1 Corinthians 6:12-20

First, there are those matters which are largely INTERNAL AFFAIRS - i.e., matters which are known, in the main, only by those inside the Church but which, nevertheless, are still having a big effect on the Church's unity and witness. The main concern there was the Corinthians' divisiveness which was fueled by their faulty understanding of wisdom, and leaders , and ministry.

Second, Paul moves on from talking about INTERNAL AFFAIRS to discussing EXTERNAL MATTERS - i.e., issues which WERE known to those outside the church and which were also affecting her unity and witness - things like inappropriate sexual relations, Christians dragging one another into court, or, as we shall see this morning, engaging in ritual prostitution. These have been the central concerns of chapters 5 and 6 and we will, hopefully, be bringing these particular matters to a close this morning.

Now, before we launch into the text itself, it will be helpful to make two preliminary comments which should help us to read this passage more faithfully. For starters, as we think about this matter of prostitution and engaging the services of a prostitute it is useful to remember the Corinthian cultural context. As we have already seen, Corinth was a place that had a long history of very relaxed standards when it came to the matter of sexuality. All sorts of things which you and I would readily frown upon in our own day were accepted, back then, as a part of ordinary, normal, everyday practice. This included the practice of visiting prostitutes and engaging in ritualistic sex at one of the local religious temples. That sort of behavior was considered to be okay within the Corinthians context of that day.

And yet, as we saw in our look at 1 Corinthians 5, even with their very loose sexual standards, the Corinthians nevertheless did have some standards. There were things that even they found unacceptable. One of those things was the practice of sleeping with your step-mother, which is what 5:1-13 was all about. So, what you have in chapters 5 and 6, in the main, is this: In 1 Corinthians 5:1-13 Paul wants one of their members to refrain from doing that which the Corinthian public considered detestable and in 6:12-20 he wants them to refrain from doing that which the Corinthian public considered to be perfectly acceptable: ritual prostitution.

That is one preliminary observation. The other comment to make has to do with the particular form of writing that Paul is using here. He is using a using a form of argument called a diatribe - which is simply setting up a kind of imaginary conversation between himself and someone with an opposing view of things. In this case it is a conversation between some of the Corinthians who were seeking to find a way to justify their continued involvement with temple prostitutes - it was a conversation between someone with that point of view over against Paul, who has a very different perspective on these things, as we shall see.

So, because he is arguing in this manner, Paul says, or at least quotes some things in this passage that he does not personally believe, but which are representative of what some of the Corinthians believe to be true. These statements are set apart, in the text, by quotation marks. So, for example, in verse 12, you will notice in the ESV that the opening phrase "All things are lawful for me" is set apart in quotations. Those words are what the Corinthians are saying. They are representative of the kinds of statements they are making and the kinds of arguments they are using to defend their continued involvement with prostitutes. Following that quotation in verse 12, you see the phrase "but not all things are helpful" - That part is not in quotation marks and is Paul's response to the Corinthian viewpoint. That is an example of a diatribe.

Now, before you get too settled with that and nod your head and say, "Okay, I get it now" - let me just say at the outset that although that IS what Paul is doing here - it is not necessarily as straight forward as it might appear. You see, the challenging part in all of this is getting the quotation marks in the right place. And this is because in the original language of the New Testament - in Greek - there is no provision for quotation marks. And that means you are left with the task of working out what is going on purely from the context of the passage itself. The result is that while some things are pretty clear - like the opening quotation in vs 12, other things are not nearly so clear and so there is not complete agreement among commentators as to how much of what is said ought to be regarded as a quotation of the Corinthian view, and how much should be seen as Paul's own comments. That involves a judgment call and some careful analysis on how you see the various parts relating to one another.

So, as we work our way through the passage this morning, it will be helpful for you to keep these "preliminary comments" in mind. Let's turn to the passage now, but before we do, let's pray....

Now, in looking at what Paul is saying here, there are two main things I want us to focus on this morning - (1) the "Corinthian Ethic" and then (2) Paul's response to that "ethic". The first main thing, then, is what I would call the Corinthian Ethic. What is it?

Well, by "Corinthian Ethic" I am referring to the manner of thinking that was guiding many of the Corinthians in how they approached sexual matters - a manner of thinking that is revealed by the kinds of things the Corinthians are being quoted as saying. As you look at the quotations that appear in the early verses of this section you can pick up at least two characteristics of the Corinthian ethic: it's individualism and it's dualism. Let me explain what I mean by those things...

The Corinthian ethic was, first of all, very individualistic. "All things are lawful for me..." they said. "All things are lawful for me..... food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food...." Now, as for what these slogans actually mean, we'll look at that in a moment, but for now I simply want you to notice how very self-centered and individualistic they are. The Corinthian language and the Corinthian mind-set was all about rights - my rights, my privileges, what is good for me, etc. So, their ethical thinking was very individualistic.

In addition to being individualistic the Corinthian ethic was also dualistic. Now what do I mean by that? Well, simply put, their perspective, illustrated by their comments, seems to be that the thing that really matters about a person is his/her soul or spirit. That is the part that really counts and the body - well, the body is, at best, a kind of temporary shell - a cocoon that will one day be jettisoned and our spirit or soul set free.

That kind of thinking seems to have been in vogue in Corinth and is very similar to some things taught by a Philosopher named Plato who saw the body and material things as being crude, common and profane and thus of relatively little value compared to things of the soul and spirit. This "dualistic" or "two-fold" view of reality seems to have had some influence on some believers in Corinth and so, when you combine that with their radical view of grace - which we've seen previously - the result is a view which allows and even encourages people to indulge their bodily appetites precisely because in the end they don't mean anything and don't count for anything, at least in the Corinthian view...

Now this aspect of the Corinthian ethic is seen most clearly in the first half of vs13 which, in the ESV at least, would be even clearer if they had placed the quotation marks in the right place so that instead of reading, "Food for the stomach and the stomach for food" - end quote, it should read, "Food for the stomach and the stomach for food - and God will destroy both one and the other" - END QUOTE. That rendering, it seems to me, would be more on target with what the Corinthians are saying - not just the bit about the stomach and food. Right? I mean, that is precisely the problem being highlighted in this passage - the Corinthians' wrong understanding of the body and its role in the scheme of things.

Which is why, in response to the Corinthian view that the stomach and food - i.e, the body and material things - will be destroyed in the end, Paul says, "The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14 And God raised the Lord and will also raise us up by his power". What's Paul saying? He's saying that the Corinthians are wrong in their view that in the end the body will be destroyed. On the contrary, in the end the body will remain and indeed will be raised up with Christ. Now we will go into some of these things in greater detail in a moment. But please note that the Corinthian ethic was one that was both individualistic and dualistic in nature.

Now, as I said a few moments ago, there are two main things I want to focus your attention on this morning. The first one was the nature of the Corinthian ethic - which we have seen. That leaves us to address the second main thing and that is Paul's response to the Corinthian ethic.

In examining Paul's response we see that there are two main parts or stages: Firstly, he deals with their "arguments" and "wisdom" - such as they are - and, secondly, he seeks to replace their inadequate and self-centered ethic with one that is fully adequate and is Christ and community centered. Let's look, then, at the FIRST WAY in which Paul responds to their slogans and that is by showing them up as the inadequate guide that they really are.

You may have already picked up on the fact that in responding to their slogans like "Everything is permissible for me", etc. - Paul doesn't just come right out and dismiss them out of hand. He doesn't just quote what they are saying, and then respond with some remark like - "That's a really stupid statement". On the contrary, he comments on what they are saying in a way that indicates that there is some validity to the things they are saying, or at least to some of what they are saying, in certain contexts.

What is happening here, as I believe some commentators have rightly suggested, is that the slogans the Corinthians are using - and which Paul is quoting here - are actually comments that Paul himself made - in another situation, with a different intent. And so what the Corinthians appear to be doing is taking Paul's own words out of context, and applying them to a different situation and in a way that Paul himself would never have done.

You see Paul, who was formerly Jewish, and thus subject to all sorts of dietary restrictions, was now free in Christ - and because of a revelation given to Peter - to partake of anything. Paul's view now - at least with regard to food - was that "all things were lawful." There was no such thing as non-kosher food anymore. So Paul would have practiced - and taught this view.

It was this that, apparently, some people in Corinth have taken and have drawn an illegitimate parallel between bodily appetites and sexual appetites. As if to say, the body was made for food - and so we eat, anything and everything. It's all okay. In the same way, they reasoned, the body was obviously made for sex and so we are equally free to satisfy that "hunger" in whatever way we choose. "Everything is permissible". That, or something close to it, seems to have been their reasoning.

Let me ask you: Has that sort of thing ever happened to you? Have you ever had something that you said, and sincerely meant, in one situation taken and applied to another situation and in a way that you did not intend - or ever would intend? Have you ever had your own words taken out of context and misused like that? Of course you have. That kind of thing happens all the time. That, I believe, is what is happening here.

Now, Paul is going to respond to their illegitimate in a moment, but before he does that, he pauses to deal with their comments simply on their own merits, as if to say, "Your analogy is all wrong, and your misuse of what I said is inappropriate but even before I address all that I want you to see that this approach you are taking, this way of thinking about issues like this is woefully inadequate, even on its own merits."

One commentator illustrates the inadequacy of this approach by applying it to something as benign as buying a house. A person could look at a whole range of houses with a wide variety of prices and conclude that it was both lawful and possible to purchase any one of them. But the fact that purchasing a $400,000 home is lawful and possible does not mean that it is necessarily wise or beneficial to do so. The fact that something is lawful and permissible, in itself, is simply not enough information to act upon.

So, by responding to their statement, "All things are lawful" as he has Paul wants to reveal this kind of approach as the very, illogical, low standard that it is. Lowest-common-denominator approaches such as that are a sure recipe for disaster, in any congregation. Why? Because it is not enough to know whether things are permissible. It is also important to know whether they are helpful or beneficial, whether they carry within them the danger of enslaving a person to a particular habit or passion, etc.

So, with just a couple brief responses Paul is trying to show them the inadequacy of their slogans - from a purely logical standpoint. However, he obviously has more to say, and deeper reasons to take them to task over this matter. And so, after highlighting the inadequacy of their thinking - from a logical standpoint - Paul wants to address the matter from an ethical standpoint and, in so doing, want to replace their self-centered ethic with one that is Christ-centered. In addressing this, Paul lays down five foundational principles upon which the Corinthians can base their life and practice, especially as it regards matters of sexuality.

First, Paul says that the body is for the Lord and Lord is for the body, in verse 13. This is one area where their analogy with food simply breaks down. The body certainly is meant to have food and needs it to survive. And the body is made for sex. We are sexual beings. But to say the body is made for sex is not to say it is meant for every kind of sex. Paul says, it is not meant for sexual immorality - which in the immediate context is prostitution - but which in other contexts would include things such as homosexuality, sex outside of marriage, etc.

The body is not meant for those things but is "for the Lord and the Lord for the Body" - which is simply Paul's way of saying that you can't think about the body and its needs apart from the God who made it. The Corinthians cannot think of themselves in isolation from God. They have to do all their thinking inside the framework that says God is the one who created them, that God saw his creation as good, and that God created and designed our bodies - including our sexuality - for his own purposes. The moment you start thinking about people and sex apart from that framework, you start to go off the rails. The body is for the Lord and the Lord for the Body.

Second, Paul reminds the Corinthians that, contrary to what some of them were saying about the body being destroyed and having a limited future, the body is here to stay. Vs 14, "And God raised the Lord and will also raise us up by his power." Now Paul will devote much more space to developing this idea in chapter 15, but he raises it here because it is has deep, central significance for the matter at hand.

The Corinthians are operating under the false belief that the body is only temporary and this belief, along with some other wrong ideas of theirs, was leading them to all sorts of wrong conclusions about things - and what was permissible for Christians to engage in. So Paul here briefly asserts what he will later talk about in greater detail - precisely because it is so vitally important for life here and now. The body is important, it is here to stay, and is not an irrelevance.

Third, Paul tells the Corinthians that their bodies are members of Christ himself (See vs15-18 again). Now, let me just say on the front end that this is deep water. There's a lot here and we will not begin to deal with this passage in anything approaching an adequate manner. But if I had to summarize what I think Paul is saying here it is this: Paul is reminding the Corinthians that, if they are really the Lord's, then they are in true spiritual union with him.

The reality that believers are in union with Christ and that this involves them both body and soul is then brought to bear upon the specific problem of visiting prostitutes (repeat vs15- 16). Paul is talking about the act of physical intercourse between a man and a woman and, leaning on Moses' words from Genesis about the sexual union that is created between man and woman, Paul is making the point that for a believer to unite physically with a prostitute - because of the one flesh principle - to do that sort of thing is - because of the reality of our spiritual union with Christ - to create some kind of unholy conjunction between Christ and the prostitute.

So what Paul is doing is showing people - in a graphic way - how this practice of engaging in ritual prostitution brings into close conjunction things that ought not to be. It is to think the unthinkable. To imagine the unimaginable. He wants them to see it for the cheap, dirty, shameful thing that it is. He wants them to see that it is about much more than just them, that it goes way beyond them. What they do is not just about them. It is never just about them but ultimately about Christ himself.

That is why he tells them to "flee sexual immorality". This is what sets the sin of sexual immorality apart because there is this "one fleshness" thing that happens which leaves a very different sort of mark on a person's soul. Paul writes, "All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body." One commentator uses the analogy of having a nice new car and he talks about how one might commit all sorts of sins WITH that car - driving recklessly, speeding, illegal parking, etc. But, this writer says, if you were to go out and get a load of cow manure and dump it in the back seat you would not be sinning with the car but AGAINST the car". That's what Paul is getting at. Sexual sin does something to YOU.

As Calvin says, it creates a stain that is unlike any other - and it introduces a disintegration into a person that leaves them forever changed and affected. Not beyond redemption, not beyond forgiveness, not beyond healing, mind you, but nevertheless there is a scar - something that remains, something that you will carry about and bear within you all the rest of your days and which only that final great healing - when we meet the Lord - will take away. That's how serious it is.

Fourth, our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit (See19a). Now, in an earlier section of this letter we saw this same idea and you may remember how in that particular part of Corinthians Paul was saying not "you, individually" are temples of the Holy Spirit but rather that y'all, together are temples of the Holy Spirit. Here, however, he reverses the emphasis, for obvious reasons. Here he reminds the Corinthians that they are not only temples of the Holy Spirit corporately, but also individually. And it doesn't take much imagination to understand what kind of positive shaping influence the increasing recognition of this fact ought to have on believers in every age. Imagine how differently you might live if you were to remember this truth even 5% of the time.

Fifth, Paul reminds the Corinthians that their bodies are not theirs but in fact have been bought with a price - with Christ's blood. (See vs19b-20). The Corinthians were acting as if it was their life and theirs alone. Paul says NO - it's not your life. It's not your body. It's Christ's body. He created it, He bought it, He died for it. It's HIS. In fact, it is TWICE his.

Sadly, in our own day, you will hear arguments made all the time, by professing Christians mind you, that certain actions are acceptable because they actually believe - in direct contradiction to Scripture - that their bodies are their own and that no one has any right to tell them what they can do with them. That's simply not true. You are not your own, you were bought with a price. Therefore honor God with your body. (Pro-choice proponents please take note.)

At any rate, all of these truths are Paul's response to the woefully inadequate ethic by which the Corinthians had been operating. Through them Paul offers the foundational principles for an ethic that is not self-centered and individualistic but which is Christ-centered and community minded.

Now obviously Paul's words here are deeply relevant in our own day, aren't they? We are a culture that is very Corinthian in its attitude and approach to matters related to sexuality, aren't we? And we desperately need an ethic that it not a kind of lowest-common-denominator, what's best for me, approach. We don't need anything else that is trumpeting the importance of claiming and protecting OUR precious rights, and OUR precious privileges. Rather, we need an ethic that is thinking in completely different ways, that is asking entirely different questions, that is not driven by rights but by love for Christ and others, and by a concern for community, and by a sense of responsibility, and by a spirit of service and sacrifice. Paul's five principles here will take us a long way in that direction. They are, again:

• 1) that the body is for the Lord,
• 2) that the body is here to stay - as the resurrection proves,
• 3) that we are members of Christ himself, and members of each other
• 4) that our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit and that,
• 5) that our bodies are not our own but have been bought with a price.