Prefer Wrong Doing (Part 1 of 2)

The Counterintuitive Teaching of 1 Corinthians 6

If you pay close attention to this passage of Scripture, you're going to find one of the more counterintuitive teachings within Scripture. It doesn't make sense based upon our sociological or societal understanding of things, what the Apostle Paul is saying within this context. But it's a very good emphasis, a very good illustration of the realities of things that could have temporal profit or temporal value—in other words, just an earthly significance—or things that can have a more transcendent spiritual significance in our lives.

Paul is going to say much more than just simply don't sue each other. That's typically this passage of Scripture. That's all the understanding of it is: don't take a lawsuit against each other. And of course, many of us probably have no idea how to initiate a lawsuit. And many of us have probably never been sued before. But Paul broadens the scope a lot more to talking about people who would be fundamentally totally okay with being wronged.

That's how you can begin to see some of the counterintuitiveness of this. Paul is instructing his audience, his congregation—and by virtue of the teaching that he has in his congregation, that we would take away from it as well—the reality that we should as Christians in relationship to other Christians be perfectly okay with being wronged based upon the content that's being said here in this passage of Scripture.

1 Corinthians 6:1-8
“When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life? So if you have such cases, why do you lay them before those who have no standing in the church? I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no one among you wise enough to settle a dispute between the brothers, but brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers? To have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded? But you yourselves wrong and defraud even your own brothers?”

Saying, prefer wrongdoing when you are the object of wrongdoing. And the subject is your brother or your sister in the Lord. Prefer this attitude even specifically when something else is missing, when there's no other alternative or there's no other option for you in your relationships with people within the church, with other brothers and sisters in Christ, when there's no other way of settling a dispute or just simply the reality of a dispute existing, be wronged and be okay with it. Prefer that overtaking somebody to court to settle the dispute.

And just so we can have another point of clarification here, the Apostle Paul, who in Romans had taught very explicitly and specifically about obeying the law, he's not saying that when somebody wrongs you by breaking the law that you shouldn't have the civil authorities involved in a circumstance like that. Certainly in any particular circumstance where somebody breaks the law, the law needs to be involved because it is a Christian activity to obey the law in as much as it does not hinder their relationship with God or prevent them from living as a Christian. And in those circumstances civil disobedience is definitely the case. But be that as it may. What we're talking about here is that there is a wrongdoing, something happens, there's a defraud or whatever it is. And within those circumstances somebody has offended somebody else within the church and the Apostle Paul is saying that your preferred attitude towards that is to go ahead and simply be wronged.

Now obviously he doesn't say that there should be all sorts of injustice running around in the church, that everybody should just simply do wrong and not even sweat it, but that if you are the object and the recipient of wrongdoing and especially if there's nobody within the church who's wise enough to mediate. And of course the rhetorical understanding of this passage of Scripture is that there should be at least somebody within a gathering together of Christians—at least one person who can mediate disputes between brothers—but assuming that we don't have that opportunity or assuming that we just simply have been wronged, then our preferred attitude is to be wronged.

Shameful Disputes Before Unbelievers

As he raises this objection, notice what he says here in verse one, he goes from having rebuked the congregation previously to doing what we looked at last week where he removed somebody from the congregation. In fact, delivered him over to Satan, which was one of the most significant and loving acts that he could have done in order for that person, in order for that brother to be saved, in order for his flesh to be destroyed and his spirit to be preserved, his soul to be preserved. Now having gone from rebuked to removal, he goes back to rebuked. This is something that is shameful in your midst, stop bringing each other to court, stop taking your disputes outside of the church.

Who in the world, when one of you has a grievance, does he even dare to go to the law before the unrighteous instead of the saints? Who would dare to do that? Who would dare to take their brother or their sister when there's an argument, when there's a dispute? You stole money from me or that money was only supposed to be a loan or whatever it is. Who takes somebody before the courthouse, who takes somebody before the secular outside of church's society to try to settle this dispute instead of taking it before the saints? Instead of bringing it to other brothers and sisters in Christ, why would you go outside of the church?

And especially from what 1 Corinthians chapter 2 verse 14 had taught, that the outside, the unbelievers, they don't understand the things of the kingdom. So the disputes between brothers and sisters are something that they fundamentally will not be able to grasp, they'll consider it to be a dispute just like amongst anybody else. It's you're going to go to people that are not going to wisely understand your case, they're not going to wisely be able to discern the intricacies of what it is to be a Christian's relationship with another Christian. Who dares go outside the church? Why on earth would you go to some place outside of the church when it should be handled in house?

And especially coming off of the context that we just looked at because the Apostle Paul has thoroughly established it that outside of the church is where danger lurks. That's where it's okay to send somebody who is thoroughly disobedient, living in such open, unrepentant, blatant sin who has the name of brother, so-called brother, nominal Christians we define last week, and they're living in open, blatant, unrepentant sin, remove that person from your midst and putting them outside of the church puts them into an opportunity whereby which Satan can have his way with their flesh. So taking matters that belong inside the church, outside of the church, given the context that we looked at last week is even more fallacious. It's even more of something that doesn't make any kind of sense whatsoever.

Saints Qualified to Judge

But then of course the argumentation and the reasoning that he gives here, notice he says in verse two, do you not know that the saints will judge the world? Now what are the particulars of that? Not exactly sure, but it has to do with judging the world. That perhaps within the sphere and the circle of understanding what it is to be a Christian, that you would become co-heirs with Christ, reigning with Christ, that when it comes time to the opportunity for the world to be judged, you would play a role in judging the world. Now all of the particulars of what that entails we will find out, we will experience, but it certainly is the case that you would be placed as some kind of an arbiter. You would be placed as some kind of a judge. You would be placed as somebody who would pronounce a decree about the circumstances in which the world has been experienced and has lived. You would be a judge of the world. That's a pretty high and lofty calling there.

But if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to judge trivial cases? In other words, if you look amongst the congregation and within this congregation, there is a complete and total lack of an understanding of how to resolve even the minutia of cases, the minutia of disputes, trivial cases, totally pointless cases, how do you expect to then be able to be in that position that we are supposed to be judging the world in? How could you do that? You're not able to resolve these insignificant cases.

Do you not even know that we are to judge angels? Think about that. Whether of course that would mean that that would include fallen angels, I don't think that's necessarily entirely relevant as much as it just is simply saying, we are to judge angels, we are to judge divine beings, supernatural beings for all of the different various activities, all of the different tasks that they had, everything that pertains to the angelic ministries, or again, perhaps even the subjects of fallen angels there. If that's the case, then we would be in positions of judging individuals that are not human, they're supernatural individuals. And yet, what's the deal if we can't even begin to judge matters of trivial cases?

How much more then matters pertaining to this life? With what it is to be a Christian with the kind of discipleship, training, education, and the scriptures, and the wisdom that God gives, the knowledge that God gives, all of the things that are contained in being a Christian, growing in your salvation, growing in your knowledge of God, receiving those mysteries of salvation that the Apostle Paul has talked about already in 1 Corinthians, all of those different things contained in the subject matter of being a Christian, if you're not able to, is there not somebody who can that when you have a dispute or some kind of a disagreement with somebody within the church, that you would be able to resolve it?

I think nowadays, the kind of terminology that is employed or the kind of tactics that employed when there's a dispute that arises between brothers and sisters in the church is somebody who just simply leaves. They leave the church, not experiencing the qualitativeness, the value or the significance of what it's like to resolve conflict. And of course, the problem is that there's two problems in a dispute, two sides, both are contributing in some way, shape, or form, even if it's 5% on this side or 95% on this side, both sides are contributing something of the problem and the problem with leaving without resolving the conflict, as you haven't demonstrated an ability to resolve conflict, nor have you demonstrated a repentance in the problems that you were contributing. So then you leave and you take your problems with you, which for some people might be a good thing, but then you end up at another church where you're carrying the baggage with you. It doesn't help anybody, it doesn't help improve you as a person, doesn't help grow you as a Christian.

What is most important is to be able to resolve the conflict and is there not anybody who's able to do that here? If somebody not able to resolve these disputes, certainly there's all sorts of petty kinds of discussions or disputes that can happen, that have happened, and that would cause us to not want to attend anymore or cause us to be bitter or even to the extreme degree, that because there still is no resolving of the conflict, we would take it to those outside the church. You're going to judge the world, you're going to judge the angels, you should be able to judge life and matters that pertain to life.

You can see how he sort of broadens the subject matter a little bit, not just to simply, well, there's a couple of Christians that went and took each other to the court because so and so sold, so and so a car, and they didn't really give them a title or whatever it is, they kind of, the person who bought the car, sort of, short-changed them, or there was a goods or services that were promised in exchange of money, either side reneged, and it's sort of like eBay in the church where you're like, yeah, I'll pay, no, I didn't pay, and then you just kind of say, well, whatever, and then the other person takes you to court, it's a little bit more than that, it's a little bit broader than that, any matter that pertains to life matters pertaining to this life, and in such cases, why would there not be somebody who is able to mediate these things?

Why Not Rather Suffer Wrong?

So then what am I supposed to do? How am I supposed to react? What is supposed to be the circumstance that I'm supposed to experience, that I'm supposed to live in? If I'm within a church, and while I'm within a church, somebody wrongs me, or specifically here, I'm grieved, there's a grievance that happens from somebody else. How am I supposed to react?

Well, notice some of the strange terminology here that's used when he says in verse 7, to have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded? And so here's kind of that primary emphasis that we saw here is the reality that on this end, there should be somebody who is within the church who can resolve conflicts. There's a mediator, there's a counselor, there's somebody with enough Christian experience, with enough biblical experience, somebody who should be able to resolve the conflict.

But then over here, there's the person who was wronged, there was the person who was defrauded, and the default response, the default attitude that a Christian should have in response to being grieved, to being wronged, to being defrauded by another brother or sister in the Lord, is to be okay with that against taking it outside the church. It's more important, and in fact indeed it is a greater representation of the gospel. It is an avoidance of a misrepresentation of the name of Jesus Christ. It is a specific definition of what it's like to come out of the world.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11
“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.”

That's the very reason why verses 9 through 10 exist. It's indicative of being sanctified, it's indicative of being taken outside of the world. In other words, it means a reality exists that you are not like the world around you when somebody wrongs you and their brother, their sister in the Lord, that you would be okay with being wronged. And that's hard. It's very difficult. It's a human response, it's an indeed a very unrighteous response, it's a natural man response that when somebody wrongs us, we demand that they pay for it. We demand to have restitution for what was happening. We demand that they make amends for what has taken place financially, emotionally, whatever it is, they need to pay because they wronged me. It's a very unrighteous response to it that is the response of those that will not inherit the kingdom of God. And certainly it is a misrepresentation of the gospel.

Here's a reminder in John chapter 1, very startling an interesting statement that happens there where it says, and Jesus came to his own and his own rejected him. And yet because of the glory and the joy that was set before him, he still endured the cross for the purposes of those who even rejected him, their salvation. Or perhaps something akin to Jesus's sermon that if you are smacked on the cheek, that you would turn the other one, that you would indeed be wronged for the sake of the gospel.

Now it has its specific context, so make sure that you focus and not go too crazy with this kind of understanding. What Paul is specifically talking about is a brother or a sister in the Lord, somebody who is inside the church who has a grievance against you, somebody who has wronged you, somebody who has harmed you, that when that happens, that your response is that it would be better to be defrauded and to be wronged than to bring legal repercussions against this person or to take them outside of the church to try to deal with them or to try to resolve the conflict. It's better to be wronged.

Number of Sundays ago, I had given an example of a man, I'm not too sure I can actually call him a brother, but a man within the church who he had broken the law, he had evaded the police officers and he drove to the church that we were pastoring at and there were four police cars outside of the church. They broke his window, dragged him out of his car, maced him, arrested him and sent him to jail. He came several days later after he made bond or whatever it is, however he got released and he came in and he was expressing to me how victimized he was. And of course, as he was explaining things to us, we were telling him you need to submit to the laws of the land, you need to submit your eldership that is telling you to not disobey the laws of the land and he had come back and met with us again and was telling us that his lawyer told him he had every right to stay in his car, he had every right and not adhere to what the officers were telling him and so the advice that we gave from scripture was not as good as his secular lawyer's advice.

Of course, this verse right here would even extend to the idea that what would be the benefit, what would be the profit of not submitting to the authorities in that circumstance and what would be the profit of being wronged and being okay with it. Of course, certainly what's at stake is the name of Jesus Christ. Imagine how that would be the case inside of the church where a brother or a sister would wrong us, would offend us, would bother us and we would become so hostile against them that we would drag them into court that we would sue them for what's taking place.

Now of course, as this youth group typically handles elephants within the room, there is that elephant that exists within the room of the fact that divorce is a lawsuit against a brother or a sister and so if I am in a marriage, married to a believer and my spouse wrongs me, why not rather be wronged. And of course, is there not anybody within the church who can mediate things that pertain to life, things that would even involve those kinds of circumstances? Is there not somebody that can sit down and that can work towards resolution or is the stubbornness within people's hearts, the hardness of people's hearts, is it so thick, is it so callous, is it so overgrown, that the response of somebody grieving me, the response of somebody offending me, is that they need to pay. Instead they need to be forgiven.

I believe it's Luke 17 that specifically talks about the need for a person to be forgiven, a brother or a sister who especially who repents that the command is to forgive them. 1 Corinthians 5 already dealt extensively with a person who is living in an open, flagrant, unrepentant sin, that person is to be removed from the church, but certainly Christians inside the church and has even used the terminology of trivial cases, these disputes that arise between us, is there enough forgiveness to be understood from the gospel to be reciprocated to other brothers and sisters when it disputed arises?

Already a Defeat

Now notice again what it said in verse 7 because the realities of what happens here are very important because when Paul says when you take somebody to court you bring somebody before a civil court, there are whatever kind of a court that it is and there's a lawsuit you're suing your brother, you're suing your sister, you've already lost. It's already a defeat. And especially because even though you can go to the lawsuit and you can say but Paul I won, I won the lawsuit, they had to pay, they had to pay for the damages that they caused or they had to pay for this or whatever it is or they settled it and therefore I got my goods back or whatever the dispute ultimately ends up being and whatever the response of the court's ultimately ends up being the fact of the matter remains is that you can say all you want that it was resolved and that you won and that if you took a brother or sister to court you've lost in any kind of a meaningful fashion because there is a spiritual component, there is a spiritual significance, there is a transcendent and higher quality of winning that goes beyond whatever it is that you could win from a court in fact you lost by doing that but the transcendent value that is experienced is the beautiful reality of Paul saying I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

That's played out by brothers and sisters that are able to forgive one another that are able to buttress their relationships that are able to create greater degrees of relationship with one that are able to experience greater degrees of forgiveness and qualitative sense and of course are able to glorify God by not taking their brother or sister to court and God's glory and the experience of God being glorified are of greater satisfying value than whatever temporary win from a lawsuit you could ever receive. That's why it's losing is because God's not honored, God's not glorified and the experience of God's glory is missed by disobeying him in this particular sense.

So put that into perspective and put that into context within your life of the reality that if somebody within the church has offended me it is of no value to leave, it is of no value to ignore it, it is of no value not to be able to deal with it and if you're having trouble coming to a point of resolution there is somebody within the church who can sit down and help mediate and help bring you to a point of resolution and enable you to experience the kind of God honoring, God glorifying resolution that strengthens the relationships of brothers and sisters within the church and causes a greater degree of satisfaction when God is glorified. That reality definitely exists, why not rather be wronged and why not rather have somebody mediate it to a point of resolution.

And avoid verse 8, not like reading it, like you read verse 7 skip over it, but avoid that being the reality within your life do not be somebody who is wronging somebody else, who is defrauding somebody else. Why not rather be wronged? This terminology here means to suffer injury, means to be mistreated or it means to be treated unjustly.

And folks we get it, we understand it that there are circumstances that can be experienced as Christians together and in fact sometimes people respond in such a way that seems very unrealistic when it comes to churches that I can't believe so and so treated me that way. Really what's a greater surprise is coming into a church full of wretched heathens and being treated nicely. That should be the greater shock. The greater shock is if not somebody didn't greet you on Sunday, but the fact that anybody greeted you or anybody even said hi in such a nice tone because we're all in desperate need of Christ and we are all wretched, vile, evil sinners.

Now you'll notice from verse 9 and it's then that we were some of these specifics in full categories and now we are not and so obviously what's surprising and what's fantastic about coming into a church and seeing any kind of rightdoing is the reality of the gospel but you should expect, you should always expect. If humans are involved, if people are involved, somebody is going to get hurt. It's a guarantee. Going into a friendship and you're thinking that this person can never do any wrong or anything like that, you're going to be surprised. You go into a romantic relationship and you're thinking this is fantastic. This person's the one. This person is so wonderful and so amazing. You can't let her get away. You got to put on a front you got to put on a facade. You got to put on a show so that way you can thoroughly deceive this person into marrying you.

If people are involved, wrongdoing is going to happen. Now that doesn't excuse it because every person is accountable for their deeds. Every person is accountable for their actions but certainly somebody is going to treat you unjustly. Somebody is going to injure you. Somebody is going to wrongly treat you. It's going to happen within the church. The term defraud here also means to suffer loss. So to suffer wrong means you're stuck with some kind of an injury. To be defrauded, it means you lost something that's of value.

Why Not Rather Suffer Wrong?

Something happens to you versus something is taken from you—or to be defrauded means you're deprived of something. You're not given something you think you're due, and maybe genuinely you are. These are the kinds of words being used here. Imagine the Apostle Paul saying, "Why not rather suffer injury? Why not rather be deprived of something?" See how countercultural that is—counter even to church culture. There's a group of people who come into the church expecting to get something, to benefit, to take something away. Technically, you should expect the gospel from the church, but in interactions and relationships with other people, expect to be deprived of something. Expect to suffer loss coming into the church.

With the church-shopping mentality of our culture, where we go into a church and something's not right—I'm not getting exactly what I want—so we leave, go someplace else, complain, criticize, or even sue: Why not suffer loss? Why not rather be wronged?

The Unrighteous Will Not Inherit the Kingdom

Notice verses 9 through 11. These seem strange, almost like separate contexts, but there's a tiny conjunction—a single letter in the Greek text, ē—that connects them: "Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

It seems strange to put a list of vices right after talking about not defrauding one another. But remember verse 1: "When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous?" And verse 9: "Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?" Paul lists specific examples of the unrighteous. The emphasis is: Who dares bring a brother or sister before the unrighteous, who will not inherit the kingdom of God? You are no longer like the unrighteous. You are those Jesus purchased with his blood. You are saints—literally, righteous. Why go before the unrighteous, who will not inherit the kingdom? They're not concerned with mediation that considers your eternal profit and value.

Those who are unrighteous cannot give eternal value, advice, or mediation that matters. You're not like them. You're out of the world, no longer associated with them. You are in the church, among those inheriting the kingdom of God. Therefore, matters of dispute within the kingdom should be resolved among brothers and sisters.

This list is similar to that at the close of chapter 5—those who should be put outside the church. But these don't bear the name "brother." They live in open sexual immorality, fornication. It's haunting to hear: The unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God. They will not be saved. Typical identification with these categories—no profession of faith plus acceptance of them—means no inheritance.

Fornicators, idolaters—those who treat anything God created better than God, or are more devoted to something than God. Adulterers—those who lust for or pursue someone else's spouse, committing fornication in their hearts.

Some translations say "effeminate" and "homosexuals"—the passive and active partners in a homosexual relationship. The ESV says "men who practice homosexuality." They will not inherit the kingdom of God. There is no such thing as a gay Christian according to this text. It does no justice to the LGBT community—or however many acronyms—to support or encourage continued lifestyle in homosexuality. The greatest way to love them is to tell the truth: None of these will inherit the kingdom of God, but the gospel of Jesus Christ is how you inherit it. Nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers.

You Have Been Changed

If you've practiced these things, struggled with them—including same-sex attraction—recognize you're not identified by those terms or sins if you're a genuine believer. Verse 11: "And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

Don't trust in your works or deeds, but in the washing, sanctification, and justification the Lord Jesus gives. You're not any of these anymore. That's why there's no gay Christian—you've been fundamentally changed into a saint. You're no longer a drunkard. Don't let the world or the unrighteous label you an alcoholic. You're not labeled by sin, but as a saint, by the work of Jesus Christ—washing, sanctification, justification in his name and by our God's Spirit.

Don't be oppressed by sinful labels. Be liberated: If you believe in Jesus Christ, none of these is your identity. You've been washed, sanctified, justified. Because of this reality as a Christian, you can be wronged, defrauded, and it can be okay—because someone in the church can mediate. The glory of God is more important than getting payment for wrongdoing.