In 1 Corinthians 3:16, 17, Paul declared, You (collectively) are Gods temple; Gods Spirit continually lives in you. Paul declared that internal division within the congregation was indefensible because the congregation was Gods temple (sanctuary) containing Gods Spirit. Thus, internal division was inappropriate behavior for a local group composed of men and women who were in Christ. The plural pronoun Paul used to indicate he was addressing the congregation is seen in English translations: in the King James Version (contrasting yeplural -(3:16), with any man (3:17), and in the Phillips Modern English translation or the New International Version which both contrast you yourselves (3:16) with anyone (3:17).
In last weeks text (in the same letter as todays text) Paul condemned internal division within the congregation at Corinth as an attack on Gods templewhich was the congregation.
In todays text, Paul spoke of the individual Christian as Gods temple. The context is sexual involvement of a Christian by personal choice with a prostitute. Paul said this was inappropriate behavior for a person who has surrendered self to Christ. The argument Paul made is basically the samethe individual Christian contained Gods Spirit.
Todays text concerns itself with the choice of a Christian to be involved in sexual intercourse with a persona prostitutewhen there is no thought of the commitment of marriage. Pauls approach is much more than that is an immoral acthis approach: that the choice to engage in such sexual intercourse (which was common) was a violation of Christian commitment. The violation of Christian commitment insulted God by making His temple unclean (unsuitable for Gods presencefor the concept of inappropriateness making an assembly unclean, consider Deuteronomy 23:1-6).
So which is it? Is a congregation Gods temple? Or is the individual Christian Gods temple? Both! Why both? The same thing makes both the congregation and the individual Christian Gods templepossession of Gods Spirit. A congregation is a collection of men and women who have given their lives to Jesus Christ. Christians are a people who possess Gods Spirit. Whether as individuals or as a congregation, Christians behave as persons who possess Gods Spirit. The presence of God is in them whether they are together or they are pursuing their lives individually. Ungodliness had NO role in their collective or individual behavior. Both internal division (in the congregation) and sexual immorality (in the individual) were/are ungodly.
Stress that in both the Jewish temple and idolatrous temples, there were acts that were inappropriate which contaminated that temple. The people to whom Paul wrote were familiar with and would not question that concept.
The meaning and application of this text has been/is much discussed. Two things must be remembered. (1) What todays Christians would regard as undesirable sexual involvement would not even be considered immoral by many in the first century. (2) The existence of choice did not exist for many in slavery. A slave had to do as he or she was instructed to do by an owner. A Christian slaves options were extremely limited. There was a vast difference in being an agreeable, willing, pursuing prostitute and in being a slave. There was a vast difference between pursuing prostitutes as one was motivated and controlled by sexual desire and being a slave.
In (1), those who are not Christian neither saw nor acknowledged harm in no commitment sexual intercourse. There would be a distinct difference in the Christians choice to engage in no commitment sexual intercourse and societys view of no commitment sexual intercourse. In (2), the emphasis is on choice, not merely on the act. Both would be quite relevant to the societies of Pauls time.
There was an old history in idolatry of regarding sexual intercourse as a fertility rite. There was an ancient history in idolatry of sacred prostitutes. It could be considered a religious act to involve oneself in temple prostitution. There was also the common act of prostitution that was based on nothing more than the sexual desire of the person. In those two, what most Christians today would consider to be sexually immoral was in the first century (especially among non- Jewish people) common practice. (If you as a Christian view this as strange practices and concepts, have you heard of people today engaging in sexual intercourse for personal gratification without any form of commitment, or an unmarried man and woman living together, or an unmarried man and woman joyfully, deliberately having a child? Perhaps the strangest consideration today is that such sexual intercourse and having children without marriage is considered wonderful and approved in some situations, but shameful and unapproved in other situations.)
For the person who could make choices, but who was not a Christian, there were many ways to justify no commitment sexual intercourse. Paul said the key was found in the understanding that Christians did not think like nor view situations as did people who were not Christians. The values of a Christian were different from the values of people who were not Christian. Today, Christians are too often ignorant of those differences.
Most of us are so far removed from the realities of slaverythe ownership of a person by another personthat we cannot imagine being in an existence that is robbed of choice.
Again, the concept of choice is extremely important. For example, even today there is a vast difference in being a rape victim and in pursuing or willingly yielding to no commitment sexual intercourse. The demands of slavery could (and often did) surpass the situation of rape.
It is extremely important for you to see and understand Pauls approach regarding a Christians willing sexual involvement with a prostitute. Pauls approach: As a Christian, you knowingly, willingly committed your body to Jesus Christ in order that God might live in you through His Spirit. Because you made that commitment to God through Jesus Christ, you are not free to involve the same body in other commitments. Involvement of your body in commitment to Jesus Christ and to a prostitute is an insult to God. Such dual commitment to such opposite influences in you is nothing less than a violation of Gods temple. It is nothing less than (1) taking Gods sanctuary suitable for Gods habitation/presence and (2) making that habitation unfit for Gods presence. Society may regard such actions as an acceptable behavior, but that behavior is a careless affront to what God is and what you committed yourself to being. In understanding, honor your commitment to God!
The choice to be involved in no commitment sexual intercourse was, for the Christian, the choice to insult God because the Christians body was no longer a suitable habitation for Gods presence.
God made an unspeakable investment in you! Invest your body to be Gods temple! Gods investment in you through Jesus Christ was not a partial investment based on a contradictory commitment! Do not make your investment of your body in God partial or contradictory.
Christians need a deep, accurate understanding of what God did through Christ to make it possible for the Christian to be a Christian. The Christians obedient thank you responses to God are quite limited. The chosen use of the body is one of the thank you responses a Christian can make.
Pauls point would have been profound and clear to those who lived among temples. You understood what you were doing when you decided to be a Christian! Your decision was based on choice, not deception! Do not attempt to do the impossible nowto be godly and ungodly at the same time by using your body for contradictory purposes! It cannot be done! You cannot invest the same body in opposing pursuits! You can only devote your physical existence to the pursuit of God or to the pursuit of godlessness!
Paul used an understood illustration to emphasize the spiritual seriousness of making what was a socially acceptable choicehe did not merely say, Do not do that! It was important for the Christian to understand why I do not do that. It was important for the Christians at Corinth to understand that more was involved than a condemned act.
Commitment to Christ must be an understood commitment! Note that Pauls appeal is based on commitment and the use of physical existence. Christian existence is an understood commitment, not a mindless ritual.
Much thought needs to be given to understood commitment. Much more is involved in being Christian than observing biblical Christian acts and rituals.
For Thought and Discussion
1. What was Gods temple in 1 Corinthians 3:16, 17? In 6:15-20?
In 1 Corinthians 3:16, 17 the temple was the congregation at Corinth.
In 1 Corinthians 6:15-20 the temple was the Christian individual at Corinth.
2. How could both be considered Gods temple (sanctuary)?
Whether Christians collectively or individually are considered, they collectively or individually possess Gods Spirit. A congregation was merely an assembly of Christian individuals. It was having Gods Spirit in them that made them Gods temple.
3. What two things should be remembered?
a) What todays Christian would regard as undesirable sexual involvement would not be considered immoral by many in the first century.
b) The existence of choice did not exist for many in slavery.
4. Discuss how many could consider sexual intercourse without marriage commitment as okay.
The discussion should include the facts that they might refer to fertility rites, or sacred prostitutes, or the rightness of responding to a natural desire. Many considered such sexual intercourse as a religious act.
5. Illustrate how today people consider sexual intercourse without marriage commitment okay.
This discussion will include what the individual student considers to be an illustration.
6. What was Pauls approach to willing sexual involvement with a prostitute?
Pauls approach: The Christian was not free to use his/her body in conflicting commitments. To choose no responsibility sexual intercourse insulted God by ignoring the commitment the Christian made to Him.
7. What was/is an insult to God? Why?
Christian no responsibility sexual intercourse is an insult to God. It ignores the commitment the Christian made to God when he/she entered Gods spiritual family and accepted forgiveness and other spiritual blessings.
8. Discuss Gods investment in a Christian.
The discussion should include the things God does for us in Jesus Christ.
9. What did they make to God when they became a Christian?
They made an understood commitment to God to use their bodies only for godly pursuits and involvements. They made a choice, and the choice was not based on deception.
10. Discuss the meaning of understood commitment.
The discussion should include (a) the desire to learn Gods values and (b) the desire to use the body only for godly purposes. That does not mean all the choices are evident at the moment of becoming a Christian, but it does mean the person knows the type of being he/she wishes to bea person who belongs to God through Jesus Christ in all matters. One is devoted to the reality of eternal existence rather than transitory physical existence which is certain to decline and end.
Link to Student Guide
Lesson 9