1 Corinthians 6:12-14: All Things are Lawful, But Not All are Helpful
We live by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, we live in obedience to God’s holy law, and we do whatever we do to his honor and glory by giving thanks for all things in Christ’s Name. We have not been called to sadness, but to gladness. We have not been called to dourness but delight. We have not been called to fearfulness or fretting, but to faith and feasting, now and forevermore.
After discussing lawsuits (vv.1-8) and issues of licentiousness (9-11), Paul now turns to matters of Christian liberty (12-14) in transitioning to a discussion of sexual immorality (15-20). There are a number of principles to unpack in the second half of this chapter: Christian liberty and its abuse, how eschatology informs our daily life and behavior, the way in which sexuality is to be understood and expressed in relation to union with Christ, and how Christ’s Lordship directs our view of the body and its use in the present world. Each of these topics are rich opportunities for contemplation. The second half of chapter six is densely theological and abundantly practical.
Paul uses almost exactly the same expression twice in this letter: All things are lawful for me, but all things are not helpful. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any (cf. 10:23). Many modern commentators assume Paul is quoting a saying common among the Corinthians and responding to it. Perhaps it was from Greek philosophy. Perhaps it was a rationalization offered by the more licentious Christians in the church. Some Bible versions will even bracket the first line in each phrase with quotation marks to indicate that Paul is quoting (cf. ESV). But there are no quotation marks in the actual text of 1 Corinthians. This is simply a choice by the editors; it is an interpretation, perhaps a valid one, but certainly not a feature that should be regarded as very important in deciding how the passage is to be understood. Maybe Paul is quoting a saying the Corinthians knew and used, or maybe he is quoting himself. Preachers sometimes use specific phrases and will repeat them periodically in their teaching. The source of the phrase isn’t really important. What’s important is how Paul discusses and applies it.
Even though vv.12-14 are closely connected to the verses that follow, we will spend one lesson looking at the principles found here. This will lay a foundation for the rest of the passage.
All Things are Lawful, Except What Is Not
Paul is speaking of things that are lawful in themselves. Clearly some things are not. He just listed the kinds of people who will not inherit the kingdom of God, so obviously fornication, idolatry, sodomy, and drunkeness are not among those things the apostle describes as lawful. But that isn’t what Paul is saying. He’s not justifying the behavior he just denounced. He is speaking within a different category. He is saying: “Among those things that are lawful….”
The fact that we are forgiven of all things by which we have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory does not mean all these things are, therefore, lawful. Forgivable and lawful are not synonyms. I can be forgiven for murdering my neighbor, but it would not be lawful for me to do so. Similarly, there are many ways in which we may (and do) fall short on a regular basis and be forgiven, but the fact that we are not cut off from divine communion for these things does not mean they are good, right, or lawful pursuits.
There has always been a strain of antinomianism in the Church against which we must be on guard. That does not mean legalism is not also a problem. Of course, it is. But Protestant and Reformed Christians are so aware of the dangers of legalism that we may be less sensitive to and perceptive of the equal, opposite danger of antinomianism. The term means against the law and it refers to a sort of “Christian lawlessness,” the notion that Christ has delivered us from the binding, moral authority of God’s law. Nothing could be further from the truth. Christ delivered us from the condemnation of the law, from our guilt and misery and judgment. He delivered us from the vain attempt to be justified by our works, from trying to be accepted on the basis of our obedience. That is what Christ saved us from. He did not save us from the law’s authority to obligate us.
Some Christians will say, “All things are lawful!” Kind of, sort of, not exactly. Yes, within the category of lawful things, we have tremendous freedom. But that does not mean nothing is outside of the law or God’s permission. We were set free to obey God’s law, not to disregard it.
Some Things are Lawful But Not Helpful
Within the realm of lawful behavior, there is always a danger of making good things into ultimate things or being preoccupied with what is acceptable rather than pursuing what is excellent. A thing may be lawful in itself and yet not helpful. It may be morally permissible but mostly a waste of time. That is the principle at work in these verses.
The question is not merely, “What is wrong with this or that?” The question ought to be, “What is right?” There may not be a prohibition against something, but are we merely seeking what is minimally acceptable or what is spiritual and exceptional? There is nothing unlawful about watching or reading the news, so it should be fine for me to spend all of my time doing that to the neglect of Scripture reading, prayer, and productive labor, right? Many Christians justify wasting time or cherishing heart idols by insisting the Bible does not forbid whatever they are doing.
Scripture commands us to redeem the time, making the most of every opportunity (Eph. 5:16). Legalists will twist and abuse this, condemning and scorning the way other believers spend their time. But the fact the principle can be abused does not mean it does not appear in the Bible. We are to be concerned not only with what is lawful but what is helpful, what edifies (10:23b). That does not mean every moment must be spent in Bible reading or prayer. It does not mean you should feel ashamed to read a novel or watch sports. It does mean that whatever you do, you are to do it in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ (Col. 3:17) and to the glory of God (10:31).
So what is helpful? The word is a Greek compound whose parts mean to bear with. That is what a helper is, someone or something that comes alongside and helps you carry a burden. Many lawful things can help us bear the burdens of this present life, but they need to be helping us lift and travel in the direction we want to go. Something that helps us travel to hell is not helpful.
Lawful Servants But Unlawful Masters
Lawful things may be wonderful servants in a life which honors God, but they are terrible masters. Good things must not be made ultimate things. Yet we see this all the time. It is treated as an honorable or commendable thing, especially in sports. You can buy a t-shirt that says Train, Eat, Sleep, Repeat for every imaginable sport or discipline. By itself there is nothing wrong with this. But many of us have seen people who have made their career or hobby into their religion.
-
Remembering God’s Word Unto Ourselves and Our Children
Hoping in Christ and clinging to His Word, and walking with Him by grace, believers don’t forget Him but remember Him—and this not only unto themselves; they remember Him to their children. This is the great purpose behind the use of confession and catechisms: that we ourselves would remember Him, and that we would teach the next generation, so that they would both remember Him for themselves and teach the generation yet to come.
Associate Reformed Presbyterians adhere to the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms—a wonderfully biblical thing to do, as we hope to see from Paul’s letters to Timothy next month. In this series of articles, I hope to convince you from Scripture of the necessity and wisdom of mastering and using our doctrinal standards, and then proceed to highlight from Scripture the riches in Christ that can be gained by way of some of our theological distinctives.
But, as a way of setting up for that, I’d like for us to consider from Psalm 78 Israel’s forgetfulness of the Lord and His Word—both in their own hearts (failing Deut 6:6) and to their children (failing Deut 6:7). This article will be best-read with your Bible open, taking the time to see each of the statements from the verses referenced.
Psalm 78:1–4 teaches us that telling to the next generation the praises of the good, great, saving God is an obligation not an option. v4 refers to failure to do so as “hiding” the “praises of the LORD and His strength and His wonderful works that He has done.”
vv5–7 tell us that God Himself established this “right” that covenant children possess, that they would receive instruction in the Word of God from one generation to the next. It is His appointed means by which successive generations would be brought to “hope in God and not forget the works of God but keep His commandments” (v7).
But the people of Israel up to the point of the Psalm’s writing had not been faithful to their purpose (v8). Not only did they forget to tell their children the wonderful works of God, they forgot those works for themselves—and so drifted from Him and rebelled against Him (vv10–11). Even those who saw the miraculous plagues and power by which He delivered them from Egypt, and by which He led them through the wilderness, forgot these works during their own lifetimes (vv12–20). And if they forgot Him for themselves, how can they have remembered Him to their children?
Although God was full of wrath against this (vv21–22), yet He responded with even more mercy and more miracles (vv23–30)—accompanied byreminders of His wrath against sin as in v31. Against such a backdrop, how marvelous is His grace that even their superficial and temporary repentings (vv32–37) were met with great compassion and forgiveness and restoration (vv38–39)!
Read More
Related Posts: -
Realtor Ethics Case Involving Gay Rights, Montana Pastor Garnering National Attention
Clinton Community Church Pastor Brandon Huber is facing a complaint that he violated the NAR Code of Ethics’ prohibition on engaging in “hate speech” against anyone because of their sexual orientation. Huber is suing the Missoula and national Realtors’ groups, saying the code of ethics should be invalidated because it’s too vague to be enforced and because it tramples on his religious beliefs.
HELENA — A case involving a Missoula-area pastor, gay rights and the National Association of Realtors’ code of ethics may be the first legal test of the code, involving LGBTQ+ discrimination, an advocacy group says.
The head of the LGBTQ+ Real Estate Alliance also told MTN News this week that the pastor and part-time real estate agent should be temporarily suspended from membership in the Realtors’ group – and that the complaint against him should not wait for resolution of the lawsuit.
“Litigation, especially in a pandemic, could be strung out for years,” says Ryan Weyandt, CEO of the group. “This individual, who has been alleged by a member of the community to violate the code of ethics, thus invalidating his membership – for that to be strung out in limbo for years, I think is unacceptable.”
A Missoula Organization of Realtors official said Wednesday that no discipline, in connection to an ethics complaint, can be taken until the complaint is heard and ruled on by an MOR hearings panel.
Clinton Community Church Pastor Brandon Huber is facing a complaint that he violated the NAR Code of Ethics’ prohibition on engaging in “hate speech” against anyone because of their sexual orientation.
Huber is suing the Missoula and national Realtors’ groups, saying the code of ethics should be invalidated because it’s too vague to be enforced and because it tramples on his religious beliefs.
Read More -
A Minute With the Minutes On Overtures 23 & 37
These numbers suggest that the “no” votes on the highly-contested, SSA-related overtures were disproportionately those of teaching elders. Of course, the reverse can also be assumed, that a disproportionate number of the “yes” voters were ruling elders…. Does this suggest a disconnect between pew and pulpit (RE/TE)? Or is it a metro/blue suburbs vs. rural/red suburbs disconnect? Or southeastern vs. the rest of the country (assuming more REs attend from the southeast)? There are likely many theories, no one of which explains all.
The recorded “no” votes on the controversial overtures 23 and 37 from the last Presbyterian Church in America General Assembly (PCAGA) are now available in the just-released minutes of the 2021 summer assembly. Recording of votes is optional and generally indicates strong feelings or convictions on a given issue or measure. One conclusion that might be drawn from these numbers is that teaching elders (TEs) in the PCA are far more likely to have strong feelings about these overtures than are ruling elders (REs).
Overture 23 had 1855 votes cast. It passed 1438-417 (71% for, 29% against). 137 “no” voters recorded their votes (33% of those against). Of that 137 only 18 (13%) were ruling elders. Ruling elders made up 25% of all commissioners (616 out of 2115 total elders).
Overture 37 had 1826 votes cast. It passed 1209-617 (66% for, 34% against). 177 “no” voters recorded their votes (29% of those against). Of that 177 only 18 (10%) were ruling elders. Again, ruling elders made up 25% of all commissioners.
These numbers suggest that the “no” votes on the highly-contested, SSA-related overtures were disproportionately those of teaching elders. Of course, the reverse can also be assumed, that a disproportionate number of the “yes” voters were ruling elders.
This is speculative, but if the recorded TE:RE “no” vote proportions are an accurate representation of all “no” voters it might be reasonable to suggest that approximately 55 ruling elders voted against overture 23 out of 616 in attendance. For overture 37 the number of total ruling elder “no” votes might have been around 62 out of 616 in attendance.
Does this suggest a disconnect between pew and pulpit (RE/TE)? Or is it a metro/blue suburbs vs. rural/red suburbs disconnect? Or southeastern vs. the rest of the country (assuming more REs attend from the southeast)? There are likely many theories, no one of which explains all.
The recorded “no” votes can be found on pages 89-99 of the 2021 GA minutes.
Brad Isbell is a Ruling Elder in Covenant Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Oak Ridge, Tenn. This article is used with permission.
