Section III The New Faith and a
New Morality
Paul was vitally concerned about a new morality. He felt that the old code of conduct led to despair and self-destruction. This old morality was in the process of decay in both individuals and nations. The Christian gospel presented a new religious faith and a new ethical outlook. The new faith was grounded on the revelation of God in Christ. The new morality also was founded on the life and teachings of Jesus. This new ethic was not an attempt to make the demands of the gospel acceptable to man. It grew out of the direct challenge of God’s claims upon life.
The pride of learning and of gifts in the church at Corinth did not produce a corresponding strength in ethical and moral matters. In fact, the Corinthian church had degenerated to the level of public scandal. The cause was a weak toleration of sin.
1. The General Knowledge of the Sin (5: la)
Paul asserts: It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you. Perhaps through Chloe or Stephanas the report had come to Paul of this shocking situation. It is reported is taken from the verb “to hear.” The meaning is not so much that a report had come to the apostle nor even that the situation was common knowledge in churches in other cities. The truth was that the incident was generally known within the church at Corinth. The matter was a topic of frequent conversation, and Paul might have said, “Among you one hears of fornication.”
The word commonly (holos) means “altogether,” “most assuredly,” “incontrovertibly.”1 These people who were so proud of their knowledge now had a personal knowledge of another kind—a firsthand acquaintance with sin in its rawest form. The Corinthians were quick to parade their intellectual achievements and to argue the fine points of theological issues. They could quarrel over nonessentials and split the church over the importance of various leaders. These carnal Christians could exalt their gifts and exult in their ecstatic experiences. But their knowledge, their ardor for debate, their gifts, and their ecstatic experiences seemed powerless to deal with a glaring sin which shamed the entire church. The ultimate test of spirituality is not knowledge or gifts; it is the ability to deal effectively with the sin problem.
2. The Reality of the Sin (5:1b)
Fornication (porneia) originally meant prostitution, “but came to be applied to unlawful sexual intercourse generally.”2 It is possible, even after people have been saved from sin, for such things to erupt occasionally in the church. The Corinthian man involved probably had joined the church as a true believer, and had fallen into this sin after becoming part of the church fellowship. The problem at hand was not so much that one of the converts had fallen into sin. The big problem that caused such concern on the part of Paul was the reaction of the church to the situation.
Paul was well aware of the sensual and licentious attitudes in Corinth. Here vice existed in every form. Some descended to the bestial level and became brutish in their actions. Others, more refined and sophisticated, tended to regard sex as a casual method of entertainment or recreation. Still others associated sexual intercourse with religion and made it a part of pagan worship.
Paul wanted to be relevant in his preaching. But he realized that making the gospel relevant was not a matter of softhearted tolerance or of softheaded compromise. To him the gospel was relevant when it dealt adequately with sin. The apostle’s concept of Christianity centered in the Cross and in the Christ who died to make men holy. Thus any situation which encouraged sin and threatened or contradicted the life of holiness was regarded as a perversion of the gospel. For Paul it was a denial of the power of God to profess to be a Christian and to live in open immorality.
3. The Nature of the Sin (5: lc)
The flagrant nature of this sin was something that even the easygoing heathen would not permit—it was such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles. The sin was incest. A man was living in sin with his father’s wife. It is not clear whether the man had seduced his stepmother, whether the affair had caused a divorce between the father and the woman, or whether the father had died. Whatever the details, it was commonly regarded as a particularly foul situation.
Such a degrading domestic arrangement was contrary to both social standards and religious practices. The marriage of a son with his stepmother was, among Jews, forbidden under penalty of death (Lev. 18:8; Deut. 22:30). Even Roman law did not permit unions of this kind.3 In the phrase have his father’s wife, the verb suggests that the relationship between the man and the woman was continuing. To Paul the situation was unbearable, and it illustrates the boldness and the deceit of sin. Vine writes: “This case shows that the natural conscience of an unregenerate man can act on a higher level than the seared conscience of a carnal believer.”4
B. WEAK AND CARNAL TOLERANCE, 5:2-5
It is not clear why the guilty person had not been called to account. Perhaps he was a prominent man whom the members felt reluctant to challenge, or he may have claimed superior knowledge or displayed exciting gifts that seemed to clothe the situation with respectability. Perhaps the church was so engrossed in its quarrels that it ignored the sin. Finally, the Corinthians may have tolerated this immorality in order to gain a license for other vices or non-Christian attitudes. Whatever the causes, the apostle speaks to the matter directly.
1. Carnal Pride Versus Humble Mourning (5:2)
Paul writes, And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you. The verb are puffed up is in the perfect tense, indicating a permanent condition of carnal pride. The church was proud of its knowledge and of its gifts. But “no intellectual brilliance, no religious enthusiasm, can cover this hideous blot.”5 In the church at Corinth “the sin of pride had dazzled them so that they did not see things as they really were.”6
Instead of living in blind pride, the church should have been in tearful mourning. The verb form have not … mourned is an aorist, pointing to an act which should have been completed in the past. As Kling stated it, a truly spiritual church would have mourned “that a member of their body had sunk so low, and the Church of the Lord, which ought to have been kept, had been thus defiled and dishonored.”7 The word mourned (epenthesate) denotes funeral mourning. The picture is that of a public demonstration of grief because a member of the family has died.
The church at Corinth is not blamed because one of its members sinned. The indictment is because they tolerated the situation. The church should have either sorrowfully expelled the guilty man from its number or prayed for God to remove him. Godet suggests that, if the church had gone into mourning, perhaps God would have removed him as He did Ananias and Sapphira.8 But in spiritual smugness the church did neither. Instead, it continued to boast of its knowledge and gifts, to manifest a weak tolerance toward an infamous sinner, and to display a proud spirit at the same time, making the entire congregation share the guilt of the sin.
2. The Apostolic Judgment (5:3-5)
Since the church was unduly tolerant of the situation, Paul was forced to proceed with his own recommendation, which involved a threefold judgment.
a. The decision of Paul (5:3). The apostle writes, For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already … concerning him that hath so done this deed. The Corinthians were present on the spot and could have taken disciplinary action against the offender, but they did not. Paul was absent and could have excused himself from immediate responsibility, but he stood in the prophetic succession and was more concerned about the holy state of the church than about avoiding difficult issues. Even though he was in another city, he felt this problem as keenly as though he were sitting in their congregation. And his decision was exactly the same that he would have made if he had been at Corinth.
In v. 3, Paul said, in effect: “I have already decided and passed sentence, as if I were present in the church.” The verb ‘have judged is in the perfect tense, indicating a note of finality regarding the decision. Paul’s judgment may appear to be severe, but the case was a clear-cut violation of the Christian ethic. The man had openly entered into a relationship knowing full well that it defied all social custom in general and the new morality of the Christian faith in particular. In addition, the man persisted in his state without shame or remorse. He was a spot of cancer on the body of the church. Paul prescribed immediate surgery to remove the affected part.
b. Congregational procedure (5:4). Verse 4 indicates the basis for the apostolic judgment. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ. Paul identified himself with them even though he had just rendered a strong personal pronouncement. But he recognized that his personal authority could not be imposed on the congregation. More importantly, he was alert to the truth that human authority never has priority over divine power. He appealed to them on the basis of a congregational procedure involving both spiritual and legal principles.
The spiritual principle was that they should consider the matter in the name of our Lord Jesus. Paul’s spirit (presence) would be unseen but would exert a definite influence. However, in such a situation “a third Supreme Presence is necessary to make the sentence valid.”9 The gravity of the situation required that any action taken be done in the name of the Lord. Such a procedure was not designed to open the door to false claims of ecclesiastical power to punish or to torture. What unspeakable crimes and how much injustice have been done under the pretense of executing punishment in God’s name! The presence of the Lord is needed to sanction any disciplinary procedure. All such actions should be in harmony with NT teachings and with the spirit of Christ.
Paul also recommended a legal principle—a formally called meeting of the congregation to consider the matter. The words gathered together mean an officially assembled group.10 That such a meeting was held may be inferred from II Cor. 2:6, where reference is made to punishment decided upon by the majority. Both the divine guidance and the officially called meeting were to operate within the power of our Lord Jesus Christ.
In other words, the basis for any decision was to be the gospel of Christ. Only this gospel can form a valid criterion of judging those who are joined to Christ and those who are not.
c. Ecclesiastical pronouncement (5:5). Paul has progressed from personal judgment to congregational procedure, all under the direction of Jesus Christ, the Lord. Now the climax is reached in the official pronouncement by the church.
First, Paul suggests that the church deliver such an one unto Satan. Several interpretations have been given of the earlier statement of v. 2, “That he … might be taken away from among you,” and of this figure of delivering the offender to Satan. John Calvin thought that v. 5 established the power of excommunication in the church.11 Others feel that Paul was issuing a pronouncement of a personal penal sentence which would take effect immediately, as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) and of Elymas (Acts 13:6-11).12 Still others interpret this action as simply placing the offender outside the bounds of the church, where Satan rules as “the god of this world” (II Cor. 4:4). “He was for a time separated from spiritual influences, and was … handed over to Satan.”13 This last explanation appears to be the most acceptable.
A second aspect of this pronouncement was its purpose—the destruction of the flesh. The word for destruction (olethron) means “to ruin” rather than “to destroy” or “to annihilate.” The suggestion is that, if the man is thus given over to evil, he will exhaust his physical powers and ruin his opportunities for happiness. Having done this, he will, like the prodigal son, recognize his spiritual poverty, and desire to return to the fellowship of Christ and the church. The sentence of Paul is remedial rather than punitive. A similar incident is contained in I Tim. 1:20, where Hymenaeus and Alexander are delivered over to Satan “that they may learn not to blaspheme.”
This ecclesiastical pronouncement contains also spiritual concern for the offender. The reason for the action was not only to protect the church from the infiltration of sin, but also that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. The idea is that, if the man is at all sensitive to God’s redeeming grace, the discipline of rejection from the church may bring him to his senses and he may be saved. The man was doomed if he continued in his state of sin. Even if he experienced physical death under the judgment of God, such a death would be a blessing if its imminence caused the man to repent before he died.
Paul’s view of sin was solemn and serious. He was tolerant of mistakes and realized the awful grip of sin upon the human personality. But he preached that the grace and power of God were designed to lift people to a life of holiness and of purity. Anything which threatened the holy life of the church had to be eliminated. Paul would not quibble about the fine points of the ceremonial law. Nor did he get unduly exercised about the external rituals of Christianity. But when it came to sin in the church he was adamant. A church that tolerates sin is carnal and is ripe for destruction, so Paul proceeds to the larger area of the whole attitude of the Corinthian church in this regard.
C. THE NEW FAITH AND A NEW POWER, 5:6-13
To the Apostle Paul the salvation offered freely in Christ Jesus was a truly revolutionary force in man’s life. The new faith produced a new power. This power was an inward, spiritual force with unlimited potential for spiritual progress. In his discussion of the spiritual life of the church, Paul states a principle, declares an imperative, presents a potential, makes an exhortation, and issues a warning.
1. A Spiritual Principle (5:6)
The spiritual law stated by Paul has a negative aspect and a positive one. The negative element is found in the expression: Your glorying is not good. The term glorying (kauchema) does not denote an exhibition of boasting. It points rather to the attitude of pride and conceit. The abundance of knowledge and gifts should have produced a higher type of spiritual life in the church. But it had the contrary effect. The people were smug about a self-assumed spiritual superiority, yet blind to an open act of shame.
The positive aspect of the spiritual law stated here is sobering indeed:Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? To be indifferent to the presence of sin does three things to a congregation. It makes them share part of the responsibility and guilt; it lowers the standards of biblical faith and conduct; and it encourages a gradual spread of other sins in the congregation.
The trouble with the church of Corinth was that it was either unaware of or indifferent to the seriousness of its spiritual decline. The leaven was not only the presence of an unpunished offender in their fellowship, “but the general laxity and impurity displayed by their whole bearing in the matter.”14 A sin so poisonous, if permitted to remain, “held an indefinite power of corruption; it tainted the entire community.”15 Since one bad member can infect the whole church, there was a “danger of future contagion.”16 A spiritually proud church can be gradually infected by sin until the entire church is caught up in either guilty toleration or actual participation in sin.
2. The Spiritual Imperative (5:7a)
Because of the danger to the whole church Paul issues a ringing command: Purge out therefore the old leaven. The reference to leaven is taken from Exod. 12:18-20 and 13:6-7, where each Jewish family was commanded to get rid of all leaven in preparation for the Passover. The word purge is a strong one meaning to “cleanse thoroughly, purify … to eliminate.”17 The old leaven was the spiritual evil that permitted the church to tolerate the incestuous person. It is called old because “it was the remains of their former unregenerate state, which, like leaven, was still at work vitiating their character.”18 Paul indicates that the reluctance of the Corinthians to deal with the glaring sin in their church was because all the Corinthians had the old leaven in them “the old worldly and fleshly disposition that was carried over in their hearts from their former life.”19 To purge out … the old leaven meant that each member should apply the purging process to himself, “in order to leave in the church not a single manifestation of the old man, of the corrupt nature, undiscovered and unchecked.”20 Each Christian is exhorted to be delivered, not only by ridding himself of all sin, but also by living the kind of holy life that is potentially his in Christ Jesus.
3. Spiritual Potential (5:7b)
The reason for Paul’s concern regarding the cleansing of the old leaven of “heathenish and natural corruption”21 was that the Corinthians might realize their spiritual potential in Christ: that ye may be a new lump. The removal of this remnant of natural corruption would result in a fresh, new kind of Christian life. New (neos) means new in the sense that the thing or condition did not exist before.
Another word for new (kainos) means new in the sense of differing from what is old. The Corinthians were already new in the sense of differing from their old way of life. But now they were to be new in a distinct sense—“Their Christian life and character are to be like an entirely fresh start.”22 Kling writes of the new lump: “There is no leaven, hence a complete whole, morally renewed by purification—a church holy and free from sin, evincing its early love and zeal.”23
Paul reminds the Corinthians of their potential by a reference to the Christian ideal: Ye are unleavened, i.e., without the old leaven of sin. It is the method of Scripture to refer to Christians in their ideal rather than their actual state.24 Such a reference serves as a reminder that they should “come up to their true ideal.”25 This spiritual potential is realized through the power of Christ. What the Christian needs to do is to become in reality what he already is in potential. “He must become holy in fact, as he is in idea.”26
The basis of the spiritual potential of the church is found in the words: For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us. The verb is sacrificed, or “has been sacrificed,” is an aorist, indicating a definite, completed act. The benefits of the completed sacrifice still linger and apply to the Christian, both of Paul’s day and of the present day.
4. Spiritual Exhortation (5:8)
In v. 8, Paul spiritualized the Passover feast for the church. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. Thus the church is called upon to “break with all the evil dispositions of the natural heart, or that which is elsewhere called the old man.”27 The phrase let us keep the feast means to observe a festival. Keeping the feast suggests the continuous life of the Christian, a day-by-day walk in holiness, strength, and joy.
But the Christian cannot make his life a daily festival of the Spirit while the old nature remains, because that old nature works against the Spirit. Two features of this nature are malice (kakia) and wickedness (poneria). Malice means “a desire and effort to injure a neighbor” or a deliberate vice, while wickedness means “the performance of evil with persistency and delight.”28
The new morality which Paul associates with the revelation of God in Christ is expressed by sincerity (elikrineias), which means pure, unalloyed, or consisting of unmixed substances. According to Godet the word originally meant “to judge by the light of the sun,” thus denoting transparency, and “so the purity of a heart perfectly sincere before God.”29 Truth means reality, or that which is in harmony with the revelation of God in Christ. Sincerity and truth are the constant source of nourishment in the building of a holy life in Christ.
5. Spiritual Warnings (5:9-13)
a. The warning repeated (5:9). In a previous letter (perhaps a lost epistle) Paul had warned the Corinthians not to company with fornicators. The term to company with carries the idea of mingling freely, or of living in an intimate and continuous relationship with those who were obsessed with sex. Apparently the Corinthians had either ignored Paul’s warning or had bypassed it with subtle double-talk. So he repeats the warning.
b. The warning explained (5:10-11). Verse 10 explains that to refrain from all contact with people of loose morals would be impossible. Especially in a city dedicated to sexual license it would be impossible to isolate oneself from sinful society. The only way to avoid mixing with sinful people is to go out of the world—to exile oneself from society. But the impossibility of avoiding incidental social contact with immoral people was no excuse to condone such association in the church.
In v. 11, Paul repeats his warning against association with such fornicators. Necessary incidental contacts are not to become intimate associations. With such people Christians are not to eat. Here the Oriental idea of inviting or permitting a man to eat at the table as an honor or gesture of friendship is indicated. To eat with a man was to put a personal stamp of approval on him.
Paul presents a list of those who should be excluded from free and open domestic and social association. There is, of course, the fornicator. The person who practices illicit sexual behavior does not grace the table of the Christian. The covetous person, goaded by greediness and motivated by self-interest, makes a poor companion for the man who desires to serve God. The idolater, with his deference to false gods and materialistic concepts, is not a congenial dinner partner for one who accepts and honors Christ. The reviler, who uses violent and abusive language against God and man, will scarcely add flavor to the table conversation. The drunkard, with his idiotic prattle or belligerent arguments, will edify no one and will embarrass all. The extortioner who has cheated a gullible woman or exploited a naive man can add nothing to the food and drink of love and charity.
c. The warning limited to believers (5:12-13). Paul was not commissioned to judge them … that are without (12). This is what the Jews called the heathen. Paul borrows the term and uses it to include both heathen and Jews—all those who had not accepted Christ. To the unregenerate, Paul had only one obligation—to preach the gospel. He was aware that his influence in apostolic discipline extended only to those who professed a common faith in Christ. The duty of both Paul and the Corinthians was to exercise discipline upon those within the church.
God deals with the unregenerate: but them that are without God judgeth (13). Of course, the unfaithful Christian is also judged by God. But the Christian has an obligation to exercise a valid discrimination in regard to conduct within the fellowship of believers. So Paul’s verdict still stands: Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. The church should manifest a concern over the action of its members.
“A Disciplined Church” (1) Does not sanction immoral conduct, 1-5; (2).Is a purified church, 6-7; (3) Reflects sincerity and truth, 8; (4) Recognizes that different treatment is appropriate for sinners in the church and those outside the church, 9-13.