June 23 Click on verses for Full Scripture

previous - - - - - - - - - - next

Today's Pathway: I Corinthians 6:1-8 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.

Paul now addresses the subject of church members taking each other to court. He opens in verse 1 by questioning how any of them would have the boldness ("dare") to take a dispute with a fellow church member before unsaved judges. He states that rather than doing that they should take their disagreements before the church. There are a couple things that need to be seen before we go further. First, he is not talking about a criminal case, but rather about a civil court issue. Second, he is not saying that a Christian can never defend his cause in a secular court. Paul himself appealed to Caesar (Acts 25:11-12) for a proper legal judgment when he was accused of crimes he did not commit. What he is saying is that it is wrong for two believers to go to court to resolve a lawsuit when the church should be able to handle it. This is the same basic principle that we discussed previously from Matthew 18. If two brethren have a disagreement, and it can not be resolved between the two of them, nor before two or three witnesses, then the matter is to be brought before the church body and they can make a decision.

Paul anticipates the argument that might be raised by the church. They might say that they were not qualified to make such judgments because they had no legal training. He reminds them in verse 2 that someday they will judge the world. Daniel 7:20-21 speaks of the rise of the Antichrist and his war against the believers during the Tribulation. Verse 22 says that this would continue "until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High". If Christians will judge the world, shouldn't they be qualified to make sound judgments in financial disputes between their fellow church members? In verse 3 he tells them that they will judge angels. While nothing in the Bible spells out exactly what this means, it is clear that the saints will have some sort of position of authority over the angels themselves. That being the case, if a Christian can someday judge an angel, he can surely judge between two fellow believers.

There are differences of opinion as to what Paul is saying in verse 4. It could mean that the church should select those who were the least esteemed in the congregation to judge these issues, because even the least esteemed believer is better than an unsaved judge. And also, since the Corinthian church leadership was prideful and divisive, those who were viewed as being the "least" might render a better decision than those who considered themselves to be the best. He has already told them,

"God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise" (I Corinthians 1:27).

In verse 5 he says that what the church is allowing is shameful. He then asks if there isn't anyone in the church who is wise enough to make a fair judgment in these matters. The members thought that they were wise (I Corinthians 4:10), so Paul asks that if they are as wise as they think they are, why are they not handling these issues themselves? Finally, Paul challenges them in verses 7-8 that they would be better off being defrauded than taking these issues before unsaved judges. It would be better to be wronged than to lose their personal testimony, and that of the church, in a secular court. Jack Arnold offers this conclusion:

"To have an unbelieving judge arbitrate for two Christians is a defeat regardless of the verdict. No matter who wins the lawsuit, the cause of Christ suffers. People are turned off when they see believers fighting each other in an open, aggressive, hostile way. What lawsuits among Christians means to the watching world is that Christians are no better off than non-Christians. What have we to offer the unsaved world if we have to get unbelievers to settle our disputes"