I Corinthians 5 · The Lantern

ολως ακουεται εν υμιν πορνεια και τοιαυτη πορνεια ητις ουδε εν τοις εθνεσιν ονομαζεται ωστε γυναικα τινα του πατρος εχειν

Of course, a man of the noble courage of our apostle (to say nothing of the Holy Ghost) was afraid, when writing to the children whom he had begotten in the gospel, to speak freely of the God of the world; for against Him he could not possibly seem to have a word to say, except only in a straightforward manner!

When he was discoursing about their divisions, he did not indeed at once address them vehemently, but more gently at first; and afterwards, he ended in accusation, saying thus, "For it hath been signified unto me concerning you, my brethren, by them which are of the household of Chloe, that there are contentions among you." But in this place, not so; but he lays about him immed…

After discussing matters which pertain to the sacrament of baptism, the Apostle begins to consider matters which pertain to matrimony. First, he attacks a sin contrary to matrimony, namely, fornication; secondly, he discusses matrimony itself (c. 7). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions the crime; secondly, he censures it (v. 6).

και υμεις πεφυσιωμενοι εστε και ουχι μαλλον επενθησατε ινα εξαρθη εκ μεσου υμων ο το εργον τουτο ποιησας

Accordingly, he could have said that to a fornicator, too, "affection" only was conceded, not "communion "as well; to an incestuous man, however, not even "affection; "whom he would, to be sure, have bidden to be banished from their midst -much more, of course, from their mind.

And "tell me not," saith he, "that the fornicator is but one: the charge hath become common to all." Wherefore at once he added, "and ye are puffed up:" he said not, "with the sin;" for this would imply want of all reason: but with the doctrine you have heard from that person. This however he set not down himself, but left it undetermined, that he might inflict a heavier blow.

Then when he says, you are arrogant, he mentions the guilt of those who condoned this sin: first, he condemns them for condoning it; secondly, he supplies what they failed to supply (v. 3).

εγω μεν γαρ ως απων τω σωματι παρων δε τω πνευματι ηδη κεκρικα ως παρων τον ουτως τουτο κατεργασαμενον

Come, now, if he had not "wholly saddened" so many persons in the first Epistle; if he had "rebuked" none, had "terrified" none; if he had "smitten" the incestuous man alone; if, for his cause, he had sent none into panic, had struck (no) "inflated" one with consternation,-would it not be better for you to suspect, and more believing for you to argue, that rather some one far d…

None would expect anything else, implies Paul, once again showing how important the matter was.

Then when he says, For though absent in body, he supplies for their failure by pronouncing sentence against the sinner. In regard to this he does three things: first, he shows the authority of the judge; secondly, the method of judging; thirdly, the sentence of the judge (v. 5). As to the first he does two things: first, he shows the authority of the minister, i.e., himself.

εν τω ονοματι του κυριου ημων ιησου χριστου συναχθεντων υμων και του εμου πνευματος συν τη δυναμει του κυριου ημων ιησου χριστου

παραδουναι τον τοιουτον τω σατανα εις ολεθρον της σαρκος ινα το πνευμα σωθη εν τη ημερα του κυριου ιησου

ου καλον το καυχημα υμων ουκ οιδατε οτι μικρα ζυμη ολον το φυραμα ζυμοι

And we have the precept: "If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner, with such an one no not to eat." And again does the apostle say, "Let no man deceive you with vain words; for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the sons of mistrust.

Then, having ended his sentence, and spoken it in brief without dwelling on it, he brings in again a rebuke, directing himself against them; "Your glorying is not good:" signifying that it was they up to the present time who had hindered him from repenting, by taking pride in him.

After reminding the Corinthians of two crimes, namely, that of the fornicator and that of those who condoned the sin, the Apostle now censures both crimes. First, the crime of condoning his sin; secondly, the sin of the fornication (c. 6).

εκκαθαρατε ουν την παλαιαν ζυμην ινα ητε 1510 νεον φυραμα καθως εστε αζυμοι και γαρ το πασχα ημων υπερ ημων ετυθη εθυθη χριστος

Let us not, therefore, be insensible to His kindness. For were He to reward us according to our works, we should cease to be. For "if Thou, Lord, shalt mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?" Let us therefore prove ourselves worthy of that name which we have received.

The old leaven has a double meaning here. On the one hand, it refers to false teaching, just as Jesus warned his disciples to beware the leaven of the Pharisees. On the other hand, it also refers to the sin of fornication being dealt with here. Paul teaches that the passover is the sacrifice, and not the exodus, as some people think.

Then when he says, Cleanse out the old leaven, he shows what should be done in the future: first he presents the teaching; secondly, he assigns reason (v.7).

ωστε εορταζωμεν μη εν ζυμη παλαια μηδε εν ζυμη κακιας και πονηριας αλλ εν αζυμοις ειλικρινειας και αληθειας

Just as a little leaven leavens the whole lump, an evil life corrupts the whole man. Therefore Paul wants us to avoid not only evil acts but all interest in sin, so that sincerity may cleanse our lives and truth may exclude all deception.

He shows that every time is a time of celebration for Christians, because of the abundance of gifts bestowed upon them. For the Son of God became man and was slain so that you might celebrate — not with the leaven of the old Adam, and not with a life full of evil, or, what is worse, of wickedness; for evil is everyone who does what is evil, but wicked is the one who does it wit…

Then when he says, Let us, therefore, celebrate, he reaches his conclusion. To understand this it should be noted that the paschal lamb, after being sacrificed, was eaten with unleavened bread. Therefore, just as the paschal lamb was a figure of our sacrificed pasch, so the observance of the new pasch should conform to the old paschal observances.

εγραψα υμιν εν τη επιστολη μη συναναμιγνυσθαι πορνοις

και ου παντως τοις πορνοις του κοσμου τουτου η τοις πλεονεκταις η αρπαξιν η ειδωλολατραις επει οφειλετε αρα εκ του κοσμου εξελθειν

No doubt he used to please them by celebrating the Saturnalia and New-year's day! [Was it so] or was it by moderation and patience? by gravity, by kindness, by integrity? In like manner, when he is saying, "I have become all things to all, that I may gain all," does he mean "to idolaters an idolater? ""to heathens a heathen? ""to the worldly worldly?

Paul means that it would be better to die than to mix with fellow believers who sin like the fornicator in question, because death would put an end to it sooner rather than later.

Then when he says, not at all meaning, he corrects the false interpretation of the above words: first, he states what he does mean; secondly, he draws a conclusion (v. 10b). In regard to the first it should be noted that the Corinthians had given two false interpretations to his statement. First, they supposed that he was referring to fornicators who are unbelievers.

νυνι δε εγραψα υμιν μη συναναμιγνυσθαι εαν τις αδελφος ονομαζομενος η η πορνος η πλεονεκτης η ειδωλολατρης η λοιδορος η μεθυσος η αρπαξ τω τοιουτω μηδε συνεσθιειν

Brethren, be not deceived. If any man follows him that separates from the truth, he shall not inherit the kingdom of God; and if any man does not stand aloof from the preacher of falsehood, he shall be condemned to hell. For it is obligatory neither to separate from the godly, nor to associate with the ungodly.

In like manner keep yourselves separate from all those of whom the apostle makes mention when he says, "with such persons, no, not to eat; ". Those also are to be dealt with in like manner of whom he says, "With such persons, no, not to eat; "

Then when he says, But rather, he presents the true interpretation. First, he states his intention; secondly, he assigns a reason (v. 12); thirdly, he draws the intended conclusion (v. 13b).

τι γαρ μοι και τους εξω κρινειν ουχι τους εσω υμεις κρινετε

Dogs, sorcerers, fornicators, murderers, out!" -of course, such as do not act according to the precepts; for to be sent out is the portion of those who have been within. Moreover "What have I to do to judge them who are without? " had preceded (the sentences now in question).

Next he adds also the reason why he forbids them not to mix with heathens of that character, implying that it is not only impossible, but also superfluous.

Then when he says, For what have I, he gives the reason for what he had said. In regard to this he does three things: first, he gives the reason, saying: I have said that this is to be understood of brothers and not unbelievers, for what have I to do, i.e., what business is it of mine to judge, i.e., pass a sentence of condemnation on outsiders, i.e., on unbelievers who are com…

τους δε εξω ο θεος κρινει και εξαρειτε τον πονηρον εξ υμων αυτων

But, as the argument now stands, since what is eternal can be deemed evil, the evil must prove to be invincible and insuperable, as being eternal; and in that case it will be in vain that we labour "to put away evil from the midst of us; " in that case, moreover, God vainly gives us such a command and precept; nay more, in vain has God appointed any judgment at all, when He mea…

"Put away from among yourselves the wicked person." He used an expression found in the Old Testament, partly hinting that they too will be very great gainers, in being freed as it were from some grievous plague; and partly to shew that this kind of thing is no innovation, but even from the beginning it seemed good to the legislator that such as these should be cut off.

Thirdly, he settles a doubt. For some one might conclude that unbelievers are better for not being condemned for the above mentioned sins.

I Corinthians5