside the church are damned. Our mission isn’t to persuade the lost to act like Christians. It’s to persuade them to in fact be Christians — and this message is the same for strippers as for policemen. And the message is Jesus.
How did Jesus treat sinners?
We have to stop thinking like judges and start thinking like Jesus.
(John 8:7-11 ESV) 7 And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. 9 But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him.
10 Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
11 She said, “No one, Lord.”
And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”
Now, Jesus insisted that the woman give up her sin, but he began with unmistakable, other-worldly compassion. The men who wanted to stone her judged her according to the Law. They were entirely within their rights to brand her a sinner and demand punishment. (The Romans would have disagreed with the stoning, but would have allowed non-capital punishment.) But they weren’t like Jesus. Jesus loved her, provided forgiveness, and urged her to give up sin. And I’m confident she felt no judgment.
Jesus treated the prostitutes, adulterers, lepers, and publicans — the outcasts of society and most obvious sinners with love, grace, and compassion.
(Luk 7:44-50 ESV) 44 Then turning toward the woman he said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave me no water for my feet, but she has wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. 45 You gave me no kiss, but from the time I came in she has not ceased to kiss my feet. 46 You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment. 47 Therefore I tell you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven–for she loved much. But he who is forgiven little, loves little.”
48 And he said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.”
49 Then those who were at table with him began to say among themselves, “Who is this, who even forgives sins?”
50 And he said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.”
But Jesus condemned the religious — the Pharisees and Sadducees in no uncertain terms —
(Mat 23:2-7 ESV) 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, 3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you–but not what they do. For they preach, but do not practice. 4 They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. 5 They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, 6 and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues 7 and greetings in the marketplaces and being called rabbi by others.”
Why the distinction? Why condemn the religious Pharisees and show compassion for adulterers? Well, because the standard for how we deal with those in the Kingdom differs from the standard for those outside the Kingdom.
It’s not that we should hypocritically make the Kingdom seem easier than it is! Not at all. Rather, the point is that joining the Kingdom is voluntary. If you aren’t willing to meet God’s terms, you don’t have to. If you join the Kingdom, you’ve agreed to live by God’s rules, and you may well find yourself judged — as was the incestuous man in 1 Cor 5. But if you choose not to join, you receive no inheritance and you suffer the fate of the damned — whether you’re a Red Cross volunteer or a stripper.
Why invisible?
And so, why is this passage invisible to us? Here are my theories, but they’re just, you know, theories.
1. We really enjoy judging those outside the church. We enjoy judging those inside the church, too, but judging members of our own congregation damages our social connections. And so we limit our most serious judging to those we are least socially connected to — other congregations, other denominations, and most especially the lost. And that shows that such judging has little to do with love — or else we’d most especially judge those closest to us — those we love the most.
2. Judging is easy. A reader mentioned the laziness of Story 1 vs. Story 2, and I think that’s quite insightful. Picketing is easy. Harrassing is easy. Befriending people with different morals and lifestyles is hard. Therefore, I greatly admire those who live Story 2. It must be very hard — and therefore truly an act of great love.
3. We want the world to stop acting like the world. Our towns and neighborhoods would be vastly more pleasant if everyone would just act like Christians! And so we want to take a shortcut — demanding that they change their behavior without changing their hearts and allegiances — because what we really want is a nice world, not a redeemed world. And there is a difference.
4. The world is dirty. Worldly people can be very unpleasant. Redeeming those in the world requires getting dirty. And judging can be easily done from a nice clean church building, surrounded by nice clean people. (“Pharisee” is derived from the Hebrew for “separate”!) It is, in fact, easier to live a morally pure life separated from the impure. (I’m confident the some of the Christian husbands in the parking lot of the strip club seriously considered stepping into the club for a few minutes, while their wives weren’t watching!) It goes against instinct and common sense to associate with those guilty of the things you’ve escaped. (But imagine what it must have been like for Jesus to leave heaven to associate with the likes of us!)
My congregation
Celebrate Recovery is all about addicts, most of whom aren’t Christian.
The Brown House ministry serves a housing project, where many aren’t Christians.
CONNECT is a program in which adult couples “adopt” a child from the projects — who is often not from a Christian home.
B.A.G.S. (Be a Good Samaritan) provides food and necessities to the homeless — often not Christians.
Harvest Hands provides free groceries to the poor — often who are not Christians.
Kairos is a trans-denominational ministry to prisoners — most of whom are not Christians.
None of these involve judging. All are an effort to get involved in the lives of the lost by showing them the love and compassion of Jesus — without endorsing sin. And we are seeing more conversions out of these ministries — some of which are quite new to us — than from anything else.
Now, I’m not remotely taking credit for any of these ministries. These are the works of other people through whom the Spirit is working more powerfully than in me.
The Spirit can only thrive in a churches that teach a powerful grace from God — because only those who believe they’ve received a powerful grace feel the need to extend a powerful grace to others. It’s the vastness of God’s grace to us that instructs us on how to treat the sinners lost outside of Jesus.
How will Light drive out darkness if Light stays in Light? Light is only useful in darkness.
Royce
Jay,
This "invisible passage" haunts me. How can we win the world if we refuse to associate with the people of the world. If we ensconce ourselves within the walls of our nice buildings and merely invite people to come into our assemblies (with the invitations most often given only by public advertisements, not given personally), we do not build relationships nor do we show the love of Christ.
Thank you for your comments on it. You are exactly right.
I did find one sentence ironic, though.
"Our towns and neighborhoods would be vastly more pleasant if everyone would just act like Christians!
I believe our congregations would be vastly more pleasant if everyone would just act like Christians.
Jerry
Jay,
I am very perplexed on this one based on several reasons.
1. I really don't see where the said passage advocates we should all start Saturday night visitation programs at the local strip clubs and bars. The passage says we can't live isolated like monks and we must show respect for people who are not Christians but it is a real stretch to take it much farther than that.
2. The first story says the people at that church intended to save the lost and keep the saved saved. (excuse my old fashioned wording). It sounds to me they have pure motives but have chosen a very poor strategy that doesn't fit 21st century culture. I thought grace was suppose to cover pure motives. Why are you judging them?
3. I personally know a brother (I'll call Tom) who lived the strategy of the second story. Tom was trying to reach a friend of his.. Tom would visit and listen to his friend play in local bars. Tom told me he never drank while there and that he hoped to get his friend to reciprocate and come to church. Well, Tom met a girl in one of those bars. She became pregnant. They got married. Both spoke openly of how miserable the marriage was. I'm not against the strategy of story 2 but it is extremely high risk. It has the strong possibility of violating the principle of "bad friends make bad behaviors" (also from the letters to the Corinthians).
It appears to me that in the last several decades the church has made more "actors" than disciples of Jesus.
We get someone into the water and tell the do these things and don't do these things, attend "faithfully" every service and that's all you need. The result is a house full of impostors who know nothing of the power of God to transform a sinner into a saint and cause him to hate sin.
If Jesus went after sinners why shouldn't we?
Royce
This is not separation from this world, but imitation of this world. It is a nice way to enjoy the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life in a seemingly "holy" way … Which shows plainly that we haven't understood what the world is and how it works.
Can we imagine Christ cheering a soft-ball team? If at all, He would cheer for both teams.
Can we imagine Christ taking part in a casting show, e.g. the PPSC – Palestinian Psalm-Singer-Context? He would lead the participants to sing in unison – so God would be the winner, receiving all praise.
But a different question, someone asked me recently: If Christ came to live among us today, where would He choose to live? In a nice and clean middle-class suburb? Or in the Bronx?
And where are our churches located? Where do we build our homes? With whom do we associate in daily life? Which streets do we walk?
It's not about living a spectacular life, but about being where the need is without looking down at the sinners as the pharisees did. And without calling evil good either. Without participating in what is clearly defilng, but enjoying fellowship with the tax collectors (and having a drink with them). Not being self-righteous, but seeking and bringing righteousness to the wicked.
Once I thought: Would Christ go to a rave-party? Not, because He would think this is great, but probably to go fish for men and get them out of there. To show them the emptiness behind the noise and lead them to the fulness of life. And I still think this way.
Alexander
Jerry,
"I believe our congregations would be vastly more pleasant if everyone would just act like Christians."
Amen to that, brother.
Mike
Rich,
There are places I can go and minister because the vice that is the focus of the establishment does not particularly entice me. There are other places I don't go because at this point in my spiritual maturity, I am still attracted to the sin. (One might suppose any place with a buffet would be in the second category!)
I don't know how "Tom" used the time with his friend, but in any case, I share your grief at his experience. However, I don't believe someone's failure should mean something should not be done. It certainly means we need to be very careful. I dare say that approach #2 is the one most likely to bear fruit for the kingdom, but the training, safeguards and accountability need to be bathed in prayer.
Mike
Mike,
Thank you for your sincere response. I thoroughly agree with your comments. This is especially true for the buffet. I appreciate you bringing out the differences in probable results between the two methods. I think that should be the focus rather than guessing the motives of the two groups.
Basically, we are asked to choose between two extremes. Both contain risks. The first group's zeal to show a better way to live can easily lead to thinking they are better humans. The second group's zeal to emphasize all humans are the same can easily lead to participating in the same sinful behavior.
I totally agree with all who advocate we demonstrate more love.
We, the church, have got to move beyond the idea of success in what we do, in our lives, etc. We are followers of a God whose power is shown in weakness, not strength.
Taking Rich's example "Tom", he got a girl pregnant. He probably messed up by marrying her. He is miserable in the marriage. I'm not trying to be callous or uncaring, but so what? Is he bringing Christ into the moment in those failures? Is he sharing those failures publicly and allowing the body of Christ to witness to him? Is he witnessing to the the body of Christ about his failures? Does his failure strengthen others in Christ?
Does he allow God to use his failure?
Or does he hide? Is he filled with shame? With guilt? Does he deceive himself or others about this? Does he withdraw from his wife? From his church – the very physical presence of our Lord?
It can't be viewed simply from the "comfort" of "Toms"'s life, but from the godly perspective of the kingdom. God uses our failures for His purposes, just as he does our successes, if we will but let him.
The amazing thing is that we can find peace in our failure if we will turn them over to God for His purposes – not making our lives better, easier, or more comfortable, but allowing us to have a heart of praise within us, neither because of the suffereing, nor in spite of the suffering, but as a testament, a faithful witness, to our God in the suffering.
We, as the body of Christ, can cry when our brothers suffer, and yet simultaneously praise God for His power manifest through submission and weakness. It is not logical – it is one of the mysteries at the core of what it is to be God.
My heart for "Tom" is not to fix him, not to arrange marital counseling, not to babysit hit kids so he and his wife can connect. I want to share in "Tom"'s pain, to sit with him as he acknowledges the extent of his failures. To allow "Tom" the space to then see that Christ is still there, present in that moment. It's only then, when Christ is fully acknowledged and fully present, that true healing can begin.
Jay,
Aric Clark over at the Two Friars And A Fool blog did a pretty good post where he shows that while the Pharisees had a set of uncleanness rules, believing that uncleanness would infect their personal holiness, Jesus operated with the opposite set of rules–His holiness infected the sinful world (thus, he touched lepers and associated with tax collectors and sinners). That seems very convincing to me.
But do you do about 2Cor 6 "come out from among them and be ye separate"? Or "Bad company corrupts good morals"? How do we harmonize the passages?
–guy
Now, we are getting down to where the rubber meets the road.
LUST is the sin, not what is lusted after.
No difference in lusting after a womans body and a well formed and attractive meatball at a buffet !
Funny how we meet folks to talk of the Church at restaurants regardless of their size and then discourage them from putting temptation in front of anyone.
I'm amazed at the pictures of preachers on other sites like "preacher files" and how they look. Would they permit a picture of themsekves with a bar or strip joint anywhere in the picture? Seems like they at least would be aware of the obvious message that is being silently sent.
Guy,
You ask some good questions. Let's take,
(1Co 15:33 ESV) Do not be deceived: "Bad company ruins good morals."
It seems unlikely that Paul meant to contradict what he said back in chapter 5. After all, "company" in 15:33 has the same root as "associate" in 5:9 and 5:11 —
(1Co 5:9-11 ESV) 9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people– 10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 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.
There is a certain tension between these passages that we resolve by looking at Paul's purposes.
Nor would Paul condemn Jesus, who associated with prostitutes, publicans, and "sinners." He was often condemned by the "pure" for his associations.
I think the preceding comments by a number of readers provide good counsel. Some of us — maybe just our wives — can enter a strip club and not be tempted. Others of us (nearly all men) cannot.
We can't convert those of immoral character without associating with them, but we should have the moral fortitude to resist the temptation to participate in their immorality. And if we can't handle the temptation, we need to let someone else handle that ministry.
And, of course, we shouldn't deceive ourselves into thinking that we're drinking and chatting up that girl in order to convert a friend when we're really enjoying the flirtation.
There are no bright line tests. Some things are all about wisdom, prayer, and the Spirit. And not going alone.
There's a lot of talk about spiritual disciplines. The best discipline is keeping a friend close so you don't do something stupid and self-destructive because you're the only Christian around.
Jay,
I agree with your comments to Guy. A couple of comments:
1. Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish the difference between associate and participate. Many times we don't participate but our actions are interpreted that we support a sinful act. I think the "giving makeup" to the strippers might be getting close to this.
2. "If we can't handle the temptation…" My experience is that most have more confidence in this than is justified.
More on our brother "Tom".
People at church were confronting him saying he was sinning for entering the bars. In his frustration he asked for my opinion. I told him that it wasn't a sin to enter a bar but it was very unwise because of the obvious temptations that come with it. He said that wouldn't be a problem and closed the conversation as if I had cleared his conscience.
To this day, I wish I hadn't been so theoretically correct and had told him there was a "bright line" that he mustn't cross.
Rich,
In most cases Tom wouldn't be seen by church members while in the bar, but could be seen while entering or leaving and give the wrong idea.
Same reason I wouldn't go in a X rated picture show lobby to pick up plans for a gas station and restaurant he wanted built. Not that I would of been tempted, but how it looks.
People do respect and respond to someone that has committed a sin and repented and changed. Those can teach others well as they have their ear like no other.
On the other hand, someone committing one of the sins listed by Jay among others that obviously have not repented and changed don't carry much weight (pun intended) until they change themselves.
Hard to speak to a dope addict or any kind of the many addicts and you yourself showing you are also an addict of whatever kind.
Case in point. Jerry Jenkins a great gospel preacher in Birmingham, Alabama used to be big and fat and realized this very point, repented, turned from his addiction, started running, dieted and lost the weight. His unwritten lesson was well understood and his sermons on this subject well received. In America and the Church, this is shyly overlooked and I've only once seen it preached and that was by Jerry.
I know this makes some angry, but we need to condemn and preach against GLUTTONY, just as much as drunkedness, adultery, and all the others we DON'T do.
There should be no elders or preachers or teachers that are way overweight or that have any ongoing, unrepented sin .
@Alabama John, don't just assume because one is overweight that is caused by the sin of gluttony. I have three sons who eat just about the same things, one will be going to the doctor soon to find out why he is underweight, one is just right and the other is overweight. I haven't done research into exactly what gluttony is, but I don't think it is just being overweight. Some people could be gluttonous and never gain an ounce.
Alabama John,
I know being overweight isn't good, but please don't stereotype.
True story.
A couple of years ago I was 70 lbs overweight but ran in a 10 mile race with no problems other than being extremely tired at the end. Within a few weeks of this a dear friend and brother the same age (and at most 10 lbs overweight) had heart by-pass surgery.
Anne,
there are no fat people in concentration camps or prisons. Cut down on the food and the fat comes off. Over eat and it comes on unless sickness is present. Look at a training track for greyhounds or racehorses opposed to a gorging feedlot for fattening up animals. Works the same in animals as humans.
Rich,
it is not just not good, it is a sin! Would you condone a heroine addict because he was running beside you on that run. There are exceptions but ask any doctor and your 70 lbs overweight conditions odds of dying sooner than the 10 lb overweight man is greater. Don't justify!
Congratulations on your running. keep it up and the 70 lbs will disappear. Way to go and getting started! I'm proud of you and pulling for you! You are one of those that can talk to addicts and they will listen.
Proverbs has a lot of strong words and warnings about this: 23:20-21, 23:2, Also the NT: 2 Peter 1:5-7, 2 Timothy 3: 1-9, 2 Corinthians 10:5, No to access of any kind in Galatians 5:22.
This subject is not preached and should be as it is the silent verse needed most in America, the fattest country in the world.
Physical appetites of all kinds are an analogy of our ability to control ourselves.
The point is we should preach do as I do, not as I say.
Yes there are no fat people in concentration camps, but that is not in the same leagues as gluttony. You can be overweight without eating excessively. Eating the wrong foods I don't think would come under gluttony.
" Some of us — maybe just our wives — can enter a strip club and not be tempted. Others of us (nearly all men) cannot"
Jay, do you think there are only women in strip clubs, These young women are striping because there is someone paying to watch. What makes you think wives can go in there without temptation.
Hbr 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin.
If we live without temptation, we are never tested.
Alcoholics Anonymous is the most successful I know of and they won't even start helping someone until they will say: "Hello, I'm ___ and I'm an alcoholic".
Admitting to yourself you have a problem begins the recovery.
How many I have seen that said they had medical or metabolism problems lose it fast when they were put on a FORCED diet and MADE to exercise.
Ask any old timer US Marine about the "Fat Mans" platoons at Parris Island!
At least when talking to others about their problems, admit to start with that you have an addiction as well and so can symphatize and help each other. That would sure help your effectiveness.
I keep saying you, but I don't mean you personally, but whoever is overweight.
Preaching on this instead of what we don't do would be the kiss of death to any preacher and that's why we don't hear it. Now, if someone cursed, smoked or drank! Go Get Um!!
Jay,
So you're saying that the "bad company" passages applies to which particular *Christians* we associate with? (Couldn't this get hairy in terms of judging our brothers?)
What about the 2Cor 6 passage? i agree we can't take Paul to contradict himself or the lifestyle of Christ, but therein lies the need for explanation . How can we both spend time with worldly people and also be separate from them? i know an easy answer just is, well, be separate in that you don't sin. But The 2Cor 6 passage does sound like it's talking about association in particular, not some special way of saying "don't sin."
–guy
Alabama John, All am I saying is you can't lump everyone who is overweight as being guilty of the sin of gluttony. Are there overweight people who are gluttons and addicts? Yes. Are there skinny people who are gluttons and addicts? Yes. Just because someone has a weight problem doesn't automatically qualify them as a sinful glutton. And I don't think I'll be signing up my young son up for a forced march anytime soon. He is not a glutton.
The first step is the hardest!
And what does that mean?
We as Christians love one another and as brothers and sisters desire the happiest and healthiest life possible for every one of us here on this earth and are willing to help each other achieve it.
Our fervent prayer is that we spend eternity together as the ages roll.
As the song goes, Don't look for me neath the walls of jasper, don't look for me on the streets of gold, look for me at Jesus feet.
That grace is what me as the head sinner needs most!
Guy,
Paul is quite clear in 1 Cor 5 that we must not associate with Christians who are immoral. He wasn't speaking of honest disagreement regarding doctrine. He was speaking of those who do what they know to be wrong. Such Christians are to be prayerfully urged to repent and, if necessary, disfellowshipped. We don't associate with them in their sin. But, obviously, we must "associate" with them in order to urge repentance. But we don't share in their sin nor do we put ourselves in a position to be tempted.
Take the case of a woman guilty of sexual immorality. Yes, the elders should approach her regarding her sin and urge repentance. No, no man should meet with her alone. In fact, they'd do well to bring a wife along for the visit. Temptation is not to be toyed with and we should undertake very strict self-discipline in this area.
You ask about —
There are those who ignore this passage and those who read this too strictly. Paul clearly has in mind the necessity of avoiding entangling connections with the lost, that is, connections that would lead to temptation. But just as clearly he doesn't mean that we must hide away in a monastery (or church softball league) away from those we need to bring to Jesus.
Therefore, I interpret at the level of purpose and caution. The very same act engaged in for the very same purpose can violate or not violate this passage. If my wife enters a strip club to form relationships with the strippers to bring them to Jesus, that is a holy and righteous thing — unless they tempt her to use drugs or abuse alcohol or objectify men or even to lust. If she is at risk of temptation, she must flee the club. Even if she considers herself strong enough to resist the temptation, she has no business going alone. A rope of three strands is not easily broken.
There is no easy, brightline test. Some women would be easily tempted. Some would never be even a little tempted. They must constantly remind each other to hate sin and fear temptation. And they must have Christian cohorts who hold each other strictly accountable.
But in 2 Cor 6, Paul reaches further than simply being tempted. He warns us against tempting agreements or entanglements. We can't be business partners with the strip club owner, even if our goal is to shut the club down. After all, a partner must be loyal to his partners. We can't take on duties that conflict with our Christianity.
Where I grew up, this meant we couldn't date Baptist or Methodist girls. And that kind of interpretation has led many to ignore the passage. Baptists aren't unbelievers.
The correct interpretation to draw the line between believers who are faithful (trying to be obedient despite their imperfect natures) and all others. And when we associate with others, we must be very cautious not to put ourselves in a position of temptation — whether that position is a Bible study with an attractive woman or a business partnership with a worldly individual.
Doesn't all this also apply to one guilty of gluttony being lustful and tempted by and after food?
Should they work at a restaurant?
Should we have a church dinner on the ground if it causes them tio sin?
Lets pray for those that are grossly overweight just as much as those going into a strip joint.
Ever seen a member withdrawn from for being on drugs, wild women, alcohol, how about gluttony?
I've seen the first 3 preached on and withdrawn from several times. Never heard a mention of the 4th. WHY?
Last week, my wife attended a Women of Faith conference in Atlanta. Thousands of women there and one of the special singers was Sandi Patty. Those of you that like and know gospel singers know who she is. See her on the Gaithers a lot. Great voice.
She told the story of her being prayed with and for to help her lose her addiction to food and the resulting weight. She read her doctors report on herself and it said she was "seriously morbidly obese" and that woke her up. She went from that description to morbidly obese, to obese, and now, 75 pounds later, to simply overweight,
Like any addiction, we need to try to help these brethren and not look the other way. People notice when someone is counceling on the sin of alcohol or drugs or any addiction and is sitting there way overweight, just as addicted. We do them no good to overlook this, put temptation in front of them as it hurts their health and will kill them before their time, just the same as misuse of alcohol or drugs will.
Love them, pray for them, but do not ignore this serious problem and sin.
30 30