WELCOME
PRAYER
SONG
SILENCE
Alright, let’s move on into our text of 2nd Corinthians. Last week Paul (in verses 23-24 of chapter 1 and verses 1-4 of chapter 2 entered into a new topic where he, in what I consider a round-about way, explained the reasons he had yet to visit the saints at Corinth.
We know from 1st Corinthians that Paul had instructed them on how to manage a situation with a man who was sinfully engaged with his fathers wife.
I believe or suspect that what he speaks to next in verse five is speaking to this man and the situation Paul addressed in 1st Corinthians chapter 5.
There, the whole chapter is dedicated to addressing the believers treatment and acceptance of a sinful man in their presence, and so Paul wrote to them then:
1st Corinthians 5:1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.
2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.
3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,
4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.
When we covered this in Milk a number of weeks ago we discussed the following facts:
That Paul and the other apostles job was to keep the church/bride together and the behaviors of this man could certainly serve to divide them up.
That the behaviors also would have lead to scrutiny of the non-believers at Corinth -something Paul wanted to avoid.
And we also talked about how this specific apostolic advice was from an apostle to them/then and that due to the eschatological setting, it had a place but that today such instructions are wholly unnecessary in the Body.
This last point is even made more real by Paul’s attitude here in chapter 2 of II Corinthians. WHY?
Listen to what he says now – it is very interesting though it is written (in my estimation) terribly:
Speaking of the man and his father’s wife, referring to him and the situation we just read about, Paul writes at verse 5
5 But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all.
6 Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many.
7 So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.
8 Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.
(NOW LISTEN TO THIS AS HE REFERENCES WHAT WE JUST READ IN 1st CORINTHIANS)
9 For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things.
10 To whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also: for if I forgave anything, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;
11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.
We will speak mostly to these verses today but let’s finish out the chapter as Paul addresses some other (what seem to be) random points relative to his life and them at Corinth, saying:
12 Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach Christ’s gospel, and a door was opened unto me of the Lord,
13 I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother: but taking my leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia.
14 Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place.
15 For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:
16 To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?
17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.
Alright, let’s jump back to verse five where Paul readdresses the handling of the man who sinned with his father’s wife as he says:
5 But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all.
Now, let’s point out the obvious – neither here nor in 1st Corinthians does Paul use the brothers name. Did you notice this?
He uses other names, like when he points out that there were enemies that were against him in other parts of his epistles – but when it came to the name of this man who was involved in sin Paul did not publicize his name.
I love that. Discretion with a brother who is trapped up in sin. Outright enemies of the faith, names listed. But a brother who has fallen prey to his flesh – anonymity.
This is a VERY different approach than what religionists do when they discover a sinner in the group. They out them, often publicly – but not Paul.
There is something to this folks – and it is something I love.
Paul makes his remarks general in what I think is a kind and tender approach to the situation. Of course the believers who read this epistle would know whom he meant, but they had already punished him, as Paul suggests here, enough or sufficiently.
Here, Paul returns them to kindness and consideration for the soul.
All he gently insinuates is the man caused grief. To whom? To the people there as Paul clearly adds:
“He hath not grieved me, but in part.”
Meaning, his actions did not necessarily offended or grieved me completely – only partially, presumably as a part of the Church/Bride he felt pain when it felt pain and joy with joy.
The wording of this verse is challenging to me.
5 But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all.
The meaning seems to be that Paul admits that the situation with the man and his fathers wife grieved him in part and Paul says this to ease the burden on them who worried about Paul and his heart.
That in expressing the small amount of burden it had on my soul such news would only burden you a bit.
The other sense seems to be that the believers at Corinth had shown their willingness to follow Paul’s directions on what to do with this man and they removed the offender as told.
The sense of this verse could mean that connected with the verse that follows that they had promptly administered sufficient discipline, and that they were not now to be charged severely with having neglected it.
In other words, even though Paul said he had been pained and grieved, he had seen occasions not to bear hard on the whole church, but to be ready to commend them for their promptness in removing the man from fellowship – and so Paul adds at verse 6:
6 Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many.
Which in another version says
And in the case of such a person the punishment which was inflicted by the majority of you is enough.
How Paul knew this we don’t know – it could have been by the Spirit, by letter or direct communication from travelers.
Whatever it came, Paul believes that the orders were enough to accomplished all that he had desired. It had humbled the guy, and brought him to repentance; and doubtless led him to put away his behaviors.
Since this was the result, Paul deemed it right and proper to restore him to the privileges of the church.
Now, what’s interesting is that the privileges of the church included starvation, ill-treatment, and danger of life and limb.
From this we know something about the power of the Spiritual fellowship that comes to those who are His – both with others and of course with God.
We cannot get around the fact that church-bride apostolic discipline and direction was a huge part of the faith in that age. At the same time we have to see that in this age of the Body governed directly by the Spirit such things are way outside the purview of man.
We note that verses 5-10 are all directed to gently restoring this brother and that Paul took such a restoration seriously.
Then in contradistinction to the punishment the man faced at their hands Paul now says (at verse 7)
7 So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.
On the other side of the punishment inflicted on him, and instead of continuing the punishment, you ought again to admit him to your communion and fellowship.
Now, coming from Mormonism, the process that they demand is not similar – though they try to suggest it is through their courts of love.
I’ll tell you how it is different here in the Bible.
In the Bible men and women can fall into egregious sin but God forgives them completely.
In Mormonism the forgiveness is limited, and consists of a number of consequences neither David nor Mary Magdalene seemed to have faced.
How? The record keeping that follows a member wherever they go. This is NOT reflective of biblical Christianity and the wholesale forgiveness available by and through Christ.
So Paul says rather than continuing the pain and disgrace of excommunication, bring him back, and Paul adds:
“And comfort him lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with an overabundance of sorrow.”
Please please do not ignore the time, the age, what they were under, who was leading them, and the purpose of the Church-Bride and what they were going through in faith UNTIL he came to save them.
Please. To not will automatically entice earnest people to try and do the same thing to errant souls – and in the end will wind up, in most cases,” allowing them to be swallowed up in an overabundance of sorrow.”
I am convinced, after nearly 35 years of counseling people – especially people who get caught up in sin – that for the most part (not always, but for the most part) it is the Goodness of God and the Love shown to those who least deserve it that causes the greatest changes, and that judgment and harsh condemnation, in this age, by a body of religious folk, typically have the opposite effects.
Paul adds (verse 8)
8 Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.
The terms confirm, (kurwsai) occurs in the New Testament only here and in Galatians 3:15 and it means, “to give authority, to establish as valid,”
So we might see this as an apostolic blessing upon them that they confirm what?
“Their love toward the man.”
To me this suggests that their approach in his excommunication evidenced what we might see as non-love; not that it was non-love but it seems that the man needed to know that he was loved by these fellow believers, so Paul admonishes them to step in with their love more demonstrably.
Most see this action against the man as an excommunication – meaning that the believers went without communication with the man while he was ousted from fellowship.
Is excommunication in order today? Perhaps – and these are my thoughts toward it – for whatever they are worth.
We are in the age of the Spirit, not of apostolic leadership. And so there is no need for corporate excommunication – however, some may be led of the Spirit to excommunicate people from their lives – so long as the person remains a threat to them, themselves, or others.
What I mean by this is there could certainly be a time when a person ought to be treated without communication – may the Spirit guide – but it is a personal decision – not a corporate decision – and therefore the one choosing to excommunicate is accountable before God for how they proceed.
Therefore, personal excommunications are not to be taken lightly, must be an exercise of true love, and ought to be expressed in the spirit of humility and brokenness, not revenge or punitive intentions for God is the judge and revenger, not man.
To me it seems that longsuffering with the difficult, the sinful and the struggling is the order of the collective but again, the attitudes and actions of the person in question must be assessed my each individual, and not a collective decision by a group of people lest the person allows the root of bitterness grow in their heart.
Again, I have found that longsuffering love goes a lot farther with people than withholding communications – but let the spirit guide for I do not think God ever expects us to indulge dangerous, recalcitrant, diabolically driven people.
In any case, and in the case of this man, Paul has instructed them to now show him more love and to comfort him.
Now, the next verse sort of blows my mind a bit because Paul’s admission here seems to suggest something fairly radical – let’s read as he says:
9 For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things.
At first read this sounds like Paul is saying that this was all a test to determine their loyalty and obedience to him. But there is a key word included here in the King James at least – “also” –
“For to this end also did I write, . . .”
The word also in the Greek is present in all source material and so its was not some scribal addition – it was another reason Paul wrote.
So, on the one hand he addressed the situation with them. But at the same time his instructions served to test their allegiance to Paul the Apostle, to see if they would follow his lead obediently.
As they should – he was taken, trained and set apart by the Lord Jesus to bring the Good News to the Gentiles of that age, and His apostolic lead was an imperative to wrap that age up in the preparation of the Church-bride.
The apostle did not say that in some arbitrary manner he sought to test their willingness to obey him but the meaning is this: Paul is telling them that instead of showing up and dominating over them with news and directions which would have caused everyone misery, he chose to WRITE the first epistle, give them instructions, and see that if in His absence, the believers at Corinth would be willing to follow him.
Built into this we learn of another reason Paul did not come to them as they expected, which caused some criticism of him – he wanted to see if they would read his words and comply.
As a result of the results – which was the believers followed Paul’s directions, and handled the matter with the man, proving their obedience to what Paul had written – Paul adds the next verse, where he says to the Church at Corinth some amazing words, words similar to what Christ had said to His chosen apostles before He ascended. So Paul says:
10 To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; 11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.
In that first line of verse 10 – “to whom ye forgive any thing,” ePaul seems to be saying:
“I have such confidence in you as a Christian church or body that if you as a group forgive an offence in one-of your members, I shall approve the act, and shall also be ready to forgive.”
It seems that perhaps the believers there in Corinth had perhaps communicated to Paul that they wanted to express mercy and compassion on the man, and maybe Paul wanted to let them know that because of their obedience to him he knew he could trust their inclinations.
I would suggest that Paul was bolstering their confidence in the Lord through the Spirit as he knew he was not going to be around forever and that believers, as a group, needed to know that God was with them and that they had the capacity to act in His name over His church-bride.
Paul adds:
“for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;”
“For if I forgave any thing. If I forgive anything; if I remit any of the punishments which have been inflicted by my authority.
For your sakes. It is not on account of the offender alone; it is in order to promote the happiness and purity of the church.
Simply put, “If I have forgiven anything, I have forgiven it for your sakes, for your well-being, in the person of Christ.”
“By the authority, and in the name and actual visage of Christ, I too forgive all that you forgive and I do it for your sakes.”
Why?
He tells us at verse 11
11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.
The more literal translation here is
“That we may not be defrauded by Satan.”
With the verb here meaning, “that Satan will not get the advantage or get gain among
us.”
So the overall contextual meaning seems to be that both Paul and the church at Corinth to whom he writes ought to bring the man back into fellowship with total forgiveness, and ought not take any measures that lack compassion or care for others, because in the presence of unforgiveness and such attitudes, Satan has the potential to get the gain.
This is the direct reason given by Paul as to why he forgives in Jesus name and face all things – and that they should too.
How would Satan get the advantage? I would suggest that the ways are endless but they way he does it seems to be thus:
He operated in darkness and dark realms, and as long as the believers operated in the light, they were safe from his powerful sway and influence.
I have literally seen my life fall apart by the ways and wiles of darkness when I have allowed myself to step too far from the light – and it certainly takes immediate advantage.
So Paul seems to intimate that if he or they remained in anything that could get shadowy or dark – like feeding attitudes of vengeance or unforgiveness or maintaining a lack of compassion and love of Christ, Satan would have opportunity to work his wiles and get gain.
This was an outright war with Satan folks in that day and age as Revelation tells us that he was “roaming about like a roaring lion” and that He was going to really rage against the bride “knowing that his time was short.”
As a means to protect the church-bride from Satan God sent His spirit with abundance (manifested in miraculous gifts) and living apostles who were predestined from the foundation of the world to do what they did.
Of course, because of what scripture says, I am personally convinced that Satan has been cast into the Lake of Fire – way back at the end of that Age.
People ask, “If that is the case, how do these same things happen to us when we allow too much dark in our lives?”
Remember – and I know you all know this – but remember, Satan was a created being, an angel of light according to most Christian views.
He, the angel, was influenced toward the dark. And when he succumbed he may have represented the dark, but he was not the dark. That is a totally different source of power – far more powerful as far as I’m concerned.
So just because “the accuser” of that Age has been cast out does not in any way mean that darkness cannot get the gain in this world. It won’t win, but it can get the advantage.
Here at Corinth the advantage that Satan might gain is not revealed, and like I said, there were probably innumerable ones waiting to be had.
But it appears – APPEARS – that his foothold would come by the believers, under the pretense of religious duty, to be harsh, unforgiving, and lacking compassion.
And in these realms, Satan’s hold and advantages can be great.
Paul adds, “For we are not ignorant of his devices.”
Paul, and perhaps some of the believers in that day were well-aware of Satan’s skill-set.
I want to approach what some of those traits and skills are by addressing the being of Satan from a biblical sense and then speak to these traits as traits of darkness in our day.
Biblically speaking, we know that Satan had an ability to do a number of things and that he is described in a number of ways.
Jesus called him a liar, the father of lies, a murderer from the beginning, someone who blinds, tricks, tempts, that he can masquerade as light, that he is the prince of darkness, that he is cunning, that he is a tempter, that he is an enemy to God, that he thwarts plans to share Jesus, that he steals the word from the hearts of those where it is planted, that he captures, binds, and imprisons and was responsible for some illness and disease back in Jesus day.
Today, most Bible readers suggest that Christians are still engaged in warfare with Satan and His angels.
I understand this and do not begrudge them their idea. However, scripture clearly leads us to believe that in our day, post the end of that Age, that Satan has been defeated and even cast in the Lake of Fire.
Now, a number of Christian Bible students admit that Jesus has had the victory over all things, Satan included, and that while all things have been placed in His hands Satan still roams – but only where God allows.
Again, the reason for this belief is the refusal to accept that the former age is over and that all the events of Revelation 19-20 have happened – including the tossing of Satan the accuser into the Lake of Fire.
To me, as I mentioned, the fact that the “accuser of the brethren” (by the way, he is able to accuse because of the presence of the Law) but to me, the tool called Satan is irrelevant in this day and age because what originally tempted him to fall and wander and accuse is far, far, far more powerful than a fallen angel.
I call this power, the darkness. I don’t mean to in anyway personify it or give it an identity.
It is, because God is. It exists as Dark because God exists as Light. And it can be as mighty and present in a human as it can as a hovering form in space.
The darkness or the Dark is antithetical to all that God is – which is light, a consuming fire, love, justice, truth, joy, and all the things that go with being a good God – as articulated in scripture.
So the dark has every capacity/power/ability to do all that Satan did, and perhaps more when we think about it.
But because the Dark is not personified, is not a being, and is not something that can be captured because it exists in simple opposition to light, the darkness is eternal, it is not to be beat or fought, it is to be chosen or denied.
It’s power, ability to tempt and trap, and beguile and influence is in the negative, in the absence, in the cold uncreative dearth where life and living do not exist.
There is no such thing as cold – there is only the absence of warmth.
There is no such thing as dark – it is only the absence of light.
And so it is with the Dark. It is like the black hole – completely dedicated to self, to taking, to sucking life out of the universe not giving or contributing to it.
I am of the opinion that the dark selfishness of the black hole, the sub-freezing temperatures of the coldest things on earth, are always present in the world, including in the human heart.
Extract God from anything and you have the very essence that drew Satan to his demise.
As Christians of the New Aeon, we do not need the accuser of the Old Covenant around to cause pain, and seduction, and evil. Turn from God and His being of light and love and we have something far worse – our own dark souls that will do anything to gratify its desires, will and ways.
And we are fully responsible for the dark we allow.
There is a major push in Christians to think about, fear, and war against Satan.
I would suggest that in the Apostolic age, and in the days of the human Messiah, that Satan was a viable force that needed to be confronted and warred against.
But at the culmination of that age, the world forever more now battles with a far more insidious force – the absence of God, His light, and His love.
Because in the removal or rejection of Him and the victory He has had, the ONLY destination is the death of darkness – which can and will consume any who love it more than the light.
All of the properties Satan bore are in full strength in the Dark. And so its presence can tempt, can draw us deeper into itself, can imprison, bind, make ill or diseased, blind (of course) and cause us to trip and fall.
Whatever God is, the darkness exists and thrives in His opposite. Understand this and you will understand how evil continues to happen today without the character Satan.
And we will stop here.
Q and A
PRAYER
A TRANSVERSION of the New Testament
