Perhaps you’ve been told that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:19). And perhaps this declaration came in the wake of an argument against drinking alcohol, smoking tobacco, piercing a part of your body, or getting a tattoo. This go-to verse has kept countless multitudes in reverent submission to a variety of cultural expectations. At least until many of those submissive masses come of age. When many inevitably rebel against the behavioral expectations set for them, are they rebelling against the word of God?
Context matters. If we learn to read the Bible for what it is—and not as a collection of independently assembled proverbial sayings—we’ll discover that some of our most familiar passages don’t actually mean what we’ve always assumed.
Heart2 (2011), Creative Commons
The Verse
It appears rather straightforward. I’ll even go as far as to quote two verses:
Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body. (1 Cor 6:19-20)
Easy, right? If you profess to follow the Lord Jesus Christ, your body has become a temple for his Spirit. Therefore, it is not appropriate for you to put harmful substances (alcohol, tobacco) into it, or to mutilate your body with excessive piercings. Glorifying God in your body requires you to abstain from such harmful behaviors.
Consistency
Let’s just make sure to follow that line of thinking all the way into the station. If this verse prohibits alcohol, tobacco, or piercings, then how much more does it also prohibit caffeine, chocolate cake, bacon grease, late nights, failure to bathe, steel factory employment, vasectomies, and drivers’ licenses? Each of these things either 1) introduces harmful substances to the body, 2) puts the body at significant risk of harm, or 3) makes permanent bodily changes for reasons other than preserving health.
Charles Spurgeon understood the absurdity of this logic. The story is told1 of the time he met Dwight L. Moody. Upon being greeted by the Prince of Preachers chomping on a flaming stogie, Moody exclaims, “How could you, a man of God, smoke that cigar?” Spurgeon advances on Moody with pointing finger aimed at the latter’s seriously overweight gut: “The same way that you, a man of God, can be that fat.”
The Context
But we need not rely on witticisms or sophistry to make the point. The context is more than adequate to the task.
The main idea of Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians is that the church of God, set apart in Christ Jesus, must live in harmony and not with factional infighting (1 Cor 1:2, 10-11). He first addresses how factional thinking betrays the world’s wisdom and is contrary to Christ’s wisdom (1 Cor 1-4). Then he turns to matters of sexual conduct.
In 1 Cor 5, Paul addresses a serious matter with serious words. The Corinthians must not tolerate sexual sin, especially not sin that even pagans would refuse to tolerate (1 Cor 5:1). This leads Paul to clarify what sort of people they ought to dissociate from: not all sinners, but those who walk proudly in sin while bearing the name of Christ (1 Cor 5:9-11). The church has a responsibility to judge those inside her community (1 Cor 5:12-13).
This topic of sitting in judgment on offenders leads Paul into a tangential discussion of lawsuits (1 Cor 6:1). His point is that we should be able to trust the church to be competent in rendering justice, as we will one day judge the world (1 Cor 6:2). The unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom (the authority to judge the world), but the righteous will (1 Cor 6:9-10). Some of you were in the former group, but now you are in the latter (1 Cor 6:11).
In 1 Cor 6:12, Paul is back on his main topic of sexual misconduct. He deals with what must have been a common saying among Corinthian Christians: “All things are lawful for me” (1 Cor 6:12). But he clarifies that things are lawful only insofar as they are helpful and not enslaving. He questions another saying they have about food (1 Cor 6:13) before homing in on his main point in this part of the argument: “The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body” (1 Cor 6:13).
At this point, he moves into his metaphor of the body as a “member” of Christ (a part of Christ’s own body). He applies this to the sin of prostitution (1 Cor 6:15). One who joins with a prostitute becomes one flesh with the prostitute (1 Cor 6:16), when that person ought to be one spirit with the Lord (1 Cor 6:17).
His application? “Flee from sexual immorality” (1 Cor 6:18). To support this application, he uses the metaphor of temple to describe the body. Your body is the Holy Spirit’s temple; therefore, do not offer that temple in union with an illicit sexual partner (something well-accepted in Corinthian culture at the local pagan temple, considered an act of worship).
After prohibiting ungodly sexual ethics in 1 Cor 5-6, Paul moves on in chapter 7 to promote a godly sexual ethic. This rounds out the discussion of sexual ethics, and connects it back to the main theme of living in harmony for the good of the community.
The Linchpin
Tucked right between the application (1 Cor 6:18a) and the temple metaphor (1 Cor 6:19) is a crucial clarifying statement: “Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body” (1 Cor 6:18b). Paul explicitly excludes every other sin from his temple metaphor. Therefore, we are not authorized by the Lord—in fact, we abuse his word—if we use it to address any other sin besides sexual immorality.
Conclusion
Please note: In this post, I am not arguing for drinking alcohol, smoking tobacco, getting a tattoo, or piercing your body. Those topics are complex and require more discussion than I’ve offered here. I am simply throwing 1 Cor 6:19 out of the discussion. When discussing anything besides sexual immorality, “your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit” is out of bounds. Part of your training for making wise ethical judgments is coming to understand this fact (1 Cor 6:2).
Context matters.
1I say “the story is told” because I have not been able to track down an original source for this story, so it may be spurious.
Thanks to Matthew Bair for the idea for this post. Click to see more examples of why context matters.
