article18

§13 Shocking Sexual Immorality (1 Cor. 5:1–13)

The move from chapter 4 with its discussion of the ministry of the apostles to chapter 5 with the focused discussion of immorality may seem to be an illogical leap on the part of Paul. Quick shifts in focus such as this one have led a few interpreters to suggest that the document called 1 Corinthians is not a unified composition; but that reading of the text is an overreaction to the diversity of Paul’s remarks. Indeed, in 4:18 Paul confronted some of the Corinthians because they were arrogant (ephysiōthēsan, from physioō), and after seeming to shift the focus in 5:1 with the reference to immorality Paul repeats the confrontative accusation that the Corinthians are arrogant (pephysiōmenoi, from physioō) in 5:2. Unfortunately this connection is lost in the NIV’s translation of the first declaration as “arrogant” (4:18) and the second as “proud” (5:2). Nevertheless, Paul’s choice and use of words indicate continuity of concern. From the mention of Corinthian arrogance in reaction to the apostles’ style of ministry in chapter 4, Paul specifies an instance of that arrogance by taking up the topic of immorality; thus Paul concretizes his criticism and illustrates the validity of his accusation. Moreover, behind the censure of arrogance in both chapters is Paul’s overarching concern to recall and to redirect the Corinthians into a manner of life that embodies and fulfills God’s commission of the Christian community to mission. As one sees through a careful, close reading of the text, Paul is upset because of the immorality in Corinth, but he treats that flamboyant phenomenon as a symptom of the true, deeper problem that he faces among the Corinthians, namely, their spiritual arrogance, which produces elitism or indifference that renders the congregation inactive and ineffective in living out God’s will for their lives in this world.

Three distinct, interrelated sets of verses bring the new issues into play in Paul’s communication to the Corinthians. First, in 5:1–5 Paul identifies an incident of sexual immorality in the Corinthian congregation, wherein “someone has his father’s wife.” He declares his shock and announces that he has already passed judgment; then he instructs the church about what to do and why. Paul’s reference to the problem raises questions, but most likely the situation is that a man is living with his former stepmother. In turn, the language related to Paul’s judgment, his instructions to the Corinthians, and his explanation of the prescribed action are difficult and produce at least two challenges for interpretation. The language of Paul’s directions concerning the action the Corinthians are to take is ambiguous. Moreover, Paul’s purpose is unclear when he tells the Corinthians, literally, “Give this one to Satan unto destruction of the flesh, in order that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.” What does “unto destruction of the flesh” mean? Whose “spirit” is it that “may be saved”? There are no easy answers.

Second, in 5:6–8 Paul turns to the community and their problem of boasting. The lines pick up the mention of arrogance in 5:2, and Paul criticizes the Corinthians’ boasting by using the image of leaven. His point is that a little undesirable boasting goes a long way. Paul continues by declaring that the motivation for Christian purity and discipline is Christ himself, whom Paul acclaims and interprets as the paschal lamb. This traditional image registers the reality of the saving significance of Jesus’ death and reminds the Corinthians that what God has done in Christ calls forth an altered manner of living for those who hear and believe the message of Christ.

Third, a new but still related line of thought comes in 5:9–13. Paul refers to a former letter that he says the Corinthians badly misunderstood. He means for the Corinthians to dissociate themselves from immoral persons in the church, not from those outside. He tells them plainly that God attends to those outside the church. In all of this, Paul’s point is that the church, as those called by God in Christ, cannot tolerate within it the kind of immorality that existed in the Corinthian church. Paul urges the Corinthians to be the church that God called them to be and to live responsibly in relation to God’s will for their life. Above all, he beckons the congregation away from its errors and toward its mission to the world.

5:1 / Remarkably, as Paul takes up this matter of sexual impropriety, he never directly addresses the principal parties participating in the scandal. The behavior in view here contrasts sharply with the “imitation” that the apostle advised in the prior section, and as he registers his judgment concerning the issue Paul reveals the fallacy of those who are “arrogant, as if [he] were not coming to [them]” (4:18).

Paul identifies the situation in Corinth as one of sexual immorality, using the Greek word porneia, a term commonly used for prostitution. This reference is comprehensive and was used to cover, always in a negative way, almost all forms of sexual activity outside of marriage. Jewish ethical writings reveal a particular disdain for such activity (Wis. 14; Jub. 25; and Acts 15:20; Rom. 1–3); and while Greco-Roman culture was generally more tolerant of casual sex than was Judaism, Paul’s words (of a kind that does not occur even among pagans) show that Hellenism was not entirely promiscuous.

Paul’s manner of describing the situation (a man has his father’s wife) is enlightening. First, the verb has indicates a somewhat permanent relationship. Second, both Jewish and Roman law forbade incest, and the descriptive phrase his father’s wife (see Lev. 18:7–8; 20:11) most likely refers to a stepmother with no indication that adultery was in mind. Specifically, Roman law forbade marriage both between adoptive parents and children and between steprelatives; thus, the man’s father could be dead or divorced from this woman, and an unacceptable liaison would be formed if the “son” and the “wife” became involved sexually.

5:2 / Paul names an even greater problem: the pride, boastfulness, or arrogance of the Corinthians (you are proud) regarding the sexual situation identified in the previous verse. The failure of the congregation to act appropriately in relation to such a situation is the heart of Paul’s concern. Not only has the Corinthian congregation condoned this culturally unacceptable behavior; Paul declares that they also are puffed up over the circumstances, and their conceit causes the apostle theological distress.

In chapter 4 Paul referred to the pride or boasting of the Corinthians, and here one finds an illustration of their assumed spiritual superiority. Paul’s sarcasm indicates that the Corinthian Christians thought they were above being rankled by behavior that was deemed unacceptable by their society. The claim of spiritual superiority made them morally complacent according to Paul; thus, not only were they guilty of benign tolerance of the unacceptable, but also they were remiss in taking no action to address and to correct the situation. Being proud they showed no grief and took no action. So Paul faults the congregation’s behavior and tells them that they should have put out of their midst the one who did this deed. This observation often seems harsh, but as the following verses show, Paul is not so much advising about discipline as he is articulating a remarkable theological truth from his apocalyptic-eschatological point of view.

5:3 / The NIV works to make clear a grammatical jumble in Greek that has often vexed translators and produced some awkward and unfortunate readings of verses 3–5. Simply put, Paul is absent “in body” but present in spirit. Whether he means to indicate that he is spiritually present or present in the power of the Holy Spirit is impossible to determine, but given that judgment is being discussed and that Paul understands his apostolic call, commission, and mission to come from God (1:1) and to be empowered by the Spirit (2:4), one should not understand him to be acting independently or autonomously. Rather, his judgment of this affair is Spirit-empowered and in the Spirit, even if Paul is referring to his being spiritually present with the Corinthians. Yet, the likelihood that Paul is emphasizing the universal presence of the Spirit over his own spiritual presence is increased by his saying that he had already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present. While the Spirit had already enlightened Paul’s thinking, Paul was not yet spiritually present in the assembly of the church, which had still to meet according to his instructions.

5:4 / In the Greek, this verse begins with in the name of [the] Lord Jesus. Some translations attach this phrase to the end of verse 3 (“judgment in the name of the Lord Jesus”), but the NIV understands these words to introduce Paul’s next comment concerning the congregation’s gathering together for worship and fellowship (when you are assembled in the name of [the] Lord Jesus …). Both translations are defensible, although the first option is the more natural reading of the phrase.

Nevertheless, Paul assumes the Corinthians will assemble. In this context, he declares that his spirit will be present with the power of [the] Lord Jesus. The sentence is difficult, and the NIV seeks to clarify Paul’s words by breaking the line into two complementary parts (I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present), although the results do not literally reflect the plain sense of the text. The difficulty for late twentieth-century readers comes in part because we do not appreciate Paul’s vivid sense of the reality of the Holy Spirit as God’s universal power and presence and his conviction of the real presence of the Lord Jesus. Paul assumes that the Spirit is real, that the Lord Jesus is present and powerful, and that since as a Christian he is in the Spirit, then he is truly spiritually present among the Corinthian assembly in the power of the presence of the Holy Spirit.

5:5 / Paul offers concrete instructions, but the plain sense of his words is not immediately apparent, so the NIV moves closer to paraphrase than literal translation. Quite literally Paul says, “Hand over this one to Satan unto destruction of the flesh, in order that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.” What does he mean?

The mention of the day of the Lord qualifies Paul’s instructions from the perspective of future, final, apocalyptic eschatology. Thus, to grasp the sense of Paul’s directions we must think in terms of a future day of final divine judgment that relativizes all current earthly existence. For Paul, the day of the Lord would bring the end to all the forces of evil (see 1 Cor. 15; 1 Thess. 4–5), but until that day evil is real and active in the world. Only God has the power to combat evil, and as God works through Jesus Christ to save humanity from the reality of sin and evil (Satan), God delivers those saved from “the present evil age” (Gal. 1:4) and brings them into the realm of the Spirit. The church itself is God’s newly gained “kingdom” (1 Cor. 4:20) in an otherwise fading world (1:18; 7:29–31).

For the church in Corinth to tolerate the immoral behavior of this particular man is a tragedy, for in the context of the church he is assumed to be freed from the power of evil and set at liberty in the power of the Spirit (cf. 6:12–20). If the church fails to judge this behavior, if such activity is tolerated and considered evidence of spiritual freedom, the condition of the man is hopeless. The church is charged with the responsibility of judging and disciplining those whom God has brought into the life of the church (see 5:9–13; 6:1–11), but if the members fail to live responsibly in relation to one another, the condition is dangerous. In the church God trusts the assembly, empowered by the Spirit, to judge and to correct one another. In relation to those outside the church, the battle against sin is God’s work.

Because the church has failed miserably to live up to God’s commission, Paul demands that the man engaging in particularly deplorable activity be thrown out of the church. This action accomplishes three important results. First, the church has to confront its own failure to do God’s work. Second, the church has to live up to its responsibilities. Third, the man who was hand[ed] over to Satan is put back in the context of the world, where the church can no longer fail him and where his only real hope is the saving power of God at work in Jesus Christ. As cruel as Paul’s advice may seem, he probably views this action as a final effort to save both the man and the church from hopeless corruption. Fee summarizes the issues succinctly with these observations, “What the grammar suggests, then, is that the ‘destruction of his flesh’ is the anticipated result of the man’s being put back out into Satan’s domain, while the express purpose of the action is his redemption” (Epistle, p. 209).

5:6 / Paul summarizes his point of view and advances his argument in this and the following verses. First, he bluntly states the point he has made repeatedly: Your boasting is not good. Having driven that conviction home, Paul introduces the metaphor of leaven in a rhetorical question. In antiquity yeast was a common image for a small matter that had the potential to affect a much larger or more significant situation. The implication of Paul’s sarcastic question is that the Corinthians ought to, but apparently do not, know better than to tolerate “a little” immorality.

5:7 / Having introduced the metaphor of leaven or yeast, Paul proceeds to develop that image to bolster his previous insistence that the man engaging in immoral sexual activity be put out of the congregation. To make this point Paul relates the image of yeast to the celebration of unleavened bread that made up part of the Passover ritual. At Passover the custom in Judaism was to cleanse the home of all yeast so as to ensure that the bread for the festival would be unleavened. This cleansing ritual itself symbolized for Paul and all Jews the elimination of all forms of wickedness from the life of the devout Jew. The original image of bread that was made so quickly that it had no time to rise was superseded by the image of cleansing, and Paul builds on that idea. He advises the Corinthians to eliminate the old yeast in order to guarantee that they would themselves be a new batch [of dough] without yeast, that their new life as Christians would be free from immorality or corruption.

Paul registers this thought in two bold statements. First, he declares that the members of the Corinthian congregation really are new, unleavened dough. They are what they are by God’s grace, and now they have only to live up to who God has called them and empowered them by the Spirit to be. Second, in a further development of the Passover theme, Paul declares the power of God that makes all this new life real, saying, For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Here Paul refers to the saving significance of Jesus’ death in a simple metaphor that is often misunderstood. This image is one of divine provision in dealing with the perils faced by humanity. The Passover lamb was not technically a sacrifice, but it was a means through which God marked out the chosen people in order to save them from wrathful destruction. While the image of sacrifice is not brought into play in this statement, one should not miss Paul’s clear point: because of what God has done and is doing in Jesus Christ, humans are set free to eliminate corruption from their lives and to become the persons that God’s Spirit is empowering them to be.

5:8 / Once more Paul extends the imagery of the Passover metaphor in order to call the Corinthians to a manner of living consistent with God’s will for their lives. He admonishes them and apparently all other Christians, Therefore let us keep the Festival. If Christ is the lamb and yeast is immorality, those celebrating Christ are to free themselves by the power of God of malice and wickedness and to devote themselves to sincerity and truth. This admonition is not a mere exercise in moral cheer-leading; rather, Paul is calling the Corinthians to live freed from sin and freed for godliness because God has already acted in Christ to make provision for the reality of their new living.

5:9–10 / Having raised the issue of eliminating evil from life, Paul revisits a misunderstanding of a previous letter he had sent to Corinth. From Paul’s comments in these verses one gathers the degree of misunderstanding was nearly complete, and while it is impossible to determine whether the Corinthians deliberately ignored or misinterpreted Paul, the earlier reference to arrogant disregard of the apostle (4:18) may indicate active resistance to Paul’s directions. In either case, Paul clarifies his position to preclude further misunderstanding.

Paul had advised the Corinthian Christians not to associate with sexually immoral people. Apparently that advice was misconstrued. The church had blithely tolerated the behavior of the man who had taken up with his father’s wife; yet some people tried to shun the sexually immoral outside the church. Paul clarifies his remarks: the Corinthians are not to condone sexual immorality in the church, nor are they to treat those outside the church with disdain; neither activity is part of the life to which they are called.

Put differently, Paul’s concerns seem to be with Christian witness and mission. The failure to deal with sexual immorality within the congregation exposes the church to criticism by those outside the church who themselves know better than to approve of such behavior. Moreover, an aloof attitude toward those outside the church who have not yet experienced God’s saving power hinders involvement with non-Christians, so that the members of the church can neither evangelize nor conduct mission. Rather than prescribing a spiritual isolationism, Paul anticipates ongoing involvement of the members of the congregation with all of those who are outside the church, whether moral or immoral.

5:11 / Paul reiterates and expands his basic point: the members of the Corinthian congregation are neither to tolerate nor to associate with anyone in the church who manifests wickedness. Paul’s tone and context make it clear that he is not calling for Christian condescension or arrogance; nor is he encouraging a judgmental spirit, although his advice has been badly misinterpreted in that direction. Rather, Paul tells the Corinthians not to have dealings with those who would attempt both to be part of the church and to continue to live in a manner unworthy of the truth of the gospel. Paul mentions so-called Christians who are sexually immoral, greedy, an idolater, a slanderer, a drunkard, or a swindler. This list is illustrative, not exhaustive. Paul is calling for the Corinthians to exercise discretion; he is not attempting to catalogue activities that are unacceptable for Christians. In turn, Paul directs the Corinthians not even to eat with such a so-called Christian. This remark is general, prohibiting meal fellowship in all forms and not merely restricting association at community meals or at the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, although those specific settings were to be avoided.

5:12–13 / Four short statements—two rhetorical questions, a declaration, and a quote from the LXX—summarize and epitomize Paul’s directions to the Corinthians concerning judgment. First, he queries, What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? This question assumes that judging those outside the church is not a task given to Christians, and it implies that the judgment of the world is God’s responsibility. Second, Paul asks, Are you not to judge those inside? The question is put to the congregation as a whole, not to each individual; and although there is a negative cast to this question, the Greek grammar assumes the answer, “Yes, we ourselves are to judge those in the church.”

Following these questions Paul makes a brief declaration that clarifies the anticipated answer to both questions, God will judge those outside. This comment gives the basis for the two previous points. Because God judges those outside the church, Christians should not judge them. Because God judges those outside the church, Christians have the responsibility to judge those who are part of the church. Paul’s declaration looks back to these two points, but in context it anticipates and clarifies the point he makes in the citation of Deuteronomy 17:7, “Expel the wicked man from among you.” The church failed to render responsible judgment, so Paul quotes Scripture to certify his point that the man must be returned to the world, where God alone executes judgment. The sad situation is that the church failed God, itself, and the man who was in error. The only hope in this hopeless situation is the drastic action of returning the man to the context of the world, where God alone is his hope—not the church and not the man’s own sensibilities. The church’s failure to correct the man, not merely the man’s wickedness or Paul’s vindictiveness, necessitated this seemingly harsh course of action.