Skip to content
The Historic Faith
Sign in
Question 3
In the Passover example, Paul uses the removal of leaven to confront “gross sexual immorality” and ties it to being “booted out of the community” (church discipline); how does that combination of “Christ our Passover was sacrificed” and “purge out the old leaven” challenge modern evangelical instincts about grace, tolerance, and what love requires in a church?
Another way to ask: How does Paul connecting “Christ our Passover” with “get rid of the old leaven” and church discipline challenge how evangelicals think about grace, tolerance, and love in the church?

Direct Answer Chuck’s point implies that grace (Christ the Passover Lamb sacrificed) doesn’t cancel the church’s responsibility to deal seriously with sin; instead, Christ’s sacrifice becomes the reason to “purge out” corruption, even to the point of exclusion when necessary. That challenges a “tolerance-first” instinct by framing discipline as part of the Passover pattern.

Support from Transcript:

  • Chuck quotes 1 Corinthians 5: “Purge out the old leaven…For indeed Christ, our Passover was sacrificed for us.”
  • He applies it to a real church problem: Paul is “dealing with the problem of gross sexual immorality in the church there.”
  • He draws the moral lesson: “Now that Christ, our Passover lamb, has been slain, we need to get all the yeast, all the sin out of our lives.”
  • He connects OT seriousness to NT discipline: “anyone who doesn’t get rid of the yeast gets banished from the community, which ties in with the discipline that he recommends there.”
  • He treats this as level-two moral instruction embedded in the OT story.
Discussion Follow-ups If discipline is part of the “unleavened” response to Christ’s sacrifice, how should a church guard against harshness while still obeying the pattern Paul appeals to?