Paul addresses a case of immorality in the Corinthian church, specifically a man living sexually with his father's wife, which is a sin not even practiced by the pagans, criticizing the congregation for their pride rather than mourning and removing the offender. Paul emphasizes that allowing such behavior within the church will corrupt the entire community, using the metaphor of leaven influencing a whole loaf, and he calls for the individual to be removed from the church to prevent further degradation of the congregation's moral fabric.
Paul addresses a grave sin within the Corinthian church, where a man is involved with his father's wife, a behavior even heathen nations deem abhorrent, highlighting the immorality tolerated by some believers due to false teachings. Using terms like “puffed up,” Paul criticizes the church for justifying such acts through pride and misguided philosophies, urging them instead to embrace true agape love, which is humble and pure.
Paul reprimands the Corinthian church for being prideful and failing to expel a member committing grave sin, emphasizing the necessity of humble mourning and purification within the community to maintain spiritual integrity in anticipation of Christ's return. He stresses that, in his time, the act of excommunication was crucial for keeping the church untainted by fallen influences and serving as a preparation for the impending judgment and salvation.
The teaching emphasizes that Jesus has already taken His pure bride, including the 144,000, guided by the Holy Spirit and apostles, and that the contemporary church should not attempt to enforce strict disciplinary practices like those advised by Paul in the past, as the institutional church cannot replicate that original environment. The focus should instead be on individual faith and spiritual conversion, acknowledging the historical context of biblical instructions, akin to past commandments such as those given to the Children of Israel for specific times.
Shawn teaches that Paul, even while physically absent, used his spiritual discernment to guide the Corinthians on how to handle a case of moral failure by expelling the offender from their fellowship, effectively handing them to Satan for the purpose of destroying the flesh to ultimately save the spirit. This action underscores the concept of two kingdoms, God's and Satan's, emphasizing that spiritual intervention and human authority in church matters can extend beyond physical presence, as demonstrated by Paul's apostolic guidance and decision-making.
Paul's direction to deliver a sinful man to Satan for the "destruction of the flesh" is interpreted as an apostolic act intended to provoke repentance and spiritual salvation in the "day of the Lord Jesus," rather than an actual curse or eternal damnation. This emphasizes the apostolic authority seen in biblical accounts, where apostles like Paul wielded divine power to enforce church purity, evidenced by incidents such as the blinding of Elymaus, demonstrating the capability to impose temporary physical consequences to guide sinners back to the righteous path.
- Addressing Sin in the Corinthian Church
- Paul's Concern and Reproof
- Fornication and its Controversy in Corinth
- Scandal Among The Early Christians
- The Issue of Pride in Corinth
- Revelation of the 144,000
- Church Discipline and Modern Context
- Challenges of Church Policing
- The Power and Role of Apostolic Leadership
- Apostolic Authority in the Early Church
- Apostolic Authority and the Destruction of the Flesh
Addressing Sin in the Corinthian Church
WELCOME PRAYER SONG SILENCE
1st Corinthians 5.1- March 18th 2018 Milk Alright, so after spending the first four chapters and addressing the fact that God’s wisdom is not from man and that there ought not be divisions in the body and that Paul is the one they ought to hear and follow, we finally arrive at a specific charge and concern Paul has to an event that has happened there in the church.
Now, chapter four occupies itself with this offence, which he probably heard about from those who were of the “House of Cloe” whom we read about back in chapter one.
1st Corinthians 5:1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. 2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you. 3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. 6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
Paul's Concern and Reproof
Now, having established his authority as an apostle in chapter four, Paul begins to reprove them for tolerating an act that he writes is not even tolerated by the heathens – the sexual relations of a son with the wife of his Father – which we will discuss. Here Paul reproves the Saints for being “puffed up with pride” by accepting this behavior in the church and he moves forward ordering them to remove the person as their influence in the Body would serve as a corrosive corrupting influence. As we read his logic is that it only takes a little leaven to influence (corrupt) a whole loaf. We will read later in verse nine that the command to remove the believer from the group was not to be taken as a command for believers to avoid engaging with heathens – this was not what Paul was suggesting. But His command was to remove the sinful believer from the Bride, Church and/or Body – that his behaviors would serve to degrade and influence the whole.
Now remember we left off in chapter 4 with Paul establishing his authority to lead and direct the believers and then the last thing he writes is a question, asking:
“What will ye? shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the spirit of meekness? “
And then he says (verse 1)
“It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.
“It is reported, (the Greek, “It is heard,”) “there is a rumor that is reported commonly,” – it’s all over the place – many people know about it.
That is not even heard out of the heathen communities around us.
1st Corinthians 5:1 (BBE) It is said, in fact, that there is among you a sinMissing the mark of faith and love—no punishment, just lost growth or peace. of the flesh, such as is not seen even among the Gentiles, that one of you has his father's wife.
Translations and Understanding the Charge
1st Corinthians 5:1 (MNT) It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and such immorality as is not even among the heathen–that a man has taken his father's wife!
1st Corinthians 5:1 (RSV) It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of a kind that is not found even among pagans; for a man is living with his father's wife.
1st Corinthians 5:1 (YLT) Whoredom is actually heard of among you, and such whoredom as is not even named among the nations–as that one hath the wife of the father!
Bottom line – a son had committed whoredom with his father’s wife by living with her – a crime not even named among the heathen nations. Now the crime hearkens all the way back to the Law in Deuteronomy as
Fornication and its Controversy in Corinth
We read in 22:30:
“A man shall not take his father's wife, nor discover his father's skirt.” (that last part, “nor discover his father’s skirt” is debated as to its meaning but it seems to be referring to the Father’s skirt as the Fathers wife and a man ought not “discover” or have relations with such.)
The Greek word translated fornication is better translated whoredom in my opinion as it is pornea and relates to any and all fleshly depravity whether it be in the bonds of marriage or outside of it. And to show the egregiousness of this act Paul says that, “such an offence is not tolerated or even known among the heathen nations." We might suggest that Paul adds this in to show his astonishment – that in the fallen corrupted heathen world this crime is unheard of but here in the Church it is occurring! What?
Writers of Antiquity made it clear that the crime was rarely heard of and when it was it was never tolerated. Cicero wrote in 50 BC that "it was an incredible and unheard-of crime." Because Paul uses the word “onomazetai” it means that among the believers this action was tolerated. If the crime was ever known of it typically came from the ranks of rulers and princes but even in those cases it was viewed as abominable.
Scandal Among The Early Christians
Some commentators (like a guy named Whitby) suggest that this situation at Corinth gave rise to the scandals that were circulated among the heathens that said that the “early Christians,” allowed for all types of licentious acts among the members of their churches which lead to gossip about Christians around the established world and became very hard to refute for the early church.
Now, we really don’t know the meaning of the phrases, “that one should have his fathers wife,” that “one should take his fathers wife”, or that one “should live with his fathers wife.” What I mean by this is not what was happening between them – pornea tells us clearly that it was sexual relations. But we don’t know if this was the sons:
Biological mom still married to a living father
Biological mom divorced from a living father
Step mom still married to a living father.
Step mom divorced from a living father
Concubine attached or unattached to the living Father in question.
The Sinful Situation in Corinth
Bottom line – the woman involved was either presently or once in sexual relations with her new lovers living father. I repeat living because according to Paul if the Father was dead the woman was free – even though that may have really pushed things to the social limit. Now, there is no question that whatever the situation this was something that:
Was frowned upon as sinful.
Was addressed and corrected by Paul.
And was allowed by the believers (or some believers) in Corinth in all probability because of the influence of the false teachers that had crept in among them and divided the flock up into sects.
Listen to what Paul writes in verse 2:
2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.
Back in chapter four Paul wrote:
1st Corinthians 4:6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.
Then in the last verses of the chapter Paul wrote:
1st Corinthians 4:18 Now some are puffed up, as though I would not come to you. But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord will, and will know, not the speech of them which are puffed up, but the power.
And now in verse 2 he returns to the term and says, in relation to this situation:
1st Corinthians 5:2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.
Later in chapter 13, the epic on Godly love, Paul will write:
“Agape loveSelfless love marked by patience, mercy, and humility—central to living in spiritual liberty. suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up.”
So, it seems to me that we are reading about a group of people that were not too loving, because agape love is not puffed up, but they were licentious in their fleshly worldly ways, justifying unheard of behaviors through their carnal minds because of their reliance on vain philosophies. Sort of like a gathering of hyper-liberal academics who, while pontificating on the evolutionary
The Issue of Pride in Corinth
Processes at work puff on their pipe and joke about their student mistresses. It’s the attitude and the heart of those in charge at Corinth that is at the root of this problem – again, all probably a result of their philosophical approaches to the faith – that they excused the behaviors of this son.
Paul tells them that they are “filled with pride, with the vain conceit of their own wisdom notwithstanding the existence of this enormous wickedness in their church. I do not think this means that they were puffed up or proud on account of the existence of this wickedness but they were filled with pride in spite of it. Paul is telling them that they ought to have been a troubled by the situation, that they ought to have been the opposite of proud (meaning humbled to the dust) by the behaviors of one of their own and then taken action to remove the individual from the body. Instead of this, they had given indulgence to feeling puffy, possessing a vain confidence in purity.
This is why 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.” Here Paul dictates the attitude that should have prevailed in their removing the man from their group – one of mourning, not one of anger, vindictiveness or disgust, but one of mourning. Paul seems to be saying that they were too proud to mourn, and therefore the perpetrator remained with the group.
The Importance of Church Discipline
Now, we are brought to a VERY important crossroads here. It is a crossroads many people are getting wearing of hearing about but unless the New Testament is understood through its lens there will be a constant misinterpretation of this passage in the faith today. Why was Paul telling these believers in Corinth that this man be excommunicated from the Church there?
He gives us the reasons (which we haven’t yet studied) in verses 5-8 saying: To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. (and then he adds in verse 6) Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? And then says: Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened.
Oh, my friends, with God as my witness, I pray that we will be guided in our understanding of these passages and this situation because if we simply read the directive, and then apply it to ourselves today we run the risk of doing so much damage because of a non-contextual view and application of scripture to our lives today.
Paul was guiding the church or bride of Christ in that day. To what end? His call everywhere he went was first to the Jews to come to Jesus and be saved from the coming wrath.
Context of the Epistles
This is the context of all the content of the written epistles of Paul, John, James, Peter and the writer of Hebrews – prepare for His approaching return and be saved. There were two great factions at war in Paul’s day – one was called the Whore of Babylon – who was fallen Israel who had rejected her Messiah and had relations with the rest of the pagan fallen world, and the other was the Bride of Christ, who kept herself pure and apart from the world, suffered and did everything that it could collectively to keep the faith untainted.
The whore persecuted the Bride and at every chance she could trying to break her up, take her virtue and steal the souls who represented her from the truth. There was Judaism at work. Roman persecution at work. Greek philosophy at work. And all of it had the tendency to draw the faithful away from their walk with Christ and BACK into fornication with fallen ways. Often this spiritual fornication with idols transmitted directly to unlawful sexual fornication.
Paul and the other apostles knew, based on their own words, that Jesus was coming back to destroy the whore of Babylon and to take his Bride up from her persecutions. So the role and rule of church excommunication was extremely important and applicable in that day and age. Just to put some meat to this claim listen to how Revelation describes the 144,000 who were part of this bride. It says in Revelation 14:1-4
1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood
Revelation of the 144,000
on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. 2 And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: 3 And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. 4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.
All of the Apostles were preparing Christ’s bride, which consisted of at least 144,000 described in these terms. In the expectation of his return, the church bride was to be pure and it was small enough that it could be policed as the members lived very different lives that we live today. It was a communal church bride, it was manageable and it was close-knit due to the constant threats of the outside communities seeking to destroy it.
Church Discipline and Modern Context
LISTEN – if – if Jesus has NOT come and taken his bride, and if the 144,000 are still being formed within the faith… IF Jesus is coming to collect his worthy bride then the church ought to still operate by what Paul is telling these believers at Corinth to do.
And guess what? Many Bible-believing churches, believing that this latter case is the reality, continue to exist under the auspices of a thriving church discipline, excommunication those who do not tow the line of faith and who fall prey to sins of the flesh. I strongly suggest that what is happening here cannot be rightly implemented or administered in our day – and when people attempt it, they are not only missing the contextual setting of what Paul is doing but they are attempting to practice the untenable – policing the body for leven.
Challenges of Church Policing
Now, there are all sorts of justifications today on how and why such discipline can and should be in place in churches today. Some say it only applies to public sins that are known to the community – like this one where Paul says it is “commonly heard.” Others say that it also only includes believers who are unrepentant – as apparently this son was. Some take things further and suggest that people need to be vetted for continued worthiness by the members or pastor as a means to keep the flock pure.
And then there are still others who, believing that they or their pastors can sniff out sin by the Holy Spirit, can govern it through this means removing the leaven week end and out. I propose the following:
Jesus has taken His holy bride, including the 144,000 and is not coming back to take another one (that would be polygamy). That his bride was overseen and guided by an over-abundance of both the Holy Spirit and living Apostles who were around until the destruction of fallen Babylon. That in the absence of the spiritual abundance and living apostles and bride of Christ, the Body of Christ has remained and flourished NOT as a collective Church or Bride for Christ to come and save, but as a collection of faithful, sold-out souls who follow Jesus by the Spirit. That whatever and whomever are in the gatherings of believers on earth today and for the past 1900 years do NOT have the power to sway those who are His by the Spirit – so where the corrupting effects of leaven may corrupt institutional groupings and denominations, it cannot touch the hearts and lives of the truly converted. In other words, with Jesus only Christian institution taken from earth (the worthy bride) Paul’s instructions here have zero application to us – primarily because they cannot effectually be implemented without all sorts of deleterious results in the lives of people in this vast and complex world. Get it?
So where we do agree with this scripture and see the wisdom in it then, its similar to reading the COI rules for sanitation and eating – it was for them in that day and age because it was necessary for what God was doing among them in that day and age. I would add that the principles presented here, however, of being humble and a broken over the poor decisions of our
The Power and Role of Apostolic Leadership
Fellow sisters and brothers, the relevance of our actions is not lost. However, I am not convinced that the current actions are necessary.
3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,
In this verse, Paul highlights an interesting concept. Despite being absent in body, he emphasizes that he is present in spirit, capable of discernment as though physically present. This underscores the importance and influence of living apostles in the early church—able to discern situations from afar. To the church at Colosse, Paul wrote:
“For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the steadfastness of your faith in Christ.”
Paul reassures the believers in Corinth that, although not physically present, he has already made a judgment.
Apostolic Authority in the Early Church
Paul goes further to express his decision:
4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
The King James Version might be cumbersome, so I referred to translations closer to the Greek language. The WNT states: “In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are all assembled and my spirit is with you, together with the power of our Lord Jesus.”
YLT elaborates: “to deliver up such a one to the Adversary for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.”
This implies Paul’s directive that, by the authority of the Lord Jesus, the church should act when gathered together. While it’s debated whether Paul organized a tribunal or left the action to regular gatherings, the instructions were clear.
Handling Sin in the Early Church
Paul emphasizes, “And my spirit is with you.” This could either mean that he expects his view to be upheld or, on a more extreme interpretation, that his apostolic spirit would oversee the gathering—a perspective I do not endorse. The shared understanding of the situation, together with “the power of our Lord Jesus,” indicated the presence of dunamis—the force of the Lord Jesus.
Paul's instructions were specific:
5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Paul's command was potent, turning the perpetrator over to Satan for the purpose of physical consequence yet spiritual salvation.
1st Timothy 1:20 also references a similar situation:
“Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.”
This illustrates that God’s judgment is often beyond human intervention or apostolic power, dealing directly with each situation. Paul’s message conveys the complete dichotomy between God’s kingdom and Satan’s influence, reinforcing the belief that one cannot serve two masters. Some scholars propose this was merely a mechanism for excommunication, representing no greater consequence.
Apostolic Authority and the Destruction of the Flesh
These tend to think that when Paul writes “for the destruction of the flesh” that this was just a manner of speaking that suggested that the sinner would learn to live by the spirit and not by the flesh through this excommunication. Again, because Paul the Apostle uses the actual name of Satan, and says the purpose is for “the destruction of the sarx” I have the suspicion that Paul is describing a straight up apostolic curse. Firstly, we know from the story of Job that Satan had the capacity to inflict physical punishment upon human beings. It is also evident from scripture that the living apostles possessed the capacity to inflict bodily calamities for crimes they believed warranted them.
The Case of Elymaus
We recall in the story of Elymaus (in Acts 13:9) where it says:
9 Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him (Elymaus),
10 And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?
11 And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand.
What the bodily malady was in this man we do not know. But many people believe it was not long present (nor was it to the deathSeparation from God—now overcome. Physical death remains, but it no longer separates us from life with God.) as 2nd Corinthians speaks of one who was restored to the faith and many believe this was him. What we can say, if this interpretation is true, it that this was an extraordinary and miraculous power given to Paul by Jesus as a means to keep His bride pure and untainted. Adam Clarke, speaking of this situation, writes something that I in part agree with as he says:
“It (the curse Paul placed on the flesh of the Man) was designed for the government of the church in its infancy, when everything was fitted to show the direct agency of God; and it ceased, doubtless, with the apostles. The church now has no such power.”
The Purpose of Paul's Curse
What was the intention of Paul and the curse? He tells us: “That the spirit may be saved IN THE DAY of our Lord, Jesus.” Again, we see the actions and words of the Apostle couched in context of that age. This was in preparation for “the day of the Lord (which always meant His coming) so that the man’s soul would be saved in that day.” If Paul was giving instruction by the Spirit, and what was happening to this man in his flesh was to save him from hell at death, I believe Paul would have said this. But he doesn’t. He specifically says that in this situation they were to turn the man over to Satan himself for the destruction of his flesh so that his spirit would be saved WHEN???? “In the day of the Lord Jesus.”
I trust scripture and what it says. So I trust that in this situation this specific man was saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. How was Paul able to bring this about in the mans life? Through his apostolic powers the man, like Job, was turned over to Satan who beat the hell out of his body in some fashion or another. The man changed his ways, and most importantly his mind, repented, and was personally received as part of the Bride of Christ upon Jesus return.
We will stop here.
Questions
Answers
PRAYER
