Cautions against going to law in heathen courts
Christians should not contend with one another, for they are brethren. This, if duly attended to, would prevent many law-suits, and end many quarrels and disputes. In matters of great damage to ourselves or families, we may use lawful means to right ourselves, but Christians should be of a forgiving temper. Refer the matters in dispute, rather than go to law about them. They are trifles, and may easily be settled, if you first conquer your own spirits. Bear and forbear, and the men of least skill among you may end your quarrels. It is a shame that little quarrels should grow to such a head among Christians, that they cannot be determined by the brethren. The peace of a man’s own mind, and the calm of his neighborhood, are worth more than victory. Lawsuits could not take place among brethren, unless there were faults among them.
Verses that belong to this explanation: 1-8
1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? 2 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? 3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? 4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. 5 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? 6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. 7 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? 8 Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that [your] brethren.
 | Author: Matthew Henry Rank: Priest AD: 1714 Source: Title: Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible Author: Matthew Henry |
The first question expresses Paul's astonishment that someone among them thought to "dispute" with a believer "before the unrighteous," i.e., before judges and jurors who are unbelievers. He finds it quite inconsistent that those who know true righteousness should appear before judges who are not distinguished by righteousness. Imagine these Christians expecting justification from those who cannot provide it!
 | Author: William MacDonald Rank: Author Posted on: 2024-05-14 Source: Title: Commentary on the New Testament Year (original): 1989 Author: William MacDonald Number of pages: 1504 Publisher/Editor: CLV Print: GGP Media GmbH, Pößneck |
It is therefore a noble encomium for a Christian to have no contest with any one;
 | Author: The Apostolic Constitutions AD: 375 |
And she will have to go forth (from her house) by a gate wreathed with laurel, and hung with lanterns, as from some new consistory of public lusts; she will have to sit with her husband ofttimes in club meetings, oft-times in taverns; and, wont as she was formerly to minister to the "saints "will sometimes have to minister to the "unjust.".
Chiding them likewise because "brethren "were not "judged at the bar of the saints: "
 | Author: Tertullian of Carthage Rank: Author AD: 220 |
Paul says that Christians should not submit their disputes to outside arbitration. For how can it be anything other than absurd for a man who disagrees with his friend to choose their mutual enemy as their reconciler? How can you avoid feeling shame when a pagan sits in judgment on a Christian? And if it is not right to go to law before pagans about private matters, how can we submit other things of greater importance to them for a decision? Note too how Paul speaks. He calls the pagans not “unbelievers” but “unrighteous,” and the Christians he calls “saints,” using the appropriate description in order to deter them from getting involved with the secular courts.
 | Author: John Chrysostom Rank: Bishop AD: 407 |
Here also he again makes his complaint upon acknowledged grounds; for in that other place he says, It is actually reported that there is fornication among you. And in this place, Dare any one of you? From the very first outset giving signs of his anger, and implying that the thing spoken of comes of a daring and lawless spirit. Now wherefore did he bring in by the way that discourse about covetousness and about the duty of not going to law without the Church? In fulfilment of his own rule. For it is a custom with him to set to right things as they fall in his way; just as when speaking about the tables which they used in common, he launched out into the discourse about the mysteries. So here, you see, since he had made mention of covetous brethren, burning with anxiety to correct those in sin, he brooks not exactly to observe order; but he again corrects the sin which had been introduced out of the regular course, and so returns to the former subject. Let us hear then what he also says about this. Dare any of you, having a matter, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? For a while, he employs those personal terms to expose, discredit, and blame their proceedings: nor does he quite from the beginning subvert the custom of seeking judgment before the believers: but when he had stricken them down by many words, then he even takes away entirely all going to law. For in the first place, says he, if one must go to law it were wrong to do so before the unrighteous. But you ought not to go to law at all. This however he adds afterwards. For the present he thoroughly sifts the former subject, namely, that they should not submit matters to external arbitration. For, says he, how can it be otherwise than absurd that one who is at variance (μικροψυχοῦτα) with his friend should take his enemy to be a reconciler between them? And how can you avoid feeling shame and blushing when a Greek sits to judge a Christian? And if about private matters it is not right to go to law before Greeks, how shall we submit to their decisions about other things of greater importance? Observe, moreover, how he speaks. He says not, Before the unbelievers, but, Before the unrighteous; using the expression of which he had most particular need for the matter before him, in order to deter and keep them away. For see that his discourse was about going to law, and those who are engaged in suits seek for nothing so much as that the judges should feel great interest about what is just; he takes this as a ground of dissuasion, all but saying, Where are you going? What are you doing, O man, bringing on yourself the contrary to what you wish, and in order to obtain justice committing yourself to unjust men? And because it would have been intolerable to be told at once not to go to law, he did not immediately add this, but only changed the judges, bringing the party engaged in the trial from without into the Church. 5. Then, since it seemed easily open to contempt, I mean our being judged by those who were within, and especially at that time, (for they were not perhaps competent to comprehend a point, nor were they such as the heathen judges, well skilled in laws and rhetoric, inasmuch as the greater part of them were uneducated men,) mark how he makes them worthy of credit, first calling them Saints. But seeing that this bore witness to purity of life, and not to accuracy in hearing a case, observe how he orderly handles this part also, saying thus, Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? How then can you who art in your day to judge them, endure to be judged by them now? They will not indeed judge, taking their seat in person and demanding account, yet they shall condemn. This at least he plainly said; And if the world is judged in you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? He says not by you, but in you: just as when He said, Matthew 12:42 The queen of the south shall rise up and condemn this generation: and, The men of Nineveh shall arise and condemn this generation. For when beholding the same sun and sharing all the same things, we shall be found believers but they unbelievers, they will not be able to take refuge in ignorance. For we shall accuse them, simply by the things which we have done. And many such ways of judgment one will find there. Then, that no one should think he speaks about other persons, mark how he generalizes his speech. And if the world is judged in you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? The thing is a disgrace to you, he says, and an unspeakable reproach. For since it was likely that they would be out of countenance at being judged by those that were within; nay, says he, on the contrary, the disgrace is when you are judged by those without: for those are the very small controversies, not these.
| Author: John Chrysostom Rank: Bishop AD: 407 |
In the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "Dares any of you, having a matter against other, to discuss it among the unrighteous, and not among the saints? Know ye not that the saints shall judge this world? "
 | Author: Cyprian of Carthage Rank: Bishop AD: 258 |
For in the first Epistle to the Corinthians the divine apostle says: "Dare any of you, having a matter against the other, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? Know ye not that the saints shall judge the world? "
 | Author: Clement Of Alexandria Rank: Author AD: 215 |
The Corinthians were wrong in two ways. First, they were unfaithful, and second, they were expounding God’s laws with a show of respect but in reality attributing their authority to idols. Commentary on Paul’s Epistles.
 | Author: Ambrosiaster Rank: Author AD: 400 |
The listed verse explanations of the individual persons have nothing to do with the explanations of the other persons. This also applies to the Bible translations.
