1 Corinthians · Chapter 5

V. 1. Fornication-The original word implies criminal conversation of any kind whatever.

His father's wife-While his father was alive.

Verse 1. There is fornication among you] The word porneia, which we translate fornication in this place, must be understood in its utmost latitude of meaning, as implying all kinds of impurity; for, that the Corinthians were notoriously guilty of every species of irregularity and debauch, we have already seen; and it is not likely that in speaking on this subject, in reference to a people so very notorious, he would refer to only one species of impurity, and that not the most flagitious.

That one should have his father’s wife.] Commentators and critics have found great difficulties in this statement. One part of the case is sufficiently clear, that a man who professed Christianity had illegal connections with his father’s wife; but the principal question is, was his father alive or dead? Most think that the father was alive, and imagine that to this the apostle refers, 2 Corinthians 7:12, where, speaking of the person who did the wrong, he introduces also him who had suffered the wrong; which must mean the father and the father then alive. After all that has been said on this subject, I think it most natural to conclude that the person in question had married the wife of his deceased father, not his own mother, but stepmother, then a widow.

This was a crime which the text says was not so much as named among the Gentiles; the apostle must only mean that it was not accredited by them, for it certainly did often occur: but by their best writers who notice it, it was branded as superlatively infamous. CiceRomans styles it, scelus incredibile et inauditum, an incredible and unheard of wickedness; but it was heard of and practised; and there are several stories of this kind in heathen authors, but they reprobate not commend it. The word onomazetai, named, is wanting in almost every MS. and version of importance, and certainly makes no part of the text. The words should be read, and such fornication as is not amongst the Gentiles, i.e., not allowed. Some think that this woman might have been a proselyte to the Jewish religion from heathenism; and the rabbins taught that proselytism annulled all former relationship, and that a woman was at liberty in such a case to depart from an unbelieving husband, and to marry even with a believing son, i.e., of her husband by some former wife.

Verses 1, 2. It is, &c. — As if he had said, I have spoken of coming to you with a rod of correction, and it is too probable I maybe laid under a necessity of using it, though it be an unwilling necessity: for it is commonly reported that there is fornication practised among you — The original word, porneia, implies criminal conversation of any kind whatever; and is used by the LXX., and by the writers of the New Testament, in the latitude which its correspondent word hath in the Hebrew language, namely, to denote all the different kinds of uncleanness committed, whether between men and women, or between men, or with beasts. Accordingly it is used in the plural number, chap. 7:2. Here the word signifies incest joined with adultery, the woman’s husband being still living, as appears from 2 Corinthians 7:12. In the Old Testament whoredom sometimes signifies idolatry, because the union of the Israelites with God as their king being represented by God himself as a marriage, their giving themselves up to idolatry was considered as adultery. Such fornication as is not named among the Gentiles — Degenerate as they are, and abandoned to very vile practices; but is generally much condemned and detested. Accordingly many quotations brought by Whitby and others on this text, show that incest was held in high abomination among the heathen. And an enormity of this kind, as is well known, is called by Cicero, scelus incredibile et inauditum, an incredible and unheard-of wickedness. That one should have — Should cohabit with, or should marry, his father’s wife — His step-mother, and that during his father’s life. And ye, notwithstanding, are puffed up — Glory in your present condition, (1 Corinthians 4:8, 10,) and make an ostentation of your spiritual gifts to the neglect of your duty. And have not rather mourned — Given evident proofs of sorrow, such as one would have supposed a crime like this should have occasioned to the whole society, throwing every member of it into a state of humiliation and self-abasement; that he who hath done this deed might be taken from among you — Might, at that time of solemn mourning, have been expelled from your communion. From the Corinthians tolerating this crime, Macknight infers “that the guilty person was of some note among them; perhaps one of the teachers of the faction, who, being greatly admired for his personal qualifications, had escaped censure by arguing that such marriages were not forbidden by the gospel.” “It is remarkable, that neither here, nor in any of the passages where this affair is spoken of, is the woman mentioned, who was the other party in the crime. Probably she was a heathen, consequently not subject to the discipline of the church.”

Verse 1. There is fornication among you. Porneia designates every species of illicit intercourse between the sexes. Our Saxon word forliggian properly expresses fornication, but here adultery and incest are comprised. In this sad case, not only the written law, but the examples of the gentiles condemned the offender, and reproached the church with indecision. And such fornication as is not so much as named among the gentiles. Virgil mentions with contempt the fall of Anchemolus in battle, who had dared to defile the bed of his mother-in-law. Æneid. 10:388, 389. Et Rhœti de gente vetustâ

Anchemolum, thalamos ausum incestare novercæ.

1. Reported—This report, like those touching the Church strifes in the first chapter, must have come from the “household of Chloe,” or from the three special messengers; probably the latter. Commonly—Literal Greek, wholly. This cannot mean, as it is rendered by some, “every-where,” or “generally;” for in Ephesus it could have not been generally spread, and at Corinth Paul could know nothing of the extent of its spread. The Greek word, with a negative in a sentence, would signify “not at all;” as here, with an affirmative, it must signify, reversely, absolutely, or as Alford, actually. The word, then, does not indicate the extent of the report, but aggravates the heinousness of the sin reported. Fornication—A term here comprehending any sexual criminality, and designating a case of incest. So much as named—According to the best manuscripts this clause should be omitted. Have—The word would indicate either by marriage or by concubinage. How dissolute a city Corinth was, how prostitution was even there made a religious rite, and courtezans were regular priestesses to the goddess of lust, we have stated in the introduction to this epistle. The present transgressor was a member of the Church, and so probably was his father, against whom the sin was committed. 2 Corinthians 7:12. We may suppose the transgressor to have been a Gentile, who construed the morality of the new religion to be “liberal” on the laws of sex. Paul, therefore, in the next clause admonishes them that such a looseness would place Christianity below the average morals of paganism. Among… Gentiles—Though from the necessity of the case marriage among near relations at the commencement of the race was tolerated, yet in time it would be disclosed by experience that such “marrying in” would depreciate and destroy the race. Then the powerful intuitions of our nature have placed abhorrence of incest among the fundamentals of moral law. Instances of incest as narratives of abomination and horror are given in many of the classic authors. Edipus, by sad mistake marrying his own mother, is the subject of one of the most thrilling dramas of Sophocles.

Ver. 1. Fornication: literally “intercourse with harlots,” but often including, as being practically the same, all improper intercourse of the sexes. Of this sin, Paul first speaks generally; then of a specially aggravated kind of fornication. With the “many” other cases (2 Corinthians 12:21-13:2) Paul will himself deal when he comes. But “to so great a degree, not found even at Corinth among the heathen, has fornication risen among you that some one has etc.”

His father's wife; or stepmother, recalls the same words in Leviticus 18:8; Deuteronomy 22:30. That he had actually married her, seems to be implied in “has,” denoting present possession, compared with “has done” and “has carried out,” 1 Corinthians 5:2, 3, denoting a past act. Cp. Mark 6:17f; Matthew 14:4; 22:28; 1 Corinthians 7:2, 29; 1 Macc. 11:9. This would explain the confidence with which Paul assumes the man's guilt, and at once pronounces sentence. That he says nothing about the woman, suggests that she was not a Christian. From 2 Corinthians 7:12 we infer that the woman had a living and injured husband. He was probably the offender's own father: for if she had married again she would hardly be called here his father's wife. If so, the man was guilty, not only of incest, but of the worst kind of adultery. That this matter precedes 1 Corinthians 7:1 and is introduced with suddenness and surprise, implies that of this gross scandal nothing was said in the letter to Paul.

V. 2. Are ye puffed up? Should ye not rather have mourned-Have solemnly humbled yourselves, and at that time of solemn mourning have expelled that notorious sinner from your communion?

Verse 2. Ye are puffed up] Ye are full of strife and contention relative to your parties and favourite teachers, and neglect the discipline of the Church. Had you considered the greatness of this crime, ye would have rather mourned, and have put away this flagrant transgressor from among you.

Taken away from among you.] iJna exarqh ek mesou umwn. This is supposed by some to refer to the punishment of death, by others to excommunication. The Christian Church was at this time too young to have those forms of excommunication which were practised in succeeding centuries. Probably no more is meant than a simple disowning of the person, accompanied with the refusal to admit him to the sacred ordinances, or to have any intercourse or connection with him.

Verses 1, 2. It is, &c. — As if he had said, I have spoken of coming to you with a rod of correction, and it is too probable I maybe laid under a necessity of using it, though it be an unwilling necessity: for it is commonly reported that there is fornication practised among you — The original word, porneia, implies criminal conversation of any kind whatever; and is used by the LXX., and by the writers of the New Testament, in the latitude which its correspondent word hath in the Hebrew language, namely, to denote all the different kinds of uncleanness committed, whether between men and women, or between men, or with beasts. Accordingly it is used in the plural number, chap. 7:2. Here the word signifies incest joined with adultery, the woman’s husband being still living, as appears from 2 Corinthians 7:12. In the Old Testament whoredom sometimes signifies idolatry, because the union of the Israelites with God as their king being represented by God himself as a marriage, their giving themselves up to idolatry was considered as adultery. Such fornication as is not named among the Gentiles — Degenerate as they are, and abandoned to very vile practices; but is generally much condemned and detested. Accordingly many quotations brought by Whitby and others on this text, show that incest was held in high abomination among the heathen. And an enormity of this kind, as is well known, is called by Cicero, scelus incredibile et inauditum, an incredible and unheard-of wickedness. That one should have — Should cohabit with, or should marry, his father’s wife — His step-mother, and that during his father’s life. And ye, notwithstanding, are puffed up — Glory in your present condition, (1 Corinthians 4:8, 10,) and make an ostentation of your spiritual gifts to the neglect of your duty. And have not rather mourned — Given evident proofs of sorrow, such as one would have supposed a crime like this should have occasioned to the whole society, throwing every member of it into a state of humiliation and self-abasement; that he who hath done this deed might be taken from among you — Might, at that time of solemn mourning, have been expelled from your communion. From the Corinthians tolerating this crime, Macknight infers “that the guilty person was of some note among them; perhaps one of the teachers of the faction, who, being greatly admired for his personal qualifications, had escaped censure by arguing that such marriages were not forbidden by the gospel.” “It is remarkable, that neither here, nor in any of the passages where this affair is spoken of, is the woman mentioned, who was the other party in the crime. Probably she was a heathen, consequently not subject to the discipline of the church.”

Ver. 2. Ye are puffed up. Some of the Corinthians, under specious pleas, had covered the offender, and wounded the faithful, who wished for Paul’s return to sanctify the church. Now for any party to set themselves above the law of nature and of nations, in covering a presumptuous sin, indicated a haughty mind which merited his coming with a rod of discipline. The primitive church, after the example of the synagogue, used to mourn for any one who was separated from them by immoral conduct.

2. Puffed up—Note on 1 Corinthians 4:6. Neither shame nor grief over this foul sin reduced their inflation. Sensuality was a fashionable indulgence in Corinth. The precise shape and rigidity of Christian ethics were not in their minds fixed; the Church took the matter easily; neither its exultation over its worldly prosperity, nor its pride in possession of spiritual gifts, was toned down. Rather mourned—Instead of indifference and persistent pride the whole Church should have melted in grief for the downfall of this one man. The Christian body should have sympathetic nerves for the sin or sorrow of each and every member. That—To the end that. Their grief should have prompted them to the instant removal of the sin, even at the expense of the excommunication of the sinner. Taken away—By the law of Christ, the great head of the Church. That not by death but by excommunication is meant, is clear from Paul’s directions vv. 4, 5.

Ver. 2. Turns suddenly from the one notorious sinner to the church generally. By tolerating him, all exposed themselves to blame. Are puffed up: or, are men who have been puffed up: 1 Corinthians 4:6, 19. Their inflated self-esteem not only gave rise to the church-parties but made the whole church oblivious of the disgrace which this man had cast upon it.

Rather mourned: instead of being puffed up. For his sin was a calamity to all.

Done this work: married the woman he now “has.”

In order that etc. They ought in sorrow to have resolved that the guilty man should be driven from their ranks. This censure proves that a church ought to separate from itself those indisputably guilty of gross immorality.

V. 3. I verily, as present in spirit-Having a full (it seems, a miraculous) view of the whole fact. Have already, as if I were actually present, judged him who hath so scandalously done this.

Verse 3. Absent in body, but present in spirit] Perhaps St. Paul refers to the gift of the discernment of spirits, which it is very likely the apostles in general possessed on extraordinary occasions. He had already seen this matter so clearly, that he had determined on that sort of punishment which should be inflicted for this crime.

Verses 3-5. I verily, as absent — Or though absent; in body, but present in spirit — Having a full (it seems a miraculous) view of the whole fact; have judged already — Passed sentence upon him by my apostolical authority, since you have neglected doing it; as though I were present — As deliberately, justly, and authoritatively; that hath so done — Hath acted in such a scandalous manner. In the name of our Lord Jesus — By his authority and command; when ye are gathered together — In an assembly for judgment, and calling upon his name, Matthew 18:20; and my spirit — Being present with you; with the power of our Lord Jesus — To confirm what you do; to deliver such a one to Satan — To expel him from your communion. This was the highest degree of punishment in the Christian Church; and we may observe, the passing this sentence was the act of the apostle, not of the Corinthians: whereupon usually followed terrors of conscience, and bodily pains or diseases inflicted by Satan, the terrible executioner of the divine justice and displeasure. For the destruction — Though slowly and gradually; of the flesh — Unless prevented by speedy repentance; that the spirit — Being brought to true contrition and humiliation; may be saved — From those infinitely more insupportable and everlasting agonies to which it might otherwise be doomed. It was observed, in the note on 1 Corinthians 4:21, that the apostles were empowered to punish notorious offenders miraculously with diseases and death. And doubtless the command here given by the apostle to deliver the incestuous person to Satan, was an exertion of that power, especially as it was to be done at the command of the inspired apostle, and by the power of the Lord Jesus. “Accordingly Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Œcumenius conjectured, that in consequence of his being delivered to Satan, the offender’s body was weakened and wasted by some painful disease. The Latin fathers and Beza, however, thought no such effect followed that sentence; because when the Corinthians were ordered (2 Corinthians 2:7) to forgive him, no mention is made of any bodily disease that was to be removed from him. Wherefore, by the destruction of the flesh, they understood the destruction of the offender’s pride, lust, and other fleshly passions; which they thought would be mortified, when he found himself despised and shunned by all. This interpretation, however, does not, in my opinion,” says Macknight, “agree with the threatenings written 1 Corinthians 4:21; 2 Corinthians 13:1, 2, 10; nor with the apostle’s design in inflicting that punishment. For when the faction found the offender’s flesh wasted by some grievous disease, in consequence of the apostle’s sentence, it could not fail to terrify such of them as were capable of serious thought.”

3. Present in spirit—Though I am here in Ephesus, yet do you conceive me as sitting in apostolic power and spirit in your midst at Corinth, ordering the execution of the sentence I now write. Have judged already—In instant contrast with your tardiness and tolerance.

Ver. 3.-5. Notice the contrast: “some one,” 1 Corinthians 5:1; “you,” 1 Corinthians 5:2;

I. Paul supports the blame implied in 1 Corinthians 5:2, by saying what he has already resolved to do in the matter.

In the spirit: Paul's own spirit, implied in the contrast with his own body. So 1 Corinthians 7:34, Romans 8:10. Though absent in the body, Paul was present in the spirit, not only (Colossians 2:5) observing them, but able to put forth his power in their midst by inflicting punishment. His bodily distance made his spiritual presence more wonderful.

Have already resolved: or, judged, i.e. pronounced sentence in his mind: see 1 Corinthians 2:2. He did this remembering that he was virtually present, i.e. able from a distance to put forth his power among them. In this way; refers to the aggravating manner, unknown to us, of the crime.

In the name etc.: 2 Thessalonians 3:6: as the servant, and with the authority, of Jesus. Close parallels in Acts 3:6, 16; 4:10, 12. Cp. 1 Corinthians 6:11; Ephesians 5:20; Philippians 2:10; Colossians 3:17. Paul had already resolved to hand over, as the representative of Christ, this man to Satan; and he will do so in the presence of the assembled church, himself present in spirit and using the power which (2 Corinthians 13:10) Christ has entrusted to him. And my spirit: emphatic repetition of present in spirit. This assembly of the church and of Paul in spirit will also be accompanied by the power of the Lord Jesus, manifested in punishing the offender.

To give up etc.: see note, Romans 1:24: the sentence then to be executed.

To Satan: 1 Timothy 1:20; Job 2:6: surrender to the power of Satan for the infliction of some kind of evil.

For destruction etc., immediate purpose; that the spirit etc., ultimate purpose, of the surrender. It is, as in 1 Corinthians 5:3, 4, the man's own spirit.

May be saved in the etc.: admitted, by the verdict of that Day, (1 Corinthians 1:8; cp. 2 Timothy 1:18,) into eternal life. Both spirit and body will be saved. But the spirit only is mentioned, as the nobler and essential part, and in contrast to the flesh now to be given up to destruction.

This surrender to the power of Satan evidently includes, but means much more than, expulsion (1 Corinthians 5:2, 13) from the church. A man already by his sin a captive (2 Timothy 2:26) of the Devil, is to be given up to his power in some further sense. This can only refer, as in Job 2:6, (cp. Luke 13:16,) to the infliction of bodily injury by the agency of Satan and by the permission and design of God. Cp. Acts 5:5; 13:11. The grossness of the present offence called for alike terrible penalty. Such would manifest the power of the Lord Jesus and the apostolic authority of Paul who was present in his spirit. It was not immediate death: for it was designed (cp. 1 Timothy 1:20) to lead the sufferer, by repentance, to final salvation. That it was a work of Satan, increases its terror and marks its connection with the man's sin. All sin is self-surrender (Ephesians 4:19) to the power of evil: and the surrender reaches further than the sinner thinks.

Destruction of the flesh, which is given as the immediate purpose of this bodily infliction, might denote destruction of the power of bodily appetites, to which this man was evidently a slave. Cp. Galatians 5:24. For these have their source in the peculiar material of the body, the flesh, which “body of the flesh” must therefore (Colossians 2:11) be “put off.” If so, the man's body was to be smitten, (for, no other surrender to Satan can we conceive to be beneficial,) that it might cease to be a chain binding him to sin. Or, by naming the purpose, these words may practically specify the extent, of the surrender to Satan, viz. to be smitten with a fatal disease, which, by leading him to repentance, may save his soul. And this is the simplest and most likely meaning of the words used. The word flesh, instead of “body,” is no objection to it. For the body of believers will live for ever. Only their flesh, i.e. the present material of their body, (cp. 1 Corinthians 15:50,) will be destroyed. Nor is this view disproved by Paul's subsequent forgiveness, 2 Corinthians 2:6ff: for this may have been, and doubtless was, as miraculous as the punishment, a miraculous deliverance from otherwise certain death. This miraculous punishment for gross immorality cannot in any way justify corporal punishment inflicted by man for doctrinal error.

It is remarkable that in this matter of discipline, and throughout these two Epistles so full of church matters, Paul never refers to the elders or bishops. That such existed, is made almost certain by Acts 14:23; 20:17, 28; Philippians 1:2; 1 Timothy 3:1ff; 5:1, 17ff; Titus 1:5. The omission arose perhaps from this, that in a church where all were recent converts the distinction between officers and private members was necessarily less conspicuous than in a church of longer standing. But, however explained, it is a sure mark of the very early age, and therefore of the genuineness, of these Epistles.

V. 4. And my spirit-Present with you.

With the power of the Lord Jesus Christ-To confirm my sentence.

Verse 4. In the name of our Lord Jesus] Who is the head of the Church; and under whose authority every act is to be performed. And my spirit] My apostolical authority derived from him; with the power, sun dunamei, with the miraculous energy of the Lord Jesus, which is to inflict the punishment that you pronounce:—

Verses 3-5. I verily, as absent — Or though absent; in body, but present in spirit — Having a full (it seems a miraculous) view of the whole fact; have judged already — Passed sentence upon him by my apostolical authority, since you have neglected doing it; as though I were present — As deliberately, justly, and authoritatively; that hath so done — Hath acted in such a scandalous manner. In the name of our Lord Jesus — By his authority and command; when ye are gathered together — In an assembly for judgment, and calling upon his name, Matthew 18:20; and my spirit — Being present with you; with the power of our Lord Jesus — To confirm what you do; to deliver such a one to Satan — To expel him from your communion. This was the highest degree of punishment in the Christian Church; and we may observe, the passing this sentence was the act of the apostle, not of the Corinthians: whereupon usually followed terrors of conscience, and bodily pains or diseases inflicted by Satan, the terrible executioner of the divine justice and displeasure. For the destruction — Though slowly and gradually; of the flesh — Unless prevented by speedy repentance; that the spirit — Being brought to true contrition and humiliation; may be saved — From those infinitely more insupportable and everlasting agonies to which it might otherwise be doomed. It was observed, in the note on 1 Corinthians 4:21, that the apostles were empowered to punish notorious offenders miraculously with diseases and death. And doubtless the command here given by the apostle to deliver the incestuous person to Satan, was an exertion of that power, especially as it was to be done at the command of the inspired apostle, and by the power of the Lord Jesus. “Accordingly Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Œcumenius conjectured, that in consequence of his being delivered to Satan, the offender’s body was weakened and wasted by some painful disease. The Latin fathers and Beza, however, thought no such effect followed that sentence; because when the Corinthians were ordered (2 Corinthians 2:7) to forgive him, no mention is made of any bodily disease that was to be removed from him. Wherefore, by the destruction of the flesh, they understood the destruction of the offender’s pride, lust, and other fleshly passions; which they thought would be mortified, when he found himself despised and shunned by all. This interpretation, however, does not, in my opinion,” says Macknight, “agree with the threatenings written 1 Corinthians 4:21; 2 Corinthians 13:1, 2, 10; nor with the apostle’s design in inflicting that punishment. For when the faction found the offender’s flesh wasted by some grievous disease, in consequence of the apostle’s sentence, it could not fail to terrify such of them as were capable of serious thought.”

4. In name… Christ—This severance of the guilty from the Church is performed, 1.) By the divine authority of Christ; 2.) By the declaratory authority of the apostle; and 3.) By the executive authority of the collective Church, in whom the normal authority permanently resides after the miraculous apostolic authority is withdrawn. When—When ye and my spirit are gathered together.

This power of excommunication was first exercised by the Jewish Church. There was a “cutting off from the people,” as in Exodus 30:33, 38; 31:14; Leviticus 17:4; and there was an exclusion of the leprous from the camp, Leviticus 13:46; Numbers 12:14. So Christ commands that he who will not hear the Church becomes as a “heathen man and a publican;” that is, his Christian character and brotherhood are no longer to be recognised, and he is no longer of the Church but of the world. In the primitive and persecuted Church, when men, “lapsed” through fear from Christianity became pagans, anathematized Christ, and sacrificed to idols, their apostasy had an awful aspect to the eyes of the faithful. The communion of the Church became unspeakably valuable, and

excommunication from it a terror to the soul. And then, when Christianity became the religion of the State, this prerogative of excommunication became a weighty power in the hands of the hierarchy. The ecclesiastical ban pronounced upon the victim isolated him from society like a leper. It deprived him of all rights in court or in Church; made it criminal to pray with him, feed him, give him drink, or even speak to him. When the pope assumed this power, he could ban kings and absolve their subjects from all obedience to them as sovereigns, and all duty or kindness to them as persons. The most appalling form of excommunication was that of “bell, book, and candle.” By the solemn sound of the tolling bell the bishop and twelve priests, each with a lighted candle, marched in solemn procession, while the people assembled, to the cathedral. The bishop, attended by the twelve, sitting before the grand altar, read in solemn voice from the book to the congregation the most direful curses that language could frame; and when he had finished, the candles were at once dashed down, the bell recommenced to toll, and the people departed, filled with supernatural terror and an awful abhorrence of the victim accursed. According to Protestantism, excommunication being the means of securing the purity of the Church, is simply the severance of the guilty from the sacraments and from all membership of the Church.

Ver. 3.-5. Notice the contrast: “some one,” 1 Corinthians 5:1; “you,” 1 Corinthians 5:2;

I. Paul supports the blame implied in 1 Corinthians 5:2, by saying what he has already resolved to do in the matter.

In the spirit: Paul's own spirit, implied in the contrast with his own body. So 1 Corinthians 7:34, Romans 8:10. Though absent in the body, Paul was present in the spirit, not only (Colossians 2:5) observing them, but able to put forth his power in their midst by inflicting punishment. His bodily distance made his spiritual presence more wonderful.

Have already resolved: or, judged, i.e. pronounced sentence in his mind: see 1 Corinthians 2:2. He did this remembering that he was virtually present, i.e. able from a distance to put forth his power among them. In this way; refers to the aggravating manner, unknown to us, of the crime.

In the name etc.: 2 Thessalonians 3:6: as the servant, and with the authority, of Jesus. Close parallels in Acts 3:6, 16; 4:10, 12. Cp. 1 Corinthians 6:11; Ephesians 5:20; Philippians 2:10; Colossians 3:17. Paul had already resolved to hand over, as the representative of Christ, this man to Satan; and he will do so in the presence of the assembled church, himself present in spirit and using the power which (2 Corinthians 13:10) Christ has entrusted to him. And my spirit: emphatic repetition of present in spirit. This assembly of the church and of Paul in spirit will also be accompanied by the power of the Lord Jesus, manifested in punishing the offender.

To give up etc.: see note, Romans 1:24: the sentence then to be executed.

To Satan: 1 Timothy 1:20; Job 2:6: surrender to the power of Satan for the infliction of some kind of evil.

For destruction etc., immediate purpose; that the spirit etc., ultimate purpose, of the surrender. It is, as in 1 Corinthians 5:3, 4, the man's own spirit.

May be saved in the etc.: admitted, by the verdict of that Day, (1 Corinthians 1:8; cp. 2 Timothy 1:18,) into eternal life. Both spirit and body will be saved. But the spirit only is mentioned, as the nobler and essential part, and in contrast to the flesh now to be given up to destruction.

This surrender to the power of Satan evidently includes, but means much more than, expulsion (1 Corinthians 5:2, 13) from the church. A man already by his sin a captive (2 Timothy 2:26) of the Devil, is to be given up to his power in some further sense. This can only refer, as in Job 2:6, (cp. Luke 13:16,) to the infliction of bodily injury by the agency of Satan and by the permission and design of God. Cp. Acts 5:5; 13:11. The grossness of the present offence called for alike terrible penalty. Such would manifest the power of the Lord Jesus and the apostolic authority of Paul who was present in his spirit. It was not immediate death: for it was designed (cp. 1 Timothy 1:20) to lead the sufferer, by repentance, to final salvation. That it was a work of Satan, increases its terror and marks its connection with the man's sin. All sin is self-surrender (Ephesians 4:19) to the power of evil: and the surrender reaches further than the sinner thinks.

Destruction of the flesh, which is given as the immediate purpose of this bodily infliction, might denote destruction of the power of bodily appetites, to which this man was evidently a slave. Cp. Galatians 5:24. For these have their source in the peculiar material of the body, the flesh, which “body of the flesh” must therefore (Colossians 2:11) be “put off.” If so, the man's body was to be smitten, (for, no other surrender to Satan can we conceive to be beneficial,) that it might cease to be a chain binding him to sin. Or, by naming the purpose, these words may practically specify the extent, of the surrender to Satan, viz. to be smitten with a fatal disease, which, by leading him to repentance, may save his soul. And this is the simplest and most likely meaning of the words used. The word flesh, instead of “body,” is no objection to it. For the body of believers will live for ever. Only their flesh, i.e. the present material of their body, (cp. 1 Corinthians 15:50,) will be destroyed. Nor is this view disproved by Paul's subsequent forgiveness, 2 Corinthians 2:6ff: for this may have been, and doubtless was, as miraculous as the punishment, a miraculous deliverance from otherwise certain death. This miraculous punishment for gross immorality cannot in any way justify corporal punishment inflicted by man for doctrinal error.

It is remarkable that in this matter of discipline, and throughout these two Epistles so full of church matters, Paul never refers to the elders or bishops. That such existed, is made almost certain by Acts 14:23; 20:17, 28; Philippians 1:2; 1 Timothy 3:1ff; 5:1, 17ff; Titus 1:5. The omission arose perhaps from this, that in a church where all were recent converts the distinction between officers and private members was necessarily less conspicuous than in a church of longer standing. But, however explained, it is a sure mark of the very early age, and therefore of the genuineness, of these Epistles.

V. 5. To deliver such an one-This was the highest degree of punishment in the Christian church; and we may observe, the passing this sentence was the act of the apostle, not of the Corinthians. To Satan-Who was usually permitted, in such cases, to inflict pain or sickness on the offender.

For the destruction-Though slowly and gradually. Of the flesh-Unless prevented by speedy repentance.

Verse 5. To deliver such a one unto Satan] There is no evidence that delivering to Satan was any form of excommunication known either among the Jews or the Christians. Lightfoot, Selden, and Schoettgen, who have searched all the Jewish records, have found nothing that answers to this: it was a species of punishment administered in extraordinary cases, in which the body and the mind of an incorrigible transgressor were delivered by the authority of God into the power of Satan, to be tortured with diseases and terrors as a warning to all; but while the body and mind were thus tormented, the immortal spirit was under the influence of the Divine mercy; and the affliction, in all probability, was in general only for a season; though sometimes it was evidently unto death, as the destruction of the flesh seems to imply. But the soul found mercy at the hand of God; for such a most extraordinary interference of God’s power and justice, and of Satan’s influence, could not fail to bring the person to a state of the deepest humiliation and contrition; and thus, while the flesh was destroyed, the spirit was saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. No such power as this remains in the Church of God; none such should be assumed; the pretensions to it are as wicked as they are vain. It was the same power by which Ananias and Sapphira were struck dead, and Elymas the sorcerer struck blind. Apostles alone were intrusted with it.

Verses 3-5. I verily, as absent — Or though absent; in body, but present in spirit — Having a full (it seems a miraculous) view of the whole fact; have judged already — Passed sentence upon him by my apostolical authority, since you have neglected doing it; as though I were present — As deliberately, justly, and authoritatively; that hath so done — Hath acted in such a scandalous manner. In the name of our Lord Jesus — By his authority and command; when ye are gathered together — In an assembly for judgment, and calling upon his name, Matthew 18:20; and my spirit — Being present with you; with the power of our Lord Jesus — To confirm what you do; to deliver such a one to Satan — To expel him from your communion. This was the highest degree of punishment in the Christian Church; and we may observe, the passing this sentence was the act of the apostle, not of the Corinthians: whereupon usually followed terrors of conscience, and bodily pains or diseases inflicted by Satan, the terrible executioner of the divine justice and displeasure. For the destruction — Though slowly and gradually; of the flesh — Unless prevented by speedy repentance; that the spirit — Being brought to true contrition and humiliation; may be saved — From those infinitely more insupportable and everlasting agonies to which it might otherwise be doomed. It was observed, in the note on 1 Corinthians 4:21, that the apostles were empowered to punish notorious offenders miraculously with diseases and death. And doubtless the command here given by the apostle to deliver the incestuous person to Satan, was an exertion of that power, especially as it was to be done at the command of the inspired apostle, and by the power of the Lord Jesus. “Accordingly Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Œcumenius conjectured, that in consequence of his being delivered to Satan, the offender’s body was weakened and wasted by some painful disease. The Latin fathers and Beza, however, thought no such effect followed that sentence; because when the Corinthians were ordered (2 Corinthians 2:7) to forgive him, no mention is made of any bodily disease that was to be removed from him. Wherefore, by the destruction of the flesh, they understood the destruction of the offender’s pride, lust, and other fleshly passions; which they thought would be mortified, when he found himself despised and shunned by all. This interpretation, however, does not, in my opinion,” says Macknight, “agree with the threatenings written 1 Corinthians 4:21; 2 Corinthians 13:1, 2, 10; nor with the apostle’s design in inflicting that punishment. For when the faction found the offender’s flesh wasted by some grievous disease, in consequence of the apostle’s sentence, it could not fail to terrify such of them as were capable of serious thought.”

Ver. 5. Deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh. On this subject sacred criticism has sent us down various opinions. Buxtorff, in his lexicon, on the word ywdn niddui, gives us examples of jewish excommunication, which in smaller crimes was for a limited period. But of more grievous sins, as in the text, they expound the words of the law, “the soul that doeth ought presumptuously shall be cut off,” as equivalent to the punishment of death. Theophylact understands this text in the same manner. Interitum carnis; hoc est, ut morbo eum maceret et tabescere faciat; that disease may emaciate and waste his constitution. David’s sin exposed him to this awful visitation, as may be inferred from Nathan’s words, who said, after hearing his repentance, “The Lord hath put away (the punishment of) thy sin; thou shalt not die.” But Augustine, sermon 68., understands this sentence simply of excommunication, while Chrysostom adheres to the former opinion, a power which allowed Satan to afflict the body. This power the apostle himself seems to have exercised on Alexander and Hymenæus. 1 Timothy 1:20. Discipline is essential: “upon all the glory there shall be a defence.”

5. Unto Satan—From the Church, under Christ, they are to surrender him unto the world under Satan. Destruction of the flesh—As was inflicted, with instant death, upon Ananias and Sapphira. It is not to be supposed, as some commentators would have it, that this destruction is inflicted by Satan, but by the judgment of God upon one who is handed over from Christ to Satan. By destruction of the flesh some commentators, excluding all supernaturalism, understand the destruction or correction of the carnal disposition, as the natural result of the admonition and discipline of the Church. Such would be a feeble meaning. A supernatural bodily emaciation would, indeed, tend to destroy the lust of the flesh, and so would be a very suitable discipline; just as blindness inflicted upon Elymas was a suitable penalty for his blindness of soul, and tended to open his spiritual perceptions. Spirit may be saved—The excommunication, though an act of severity, is an act of love. It is the Church’s last admonition of the guilty to win him unto repentance. And the destruction of the flesh, by illness or consumption short of death from supernatural infliction, as a divine penalty, would show the truth of Christianity, the value of the Church, and the guilt of sin; and might perhaps bring the apostate to reflection, conviction, and salvation. So St. Paul delivered Hymeneus and Alexander unto Satan, in order that, admonished by the consequent destruction of the flesh, they might learn not to blaspheme. Upon this case St. Paul now (vv. 6-8) states the object of Church discipline, namely, the purity of the Church, and (9-13) the degree of separation from the wicked required, and the limitation of the Church’s discipline to its own membership.

b. Sin, like a pervading leaven, must be purged from the Church, 6-8.

Ver. 3.-5. Notice the contrast: “some one,” 1 Corinthians 5:1; “you,” 1 Corinthians 5:2;

I. Paul supports the blame implied in 1 Corinthians 5:2, by saying what he has already resolved to do in the matter.

In the spirit: Paul's own spirit, implied in the contrast with his own body. So 1 Corinthians 7:34, Romans 8:10. Though absent in the body, Paul was present in the spirit, not only (Colossians 2:5) observing them, but able to put forth his power in their midst by inflicting punishment. His bodily distance made his spiritual presence more wonderful.

Have already resolved: or, judged, i.e. pronounced sentence in his mind: see 1 Corinthians 2:2. He did this remembering that he was virtually present, i.e. able from a distance to put forth his power among them. In this way; refers to the aggravating manner, unknown to us, of the crime.

In the name etc.: 2 Thessalonians 3:6: as the servant, and with the authority, of Jesus. Close parallels in Acts 3:6, 16; 4:10, 12. Cp. 1 Corinthians 6:11; Ephesians 5:20; Philippians 2:10; Colossians 3:17. Paul had already resolved to hand over, as the representative of Christ, this man to Satan; and he will do so in the presence of the assembled church, himself present in spirit and using the power which (2 Corinthians 13:10) Christ has entrusted to him. And my spirit: emphatic repetition of present in spirit. This assembly of the church and of Paul in spirit will also be accompanied by the power of the Lord Jesus, manifested in punishing the offender.

To give up etc.: see note, Romans 1:24: the sentence then to be executed.

To Satan: 1 Timothy 1:20; Job 2:6: surrender to the power of Satan for the infliction of some kind of evil.

For destruction etc., immediate purpose; that the spirit etc., ultimate purpose, of the surrender. It is, as in 1 Corinthians 5:3, 4, the man's own spirit.

May be saved in the etc.: admitted, by the verdict of that Day, (1 Corinthians 1:8; cp. 2 Timothy 1:18,) into eternal life. Both spirit and body will be saved. But the spirit only is mentioned, as the nobler and essential part, and in contrast to the flesh now to be given up to destruction.

This surrender to the power of Satan evidently includes, but means much more than, expulsion (1 Corinthians 5:2, 13) from the church. A man already by his sin a captive (2 Timothy 2:26) of the Devil, is to be given up to his power in some further sense. This can only refer, as in Job 2:6, (cp. Luke 13:16,) to the infliction of bodily injury by the agency of Satan and by the permission and design of God. Cp. Acts 5:5; 13:11. The grossness of the present offence called for alike terrible penalty. Such would manifest the power of the Lord Jesus and the apostolic authority of Paul who was present in his spirit. It was not immediate death: for it was designed (cp. 1 Timothy 1:20) to lead the sufferer, by repentance, to final salvation. That it was a work of Satan, increases its terror and marks its connection with the man's sin. All sin is self-surrender (Ephesians 4:19) to the power of evil: and the surrender reaches further than the sinner thinks.

Destruction of the flesh, which is given as the immediate purpose of this bodily infliction, might denote destruction of the power of bodily appetites, to which this man was evidently a slave. Cp. Galatians 5:24. For these have their source in the peculiar material of the body, the flesh, which “body of the flesh” must therefore (Colossians 2:11) be “put off.” If so, the man's body was to be smitten, (for, no other surrender to Satan can we conceive to be beneficial,) that it might cease to be a chain binding him to sin. Or, by naming the purpose, these words may practically specify the extent, of the surrender to Satan, viz. to be smitten with a fatal disease, which, by leading him to repentance, may save his soul. And this is the simplest and most likely meaning of the words used. The word flesh, instead of “body,” is no objection to it. For the body of believers will live for ever. Only their flesh, i.e. the present material of their body, (cp. 1 Corinthians 15:50,) will be destroyed. Nor is this view disproved by Paul's subsequent forgiveness, 2 Corinthians 2:6ff: for this may have been, and doubtless was, as miraculous as the punishment, a miraculous deliverance from otherwise certain death. This miraculous punishment for gross immorality cannot in any way justify corporal punishment inflicted by man for doctrinal error.

It is remarkable that in this matter of discipline, and throughout these two Epistles so full of church matters, Paul never refers to the elders or bishops. That such existed, is made almost certain by Acts 14:23; 20:17, 28; Philippians 1:2; 1 Timothy 3:1ff; 5:1, 17ff; Titus 1:5. The omission arose perhaps from this, that in a church where all were recent converts the distinction between officers and private members was necessarily less conspicuous than in a church of longer standing. But, however explained, it is a sure mark of the very early age, and therefore of the genuineness, of these Epistles.

V. 6. Your glorying-Either in your gifts or prosperity, at such a time as this, is not good.

Know ye not that a little leaven-One sin, or one sinner. Leaveneth the whole lump-Diffuses guilt and infection through the whole congregation.

Verse 6. Your glorying is not good.] You are triumphing in your superior knowledge, and busily employed in setting up and supporting your respective teachers, while the Church is left under the most scandalous corruptions-corruptions which threaten its very existence if not purged away.

Know ye not] With all your boasted wisdom, do you not know and acknowledge the truth of a common maxim, a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? If this leaven-the incestuous person, be permitted to remain among you; if his conduct be not exposed by the most formidable censure; the flood-gates of impurity will be opened on the Church, and the whole state of Christianity ruined in Corinth.

Verses 6-8. Your glorying — Of the flourishing state of your church, or of your gifts, at such a time as this; is not good — Is very unseasonable, your church being defiled by tolerating such vices, and thereby exposed to God’s judgments, and also in danger of infection from such an example. Know ye not — Who boast so much of your knowledge; that a little leaven — One sin or one sinner; leaveneth the whole lump — Diffuses guilt and infection perhaps through a whole religious society or congregation; that is, this single example, if tolerated, will infect others, and draw them to the like evil practices. Purge out, therefore, the old leaven — Both of sinners and of sin; that ye may be a new lump — That your whole church may be a holy society; as ye are unleavened — As, by profession, you are obliged to be saints, and separated from sin, or that, being unleavened, ye may be a new lump, holy unto the Lord. For even Christ our passover — Who was represented by the paschal lamb, John 1:29; is sacrificed for us — Has been slain to make satisfaction for our sins, 1 Corinthians 15:3. As if he had said, It concerns you to let nothing of leaven, nothing of sin, be found about you, because as Christians we are now keeping a perpetual passover, of which the Jewish passover (about the time of which this epistle was written) was only a type. What exquisite skill, both here and everywhere, conducts the zeal of the inspired writer! How surprising a transition is here! And yet how perfectly natural! The apostle, speaking of the incestuous criminal, slides into his darling topic, a crucified Saviour! Who would have expected it on such an occasion? Yet when it is thus brought in, who does not see and admire both the propriety of the subject, and the delicacy of its introduction? Therefore let us keep the feast — Let us feed on him by faith; or let the whole of our lives be like the Jewish feast of passover and unleavened bread. Here is a plain allusion to the Lord’s supper, which was instituted in the room of the passover; not with the old leaven — Of heathenism or Judaism; or with such errors and vices as we were formerly addicted to, and influenced by: neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness — Nor allowing ourselves in any unkind and corrupt affections, or sinful practices, or tolerating among us any scandalous conduct. Malice is ill-will in the mind; but wickedness is ill-will expressed by actions, especially such as are accompanied with treachery. Hence the devil is styled o ponhrov, the wicked one. But with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth — With the most simple and sincere desire of knowing and practising every branch of our duty; which if we really have, it will keep us from all these evils, and will ensure such a uniformity of behaviour, as will be honourable to our profession, and agreeable to the design of its glorious author. The apostle gives the epithet of unleavened to the graces of sincerity and truth, in allusion to the emblematical meaning of the unleavened bread, which the Israelites were to eat during the feast of the passover; for thereby they were taught to celebrate that feast with pious and holy dispositions.

6. Your glorying—Rather, your ground of boasting; namely, an entire forgetfulness of your disgrace from this sensuality. Not good—Not honourable or noble. It was a base insensibility to moral reproach. Know ye not—A solemn phrase indicating a truth it behooved them well to know: used by St. Paul in this epistle ten times. Leaven—Is a portion of old dough in a high state of fermentation, which, added to a new mass of dough, spreads the fermentation through the whole lump, and so renders the bread, upon baking, porous and light. As this fermentation is a sort of disintegration, and proves so pervasive, the ancients saw in it an image of moral corruption. So Plutarch (quoted by Wetstein) says: “Wherefore is it unlawful for the priest of Jove, called Flamen Dialis, to touch leaven? Because leaven itself comes of putrefaction, and being commingled corrupts the mass; and leaven itself seems, indeed, a putrifying; for by abounding, it altogether acidifies and corrupts the flour.” Wetstein also thus quotes a Jewish author: “Our rabbins call lust a leaven in the lump; for as a little of the yeast impregnates the whole mass and corrupts it, so lust corrupts the whole man.”

Ver. 6.-8. After dealing with the notorious offender, Paul turns again to the whole church, with words similar to 1 Corinthians 5:2. Your supposed wisdom is no good ground-of-exultation.

A little leaven etc.: found word for word in Galatians 5:9. This suggests that it was a kind of proverb; which agrees with the metaphorical mention of leaven in Matthew 13:33; 16:6.

Lump, of dough, as in Romans 11:16. The proverb reminds us that there are other things besides leaven of which a small quantity silently permeates, and influences, and communicates its nature to, the whole of that with which it comes in contact. Paul assumes that in this respect sin is like leaven, and asks whether his readers are ignorant of the wide-spread effect of even a little leaven. His question, and the proverb, apply to sin both in the abstract and as embodied in the wicked church-member at Corinth. The least sin tolerated affects the whole man and the whole church.

Cleanse out: remove from your midst by cleansing.

Old, new: a spiritual contrast favorite with Paul; Romans 7:6; 6:4, 6; Ephesians 4:22ff; Colossians 3:9f. Sin, which like leaven communicates its nature to whatever it touches, was an essential ingredient of our old life. We must therefore become altogether new. To this end we must cleanse out all sin as belonging to the past.

Although deliverance from sin is entirely a work of God's undeserved favor, through the death of Christ and the agency of the Holy Spirit, we are here exhorted to cleanse ourselves. Cp. 2 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Peter 1:22; James 4:8; Colossians 3:5, 9f. For, only by speaking thus can we grasp the great truth that it depends upon ourselves whether or not we actually receive the purity which God works. We receive it by faith: and by a life of faith we work out (Philippians 2:12f) the salvation which God works in us. This exhortation is quite general: cp. 1 Corinthians 5:8. But it includes (cp. 1 Corinthians 5:13) the removal of the man whose obstinate sin was contaminating the whole community. According as etc.: what Paul bids, accords with objective fact. In the purpose and command of God, and in their own profession, they are separated from all sin; which is to them what, during the Passover week, leaven was to the Jews. This objective use of unleavened accords with “sanctified” in 1 Corinthians 1:2.

For indeed our Passover etc.; explains unleavened, and gives a motive for the foregoing exhortation. Our position is analogous to that of the Israelites, who were forbidden (Exodus 12:15-20) under pain of death to eat leaven during the seven days which followed the death of the paschal lamb. For Christ is to His people what the lamb was to Israel. This comparison, not found elsewhere, agrees exactly with John 1:29. So then let us keep feast: for the death of the lamb was always followed, at the strict command of God, by the feast of unleavened bread, during which no leaven was allowed in the houses of Israel. The word old, repeated from 1 Corinthians 5:7, suggests perhaps a reason for this, viz. to teach Israel by a change of food that there must be a change of life. And, just as the death of the paschal lamb laid upon the Jews a divine obligation to put away their old food and begin to eat new bread, so the death of Christ lays us under obligation to put away sin and begin to lead a new life.

Nor with a leaven of wickedness etc.: further description of the old leaven, giving its moral constitution. Just so sincerity and truth are the moral constitution of the new spiritual food.

Maliciousness: Romans 1:29.

Sincerity: 2 Corinthians 1:12: that which is the same throughout. Truth: see Romans 1:18: that which corresponds with eternal realities.

The exhortation of 1 Corinthians 5:6-8 rests upon two great truths, viz. that sin, like leaven, communicates its nature to all it touches; and that the death of Christ lays upon us an obligation to cast away all sin. Of these, the former attests itself to the conscience and experience and observation of every one. Even the least thing which God hates, if clung to, darkens our spiritual intelligence, weakens our spiritual efforts, and pollutes our entire being. Therefore sin may justly be compared to leaven. That Christ is our Passover, follows by direct inference from Doctrines 2 and 3, viz. that salvation comes through the death of the Son of God, and that God designs us to be by union with Christ sharers of the life of Christ, a life devoted to God. See under Romans 3:26; 6:10; 8:39. For, if we are saved from death by the death of Christ, then Christ is to us what the lamb was to the firstborn, who but for its death would himself have died. Whereas, apart from this doctrine we cannot conceive any sufficient justification for the comparison here used by Paul. Nor can we account for the institution of the Mosaic sacrifices. Thus this comparison, introduced incidentally to support a moral exhortation, strongly confirms our exposition of Romans 3:24-26. Again, if Christ died that we may become (Romans 6:6-11) dead to sin, then His death lays upon us an obligation to reject all sin, an obligation similar to that which bound Israel in Egypt to abstain from leaven after the paschal lamb was slain. In other words, Christ died that His death might be to us the gate to a life altogether new, and be a never-passed barrier between us and our old life in sin. Thus the exhortation of 1 Corinthians 5:8 implies the teaching of Romans 6:6-11.

1 Corinthians 5:6-8 also suggest the practical use, and the probable design, of the Mosaic ritual. It embodied essential truth, truth expounded fully only when Christ came, in a form which, while actually conveying important teaching, yet as evidently needing further explanation, kept alive expectation for the coming of Him who was to unlock its mysteries. That Paul nowhere else refers to the Passover, taken in connection with 1 Corinthians 16:8, suggests that he wrote this letter about the time of the Jewish Passover, and that this comparison and exhortation were prompted by the associations of the season at which he wrote. Paul's mention of Christ as our Passover agrees with John 19:14, 31; 18:28; 13:29, which assert or imply that Christ died on the afternoon of Nisan 14, at the very time prescribed in the Law (Exodus 12:6) for the slaying of the paschal lamb; and with John 19:36, where a command about the Passover is said to be fulfilled in Christ. This agreement is not invalidated by the apparently contrary testimony, which we cannot here discuss, of Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7; Matthew 26:17ff. See The Expositor, vol. xii. p. 82.

V. 7. Purge out therefore the old leaven-Both of sinners and of sin. That ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened-That is, that being unleavened ye may be a new lump, holy unto the Lord.

For our passover is slain for us-The Jewish passover, about the time of which this epistle was wrote, 1 Corinthians 5:11, was only a type of this. What exquisite skill both here and everywhere conducts the zeal of the inspired writer! How surprising a transition is here, and yet how perfectly natural! The apostle, speaking of the incestuous criminal, slides into his darling topic, a crucified Saviour. Who would have expected it on such an occasion. Yet, when it is thus brought in, who does not see and admire both the propriety of the subject, and the delicacy of its introduction?

Verse 7. Purge out therefore the old leaven] As it is the custom of the Jews previously to the passover to search their houses in the most diligent manner for the old leaven, and throw it out, sweeping every part clean; so act with this incestuous person. I have already shown with what care the Jews purged their houses from all leaven previously to the passover; see the note on Exodus 12:8-19, and on the term passover, and Christ as represented by this ancient Jewish sacrifice; see Clarke on “Exodus 12:27”, and my Discourse on the Nature and Design of the Eucharist.

Verses 6-8. Your glorying — Of the flourishing state of your church, or of your gifts, at such a time as this; is not good — Is very unseasonable, your church being defiled by tolerating such vices, and thereby exposed to God’s judgments, and also in danger of infection from such an example. Know ye not — Who boast so much of your knowledge; that a little leaven — One sin or one sinner; leaveneth the whole lump — Diffuses guilt and infection perhaps through a whole religious society or congregation; that is, this single example, if tolerated, will infect others, and draw them to the like evil practices. Purge out, therefore, the old leaven — Both of sinners and of sin; that ye may be a new lump — That your whole church may be a holy society; as ye are unleavened — As, by profession, you are obliged to be saints, and separated from sin, or that, being unleavened, ye may be a new lump, holy unto the Lord. For even Christ our passover — Who was represented by the paschal lamb, John 1:29; is sacrificed for us — Has been slain to make satisfaction for our sins, 1 Corinthians 15:3. As if he had said, It concerns you to let nothing of leaven, nothing of sin, be found about you, because as Christians we are now keeping a perpetual passover, of which the Jewish passover (about the time of which this epistle was written) was only a type. What exquisite skill, both here and everywhere, conducts the zeal of the inspired writer! How surprising a transition is here! And yet how perfectly natural! The apostle, speaking of the incestuous criminal, slides into his darling topic, a crucified Saviour! Who would have expected it on such an occasion? Yet when it is thus brought in, who does not see and admire both the propriety of the subject, and the delicacy of its introduction? Therefore let us keep the feast — Let us feed on him by faith; or let the whole of our lives be like the Jewish feast of passover and unleavened bread. Here is a plain allusion to the Lord’s supper, which was instituted in the room of the passover; not with the old leaven — Of heathenism or Judaism; or with such errors and vices as we were formerly addicted to, and influenced by: neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness — Nor allowing ourselves in any unkind and corrupt affections, or sinful practices, or tolerating among us any scandalous conduct. Malice is ill-will in the mind; but wickedness is ill-will expressed by actions, especially such as are accompanied with treachery. Hence the devil is styled o ponhrov, the wicked one. But with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth — With the most simple and sincere desire of knowing and practising every branch of our duty; which if we really have, it will keep us from all these evils, and will ensure such a uniformity of behaviour, as will be honourable to our profession, and agreeable to the design of its glorious author. The apostle gives the epithet of unleavened to the graces of sincerity and truth, in allusion to the emblematical meaning of the unleavened bread, which the Israelites were to eat during the feast of the passover; for thereby they were taught to celebrate that feast with pious and holy dispositions.

Ver. 7, 8. Purge out therefore the old leaven. The language here is Hebraical. Before the passover, the jews cleared their houses of leaven, and lived for seven days on biscuit bread, made simply of flour and water. Christ, the paschal lamb, being sacrificed for us, christians are called to put away from their hearts the leaven of malice and wickedness, and to be consecrated to the Lord. Our old man is crucified with Christ, that the body of sin might be destroyed.

We must next purge out the leaven of wickedness from the church, that like a chaste virgin, she may be devoted to the Lord. Then we shall celebrate our sacraments in love and harmony, and all men will honour the church, which is honoured of heaven as the family of God.

7. Purge out—By expelling the sinner if impenitent. Old leaven—This refers not to any process by which leaven can be expelled from the impregnated lump; but more probably to the practice at passover of expelling all old leaven from their houses. Note on Matthew 26:2. The original reason of this use of unleavened bread was to typify the haste of Israel’s departure from Egypt, as admitting no time for leavened bread to “rise.” But to this was subsequently added the condemnation of leaven, as a type of corruption and a relic of old Egypt; and so a ritual display of expulsion was performed. On the fourteenth day of Nisan, the whole household at night, in formal procession, searched with lighted candles through every nook and corner of their residence for any fancied possible particle of old leaven to be expelled. Hence arises before St. Paul’s mind a full allegory of the purification of the Church by the expulsion of sin. Our passover—Point after point St. Paul takes in the whole symbolism of the passover. How truly the slaying of the victim was a sacrifice, and how truly Christ was the reality of which the victim was a symbol, we have shown in note on Matthew 26:2.

Ver. 6.-8. After dealing with the notorious offender, Paul turns again to the whole church, with words similar to 1 Corinthians 5:2. Your supposed wisdom is no good ground-of-exultation.

A little leaven etc.: found word for word in Galatians 5:9. This suggests that it was a kind of proverb; which agrees with the metaphorical mention of leaven in Matthew 13:33; 16:6.

Lump, of dough, as in Romans 11:16. The proverb reminds us that there are other things besides leaven of which a small quantity silently permeates, and influences, and communicates its nature to, the whole of that with which it comes in contact. Paul assumes that in this respect sin is like leaven, and asks whether his readers are ignorant of the wide-spread effect of even a little leaven. His question, and the proverb, apply to sin both in the abstract and as embodied in the wicked church-member at Corinth. The least sin tolerated affects the whole man and the whole church.

Cleanse out: remove from your midst by cleansing.

Old, new: a spiritual contrast favorite with Paul; Romans 7:6; 6:4, 6; Ephesians 4:22ff; Colossians 3:9f. Sin, which like leaven communicates its nature to whatever it touches, was an essential ingredient of our old life. We must therefore become altogether new. To this end we must cleanse out all sin as belonging to the past.

Although deliverance from sin is entirely a work of God's undeserved favor, through the death of Christ and the agency of the Holy Spirit, we are here exhorted to cleanse ourselves. Cp. 2 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Peter 1:22; James 4:8; Colossians 3:5, 9f. For, only by speaking thus can we grasp the great truth that it depends upon ourselves whether or not we actually receive the purity which God works. We receive it by faith: and by a life of faith we work out (Philippians 2:12f) the salvation which God works in us. This exhortation is quite general: cp. 1 Corinthians 5:8. But it includes (cp. 1 Corinthians 5:13) the removal of the man whose obstinate sin was contaminating the whole community. According as etc.: what Paul bids, accords with objective fact. In the purpose and command of God, and in their own profession, they are separated from all sin; which is to them what, during the Passover week, leaven was to the Jews. This objective use of unleavened accords with “sanctified” in 1 Corinthians 1:2.

For indeed our Passover etc.; explains unleavened, and gives a motive for the foregoing exhortation. Our position is analogous to that of the Israelites, who were forbidden (Exodus 12:15-20) under pain of death to eat leaven during the seven days which followed the death of the paschal lamb. For Christ is to His people what the lamb was to Israel. This comparison, not found elsewhere, agrees exactly with John 1:29. So then let us keep feast: for the death of the lamb was always followed, at the strict command of God, by the feast of unleavened bread, during which no leaven was allowed in the houses of Israel. The word old, repeated from 1 Corinthians 5:7, suggests perhaps a reason for this, viz. to teach Israel by a change of food that there must be a change of life. And, just as the death of the paschal lamb laid upon the Jews a divine obligation to put away their old food and begin to eat new bread, so the death of Christ lays us under obligation to put away sin and begin to lead a new life.

Nor with a leaven of wickedness etc.: further description of the old leaven, giving its moral constitution. Just so sincerity and truth are the moral constitution of the new spiritual food.

Maliciousness: Romans 1:29.

Sincerity: 2 Corinthians 1:12: that which is the same throughout. Truth: see Romans 1:18: that which corresponds with eternal realities.

The exhortation of 1 Corinthians 5:6-8 rests upon two great truths, viz. that sin, like leaven, communicates its nature to all it touches; and that the death of Christ lays upon us an obligation to cast away all sin. Of these, the former attests itself to the conscience and experience and observation of every one. Even the least thing which God hates, if clung to, darkens our spiritual intelligence, weakens our spiritual efforts, and pollutes our entire being. Therefore sin may justly be compared to leaven. That Christ is our Passover, follows by direct inference from Doctrines 2 and 3, viz. that salvation comes through the death of the Son of God, and that God designs us to be by union with Christ sharers of the life of Christ, a life devoted to God. See under Romans 3:26; 6:10; 8:39. For, if we are saved from death by the death of Christ, then Christ is to us what the lamb was to the firstborn, who but for its death would himself have died. Whereas, apart from this doctrine we cannot conceive any sufficient justification for the comparison here used by Paul. Nor can we account for the institution of the Mosaic sacrifices. Thus this comparison, introduced incidentally to support a moral exhortation, strongly confirms our exposition of Romans 3:24-26. Again, if Christ died that we may become (Romans 6:6-11) dead to sin, then His death lays upon us an obligation to reject all sin, an obligation similar to that which bound Israel in Egypt to abstain from leaven after the paschal lamb was slain. In other words, Christ died that His death might be to us the gate to a life altogether new, and be a never-passed barrier between us and our old life in sin. Thus the exhortation of 1 Corinthians 5:8 implies the teaching of Romans 6:6-11.

1 Corinthians 5:6-8 also suggest the practical use, and the probable design, of the Mosaic ritual. It embodied essential truth, truth expounded fully only when Christ came, in a form which, while actually conveying important teaching, yet as evidently needing further explanation, kept alive expectation for the coming of Him who was to unlock its mysteries. That Paul nowhere else refers to the Passover, taken in connection with 1 Corinthians 16:8, suggests that he wrote this letter about the time of the Jewish Passover, and that this comparison and exhortation were prompted by the associations of the season at which he wrote. Paul's mention of Christ as our Passover agrees with John 19:14, 31; 18:28; 13:29, which assert or imply that Christ died on the afternoon of Nisan 14, at the very time prescribed in the Law (Exodus 12:6) for the slaying of the paschal lamb; and with John 19:36, where a command about the Passover is said to be fulfilled in Christ. This agreement is not invalidated by the apparently contrary testimony, which we cannot here discuss, of Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7; Matthew 26:17ff. See The Expositor, vol. xii. p. 82.

V. 8. Therefore let us keep the feast-Let us feed on him by faith. Here is a plain allusion to the Lord's supper, which was instituted in the room of the passover.

Not with the old leaven-Of heathenism or Judaism.

Malignity is stubbornness in evil.

Sincerity and truth seem to be put here for the whole of true, inward religion.

Verse 8. Therefore let us keep the feast] It is very likely that the time of the passover was now approaching, when the Church of Christ would be called to extraordinary acts of devotion, in commemorating the passion, death, and resurrection of Christ; and of this circumstance the apostle takes advantage in his exhortation to the Corinthians. See the Introduction, sect. xii.

Not with old leaven] Under the Christian dispensation we must be saved equally from Judaism, heathenism, and from sin of every kind; malice and wickedness must be destroyed; and sincerity and truth, inward purity and outward holiness, take their place.

The apostle refers here not more to wicked principles than to wicked men; let us keep the feast, not with the old leaven-the impure principles which actuated you while in your heathen state; neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, kakiav kai ponhriav, wickedness, radical depravity, producing unrighteousness in the life; nor with the persons who are thus influenced, and thus act; but with the unleavened bread, allJ en azumoiv, but with upright and godly men, who have sincerity, eilikrineia, such purity of affections and conduct, that even the light of God shining upon them discovers no flaw, and truth-who have received the testimony of God, and who are inwardly as well as outwardly what they profess to be. The word ponhriav, which we translate wickedness, is so very like to porneiav, fornication, that some very ancient MSS. have the latter reading instead of the former; which, indeed, seems most natural in this place; as kakiav, which we translate malice, includes every thing that is implied in ponhriav, wickedness whereas porneiav, as being the subject in question, see 1 Corinthians 5:1, would come more pointedly in here: Not with wickedness and fornication, or rather, not with wicked men and fornicators: but I do not contend for this reading.

Verses 6-8. Your glorying — Of the flourishing state of your church, or of your gifts, at such a time as this; is not good — Is very unseasonable, your church being defiled by tolerating such vices, and thereby exposed to God’s judgments, and also in danger of infection from such an example. Know ye not — Who boast so much of your knowledge; that a little leaven — One sin or one sinner; leaveneth the whole lump — Diffuses guilt and infection perhaps through a whole religious society or congregation; that is, this single example, if tolerated, will infect others, and draw them to the like evil practices. Purge out, therefore, the old leaven — Both of sinners and of sin; that ye may be a new lump — That your whole church may be a holy society; as ye are unleavened — As, by profession, you are obliged to be saints, and separated from sin, or that, being unleavened, ye may be a new lump, holy unto the Lord. For even Christ our passover — Who was represented by the paschal lamb, John 1:29; is sacrificed for us — Has been slain to make satisfaction for our sins, 1 Corinthians 15:3. As if he had said, It concerns you to let nothing of leaven, nothing of sin, be found about you, because as Christians we are now keeping a perpetual passover, of which the Jewish passover (about the time of which this epistle was written) was only a type. What exquisite skill, both here and everywhere, conducts the zeal of the inspired writer! How surprising a transition is here! And yet how perfectly natural! The apostle, speaking of the incestuous criminal, slides into his darling topic, a crucified Saviour! Who would have expected it on such an occasion? Yet when it is thus brought in, who does not see and admire both the propriety of the subject, and the delicacy of its introduction? Therefore let us keep the feast — Let us feed on him by faith; or let the whole of our lives be like the Jewish feast of passover and unleavened bread. Here is a plain allusion to the Lord’s supper, which was instituted in the room of the passover; not with the old leaven — Of heathenism or Judaism; or with such errors and vices as we were formerly addicted to, and influenced by: neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness — Nor allowing ourselves in any unkind and corrupt affections, or sinful practices, or tolerating among us any scandalous conduct. Malice is ill-will in the mind; but wickedness is ill-will expressed by actions, especially such as are accompanied with treachery. Hence the devil is styled o ponhrov, the wicked one. But with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth — With the most simple and sincere desire of knowing and practising every branch of our duty; which if we really have, it will keep us from all these evils, and will ensure such a uniformity of behaviour, as will be honourable to our profession, and agreeable to the design of its glorious author. The apostle gives the epithet of unleavened to the graces of sincerity and truth, in allusion to the emblematical meaning of the unleavened bread, which the Israelites were to eat during the feast of the passover; for thereby they were taught to celebrate that feast with pious and holy dispositions.

Ver. 7, 8. Purge out therefore the old leaven. The language here is Hebraical. Before the passover, the jews cleared their houses of leaven, and lived for seven days on biscuit bread, made simply of flour and water. Christ, the paschal lamb, being sacrificed for us, christians are called to put away from their hearts the leaven of malice and wickedness, and to be consecrated to the Lord. Our old man is crucified with Christ, that the body of sin might be destroyed.

We must next purge out the leaven of wickedness from the church, that like a chaste virgin, she may be devoted to the Lord. Then we shall celebrate our sacraments in love and harmony, and all men will honour the church, which is honoured of heaven as the family of God.

8. Keep the feast—As Christ is our sacrifice once offered, with perpetual efficacy, for us, so our redeemed life is a perpetual paschal feast. Old leaven—The unregeneracy of our old man. Leaven, consisting of malice— Greek, kakia, internal evil disposition. Wickedness—In permanent, external practice. Sincerity—The Greek word implies such a pure transparency of substance that the sun shines through it without detecting a speck. Hence purity. Truth—The opposite of error or deceit. c. Separateness must be from evildoers in the Church—where it must be rigid—rather than from those without, over whom Church discipline has no authority, 9-13.

Ver. 6.-8. After dealing with the notorious offender, Paul turns again to the whole church, with words similar to 1 Corinthians 5:2. Your supposed wisdom is no good ground-of-exultation.

A little leaven etc.: found word for word in Galatians 5:9. This suggests that it was a kind of proverb; which agrees with the metaphorical mention of leaven in Matthew 13:33; 16:6.

Lump, of dough, as in Romans 11:16. The proverb reminds us that there are other things besides leaven of which a small quantity silently permeates, and influences, and communicates its nature to, the whole of that with which it comes in contact. Paul assumes that in this respect sin is like leaven, and asks whether his readers are ignorant of the wide-spread effect of even a little leaven. His question, and the proverb, apply to sin both in the abstract and as embodied in the wicked church-member at Corinth. The least sin tolerated affects the whole man and the whole church.

Cleanse out: remove from your midst by cleansing.

Old, new: a spiritual contrast favorite with Paul; Romans 7:6; 6:4, 6; Ephesians 4:22ff; Colossians 3:9f. Sin, which like leaven communicates its nature to whatever it touches, was an essential ingredient of our old life. We must therefore become altogether new. To this end we must cleanse out all sin as belonging to the past.

Although deliverance from sin is entirely a work of God's undeserved favor, through the death of Christ and the agency of the Holy Spirit, we are here exhorted to cleanse ourselves. Cp. 2 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Peter 1:22; James 4:8; Colossians 3:5, 9f. For, only by speaking thus can we grasp the great truth that it depends upon ourselves whether or not we actually receive the purity which God works. We receive it by faith: and by a life of faith we work out (Philippians 2:12f) the salvation which God works in us. This exhortation is quite general: cp. 1 Corinthians 5:8. But it includes (cp. 1 Corinthians 5:13) the removal of the man whose obstinate sin was contaminating the whole community. According as etc.: what Paul bids, accords with objective fact. In the purpose and command of God, and in their own profession, they are separated from all sin; which is to them what, during the Passover week, leaven was to the Jews. This objective use of unleavened accords with “sanctified” in 1 Corinthians 1:2.

For indeed our Passover etc.; explains unleavened, and gives a motive for the foregoing exhortation. Our position is analogous to that of the Israelites, who were forbidden (Exodus 12:15-20) under pain of death to eat leaven during the seven days which followed the death of the paschal lamb. For Christ is to His people what the lamb was to Israel. This comparison, not found elsewhere, agrees exactly with John 1:29. So then let us keep feast: for the death of the lamb was always followed, at the strict command of God, by the feast of unleavened bread, during which no leaven was allowed in the houses of Israel. The word old, repeated from 1 Corinthians 5:7, suggests perhaps a reason for this, viz. to teach Israel by a change of food that there must be a change of life. And, just as the death of the paschal lamb laid upon the Jews a divine obligation to put away their old food and begin to eat new bread, so the death of Christ lays us under obligation to put away sin and begin to lead a new life.

Nor with a leaven of wickedness etc.: further description of the old leaven, giving its moral constitution. Just so sincerity and truth are the moral constitution of the new spiritual food.

Maliciousness: Romans 1:29.

Sincerity: 2 Corinthians 1:12: that which is the same throughout. Truth: see Romans 1:18: that which corresponds with eternal realities.

The exhortation of 1 Corinthians 5:6-8 rests upon two great truths, viz. that sin, like leaven, communicates its nature to all it touches; and that the death of Christ lays upon us an obligation to cast away all sin. Of these, the former attests itself to the conscience and experience and observation of every one. Even the least thing which God hates, if clung to, darkens our spiritual intelligence, weakens our spiritual efforts, and pollutes our entire being. Therefore sin may justly be compared to leaven. That Christ is our Passover, follows by direct inference from Doctrines 2 and 3, viz. that salvation comes through the death of the Son of God, and that God designs us to be by union with Christ sharers of the life of Christ, a life devoted to God. See under Romans 3:26; 6:10; 8:39. For, if we are saved from death by the death of Christ, then Christ is to us what the lamb was to the firstborn, who but for its death would himself have died. Whereas, apart from this doctrine we cannot conceive any sufficient justification for the comparison here used by Paul. Nor can we account for the institution of the Mosaic sacrifices. Thus this comparison, introduced incidentally to support a moral exhortation, strongly confirms our exposition of Romans 3:24-26. Again, if Christ died that we may become (Romans 6:6-11) dead to sin, then His death lays upon us an obligation to reject all sin, an obligation similar to that which bound Israel in Egypt to abstain from leaven after the paschal lamb was slain. In other words, Christ died that His death might be to us the gate to a life altogether new, and be a never-passed barrier between us and our old life in sin. Thus the exhortation of 1 Corinthians 5:8 implies the teaching of Romans 6:6-11.

1 Corinthians 5:6-8 also suggest the practical use, and the probable design, of the Mosaic ritual. It embodied essential truth, truth expounded fully only when Christ came, in a form which, while actually conveying important teaching, yet as evidently needing further explanation, kept alive expectation for the coming of Him who was to unlock its mysteries. That Paul nowhere else refers to the Passover, taken in connection with 1 Corinthians 16:8, suggests that he wrote this letter about the time of the Jewish Passover, and that this comparison and exhortation were prompted by the associations of the season at which he wrote. Paul's mention of Christ as our Passover agrees with John 19:14, 31; 18:28; 13:29, which assert or imply that Christ died on the afternoon of Nisan 14, at the very time prescribed in the Law (Exodus 12:6) for the slaying of the paschal lamb; and with John 19:36, where a command about the Passover is said to be fulfilled in Christ. This agreement is not invalidated by the apparently contrary testimony, which we cannot here discuss, of Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7; Matthew 26:17ff. See The Expositor, vol. xii. p. 82.

V. 9. I wrote to you in a former epistle-And, doubtless, both St. Paul and the other apostles wrote many things which are not extant now. Not to converse-Familiarly; not to contract any intimacy or acquaintance with them, more than is absolutely necessary.

Verse 9. I wrote unto you in an epistle] The wisest and best skilled in Biblical criticism agree that the apostle does not refer to any other epistle than this; and that he speaks here of some general directions which he had given in the foregoing part of it; but which he had now in some measure changed and greatly strengthened, as we see from 1 Corinthians 5:11. The words egraya en th epistolh may be translated, I HAD written to you in THIS EPISTLE; for there are many instances in the New Testament where the aorist, which is here used, and which is a sort of indefinite tense, is used for the perfect and the plusquam-perfect. Dr. Whitby produces several proofs of this, and contends that the conclusion drawn by some, viz. that it refers to some epistle that is lost, is not legitimately drawn from any premises which either this text or antiquity affords. The principal evidence against this is 2 Corinthians 7:8, where en th epistolh, the same words as above, appear to refer to this first epistle. Possibly the apostle may refer to an epistle which he had written though not sent; for, on receiving farther information from Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, relative to the state of the Corinthian Church, he suppressed that, and wrote this, in which he considers the subject much more at large. See Dr. Lightfoot.

Not to company with fornicators] With which, as we have already seen, Corinth abounded. It was not only the grand sin, but staple, of the place.

Verses 9-11. I wrote to you in a former epistle — Doubtless both Paul and the other apostles wrote many things which are not extant now; not to company — Mh sunanamignusqai, not to be intermixed, not to associate with fornicators, and such scandalous sinners; not to contract any intimacy or acquaintance with them, more than is absolutely necessary. Yet not altogether — I did not mean thereby that ye should altogether refrain from conversing with heathen, who are guilty of that sin, or others equally heinous; or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters — Sinners against themselves, their neighbour, and God. For then must ye needs go out of the world — Then all civil commerce must cease, the citizens of Corinth being generally such. So that going out of the world, which some account a perfection, Paul accounts an utter absurdity. But now I have written unto you — Now I explain my mind more fully, that I meant it of persons professing Christianity: not to keep company — To abstain from ordinary, familiar, unnecessary converse with them. If any man that is called a brother — A Christian, and a member of your church; be a fornicator, &c., with such a one, no not to eat — Which is the lowest degree of familiarity. The sense of this is, that a conscientious Christian should choose, as far as he can, the company, intercourse, and familiarity of good men, and such as fear God; and avoid, as far as his necessary affairs will permit, the conversation and fellowship of such as Paul here describes. This is a thing (what decay soever of public discipline there may be) in each particular Christian’s power.

9. I wrote—In a former epistle not now extant. Note on Acts 19:12. A respectable minority of commentators doubt the reality of this former epistle. They argue, 1. The words an epistle (literally, in the Greek, the epistle) might be rendered this epistle; and that the reference might be to verses 1-5. But this reference we think to be scarcely admissible. 2. It is not to be supposed that an apostolic epistle, a part of the sacred canon, would be lost. But we have no reason to suppose that Paul and the other apostles wrote no more letters than we now have in the New Testament. See note at close of preceding chapter.

I CORINTHIANS

SECTION 8 — THEY MUST WITHDRAW, NOT

FROM ALL WICKED MEN, BUT FROM ALL

WICKED CHURCH-MEMBERS CH. 5:9-13

I wrote to you, in the letter, not to be mixed up with fornicators. Not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous ones and grasping ones or idolaters. Since, if so, you ought to go forth out of the world. And now I have written to you not to be mixed up, if any one bearing the name of brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or drunken, or grasping; with such a one not even to eat together. For what have I to do with judging those outside? As to yourselves, is it not those within whom you judge? But those outside God judges. Take away the bad man from among yourselves.

Ver. 9. A new subject closely connected with the foregoing, introduced abruptly by a reference to something Paul has already written to the Corinthians.

In the letter: a previous letter. Cp. 2 Corinthians 7:8; which refers evidently to this First extant Epistle. Had Paul written no earlier letter and referred here only to 1 Corinthians 5:1-8, these words would be needless and meaningless: whereas, if he wished to say that he referred here not to some earlier letter but to this one, he would certainly have written “in this letter.” Moreover, the word “now” in 1 Corinthians 5:11 contrasts 1 Corinthians 5:1-8 with something written before. An earlier letter from Paul to the Corinthians is by no means impossible or unlikely; and seems to be implied in 2 Corinthians 10:10. Nothing is proved by Romans 16:22; 1 Thessalonians 5:27; Colossians 4:16: for they refer to a letter just finished, and the word letter is needful to make up the sense. We need not suppose that Paul wrote no letters but those now extant. God has preserved so many as He saw to be needful for the direction and edification of the church. But there were doubtless others, written under the guidance of the Spirit and for those who received them clothed with apostolic authority, which attained their purpose by meeting a temporary emergency. In the letter, refers to some one definite letter, known to the Corinthians, which Paul has here in view; and therefore does not imply that he had written to them only one earlier letter.

V. 10. But I did not mean that you should altogether refrain from conversing with heathens, though they are guilty in some of these respects. Covetous, rapacious, idolaters-Sinners against themselves, their neighbour, God.

For then ye must go out of the world-Then all civil commerce must cease. So that going out of the world, which some account a perfection, St. Paul accounts an utter absurdity.

Verse 10. For then must ye needs go out of the world.] What an awful picture of the general corruption of manners does this exhibit! The Christians at Corinth could not transact the ordinary affairs of life with any others than with fornicators, covetous persons, extortioners, railers, drunkards, and idolaters, because there were none others in the place! How necessary was Christianity in that city!

Verses 9-11. I wrote to you in a former epistle — Doubtless both Paul and the other apostles wrote many things which are not extant now; not to company — Mh sunanamignusqai, not to be intermixed, not to associate with fornicators, and such scandalous sinners; not to contract any intimacy or acquaintance with them, more than is absolutely necessary. Yet not altogether — I did not mean thereby that ye should altogether refrain from conversing with heathen, who are guilty of that sin, or others equally heinous; or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters — Sinners against themselves, their neighbour, and God. For then must ye needs go out of the world — Then all civil commerce must cease, the citizens of Corinth being generally such. So that going out of the world, which some account a perfection, Paul accounts an utter absurdity. But now I have written unto you — Now I explain my mind more fully, that I meant it of persons professing Christianity: not to keep company — To abstain from ordinary, familiar, unnecessary converse with them. If any man that is called a brother — A Christian, and a member of your church; be a fornicator, &c., with such a one, no not to eat — Which is the lowest degree of familiarity. The sense of this is, that a conscientious Christian should choose, as far as he can, the company, intercourse, and familiarity of good men, and such as fear God; and avoid, as far as his necessary affairs will permit, the conversation and fellowship of such as Paul here describes. This is a thing (what decay soever of public discipline there may be) in each particular Christian’s power.

10. Of this world—In Paul’s last epistle the prohibition of associating with the sensualists had been apparently over interpreted, so as to make any association in the dissolute world of Corinth impracticable. This at once produced a stern asceticism, and overlooked the true field of discipline, which was to preserve both the purity and the reputation for purity of the holy Church. Or with—He now extends the rule to other vices than incontinence. Covetous—Overreachers in business. Extortioners— Rapacious men of all classes, embezzlers, pillagers, robbers. Idolaters— Image worshippers. Said by Grotius to be the first time the word occurs in any document extant. Go out… world—And St. Paul here clearly assumes that it is the Christian’s duty to stay in the world. Christianity allows no right to shut one’s self up in a monastery, convent, or cave; no right to become a monk or a nun.

Ver. 10. Not altogether. The words “not to be mixed up etc.” in the earlier letter are not to be understood universally, as referring to all fornicators without exception. Whether these words had been actually misunderstood, and the misunderstanding made known to Paul either orally (e.g. 1 Corinthians 1:11) or by letter, (1 Corinthians 7:1,) we do not know. Perhaps some had wilfully misinterpreted them, to make them appear impracticable. In either case he naturally deals with the matter here. Of this world: 1 Corinthians 3:19; 7:31; Ephesians 2:2; John 8:23; 11:9; 12:25, 31; 16:11; 18:36.

World: 1 Corinthians 1:20: all the complex realm of things around us, looked upon as existing in space. It then denotes, in contrast to those who belong to the coming age, men and things around so far as they do not submit to Christ. As an outward distinction, it denotes those outside the community which professes to have been saved from the world. So here. Paul's words about fornicators are not to be taken universally, i.e. of those who belong to the world around us, but only of professing Christians. Or etc.: other sins mentioned in Paul's letter.

Covetous: greedy for material good. It will be discussed under Ephesians 5:5.

Grasping: who with violence take other men's goods.

Since, if so, etc.: such a universal prohibition would forbid all intercourse with men around; which would be evidently impracticable. And this impracticability proves sufficiently that Paul's former words are not to be thus understood.

V. 11. Who is named a brother-That is, a Christian; especially if a member of the same congregation.

Rapacious-Guilty of oppression, extortion, or any open injustice. No, not to eat with him-Which is the lowest degree of familiarity.

Verse 11. But now I have written] I not only write this, but I add more: if any one who is called a brother, i.e. professes the Christian religion, be a fornicator, covetous, idolater, railer, drunkard, or extortioner, not even to eat with such-have no communion with such a one, in things either sacred or civil. You may transact your worldly concerns with a person that knows not God, and makes no profession of Christianity, whatever his moral character may be; but ye must not even thus far acknowledge a man professing Christianity, who is scandalous in his conduct. Let him have this extra mark of your abhorrence of all sin; and let the world see that the Church of God does not tolerate iniquity.

Verses 9-11. I wrote to you in a former epistle — Doubtless both Paul and the other apostles wrote many things which are not extant now; not to company — Mh sunanamignusqai, not to be intermixed, not to associate with fornicators, and such scandalous sinners; not to contract any intimacy or acquaintance with them, more than is absolutely necessary. Yet not altogether — I did not mean thereby that ye should altogether refrain from conversing with heathen, who are guilty of that sin, or others equally heinous; or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters — Sinners against themselves, their neighbour, and God. For then must ye needs go out of the world — Then all civil commerce must cease, the citizens of Corinth being generally such. So that going out of the world, which some account a perfection, Paul accounts an utter absurdity. But now I have written unto you — Now I explain my mind more fully, that I meant it of persons professing Christianity: not to keep company — To abstain from ordinary, familiar, unnecessary converse with them. If any man that is called a brother — A Christian, and a member of your church; be a fornicator, &c., with such a one, no not to eat — Which is the lowest degree of familiarity. The sense of this is, that a conscientious Christian should choose, as far as he can, the company, intercourse, and familiarity of good men, and such as fear God; and avoid, as far as his necessary affairs will permit, the conversation and fellowship of such as Paul here describes. This is a thing (what decay soever of public discipline there may be) in each particular Christian’s power.

Ver. 11. Now I have written to you — with such a one, no not to eat. He had written before, but now, being more fully informed by the arrival of Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, he wrote in stronger words, not to receive and return visits from excommunicated persons, as that would commit the moral glory of the christian character in public estimation, and the sour leaven would operate on the heart. These injunctions are understood to be addressed to the individuals concerned, for the church alone has the power of expulsion. She must be purged of sins so foul, or there will be no church. Yet even towards gross offenders, we must not withhold the civil duties and obligations of life.

11. But now—In this letter written here to define more clearly my former words. Called a brother—Whom your associating with would, constructively, sanction his claim to brotherhood in the Church. Not to eat—In such a way as would seem to admit to the pagans of Corinth a Church association with him. This does not mean merely to refuse sacramental communion with him, but the interchange of table hospitalities; a separateness necessarily more severe in a heathen than a Christian community. The intention is not to punish him, or to make an enemy of him, or to render him miserable; but to secure the Church equally from the infection and the disgrace of his fellowship. Seneca (quoted by Wetstein) says: “It matters not so much what, as with whom, you eat and drink.”

Ver. 11. Now I have written etc.: viz. in 1 Corinthians 5:1-8, which are practically a repetition of the injunction given in the former letter. For, the blame in 1 Corinthians 5:2 implies that they ought to separate themselves from immoral professors.

Not to be mixed up etc.: repeated from 1 Corinthians 5:9 reminds us that the principle involved in 1 Corinthians 5:2 is but a repetition of the earlier injunction. The word idolaters betrays, as do 1 Corinthians 6:9; 10:7, 14; 1 John 5:21, a proneness in some early Christians to take part, publicly or privately, through fear or through an inadequate sense of the evil of all idolatry, in the rites of heathenism. A railer: using violent language against others.

With such a one etc.: teaches plainly that they were to treat a wicked church-member quite differently from a heathen guilty of the same sins. For the church-member was sailing under false colors. Any intercourse with him would be a practical acknowledgment that he was what he professed to be, which it was most important to disown.

V. 12. I speak of Christians only. For what have I to do to judge heathens? But ye, as well as I, judge those of your own community.

Verse 12. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without?] The term without, touv exw, signifies those who were not members of the Church, and in this sense its correspondent term: µynwxyjh hachitsonim, those that are without, is generally understood in the Jewish writers, where it frequently occurs. The word kai also, which greatly disturbs the sense here, is wanting in ABCFG, and several others, with the Syriac, Coptic, Slavonic, Vulgate, and the Itala; together with several of the fathers. The sentence, I think, with the omission of kai also, should stand thus: Does it belong to me to pass sentence on those which are without-which are not members of the Church? By no means (ouci.) Pass ye sentence on them which are within-which are members of the Church: those which are without-which are not members of the Church, God will pass sentence on, in that way in which he generally deals with the heathen world. But put ye away the evil from among yourselves. This is most evidently the apostle’s meaning, and renders all comments unnecessary. In the last clause there appears to be an allusion to Deuteronomy 17:7, where the like directions are given to the congregation of Israel, relative to a person found guilty of idolatry: Thou shalt put away the evil from among you-where the version of the Septuagint is almost the same as that of the apostle: kai exareiv ton ponhron ex umwn autwn.

THERE are several important subjects in this chapter which intimately concern the Christian Church in general.

1. If evil be tolerated in religious societies, the work of God cannot prosper there. If one scandal appear, it should be the cause of general humiliation and mourning to the followers of God where it occurs; because the soul of a brother is on the road to perdition, the cause of God so far betrayed and injured, and Christ recrucified in the house of his friends. Pity should fill every heart towards the transgressor, and prayer for the backslider occupy all the members of the Church.

2. Discipline must be exercised in the Christian Church; without this it will soon differ but little from the wilderness of this world. But what judgment, prudence, piety, and caution, are requisite in the execution of this most important branch of a minister’s duty! He may be too easy and tender, and permit the gangrene to remain till the flock be infected with it. Or he may be rigid and severe, and destroy parts that are vital while only professing to take away what is vitiated. A backslider is one who once knew less or more of the salvation of God. Hear what God says concerning such: Turn, ye backsliders, for I am married unto you. See how unwilling He is to give them up! He suffers long, and is kind: do thou likewise; and when thou art obliged to cut off the offender from the Church of Christ, follow him still with thy best advice and heartiest prayers.

3. A soul cut off from the flock of God is in an awful state! his outward defence is departed from him; and being no longer accountable to any for his conduct, he generally plunges into unprecedented depths of iniquity; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. Reader, art thou without the pale of God’s Church? remember it is here written, them that are WITHOUT God judgeth, 1 Corinthians 5:13.

4. Christians who wish to retain the spirituality of their religion should be very careful how they mingle with the world. He who is pleased with the company of ungodly men, no matter howsoever witty or learned, is either himself one with them, or is drinking into their spirit. It is impossible to associate with such by choice without receiving a portion of their contagion. A man may be amused or delighted with such people, but he will return even from the festival of wit with a lean soul. Howsoever contiguous they may be, yet the Church and the world are separated by an impassable gulf.

5. If all the fornicators, adulterers, drunkards, extortioners, and covetous persons which bear the Christian name, were to be publicly excommunicated from the Christian Church, how many, and how awful would the examples be! If however the discipline of the visible Church be so lax that such characters are tolerated in it, they should consider that this is no passport to heaven. In the sight of God they are not members of his Church; their citizenship is not in heaven, and therefore they have no right to expect the heavenly inheritance. It is not under names, creeds, or professions, that men shall be saved at the last day; those alone who were holy, who were here conformed to the image of Christ, shall inherit the kingdom of God. Those who expect it in any other way, or on any other account, will be sadly deceived.

I CORINTHIANS

Verses 12, 13. For, &c. — I speak of Christians only: for what have I to do to judge them that are without — Namely, heathen: do not ye judge them that are within? — Ye, as well as I, judge those of your own community: them that are without, God judgeth — The passing sentence on these God hath reserved to himself, and they shall not go unpunished, though they fall not under your censure. Therefore — In consideration of this, both in one view and the other, let it be your immediate care, as you regard the peace of the church, and the safety of your own souls; to put away from among yourselves — Speedily, and with all due solemnity; that wicked person — Whom I have mentioned, and any others, whose characters may, like his, be scandalous and infections. The apostle is thought, by some, to have written this, and the preceding verse, to show the Corinthians the reason why, after commanding them to pass so severe a sentence on the man, he said nothing to them concerning the woman, who was guilty with him. The discipline of the church was not to be exercised on persons out of it. Hence it appears that this woman was a heathen.

12. For—I limit the application of this rule to a brother, for the following reason. What… to do—What right do I possess? Judge… without— Church discipline assumes but to govern the Church, whose members have voluntarily placed themselves under its authority. The Church is a holy republic, governed by its own laws. Do not ye—Do not you, as a Church, limit your discipline to your own number, and thereby show that such was the meaning of my letter?

Ver. 12.-13a. Reason for this different treatment of equally immoral church-members and heathens, viz. that Paul has no business to pronounce sentence on those outside (Colossians 4:5; 1 Thessalonians 4:12; 1 Timothy 3:7) the church.

Whom you judge: an appeal, in support of this reason, to their own church-discipline. “It is your business to see, not whether heathens, but whether church-members, are guilty of sin.”

God judges: both now, and finally at the great day. The punishments which in this world follow sin, prove that sinners are already condemned.

V. 13. Them that are without God will judge-The passing sentence on these he hath reserved to himself.

And ye will take away that wicked person-This properly belongs to you.

Verses 12, 13. For, &c. — I speak of Christians only: for what have I to do to judge them that are without — Namely, heathen: do not ye judge them that are within? — Ye, as well as I, judge those of your own community: them that are without, God judgeth — The passing sentence on these God hath reserved to himself, and they shall not go unpunished, though they fall not under your censure. Therefore — In consideration of this, both in one view and the other, let it be your immediate care, as you regard the peace of the church, and the safety of your own souls; to put away from among yourselves — Speedily, and with all due solemnity; that wicked person — Whom I have mentioned, and any others, whose characters may, like his, be scandalous and infections. The apostle is thought, by some, to have written this, and the preceding verse, to show the Corinthians the reason why, after commanding them to pass so severe a sentence on the man, he said nothing to them concerning the woman, who was guilty with him. The discipline of the church was not to be exercised on persons out of it. Hence it appears that this woman was a heathen.

13. God judgeth—Many pagan Corinthians may have been far more corrupt than this incestuous Church member. But they could not be expelled the Church, for they were already without its pale. Nor had the apostle any miraculous power to emaciate their bodies or blind their eyes. If he had possessed such power he would have also had a stupendous amount of penal work on his hands. Judgment enough was impending over them, from inflicting which the apostle was exempt by God’s own power.

Ver. 13b. After enforcing and guarding the express injunction of a former letter, and a principle involved in § 7 of this letter, Paul concludes § 8 by urging his readers to carry out this principle with the notorious offender of 1 Corinthians 5:1.

Take away etc.; almost word for word from Deuteronomy 17:7; 21:21, which refer to the punishment of death for idolatry and for disobedience to parents. Thus the wicked Israelite was removed from the people. The terrible meaning of these words in the Old Testament gives great weight to them when used for the lighter sentence here enjoined; and clothes this sentence with Old Testament authority.

From among yourselves: emphatic contrast to “those outside,” reminding the readers that the evil to be removed was in their own midst. The great precept of § 8, viz. that we must have nothing to do with those who profess to serve Christ and yet live in sin, was probably more easy to obey in Paul's day than in ours. For the veneer of a higher general social morality covers up, now more than then, very much actual sin, and makes if often impossible to determine the guilt or innocence of suspected persons. In nothing is Christian wisdom more needed than in our treatment of such. But, wherever it can be applied with certainty, the general principle is valid and important.