Walking With Christ

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 3:18 . . If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this
age, he should become a fool so that he may become wise.

I'm guessing that command relates to one of Christ's instructions.

"Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you
shall not enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matt 18:3)

The Greek word for "converted" is strepho (stref'-o) which basically means
to twist, i.e. turn quite around or reverse (literally or figuratively)

In a nutshell, strepho is talking about taking a new direction.

Many of those in Jesus' audiences were mature, educated folk. Jesus is as
much as saying that they need to go back to school and learn a new trade--
so to speak --which is what quite a few people had to do back when the
housing bubble burst in 2008 and they found themselves not only out of
work, but also quite over-qualified and/or their skills no longer in as much
demand like they once were.

In our age, "wise" would pertain to people high up in finance, education,
science, art, computing, crafts, music, philosophy, politics, etc. Many of
those kinds of people are brilliant, but when it comes to knowing the ways of
God, they're about as bright as an elementary school kid just starting out in
kindergartner in need of beginning right from square-one and learning some

"The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise; that they are worthless." (1Cor

Christ also spoke of humbling one's self as a little child. Well; I can say from
personal experience that wise people like those mentioned above make very
poor Sunday school students because their intelligence gets in the way. If
only they would leave their IQ at the door, even they themselves would be
the better for it.

"Receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your
souls." (Jas 1:21


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 3:21-23 . . So don't take pride in following a particular leader.
Everything belongs to you-- Paul and Apollos and Peter --the whole world
and life and death; the present and the future. Everything belongs to you,
and you belong to Christ, and Christ belongs to God.

I've noticed that avid sports fans are afflicted with chronic identity
syndromes. When their favorite team wins; they say "we" won; as if they
were on the field playing the game instead of up in the bleachers or on the
couch at home watching the action on TV.

Christians that idolize their favorite pastors and/or Sunday school teachers
are just as avid. They want to be identified with those kinds of church
luminaries because it makes them look really smart and elite; when in
reality it just makes them look silly and star-crossed.

But the thing is; when it comes to inheritance; Christ's believing followers
are equals-- the big shots with the little nobodies --because they are all,
regardless of status, co-heirs with Christ (Rom 8:17) which is somewhat
different than a regular heir.

Regular heirs each receive an individually specified portion of a benefactor's
estate while co-heirs are heirs in common. For example: supposing a
benefactor's estate totals 60 acres of land plus $10,000 in a bank account.
Co-heirs-- i.e. heirs in common --inherit the whole ball of wax corporately as
one beneficiary instead of six; viz: all six inherit the 60 acres and the
$10,000 as if each one were the only heir. So then, whatever the Father
bequeathed His son, He bequeathed everyone belonging to His son.

I honestly cannot wrap my mind around that because the ramifications are
just too, too remarkable; I really don't even want to think about it.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 4:1 . . So then, men ought to regard us as servants of Christ, and as
those entrusted with the mysteries of God.

Big names like Mother Teresa, Charles Spurgeon, and Billy Graham are
practically sacred cows-- but Christian celebrities like those are only human
rather than divine. Just be grateful you're not one of them because their
responsibility is proportional.

"From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and
from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."
(Luke 12:48)

"Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you
know that we who teach will be judged more strictly." (Jas 3:1)


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 4:5 . . Judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till The Lord
comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and expose the
motives of men's hearts.

The "appointed time" is probably referring to the event described at 1Cor
3:5-15 when every Christian's spiritual service will be evaluated for
performance awards.

Human nature has a propensity to shower accolades on religious celebrities
without having all the facts.

For example; we now know from Mother Teresa's private letters-- made
public by Father Brian Kolodiejchuk's book "Mother Teresa / Come Be My
" --that Ms. Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu was a nun with so little personal
belief in God as to be an agnostic; and yet for decades everyone the world
over thought she was the cat's meow and the bee's knees: a veritable poster
child of piety in thought, word, and deed. It turns out Teresa was a
remarkable actor. Her public image bore no resemblance whatsoever to the
secret life of her inner being.

The Spirit's corroboration that comes to Christ's followers via Rom 8:16
never happened for Teresa. As a result, the remarkable nun came to the end
of her life worried that if perchance there is a God, He didn't particularly like
her and might actually be quite intent upon condemning her.

Well; I'd have to say that if somebody is a Christian missionary with those
kinds of thoughts going thru their head, maybe they really ought to seriously
consider another line of work.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 5:1-5 . . It is actually reported that there is immorality among you,
and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles,
that someone has his father's wife. And you have become arrogant, and
have not mourned instead, in order that the one who had done this deed
might be removed from your midst.

. . . For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have
already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. In
the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in
spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, I have decided to deliver such a one
to Satan for the destruction of his flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the
day of The Lord Jesus.

Gentiles of course do sleep with their stepmothers on occasion; but the
world's practice of that kind of behavior is more an aberration than a

Well, the Corinthians were treating that man's behavior as if it were a norm,
i.e. they apparently felt that the man's conduct was trivial, undeserving of
either attention or criticism. They must have wondered why Paul was
reacting so badly rather than just "get over it". After all; it's none of his
business what goes on behind closed doors. Had he not heard of the right to
privacy? And besides, didn't the Lord say: "Let he who is without sin cast the
first stone."

Delivering someone to Satan for the destruction of the flesh just simply
means to cull them from the herd, so to speak. In other words: exclude
them from congregational activities; e.g. worship, Sunday school, and
prayer meetings. This is not as radical as totally breaking off contact with
someone; it's purpose is church discipline rather than the social blacklisting
practiced by Jehovah's Witnesses and Scientology.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 5:6 . . Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of

This principle is very old. When God permitted Nebuchadnezzar to conquer
Israel and take many of the people into captivity; good Jews as well as bad
were taken. For example: Daniel and his friends Shadrach Meshach, and
Abednego were all good Jews who didn't deserve to be taken into exile. But
Daniel accepted his circumstances because he and his buddies were all part
of the same lump of dough. (Dan 9:5-11)

The same thing happened during the Holocaust. Good Jews as well as bad
were rounded up and taken to Auschwitz camps.

There are other times recorded in the Old Testament when God moved
against His people corporately rather than individually. When that happens,
they all get slammed: the pious and the impious together.

The first few chapters of the book of Revelation outline several of Jesus'
complaints about specific churches. No doubt not every member of those
churches deserved criticism, but Jesus slammed them all as corporate bodies
rather than individuals. So then if, and/or when, those churches failed to
correct their shortcomings; the whole church-- the good and the bad --went
to the gallows, so to speak.

1Cor 5:7-13 . . Clean out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, just
as you are in fact unleavened. For Christ our Passover also has been
sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with
the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of
sincerity and truth.

. . . I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not
at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and
swindlers, or with idolaters; for then you would have to go out of the world.

. . . But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if
he should be an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or
a drunkard, or a swindler-- not even to eat with such a one. For what have I
to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the
church? But those who are outside, God judges. Remove the wicked man
from among yourselves.

This is a good argument against church expansion. The bigger a
congregation gets, the more difficult it is to keep an eye on everyone's


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 5:6a . .Your boasting is not good.

The Corinthian church was liberal in its attitudes about intimacy. That's no
surprise considering that particular city's culture in their day and age.

Then, as now, liberals tend to think of themselves as sophisticated and
progressive; and vastly superior to stodgy, inflexible conservatives.

NOTE: An article recently in the Epoch Times shares some of the secrets of a
former KGB agent whose standard plan for moving countries towards
communism includes demoralization. He said that Americans make the task
easy because they were, and are, corrupting themselves on their own; and
actually accomplishing the task much quicker than the KGB could even

America's moral decline began gaining momentum with the counter-culture
back in the 1960s -- it continues to this day and, sort of like the expansion
of the cosmos, is picking up speed instead of slowing down as might be


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 6:1-6 . . If any of you has a dispute with another, dare he take it
before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the saints? Do you not
know that the saints will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world,
are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you not know that we will
judge angels? How much more the things of this life!

. . .Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges
even men of little account in the church! I say this to shame you. Is it
possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute
between believers? But instead, one brother goes to law against another-and
this in front of unbelievers!

Apparently some of the Christians in the church at Corinth let the Sermon
On The Mount go in one ear and out the other.

"But I say unto you: That ye resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee
on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee
at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." (Matt 5:39

"Why don't you judge for yourselves what is right? As you are going with
your adversary to the magistrate, try hard to be reconciled to him on the
way, or he may drag you off to the judge, and the judge turn you over to
the officer, and the officer throw you into prison. I tell you, you will not get
out until you have paid the last penny." (Luke 12:57-59)

The Lord began his teaching in Luke with the words "Why don't you judge
for yourselves what is right?" In other words; if someone threatens to take
you to court over a tort matter, and you know good and well he's in the
right; don't force him to go to law. Instead, admit to your wrong and settle
out of court.

According to The Lord, it’s unrighteous to tie up the courts when you know
your own self that you are the one who's in the wrong. There's just simply
no righteous reason why Christian defendants and plaintiffs can't be their
own judge and jury in tort matters.

"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." (1Cor 6:7-8)

The Greek word for "defraud" is apostereo (ap-os-ter-eh'-o) which is an
ambiguous word with more than one meaning, and more than one
application. The meaning that seems appropriate in this instance is

It works like this: Were I to trip and fall because of a crack in the walk
leading up to the front door of the home of one of my kin; I wouldn't haul
them into court over it because we're related; viz: any injury I might incur
by tripping and falling because of a crack in their walk would be a family
matter rather than a legal matter; and they have a right to be treated by me
as family rather than foes. Were I to sue them for tripping and falling due to
a crack in their walk; I would be depriving them of the lenience that kin
have a right to expect from one another.

"We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the
brethren. . . We know love by this, that He laid down His life for us; and we
ought to lay down our lives for the brethren." (1John 3:14-16)

I think it's safe to say that if somebody is comfortable taking a fellow
Christian to court; then they certainly are not prepared to lay down their life
for the brethren.

It's sad to see relatives suing each other in court; but it happens all the
time. When the world does it; well, that's to be expected; but when
Christians sue each other; that's dysfunctional.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 6:18 . . Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the
body; but he that commits fornication sins against his own body.

The Greek word for "fornication" is porneia (por-ni'-ah) which doesn't
especially mean pornography; it means harlotry; a term that Webster's
defines as sexual profligacy. Porneia would include things like prostitution,
adultery, promiscuity, date sex, free love, shacking up, one-night stands,
swingers, wife swapping, and that sort of thing.

The command is not to walk away from fornication; but to run away from it
as if your very life depends upon putting distance between you and it. The
same Greek word is used at Matt 2:13 where an angel instructed Joseph to
flee into Egypt in order to save his little boy's life.

Fleeing is different than shunning. I think what we're talking about here are
the times when a golden opportunity comes along to mess around with
somebody who is absolutely irresistible. Some people would call that getting
lucky; but in God's estimation, it's getting stupid if you play along and see
what happens.

Young Christian couples often want to know how far they can go with their
dates before they're into forbidden territory. Well, we all instinctively know
the upper limits, but since the lower limits aren't chipped in stone then I
would have to say let your own conscience be your guide in accordance with
The Lord's principles stipulated in the 14th chapter of Romans regulating
gray areas. The key principles are:

"Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." (Rom 14:5)

"Happy is he that feels no guilt in that thing which he allows." (Rom 14:22)

"He that doubts is guilty if he eats, because he eats not of faith: for
whatsoever is not of faith is sin." (Rom 14:23)

However, as an old senior guy of 77 who's been around the block a time or
two: I must forewarn youngsters that the human conscience is trainable.
What I mean is, if you manage to suppress your first-time pangs of guilt, the
second time will be easier; and each succeeding suppression of your
conscience gets easier and easier till the day comes when you feel no guilt at
all. In other words: you will eventually succeed in cauterizing your
conscience. (cf. 1Tim 4:1-2)

The phrase "sins against his own body" is sort of the same wording as at
1Cor 11:27 where it's said "whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of The
Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and
blood of The Lord."

Some Christians construe 1Cor 11:27 as murder. Well if so, then sinning
against one's own body would be suicide. But actually, what we're talking
about here is gross contempt and disrespect. In other words; Christian
fornicators are treating their body like a chamber pot instead of a holy
vessel; and all the while dragging God's Spirit into situations that He finds
extremely unbecoming.

"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in
you, whom you have received from God?" (1Cor 6:19)

"Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the
day of redemption." (Eph 4:30)

They're also dragging Christ into shame and disgrace too.

"Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I
then take the members of Christ and unite them with an harlot? Never! Do
you not know that he who unites himself with an harlot is one with her in
body? For it is said, "The two will become one flesh." (1Cor 6:14-16, cf. Gen


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 6:20 . . For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your
body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

Christ's crucifixion and resurrection ransomed his followers from facing
justice and the second death in the scene depicted at Rev 20:11-15. That
was a mighty big favor, and I should think it earns him the right to expect a
favor in return. All things considered; conducting ourselves in ways that
honor God is really not too much to ask seeing as how it was He who
donated His No.1 son's life to pay the price for people's ransom. (1Pet 1:18

"in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's." (1Cor 6:20b)

Human life consists of not only body and spirit, but also soul. (1Thess 5:23,
Heb 4:12). So, that being the case; why isn't soul mentioned in 1Cor 6:20?
Well; I'm pretty sure it's implied by the pronoun "ye". In other words: soul
speaks of the person as a conscious, sentient being.

"Soul" is somewhat ambiguous. In the very beginning, the Hebrew word for
soul (nephesh) simply distinguished between fauna life and flora life.

It shows up first at Gen 1:20-21 as sea creatures and winged creatures.
Then again at Gen 1:24 as terra creatures; again at Gen 2:7 as the human
creature; again at Gen 2:19-20 as the creatures to whom Adam gave
names; and again at Gen 9:8-16 as all creatures aboard the ark, including
Noah and his family.

NOTE: Speaking of conscious, sentient beings: God's spirit is viewed by
some not as a person, but as a force. However, according to Isa 63:10 it's
possible to vex God's spirit. The Hebrew word for "vex" is 'atsab (aw-tsab')
which means distress, worry, pain, or anger. 'Atsab's first appearance in the
Bible is located at Gen 6:6, where it's stated:

"Jehovah was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and it grieved Him
to his heart."

'Atsab's equivalent in the New Testament is lupeo (loo-peh'-o). For example:

"Do not grieve the holy spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day
of redemption." (Eph 4:30)


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 7:2 . . To avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let
every woman have her own husband.

The above is especially pertinent in 2021 America. Fornication is
everywhere: on a pandemic scale. It's in our music, in our schools, in the
White House, in our offices, on our televisions, in our movies, in our novels,
and in our conversations. People are even sleeping together on their very
first dates.

Even Congressmen, Senators, and US Presidents are indulging in forbidden
love. The previous Governor of Oregon was openly shacking up with a

According to the 2020 World Almanac and Book of Facts, there was a total of
3,855,500 live births in 2017. Of those, 1,534,000 were illegitimate (a.k.a.
nonmarital) which means that nearly 40% of 2017's live births were the
result of immoral activity. Back in 1970, the ratio was only 10%.

This country is in a state of moral decadence, and steadily becoming more
and more like the ancient city of Pompeii just prior to its destruction by the
volcanism of Mt. Vesuvius.

It's important to note that 1Cor 7:2 makes it okay to marry for carnal
knowledge. My childhood religion taught me that it's a sin to marry for any
other reason except procreation and that couples who decide to remain
childless are living in sin. They get that from Genesis 1:28 where it's says:
"God blessed them; and God said to them: Be fruitful and multiply". But that
is clearly a blessing rather than a law. It's always best to regard blessings as
benefits and/or empowerments unless clearly indicated otherwise.

Ironically the original purpose of marriage was neither carnal knowledge nor
procreation; it was companionship (Gen 2:18). Leave it to people to
construe God's words to mean things they don't say in writing.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 7:3-4 . . Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and
likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not authority of her
own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not
authority of his own body, but the wife.

What we're talking about in that verse is the principle of private property in
marriage that was established right from the get-go.

"And Adam said: This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she
shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. Therefore shall a
man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and
they shall be one flesh." (Gen 2:23-24)

There are no specific Hebrew words for "wife". The word for wife in that
passage comes from the very same word as woman— 'ishshah. The
possessive pronoun "his" identifies an 'ishshah as somebody's wife. The
same grammar works for husbands too, for example:

"Gen 30:20 . . And Leah said: God hath endued me with a good dowry; now
will my husband dwell with me, because I have born him six sons." (Gen

The Hebrew word for "husband" in that verse is 'iysh which is a nondescript
word for males. The possessive pronoun "my" identifies a male as
somebody's husband.

So Eve became Adam's woman; and Adam of course became Eve's man.
They quite literally owned each other: consequently they had a right to all
that a conjugal relationship with each other implies.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 7:5 . . Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a
time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together
again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

I think it goes without saying that spouses have an inalienable right to
expect their need for companionship to be satisfied in marriage; and if one,
or both, is feeling lonely and marginalized at home, then they will be
vulnerable outside the home when someone comes along with whom they

I heard a story some time ago about a rather conniving Christian woman who
wanted a divorce from her Christian husband; but seeing as how God only
allows death or adultery to dissolve the marital bond; she deliberately began
shunning her husband in order to force him to think about finding an
alternative; and when he did; she proceeded to divorce him on the grounds
of unfaithfulness. That way, in her mind's eye, she was the victim and he the
villain. (chuckle) What people won't do to circumvent the laws of God.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 7:8-9 . . Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for
them to stay unmarried, as I am. But if they cannot control themselves, they
should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn.

Paul said it's good to remain single; but he didn't say it's best.

The Greek word for "burn" is puroo (poo-ro'-o) which means: to kindle, to
ignite, to glow, and/or to be inflamed. I seriously doubt Paul meant to
convey the thought that the believers who lacked self control at Corinth
were in grave danger of the flames of hell since he had already assured
them in 1Cor 6:9-11 that they were washed, sanctified, and justified in the
name of The Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Paul was one of those kinds of men with a very low-powered libido. But not
everyone is like him; nor is everyone cut out to live alone.

Webster's defines "celibacy" as (1) the state of not being married, (2)
abstention from sexual intercourse, and (3) abstention by vow from
marriage. Celibacy then, isn't limited to zero carnal activity; it includes
zero marriage; even platonic unions.

Not long ago, a Catholic priest here in Oregon quit the priesthood after
serving more than 30 years in order to get married because he couldn't
stand being alone anymore. He wasn't especially looking to get naked with
somebody, he just wanted a companion; which is exactly how normal guys
are designed.

"The Lord God said: It's not good for Adam to be solitary" (Gen 2:18)

The problem with a vow of celibacy is that although it may hinder a priest
from getting married, it does nothing to prevent him from pining for a
female companion. 1Cor 7:9 should suffice to silence the mouths of ascetics
who preach it's holy to abstain from every form of earthly pleasure; and also
the mouths of those who preach it's a sin to marry solely to obtain someone
to sleep with.

NOTE: Typical wedding vows are unconditional, i.e. couples, as a rule, don't
promise to love each other in proportion to the amount of love they get from
the other. It would be educational for couples to review their vows now and
again to see just how conscientious they've been in complying with the
unconditional portions of their vows.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 7:10-11a . . Unto the married I command— yet not I, but The Lord
let not the wife depart from her husband: but and if she depart, let her
remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband.

Divorcing a man for any cause other than infidelity is unacceptable (Mat
5:32). However, according to Christ's sabbath teachings, the safety and
welfare of human life takes priority over strict observance of religious laws
and customs; which tells me that women can, and no doubt should, walk out
on abusive husbands and get away from them.

1Cor 7:11b . . and let not the husband put away his wife.

A man doesn't have sufficient scriptural grounds for divorce just by his wife
walking out on him. Now should his estranged wife take up with a lover
during their separation; that would definitely be sufficient. (Matt 19:9)


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 7:12-13 . . If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be
pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman which
hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her,
let her not leave him.

It's very common for marriages to start off on common ground, and then
later on to become religiously divided; like for instance when one of the
spouses gets converted at a Luis Palau crusade. As long as the situation
doesn't cause intolerable friction in the home, the couple should stay

"For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving
wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean,
but now they are holy." (1Cor 7:14-15)

According to Matt 5:32 and Matt 19:9, divorce and remarriage are holy only
if one of the spouses has been unfaithful. So; if a believing spouse divorces
their unbelieving spouse on the grounds of religious differences, and
remarries; then as far as the New Testament is concerned, any children
produced in a second marriage will be illegitimate.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 7:15 . . But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a
sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.

In this situation, Christians are neither required, nor encouraged, nor under
even the slightest obligation to attempt reconciliation; rather, "let him
depart" strictly forbids getting back together with the unbeliever.

The unbeliever's departure is a golden opportunity, to permanently resolve a
difficult situation, that Christ's followers would be foolish to let slip through
their fingers.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 7:17 . . But as God hath distributed to every man, as The Lord hath
called every one, so let him walk.

"distribution" is likely talking about spiritual gifts. All of Christ's believing
followers are supposed to have at least one.

"Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are
differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities
of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. But the
manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one
is given by the Spirit, yada, yada, yada." (1Cor 12:5-8)

The "call" is likely the venue where each individual's gift is put to good use
for the Lord. I don't think we need to worry about how to find that venue;
it'll find us. Thing is, stay in your own zone; don't crash somebody else's
party and/or stick your nose into something that's none of your spiritual


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1Cor 7:18a . . Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become

It was of course impossible to literally reverse circumcision in Paul's day.
However, there did exist a procedure to ceremoniously reverse it. (cf.
1Maccabees 1:15)

1Cor 7:18b . . Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.

The circumcision in question is ritual circumcision; specifically the initiation
rite into Judaism.

Paul's advice is very practical because when men undergo Judaism's
circumcision rite, they obligate themselves to comply with the covenant that
Moses' people agreed upon with God on oath per Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

As a result; they put themselves in danger of God slamming them with the
curses for noncompliance listed at Lev 26:3-38, Deut 27:15-26, and Deut

All one has to do is research the last 3,500 years of the Jews' history, up to
and including the Holocaust, to see for themselves that God is serious about
those curses.

FAQ: If 1Cor 7:18b is a hard and fast rule, then why did Paul circumcise
Timothy at Acts 16:1-3?

A: The procedure wasn't done to initiate Timothy into Judaism, but rather,
so that the Jews wouldn't make an issue of Paul associating with an
uncircumcised Gentile which, in their minds, would effectively invalidate his

A similar problem exists today among Christians fixated on the King James
translation of the Bible. They will not listen to a teacher, not even a Spirit
empowered teacher, unless he quotes from the KJV. In their minds; all who
use any other version are heretics right from the get-go.


Well-known member
May 28, 2018
1 Cor 7:20 . . Each one should remain in the situation which he was in
when God called him.

I once knew a really good Catholic man who felt guilty never going out as a
missionary to a foreign land to help people less fortunate than himself. Well,
I assured him that somebody has to stay back here in the States and hold
down a job in order to earn the money needed to finance missions already in

The ratio of soldiers in the rear compared to the ones at the front is
something like six to one. It takes a massive support base to keep our guys
on the line out there facing off with the other guys; all the way from workers
in state-side factories manufacturing war materiel, to the sailors, soldiers,
and airmen moving men and materiel over land and seas, to the doctors and
nurses staffing MASH facilities, to the guys and girls driving supply trucks to
the front. We can't all be in the doo-doo. Somebody has to be in the rear
with the gear.

So take comfort in knowing that if you're involved in the effort, then you're a
part of the effort; and will be rewarded accordingly. (cf. 1Sam 30:1-25 and
Matt 20:1-16)