I can’t seem to find any articles anywhere of what the proper interpretation of this verse is/how to counter claims of it by antinomianists and sola fide folks.
[quote=Lazerlike42]I can’t seem to find any articles anywhere of what the proper interpretation of this verse is/how to counter claims of it by antinomianists and sola fide folks.
“Antinomianist”? That’s a variety of believer I haven’t heard of yet. What is it?
The New Testament Committee of the Catholic Church did a good job of interpreting the verse…
They simply put quotes around the odd verses, to show that Paul was skeptically quoting others.
Here are the Committee’s footnotes…
4 [12-20] Paul now turns to the opinion of some Corinthians that sexuality is a morally indifferent area (1 Cor 6:12-13). This leads him to explain the mutual relation between the Lord Jesus and our bodies (1 Cor 6:13b) in a densely packed paragraph that contains elements of a profound theology of sexuality (1 Cor 6:15-20).
5 [12-13] Everything is lawful for me: the Corinthians may have derived this slogan from Paul’s preaching about Christian freedom, but they mean something different by it: they consider sexual satisfaction a matter as indifferent as food, and they attribute no lasting significance to bodily functions (1 Cor 6:13a). Paul begins to deal with the slogan by two qualifications, which suggest principles for judging sexual activity. Not everything is beneficial: cf 1 Cor 10:23, and the whole argument of 1 Cor 8-10 on the finality of freedom and moral activity. Not let myself be dominated: certain apparently free actions may involve in fact a secret servitude in conflict with the lordship of Jesus.