1 Corinthians 5:1 - Meaning and Application

Here the apostle lays out the case. First, he tells them what was being widely reported about them, that one man in their church was guilty of sexual immorality (1 Corinthians 5:1). The matter was known everywhere and brought shame on Christians. It was even more disgraceful because it could not be denied.

Paul’s point is that serious sins among professing Christians are quickly noticed and spread abroad. We should live carefully, because many eyes are on us, and many mouths will speak against us if we fall into a shameful sin. This was not a common case of sexual sin, but one that was not even named among the Gentiles, that a man should have his father’s wife. That could mean he married her while his father was still alive, or kept her as his mistress, whether his father was living or dead.

If his father had already died and he married her afterward, it would still have been incest, though not sexual immorality or adultery in the strictest sense. But to marry her or keep her as his mistress while his father was alive, even if his father had divorced her or she had left him, was incestuous sexual sin. Even the pagans were shocked by such a thing. As Cicero said, it was incredible wickedness, something unheard of in ordinary life.

This does not mean that the heathen had no incest at all. But when such things happened, they offended every decent and upright person among them. They could not think of them without horror or speak of them without disgust. Yet such a terrible sin was found in the church at Corinth, and likely in a leading man, perhaps a chief supporter of one of their factions. The best churches in this imperfect world are still open to very serious corruption. If such a filthy practice could be tolerated in an apostolic church, a church planted by Paul himself, we should not be surprised that churches today can also fall.

Paul then sharply rebukes their response. They were puffed up, or proud (1 Corinthians 5:2). Perhaps they were proud of the very man who had done this. He may have been gifted, eloquent, and deeply admired, so that many looked up to him and praised him. They were proud to have such a leader. Instead of mourning his fall and the shame it brought on them, they kept honoring him and boasting in him.

Pride often lies behind our excessive admiration of other people. It makes us blind to their faults, just as it makes us blind to our own. True humility brings a person to see and admit his errors. The proud person either ignores his faults, hides them skillfully, or tries to make his flaws look like strengths. So those Corinthians who admired the man’s gifts could excuse or minimize his horrible behavior.

Or Paul may mean that the opposite party was puffed up. They were proud of themselves and looked down on the man who had fallen. It is a wicked thing to boast over the sins and failures of others. We should grieve over them, not exult in them. Divisions in the church often lead to this kind of behavior, where one side uses another’s shame for its own advantage. That is a sad result of Christian division, because it makes people more ready to rejoice in wrongdoing. The sins of others should bring us sorrow. Churches should mourn over the shameful conduct of individual members, and if they remain stubborn, the church should remove them. The man who had done this evil deed should have been put away from among them.

Paul then gives direction for what should be done with this scandalous sinner. He says he should be excommunicated and handed over to Satan (1 Corinthians 5:3-5). Though absent in body, Paul was present in spirit, and he had already judged the matter as if he were there. That is, by revelation and by the Spirit’s gift of discernment, he had full knowledge of the case and could make this decision with special authority from the Holy Spirit. He says this so they will know that he was not judging unfairly, or without proper knowledge, even though he was far away. Those who want to be seen as honest judges should make it clear that they have full proof before they sentence anyone.

He also speaks of the man who had “done this deed,” which shows the evil was not only terrible in itself, but made worse by the way it was done. Maybe he was a minister, a teacher, or an important person among them. That would have made the church and its public witness even more dishonored. When dealing with scandalous sinners, we must look not only at the act itself, but also at the aggravating circumstances around it.

Paul says he had judged that the man should be delivered to Satan, and this was to be done in the name of Christ, with the power of Christ, and before the whole assembled church. Some understand this as ordinary excommunication only. On that view, handing him over to Satan means casting him out of the church, so that he may be brought to repentance and have his sinful desires weakened. Christ and Satan divide the world, and those who live in sin while claiming to belong to Christ really belong to another master. By excommunication, they are handed over to that master, and this must be done in Christ’s name. Church discipline is one of Christ’s ordinances, and it should be carried out in his name.

It was also to be done when the church came together in a full assembly. The more public the act, the more solemn it would be, and the more likely it would have a serious effect on the offender. Church discipline against notorious and stubborn sinners should be carried out with great seriousness. Those who sin in this way are to be rebuked before all, so that others may fear (1 Timothy 5:20).

Others think Paul means more than excommunication. They believe the church had a miraculous power, given by Christ, to hand a scandalous sinner over to Satan, so that bodily sickness and pain might be brought on him. In that sense, the destruction of the flesh would mean the breaking down of bodily comfort and strength. And in such a case, the ruin of the flesh could become the means of saving the spirit. It is likely that this was a mixed case.

This was an unusual case, and the church was to deal with it through proper discipline. When they did, the apostle used his unusual authority and handed the offender over to Satan, not to ruin him, but to bring him to repentance, at least to put his sinful nature to death so that his soul might be saved. The great aim of church discipline is the good of those who come under it, especially their spiritual and eternal good. It is meant to help save their spirit in the day of the Lord Jesus (1 Corinthians 5:5).

Still, Paul is not speaking only about the offender’s own good. He also warns about the danger of his example spreading: “Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?” A bad example from someone of rank or reputation can do great harm and spread far and wide. That was likely happening in this church and in this very matter, as seen also in (2 Corinthians 12:21). They could not honestly claim ignorance of this. The experience of the whole world proves it, since one diseased sheep can infect an entire flock. A small amount of yeast quickly works through a large batch of dough.

So Christians should care about the purity and safety of the church, and that concern should move them to remove gross and shameful sinners.