Treating Causes Versus Treating Symptoms

Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.  All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything. (1 Corinthians 6:11-12 NASB)

One minor difficulty with 1 Corinthians 6 is its internal relationship, and its relationship to the previous chapter (ejecting the sinful man from the congregation).  Within this chapter and even at the beginning, the typical transition used by Paul to introduce a new topic is missing:  "Now about..."  The result is that what transitions are there are left to the reader to piece together, and internal relationships are expected to be picked up along the way.  It's probably easier if one reads ancient Greek and is familiar with ancient Greek literature and informal writing.  Most people don't fit this description and instead rely on a variety of translations.

So, in the previous chapter, a man who has been publicly guilty of incest (with his father's wife) is to be expelled from the congregation.  It's a clear admonishment to address sin within the congregation.  The final element to Paul's argument tells them not to judge 'outsiders' but instead only those within the congregation.  This actually dovetails well with the first element of chapter 6 which deals with outsiders judging issues between believers; which Paul commands them to stop doing.

It is the linkage between the first admonition to keep civil cases within the church and addressing sexual sins that we might miss the connection.  The only grammatical transition is found in the above verses, but they may seem difficult to connect in theme or topic.  But if I step back, I think I can see a literary transition when I connect the final piece of chapter 6 with Paul's charge in chapter 5.  In fact, all along to this point, I believe Paul has been trying to wake the congregational leaders up to their complete neglect of sin within themselves.  And I believe he wraps up that argument here in chapter 6.

Their perspective of these sins which have been plaguing them has been that they either don't see them at all or seem them completely differently from how God views them.  Paul's correction has been less about specific behavior and more about shifting their paradigm through which they view them.  He has used sarcasm, biting criticism, and logical argument to correct these deviations from the teaching he first gave them.  His method has been partly in response to their disrespect for him on top of all else.

So in verses 11 and 12, what we see is Paul's return to paradigm correction.  He moves from their current status (washed, sanctified, justified) and begins to use that to correct the paradigm.  He starts in verse 12 by conceding their belief that they are not under law (see my previous blog entry), but adds to it, adjusting their perspective to include what is profitable to them and their being mastered by what isn't profitable.  I believe the reason for this is that he wants them to apply those foundational truths about themselves from verse 11.

But even topically, what verses 12 through 20 are about might actually provide a partial view of why the incestuous man was permitted to remain in the congregation.  If sexual sins were actually rampant in that participating in prostitution was actually a common practice, then accepting the man with his father's wife would suddenly make a lot more sense.  While it's not clear how common this practice was in the congregation, that it warrants its own section indicates it was far too common.

So, I see this final part of chapter 6 wrapping up Paul's correction of the paradigm which forms the broken framework supporting the rest of his sections in this letter.  In other words, what he is addressing in the first six chapters is the causes of the rest of the problems, not additional symptoms.  He refers to symptoms to support his points, but his aim is deeper.  He continually uses their 'words' or their twisting of his against them, each time shifting them away from the broken view they have to the more right view of their Master.

Okay, so what I derive from this is that I too need a paradigm shift.  Perhaps I need it constantly, and maybe we all do.  But I think that repentance is that process of correcting my perspective on my behavior to bring it more in line with my Master's perspective.  Repentance aligns my mental framework with His, which requires reconstruction of mine to more closely match His.  I get this concept of what my Master's framework looks like from Scripture.  So, basically, I begin to think more like my Master through studying Scripture.  Or at least that's how it's supposed to work.  I wish it made me smarter too.  Clearly there's more to it...

The Law of Profit and Mastery

All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything.  Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body. (1 Corinthians 6:12-13 NASB)

 It seems odd to say that all things are 'lawful'.  It just does.  It doesn't sound right.  How can all things be lawful?  Paul refers to the Jewish law and justification before God, but that's only possible to understand for us through other writings of his (Galatians and Romans for instance).  Even so, how can all things suddenly become lawful?  Paul can eat a ham sandwich because Jesus died on a cross and rose again?  It doesn't seem to fit.

The church in Corinth is made up of both Jewish and Gentile believers.  They keep the Passover together.  Their Scriptures are the texts of the Hebrew Scriptures translated into Greek, but still the Hebrew Scriptures.  They are mixed, very likely with a majority of Gentile believers, but there is still an inescapable Jewish context for the early church.  The teachings of Paul seem to have included resistance toward becoming Jewish either to be saved, or as a mark of salvation.

On the other hand, Paul has clearly said that no one who is characterized by any of several sins he lists, twice, will inherit the Kingdom of God; therefore behavior is a mark of salvation.  That in itself can be difficult, and has confused various church denominations causing strife between some.  What is the relationship between being justified solely by faith yet that justification being evident in activities?  Again, how can all things be lawful, yet following the rules is evidence of salvation?

Not all things are profitable, nor will Paul permit himself to be mastered by anything.  For Paul it seems that behavior, and therefore the evidence of salvation, is not a matter of rules and law, but of profit and mastery.  It almost sounds like a 'situational ethical' criteria.  But he goes on to explain in a specific instance, getting there from the oblique reference to food, but centering around a different appetite.

Food and sex are probably the most clearly difficult addictions to overcome.  After all, both are naturally occurring physiological drives of all humans.  One we can't live without.  Both have very pronounced affects on our emotions and brain physiology.  These chemicals released into our brains can become very pleasant, and our drive can easily tend toward such things rather than the behavior, which becomes a vehicle.  This is why it's also easy to jump from one to the other addiction, or between addictions in general (smokers who quit becoming over weight for instance).

So what?  Paul drives at the heart of this right here.  He is obviously familiar with these two appetites, what human isn't.  And he has probably seen more than most how destructive they can become when lives become obsessed with them.  He brings this home to this congregation in Ancient Corinth because it clearly has become an issue there, or at least an obsession with sex has.

Paul addresses this problem not from the standpoint of 'law', but rather from the standpoint of profit and mastery.  These people are proud of their 'mastery' over whatever, philosophy, intellect, debate, each other, and so on.  Paul points out that they have been 'mastered' by something else.  Ironically, salvation is made up of submission to God, so we are to be mastered, but by God, not our own appetites.

What Paul is doing can be guessed at by his method.  It makes sense if the ancient congregation has a prevailing thought that, since they are not under the Jewish law, giving in to their appetites is acceptable.  So while Paul concedes that they are not under law, he argues against giving in to being mastered by their appetites.  Since the basis for his argument can't be 'law', he instead bases it on profitability in their relationship with their Savior.

In essence, Paul is stating that when the believers practiced sexually immoral behavior, they brought the Spirit of God into the practice with them.  The Holy Spirit was 'joined' (in a sense) with an unholy act.  When put that way, it actually explains why behavior should mark salvation really well.  How could we join the holiness of our Immanent Savior with acts of unholiness, and then somehow believe it's all okay?  We can't!  It doesn't fit.  What didn't make sense before (all things are lawful) now is eclipsed by the sheer senselessness of joining the holy and profane.

So while it's not about some 'legal code' for me, it is about holiness.  And this holiness, like my faith, my righteousness, and justification is 'imputed' rather than earned.  In other words, just like I didn't earn faith but it is a gift, like I didn't earn my relationship with Jesus it was given to me, and like I didn't earn my 'not-guilty' declaration by God but received it from Jesus' payment on my behalf; so also holiness has been given to me.  Therefore it's now a matter of what I do with this holiness rather than about being under a set of rules.

My desire to please my Master means that I 'steward' this imputed holiness.  I keep myself a clean temple in which He has condescended to live.  I will not be mastered by anything, but I will be mastered by Someone.  That's the difference.  I am holy as He is holy, for much the same reason as the Hebrews in the desert.  For as God was among His people, so He is within me, within the wasteland of my soul.  And He still brings streams in the desert, and flowers in the wastes.

A List of Who Won't Be There

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.  Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-11 NASB)

This passage or these verses are Paul's answer to why he thinks the church is seeking civil cases outside of the church.  He says they defraud each other, and his charge to this is for them to become aware, again, that this sort of thinking comes from the world, not from God.  But he puts it in very strong terms, terms that most churches in our country today would find uncomfortable.

I don't hear much today that the 'unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God.'  I attend a church where our 'slogan' is 'No perfect people allowed.'  Which is well and good, no one is perfect, I get it.  But we can't then become complacent and simply accept sin.  Here's the problem:  We're not supposed to remain as we were before we were 'saved' by God.

So, while we still make mistakes, 'mistake' isn't supposed to be our 'default setting'.  These mistakes are supposed to lead us into repentance and renewal.  The idea is that we are constantly in a state of repentance from one thing or another.  Our need for the Spirit of our Savior is constant, and His work with us is also constant.  Our minds are constantly being adjusted more and more to reflect His thought, His nature, and therefore His attitudes.

In other words, we are to display the fruit of the Spirit of God more and more as we spend time with Jesus.  So sins with which we struggle are supposed to go away.  I say this as an addict, one who has struggled with his addiction for years.  I'm never supposed to just resign myself to it, play it down, accept it, become comfortable with it, etc.  It's never 'just the way I am.'  It is always contrary to my identity before my Master.  But it seems to be a part of my 'nature'; a part that is dying (or it sure better be).

What Paul is pointing out here is that people who live such lives haven't 'confessed Jesus as Lord,' nor have they 'believed in their heart that God has raised Him from the dead.'  If they had, then they would submit to Jesus as Lord, and the power of the resurrection would be at work in them to revive them from their body of sin and death.  If that's not happening, then they are not going to inherit the Kingdom of God.  We're either in a state of submissive repentance, or we're headed for a very fiery end.

It's at this point that I have had discussions with people who then have simply given up.  "I guess I'm headed for a fiery end," they'll say.  I've said that, or at least wondered if it were true of me.  But there is something about my addiction that has been true all along, I've never been 'comfortable' with it.  What I mean by that is that my mind and heart have never seen it as acceptable.  Now, that's not 'repentance' as such, but it does mean that my mind has always had some part of it more or less with my Master.  He's always had a 'handle'.  And it's been this handle of which He has never let go.  I am free and different now, not because of my own work, but because of His.

So, the point is verse 11.  We were this way, but we were 'washed', 'sanctified', 'justified', and this in the name of Jesus and the power of His Spirit.  It's not the word 'baptism' in the Greek, but I believe it's an allusion to the practice or event.  We were washed.  We didn't 'wash ourselves' but were washed.  We didn't sanctify ourselves, we were sanctified.  We didn't justify ourselves, we were justified.  What else could be wrong?  Our condition is different, but does our behavior match that new condition?

I have been 'saved' but my struggles as an addict came after that event.  Did I lose my salvation in the midst of that struggle?  I'm not sure, but I don't think so.  I still considered Jesus as my Lord, but I found it so difficult to let go of this other 'master'.  It may be a 'mental condition' of some sort, but it's not really unassailable.  It's difficult, but not indomitable.  It can be defeated, must be defeated, and it can't form an excuse to have something which I don't submit to my Master.  I can't.  It doesn't work that way.

So, Paul's charge to the ancient church is also the charge of the Spirit of God today:  Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.  Having said that, this is also true:  Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.  The question is, will I live in the victory I've been given, or will I live in the defeat of the life I lived before?  I choose victory.  

Tort Reform In Scripture?

Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? (1 Corinthians 6:1-4 NASB)

Tort reform is all the rage, and I doubt means anything close to the same thing to various people.  We all see different problems in lawsuits between people, between people and businesses, between businesses, between professionals and clients/patients, and it goes on.  Medical malpractice insurance seems to drive the cost of medical care off the charts, requiring higher costs for medical insurance, and that's just one slice of a huge pie.  It seems anybody can sue anyone about anything and get punitive damages.  The problems only seem to benefit the lawyers and insurance companies.

Well, what if believers opted to be different?  What if believers opted to keep civil matters within the church, believer to believer?  Paul seems assume this is supposed to be how it works, not suggesting the church in Ancient Corinth try it.  Think about that.  He's using the Hebrew Scriptures as his basis, influenced by the teachings of Jesus from the 12 Apostles, and the understanding given to him through the Holy Spirit.  And he arrives at the assumption churches will handle civil disputes between members within the church.

We, in churches in this society, have arrived elsewhere, and in my opinion would require a huge paradigm shift in order to envision such a thing.  Between assumptions we don't need it (there are no torts between believers), and the hesitation to be bound by a non-lawyer religious group, I doubt this could ever become the norm.  In fact, I suspect that it could possibly put congregations at legal risk of being sued themselves (ironically).

Having said that, please note Paul's statement recorded in verse 5 (look it up, I didn't include it).  "I say this to your shame."  And yet I suspect many congregations would be proud, consider themselves prudent or wise, to avoid handling civil matters between congregation members within the congregation itself.  Where's the shame?  Where's the assumption that this is how it should be rather than a risky option?  Why has 'prudence' deserted the biblical form we were supposed to have?

Well, consider verses 6 through 8 (also not included, you'll just have to open a Bible).  The reason is our own sinfulness; sinfulness we refuse to acknowledge, of which we refuse to repent, sinfulness of which we seem to be proud.  How different are we from this ancient congregation to whom Paul wrote?  What would he write to us?  How large would be the book, long the letter, angry the words?  Would the accusing words of Jesus reverberate through our sanctuaries, "It will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the Day of Judgement than for you"( Matthew 11:24).

I don't know what solution would work for tort reform in our country.  But I think I see a huge place for it in our churches.  It mostly has to do with attitude and pervasive sin within our congregations rather than actual procedure.  The procedure is actually already in place in every state, typically known as rules of arbitration or some such.  The legal limits and scope of such activity is already defined, and there's no real requirement that legal code be used in lieu of Scripture for decisions, so religious 'courts' are already legal.  The only requirement is that those within churches submit themselves to the decisions of such 'courts'.

Would I be willing to submit myself to such a 'court', one basing its decisions on interpretations of Scripture rather than local, state, and federal legal code (I can't imagine they would have jurisdiction in Federal matters)?  That would require a lot of trust in my fellow believers.  It would require humility on my part.  But I can't be alone in this (duh!), so would I be willing to bring this up with others; explore the possibility of true mediation and arbitration rules?  It's a lot of work, and to what end?  Can I trust that my Master has it all figured out, and all I need to do is be obedient?  Okay, so I want tort reform within my church, so sue me!  Oh, wait...

Crash, Burn, Replace…Repeat

In some ways, this blog and these entries, are intended to bring about what Chambers writes/speaks of in this entry.  In some ways my hope has been to use this blog for accountability.  To that end, I have invited the world into the interior of my life, with all the weaknesses and failures found there.  At the same time, I hope this opens me up more to my Master’s work in me.

 

So, last night I ignored my limits I call middle-circle boundaries, and flirted with my addiction.  The actions and thoughts were both preceded and followed by a rather nice time with my Master.  Clearly the preceding one didn’t have the effect I would expect, so clearly there was something wrong there.  I was tired and everything, so why go into a sort of behavior that would keep me awake?  This is the sort of thing that makes any sort of behavior like this crazy.  It is totally devoid of reality living or thinking.

 

I think there was a point in the time with my Master as I was drifting off to sleep where I mentioned fighting my threatening depression by doing what I don’t want (like going to a 12-step meeting tonight), and not doing what I do want (like giving into my addictive thoughts and behaviors).  I think that in the process I blamed my depression, and that was the go-ahead; it wasn’t my fault, I can’t help it, and so it is okay. 

 

It is my fault, I can decide not to, and it’s not okay.  Let me just say that, because I can easily blame my struggle on depression.  I believe I have a weakness, in that my brain has a propensity to over stimulate AO activity (the chemical imbalance that brings on depression).  The anti-depressant is an AO inhibitor, and these usually are used for a time, but sometimes, a long time.  But this can’t be my excuse.  My depression is not so debilitating that I can’t function or think.  I can fight it, but it is a fight I’m not used to winning, and that is probably my biggest hurdle. 

 

Fighting depression is done through doing what I do not “feel” like doing.  Fighting the lethargy that comes through depression is one important way to fight depression.  The fight is not hard in any other sense than that it wears me out.  Rejuvenation comes from my Master and His Spirit, so that should not be a problem, but it is.  Perhaps at some point I will be so immersed in Him that it won’t be, but I’m not there yet.

 

That is one thing I do to fight my depression, but there are others.  One symptom is anger, another is an abundance of emotion, another is a tendency toward resentment.  So there are are several things I need to do to fight against this problem, but none of them are that complex or particularly difficult.  What makes these symptoms difficult to fight is that another symptom is a lack of energy, and that not only makes it hard to fight the depression but works to perpetuate it. 

 

This is why an antidepressant is very helpful.  I’m not at a point where I can do all that.  It overwhelms me and I collapse under it.  I hope at some point I will be able to fight it, but I have no power to do so now.  My only hope is to admit my weakness, and reach outside myself for help.  The piece that helped me begin my months of success was admitting I could not do this, that I have this weakness, and that I need something to help.  It was dramatically helpful.  But it is not a permanent solution. 

 

Since depression is not “reality” thinking but distorted thinking, the element that Chambers talks about today, letting the world and my Master into my life, is really important.  The presence of others forces reality back into my mental matrix.  The distortion requires a single perspective or view of my life.  So a 12-step program is a great option for fighting this depression.  My hope is that such a program will provide the spiritual discipline I need to eventually live without antidepressants.  I suspect there will need to be other things as well, but the 12-steps  are designed to realign my mind with my Master’s; repentance.

 

In the past, practicing the steps always brought on the problems I was trying to fight against in my depression.  It brought on the emotional and spiritual crisis I was keeping at bay through my addictive “management”.  I think I am better able to face that crisis and work through it, but with the help of an antidepressant.  What I hope happens is that, on the other side of the crisis, I find the practice of getting through it equips me to do the same thing without the antidepressant.  It may take a couple of times of “practice” to get to the point where I can get through the crisis without the chemical help, but I hope that is where I get to.

 

The reason this solution appeals to me so much is that it will not be a solution that is from me or my ability.  No other solution so focuses on what my Master can do in me than the 12-steps.  They don’t work when it becomes about what I can do, or a “formula” I can process.  They work when, in sequence, I submit all my garbage to my Master and let Him replace it with Himself.  I jettison my expectation of self-management, I focus on my Master, I take the walk of shame as I inventory my failures, I lay those out as a display for the world and my Master, I strive to let them go and surrender them to my Master, I invite those I have hurt into the process, and then I continue the process of examination and confession.  It is not a process of my achievement of anything but reduction before my Master.  The success of this process stems entirely from the fact that my Master lives, He works in me, and He remakes me into His image as I disassemble my props and facades.

 

So here I go into another day, but I suspect the ending will be different.  I have invited in the world so that my distorted thinking will collapse, and reality will return.  Be sure to point out the distortions as you pass through, but please don’t touch them.  Pointing them out helps to make them disappear, there’s no need to carry them out with you.  These are mine, I’m sure you have plenty of your own.  Distortions are not something I should share well with others.  There’s a dose of reality as you leave, help yourself to plenty of that; no trick, sometimes a treat.

 

Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest, November 1