Yea, come unto
Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny yourselves of all ungodliness; and if
ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, and love God with all your might,
mind, and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, that by his grace ye
may be perfect in Christ; and if by the grace of God ye are perfect in Christ,
ye can in nowise deny the power of God. (Moroni 10:32)
Some Evangelical critics of Latter-day Saint theology and Scripture
eisegetically abuse Moroni 10:32 as “proof” of LDS soteriology being legalistic/Pelagian. For posts
addressing this issue, see, for e.g.:
In 2 Cor
7:1, the apostle Paul wrote:
Therefore, having these promises, beloved,
let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting
holiness in the fear of God. (NASB)
In this
passage, Paul commands the recipients of these words to do something very
similar to the exhortation one finds in Moroni 10:32. There are a few things
one should note about this verse:
(1) It is
addressed to believers; this is important, as some might be tempted to claim
that these words are addressed to unbelievers and, realising the burden of the
law, seek the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ to be justified. These are
people who, in the mind of the Protestant, are already justified, so this would
be within the realm of their sanctification merely (for more against the
doctrine of imputation, see Response to a Recent Attempt to Defend Imputed Righteousness).
This is further
strengthened by the preceding verses. In 2 Cor 6:14-18 we read:
Do not be bound together with unbelievers;
for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has
light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a
believer in common with an unbeliever? Or what agreement has the temple of God
with idols? For we are the temple of the living God, just as God said, "I
will dwell in them and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall
be my people." Therefore, "Come out from their midst and be
separate," says the Lord. "And do not touch what is unclean."
And I will welcome you. "And I will be a father to you, and you shall be
sons and daughters to me," says the Lord Almighty. (NASB)
If one does not obey, they will defile the temple of God, and, as we see in 1 Cor 3, a believer could in fact lose their salvation! (see 1 Corinthians 3:15: A very un-Protestant biblical text for a fuller discussion).
(2) Paul
elsewhere in his correspondence to the Corinthian congregation explicitly
teaches one can lose their salvation, so this is not an exhortation to manifest
their justification merely; failure to do so will result in their being, in the
words of 1 Cor 9:27, "disqualified" [from salvation] (or, to be more
faithful to the Greek αδοκιμος, to become a "reprobate").
Elsewhere, in 1 Cor 10:12, Paul further warned the Corinthian congregation that they would fall from salvation:
So if you think you are standing, watch out that you do not fall (NRSV)
Commenting on this passage, and how it teaches that truly justified believers can lose their salvation, B.J. Oropeza wrote:
There are at least two important considerations which make this interpretation untenable. First, Paul begins 10:1-13 with the metaphors of salvation through the concepts of election and baptism-initiation in the Spirit and water (10:1-4). Elsewhere in 1 Corinthians those whom Paul addresses are considered to be saints, called, saved, cleansed, justified, sanctified, members of the body of Christ, and operating in the Spirit (e.g., 10:1, 6, 11 cf. 1:1-9, 18, 32; 4:15; 6:6, 11, 19f; 12:13). Paul stresses the solidarity of "all" of the Israelites who were called into these divine privileges indicating the genuine nature of these experiences. In Israel's tradition-history which Paul adopts, both Caleb (who made it through the journey) and Korah (who did not make it) participated in the "same" (το αυτο) exodus/wilderness experiences. Paul thus implies a common election that was experienced by all. Moreover, Paul calls the Israelites "our fathers" and transfers the salvific language of this passage to the Corinthians whom he believes are Christians. In his discourse on idol meats, Paul's language assumes the strong are genuine believers: 1) they, along with Paul, find their life through the same God and Lord (8:5-6); 2) they are not to offend the weaker αδελφος who belongs to Christ (8:11f); 3) they became Christians directly through Paul's effort (9:1ff); 4) they participate in spiritual matters and the new era (9:11, 24ff); and 5) they are members of the body of Christ (10:16ff).
Second, Paul's binary usage of the words "stand" (ιστημι) and "fall" (πιπτω) in 10:12 reinforce an interpretation that a genuine standing in grace and a real danger of falling into apostasy is at stake. Paul uses the perfect tense of ιστημι here as in Romans 11:20-22 where he gives another warning in the milieu of apostasy and high-mindedness. He also uses the word elsewhere in relation to apostasy and perseverance (Gal. 5:1ff; cf. 2 Thes. 2:14). Related to this usage is Paul’s understanding of ιστημι as denoting the idea of one’s standing in faith and grace or in the message of the Gospel (1 Cor. 15:1f; 16:13; 2 Cor. 1:24; Rom. 5:2; 11:20; Phil. 4:1; cf. 1 Pet. 5:12) . . . The idea of standing in faith might have as its basis the ancient Jewish concept of one establishing or standing on the word of the covenant (cf. Psa. 104:8-10 LXX). In the Deuteronomic tradition, standing in the covenant is set in contrast with departing from it (Deut. 29:13-18). In a broad sense, then, Paul may have understood this nuance of “stand” as pointing to the new eschatological covenant of the Christians. Hence, the converse of standing in a new covenant would be to fall away from it . . . Paul himself associates the terms “stand”/”fall” and “beware” with apostasy in some of his other letters. If the Galatian Christians stand in the liberty of Christ, they could escape falling from grace which occurs by attempting to be justified through the law (Gal. 5:1-4). Paul warns that those among them who are seeking to be justified by the law are “cut off” from Christian and “fallen from grace” (5:4: κατηργήθητε ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ, οἵτινες ἐν νόμῳ δικαιοῦσθε, τῆς χάριτος ἐξεπέσατε.). In this letter, Paul is anxious that the Galatians will fall back into confining ritual and social practises; hence, he fears that the original gospel of liberty through the Spirit they received may have been in vain (3:4; 4:11; cf. 2:2; 2 Cor. 6:1; 1 Cor. 15:2) . . Particularly significant is that the Corinthian argument of Paul in 10:1-13 is perfectly consistent with what he does in other letters. Similar to the Corinthian situation, the Galatian warning (βλεπετε μη—Gal. 5:15 cf. 1 Cor. 10:12) is set in the situation of falling away from grace (Gal. 5:1, 4 cf. 1 Cor. 10:5, 12), being hindered from running a course (Gal. 5:7 cf. 1 Cor. 9:24ff), ad being severed from Christ (Gal. 5:5; 4:30 cf. 1 Cor. 5:5; 10:4-10). Paul also mentions leaven as a negative influence on the believers in both letters (Gal. 5:9; cf. 1 Cor. 5:7) and a condemnation on those who practise vices such as discord, dissensions, and factions. Such works of the flesh prevent one from entering the kingdom of God (Gal. 5:19-21; 6:7-8 cf. 1 Cor. 5:8f; 6:9-10; 10:7-10; Rom. 8:12-13). In relation to apostasy, the essential difference between the two letters is that the Corinthian warning focuses on the danger of apostatising through the abuse of liberty. In Galatians the congregations were erring in the opposite extreme—they were entangled by the works of the law and needed more liberty in Christ (Gal. 3-5). For Paul, those who taught another Gospel that hindered one’s liberty in Christ were accursed and their message was a perversion and desertion or turning away (μετατιθημι) from the true Gospel (Gal. 1:6-9 c. 1 Cor. 16:22). (B.J. Oropeza, Paul and Apostasy: Eschatology, Perseverance, and Falling Away in the Corinthian Congregation [Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf & Stock, 2007], 194-95, 196-97)
I bring all of this up so the claim Paul is speaking of the external fruits of salvation merely and the like is not in view at all.
(3) Many early Christians did not view 2 Cor 7:1 as within the realm of
sanctification merely, but instead, related to one's justification and would
affect one's standing at the eschatological judgment. In his 40th festal letter
(AD 368), Athanasius wrote:
‘Ye are they that
have continued with Me in My temptations; and I appoint unto you a kingdom, as
My Father hath appointed unto Me, that ye may eat and drink at My table in My
kingdom.' Being called, then, to the great and heavenly Supper, in that upper
room which has been swept, let us ‘cleanse ourselves,' as the Apostle exhorted,
‘from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear
of God;' that so, being spotless within and without,--without, clothing
ourselves with temperance and justice; within, by the Spirit, rightly dividing
the word of truth--we may hear, ‘Enter into the joy of thy Lord.'
In the
Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, we read:
Let us still further beseech God through His
Christ, and let us beseech Him on account of the gift which is offered to the
Lord God, that the good God will accept it, through the mediation of His
Christ, upon His heavenly altar, for a sweet-smelling savour. Let us pray for
this church and people. Let us pray for every episcopate, every presbytery, all
the deacons and ministers in Christ, for the whole congregation, that the Lord
will keep and preserve them all. Let us pray "for kings and those in
authority," that they may be peaceable toward us, "that so we may
have and lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty."
Let us be mindful of the holy martyrs, that we may be thought worthy to be
partakers of their trial. Let us pray for those that are departed in the faith.
Let us pray for the good temperature of the air, and the perfect maturity of
the fruits. Let us pray for those that are newly enlightened, that they may be
strengthened in the faith, and all may be mutually comforted by one another.
Raise us up, O God, by Thy grace. Let us stand up, and dedicate ourselves to
God, through His Christ. And let the bishop say: O God, who art great, and
whose name is great, who art great in counsel and mighty in works, the God and
Father of Thy holy child Jesus, our Saviour; look down upon us, and upon this
Thy flock, which Thou hast chosen by Him to the glory of Thy name; and sanctify
our body and soul, and grant us the favour to be "made pure from all filthiness
of flesh and spirit," and may obtain the good things laid up for us, and
do not account any of us unworthy; but be Thou our comforter, helper, and
protector, through Thy Christ, with whom glory, honour, praise, doxology, and
thanksgiving be to Thee and to the Holy Ghost for ever. Amen. And after that
all have said Amen, let the deacon say: Let us attend. And let the bishop speak
thus to the people: Holy things for holy persons. And let the people answer:
There is One that is holy; there is one Lord, one Jesus Christ, blessed for
ever, to the glory of God the Father. Amen. "Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace, good-will among men. Hosanna to the son of David! Blessed
be He that cometh in the name of the Lord," being the Lord God who
appeared to us, "Hosanna in the highest." And after that, let the
bishop partake, then the presbyters, and deacons, and sub-deacons, and the
readers, and the singers, and the ascetics; and then of the women, the
deaconesses, and the virgins, and the widows; then the children; and then all
the people in order, with reverence and godly fear, without tumult. And let the
bishop give the oblation, saying, The body of Christ; and let him that
receiveth say, Amen. (Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book VIII, XIII)
I bring all
of this up as many Evangelicals will ask LDS if, based on Moroni 10:32, if we
have denied oneself of all ungodliness; LDS should respond, using 2 Cor 7:1, realising
the standard cop-out responses will not hold up (e.g., appeal to imputed
righteousness), if the Evangelical has cleansed themselves from all filthiness?
As sanctification is a process that ebbs and flows in the life of the believer,
and no one will ever reach sinlessness in this life, all part and parcel of
Evangelical soteriologies, they will have to answer, if they are intellectually
honest, "no." Such will neutralise the superficial potency their use
of Moroni 10:32 might seem to be (I say superficial as sound exegesis shows
that is far from the case in reality!)
Non-LDS Commentaries on 2 Cor 7:1
As an appendix of sorts, here are the commentaries offered by Lenski and Harris on this text for those interested in how non-LDS approach this text:
R.C.H. Lenski:
7:1) This verse so evidently belongs to the preceding that we append it
here. Accordingly, having these
promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from every stain of flesh and
spirit, bringing to its goal holiness in God’s fear! The fervency of
6:11–13 appears in the address “beloved,” the verbal of ἀγαπᾶν (on ἀγάπη see 2:4). This is not a mere term of affection
since on Paul’s part it implies the love of true understanding and of purpose
according therewith. The great promises, all of which are pure gospel, are the
motivation to which Paul appeals.
The subjunctive καθαρίσωμεν is hortative: “let us cleanse,” and is properly
the aorist to express a cleansing that actually cleanses. Call it the effective
aorist. This aorist does not denote a single act as some suppose who then
stress the idea of its being single and compare it with the single act when God
cleanses in baptism and in justification. We see the force of this aorist when
we note what the present subjunctive or imperative would say, namely enjoin a
constant cleansing, a working at it all the time, which would rather imply that
the filth is never removed or that it multiplies as fast as we cleanse it.
Some also express surprise that Paul includes himself; but this is
unwarranted. Paul writes plainly about himself in Phil. 3:12–14, compare 1 John
1:8–10. Neither Paul nor John were perfectionists. Believers cooperate with
God, and one of the activities in which they do this is in keeping themselves
clean, “keeping themselves unspotted from the world” (James 1:27). They refuse
to touch anything unclean (6:17). They resist temptation. It is about this
self-cleansing that Paul speaks. With it goes repentance for sin that we still
commit, which brings God’s cleansing, who is “faithful and righteous to forgive
us our sins and to cleanse us from all iniquity” (1 John 1:9). We are, indeed,
clean (John 13:10; 15:3; 1 Cor. 6:11), and yet we need to wash our feet (John
13:10); every branch must be purged to bear more fruit (John 15:2), we must
fight sin and temptation.
“From every stain of flesh and spirit” = from everything that would
defile either body or soul. The question is raised whether Paul could write
this phrase, and the answer given is negative. First, there is the rare word
(found only here in the New Testament) μολυσμός; but in 1 Cor. 8:7 Paul has the verb μολύνω, and
the noun appears in the LXX, in Plutarch, and in Josephus. It may happen to any
writer that even in a large volume he uses a certain word only once.
Next, here is stain “of flesh and of spirit,” and it is asked how flesh
can still be stained, and how it is possible to stain the spirit. The matter is
almost elementary: σάρξ = the body in its material substance of flesh; πνεῦμα = the
immaterial part as distinguished from the material (see C.-K. 946, at the
bottom, where our passage just precedes). In English we usually say “soul” to
refer to man’s immaterial part; our “soul” approaches the Greek πνεῦμα and
rises considerably above ψυχή, which is often used to designate only the “life”
that animates the body.
The genitives may be regarded as objective; there are sins that stain
our bodily flesh, all those that need our bodily members for their commission,
and there are sins that stain the spirit or soul such as thoughts, wrong ideas,
philosophies, false doctrines, etc. Away with all of them! The latter are worse
than the former, less readily regarded as sins, less easily cleansed away.
The fact that the aorist subjunctive, while it is effective, denotes a
process appears from the present participle: “bringing to its goal holiness in
God’s fear.” Ἁγιωσύνη, which is one of those words that are derived from an adjective by
means of the suffix -σύνη in order to express quality, is not the action of
sanctifying: Heiligung, but the resultant
quality of holiness: Heiligkeit. “In God’s fear” (see 5:11) = in this ethical sphere. The objective
genitive names God as the one who is feared.
Although it is called a low motive, one that is no longer used by
Christians today, it is not only found throughout Scripture but belongs to the
highest Christian motivation even as Paul uses it here. It goes hand in hand
with love: love is the positive side, fear the negative; love prompts one to do
what pleases God, fear prompts one to refrain from what displeases God. Neither
can dispense with the other; neither functions alone. Fear in the sense of
“terror” is quite another matter. This could not be called the beginning of
wisdom, Prov. 9:10; Ps. 111:10; it is the deadly dismay which the wicked
experience when God’s judgment finds them out.
Ἐπιτελεῖν = ἐπί plus τέλος, “to
bring to a goal.” The durative tense is iterative, and the participle modifies
the main verb in the aorist. Thus: we cleanse ourselves effectively when in
every instance that presents itself we turn from the stain of flesh and spirit
and thereby ever and again reach the goal, which is holiness in God’s fear. In
each case the holiness is the one attained in that case. The durative
participle excludes sanctification that is attained by one act; moreover, our actions are here stated and not an
action by which God totally sanctifies us in one instant.
Now a word regarding the “criticism” which would remove 6:14–7:1 from
its place in this epistle irrespective of the suggestions that are offered as
to what to do with this paragraph. Every known text has this paragraph where it
is. The style and the substance are Pauline. The rare words that occur offer no
basis for doubt. The question raised can be based only on the idea that this
paragraph does not fit properly into the connection. But this doubt is raised
by the critics already in regard to 6:11–13, yes, and 6:3–13. But this raising
of doubt should raise another question, namely whether these critics have
followed Paul’s thought in its whole connection with 6:1, 2. We have seen how
6:3–10 is exactly in line with what precedes, and how 6:11–13 is due to 6:3–10.
This is true also with regard to 6:14–7:1, a paragraph that is beautifully
wrought in detail and exactly in place.
Opening their hearts wide to Paul and to his assistants in reciprocity
for the way in which Paul has opened his own and his assistants’ hearts for
them can mean only one thing, namely separation from all cooperation with
unbelievers no matter who they may be. This is not merely stated, it is
elaborated, and exactly as Paul would elaborate it, namely by going to the
bottom of what such cooperation would mean and by casting also the full light
of Scripture upon what it means. Those are mistaken who think that this
paragraph repeats 1 Cor. 8 and is aimed only at idols, or that it is aimed only
at Judaizers and opponents of Paul. Since they are believers, indeed, who have
become God’s righteousness in Christ (5:21), who have not received God’s grace
in an empty way (6:1), who recognize the day of salvation (6:3), who appreciate
Paul’s example (6:3–10) and thus reciprocate his appeal to them (6:11–14), the
Corinthians will drop and shun all wrong connections and embrace God’s great
promises with Paul and his assistants and will cleanse themselves and in every
instance bring their holiness to its goal. In this whole letter we find what
7:1 again reveals: Paul joins the Corinthians to himself: “let us cleanse
ourselves.” He does not pose as a saint who rebukes them because they are
unclean. He wins them by doing what he asks them to do. See the full beauty of
this mutuality and appreciate its effect on the Corinthians themselves when
they read these words. (R.C.H. Lenski, The
Interpretation of St. Paul's First and Second Epistle to the Corinthians
[Minneapolis, Minn.: Augsburg Publishing House, 1963], 1090-94)
Murray J. Harris:
7:1 ταύτας οὖν
ἔχοντες τὰς ἐπαγγελίας, ἀγαπητοί, καθαρίσωμεν ἑαυτοὺς ἀπὸ παντὸς μολυσμοῦ σαρκὸς καὶ
πνεύματος, ἐπιτελοῦντες
ἁγιωσύνην ἐν φόβῳ θεοῦ. “So
then, dear friends, since these great promises are ours, let us cleanse
ourselves of everything that may defile body or spirit.” Glimpses of the
apostle’s emotions at this point in the dictation of his letter have already
been provided by his direct address, Κορίνθιοι, in 6:11 and his reference in 6:13 to his converts
as his τέκνα.
Those indications of stirred emotions and pastoral affection are now reinforced
by another direct address, ἀγαπητοί, “dear friends” (BAGD 16c; NIV) or “dear brothers”
(JB) (cf. 12:19). The inferential οὖν (“so then”) is explicated by the causal participle
ἔχοντες
(“since we have”). Even if Paul had written simply καθαρίσωμεν οὖν ἑαυτούς, the
overall sense would not be materially different. Both the hortatory subjunctive
καθαρίσωμεν and the virtual imperative ἐπιτελοῦντες find their justification and basis (οὖν ἔχοντες) in the Christian possession of “these promises” (cf. 1:20), that is,
the seven promises mentioned in 6:16–18 (see the preceding chart). ταύτας is
emphatic by position and is therefore virtually equivalent to τηλικαύτας (ἐπαγγελίας) “so
great (promises).”
“Let us cleanse ourselves” cannot refer to literal ceremonial washing
(as in Num. 8:6–7) since the cleansing involves “spirit” as well as “body”; the
reference is to figurative purification or purity (as in 1 Cor. 7:34). As used
here, the expression καθαρίζω ἀπό (“cleanse from”) is elliptical, with ἀπό
denoting separation. The sense is “Let us cleanse ourselves96 [by
keeping clear of …].” There is no necessary implication that Paul and the
Corinthians were already defiled in body or spirit and so needed cleansing,
just as “let us throw off the deeds of darkness” (Rom. 13:12) need not imply
that Paul and the Roman believers were clothed in evil. The constant need to
repudiate any possible defilement (παντὸς μολυσμοῦ) is Paul’s point. The aorist καθαρίσωμεν does not point to a
single decisive act but to repeated action conceived of unitarily. μολυσμός,
“defilement,” “pollution,” a NT hapax
legomenon, denotes something that makes a person ceremonially or morally
unclean and therefore unfit for worship. In each of its three LXX uses it is
linked with the defilement of idolatry (Jer. 23:15; 1 Esdr. 8:80 [EVV, 8:83]; 2
Macc. 5:27; cf. the cognate verb μολύνω, “defile,” in 1 Cor. 8:7).
Some have argued that since Paul often sets the terms σάρξ and πνεῦμα in
opposition (e.g., Gal. 5:16–17) and would never call for the cleansing of the σάρξ, only
its crucifixion (cf. Gal. 5:19–21, 24), the expression μολυσμὸς σαρκὸς καὶ πνεύματος,
where σάρξ and πνεῦμα are
conjoined, cannot be Pauline. But there is evidence in Paul’s letters of a
non-pejorative use of σάρξ where it is synonymous with σῶμα and of a popular, non-theological use of σάρξ and πνεῦμα where
they refer, in a complementary not antithetical way, to the outward and inward
aspects of the person. So we propose that σαρκός and πνεύματος are objective genitives after μολυσμοῦ and
refer to the whole person viewed physically and spiritually, outwardly and
inwardly.102 Paul is indicating that both body and spirit are
defiled by pagan practices. 1 Cor. 6:15–17 expresses a similar sentiment: to
defile one’s body in immorality is also to defile one’s spirit.
This urgent call to avoid both physical and spiritual defilement
restates the earlier entreaties to repudiate unholy alliances (6:14) and to
reject the pagan way of life (6:17, three imperatives). In all these cases Paul
seems to have uppermost in his mind the danger that the Corinthian believers constantly
faced of idolatrous associations that would jeopardize their devotion to Christ
(cf. 11:3). In 7:1, however, he includes himself in the exhortation and expands
it to incorporate the rejection of every possible form of defilement, idolatry
or otherwise, that might harm the believer.
ἐπιτελοῦντες ἁγιωσύνην ἐν φόβῳ θεοῦ. “(And let us) complete our consecration by our reverence for God.”
Unlike Hebrew, Greek is a language that prefers subordination over coordination
in its grammatical constructions. Instead of completing v. 1 with the
coordinated καὶ ἐπιτελέσωμεν (“and let us complete”), Paul adds the subordinate participle ἐπιτελοῦντες. But such participles often assume the mood of the finite verb on which
they depend (here καθαρίσωμεν). So it is entirely appropriate, and preferable,
to render ἐπιτελοῦντες by “(and) let us complete …” or “(Let us cleanse ourselves … and)
complete,”105 which indicates that this participle is in effect
imperatival and expresses an additional exhortation. Although ἁγιωσύνην
(“sanctification,” “holiness,” “consecration”; cf. Rom. 1:4; 1 Thess. 3:13, the
only other NT uses) is anarthrous, it is legitimate to supply the possessive
“our,” given the context (καθαρίσωμεν
ἑαυτούς).
Whether we render ἐπιτελοῦντες by “complete” or “bring to completion” or “make
perfect,” a process of sanctification (ἁγιωσύνη) is involved (note the present tense of the
participle), not the acquisition of perfect holiness. The same person who
affirmed that he had “not yet reached perfection” and that his calling was
perpetually to “press forward” (Phil. 3:12–14) would hardly envisage a
permanent arrival at holiness in the present age. From 1 Thess. 3:13 it is
clear that believers are “unblameable in holiness” or “faultlessly pure”
(Goodspeed) only at the second advent. But how is this maturing in holiness
related to the self-purification mentioned earlier in the verse? If in fact
they are separate ongoing processes and not related as cause and effect, then
we may say that they are complementary obligations resting on all believers.
In the phrase ἐν φόβῳ θεοῦ, the genitive is clearly objective, but the
preposition may be taken in three ways:
(1) causal: “because we fear God”
(NLT), “out of reverence for God” (NIV) (cf. Eph. 5:21);
(2) circumstantial: “all the while
reverencing God,” “in an atmosphere of reverential fear for God”; or
(3) instrumental: “by reverence for
God” (Goodspeed); “by living in awe of God” (GNB).
A
preference may be expressed for the third option. One would expect that in
speaking of so crucial an issue as the perfecting of holiness, Paul would
indicate the means by which it could be achieved. And certainly a reverential
awe and holy dread (φόβος) before God would promote the pursuit of holiness
in thought and action, particularly if the expression φόβος θεοῦ alludes to the final
judgment and human accountability to God (note the phrase φόβος κυρίου [= Christ] in 5:11
after 5:10, and the title κύριος
παντοκράτωρ in 6:18).
As we look back on 6:14–7:1 as a whole, several observations are
appropriate. First, the temple motif is central throughout the paragraph and
forms the ultimate basis for Paul’s appeal for holiness. After introducing this
motif in the final and climatic antithesis (“What agreement has the temple of
God with idols?” 6:16), Paul immediately makes the crucial affirmation, “It is
we [Christians] who constitute the [new] temple of the living God” (6:16). This
is then explained (καθώς) by three scriptural citations, one of which (Lev.
26:11–12 with influence from Ezek. 37:27) indicates how believers are God’s
temple (6:16), while the next (Isa. 52:11) states the necessary consequences (διό) of
being God’s temple (6:17), and the last (Ezek. 20:34 and 2 Sam. 7:14 with
influence from Isa. 43:6) declares the results of obedience to God’s call to
maintain the purity of that temple (6:17–18). The final verse (7:1) restates
the repeated pleas for separation from evil, linking this separation with the
advance in holiness that comes through the fear of God.
Second, the paragraph affords several examples of the
indicative-imperative dialectic that is so characteristic of Pauline ethics:
“You are; therefore be!” All six of his exhortations are securely grounded (γάρ … γάρ … διό … οὖν) on statements of theological truth (the seven promises) or on
self-evident facts (the five antitheses) (see the preceding chart).
Third, in Paul’s thought the Christian life is in essence an advance in
holiness, an ἐπιτελεῖν ἁγιωσύνην (7:1), a bringing to maturation of our consecration to God. This
process of sanctification involves first and foremost a sense of awe and dread
before the omnipotent Lord (ἐν φόβῳ
θεοῦ, 7:1) but also a repudiation of evil in
every form (ἀκαθάρτου μὴ ἅπτεσθε [6:17] and ἀπὸ παντὸς μολυσμοῦ [7:1]), especially the avoidance of close, permanent
alliances with unbelievers (6:14, 17). (Murray J. Harris, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text [New
International Greek Testament Commentary; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2005],
511-15)