1 Corinthians 5:13

1Co 5:13. Τοὺς δὲ ἔξω, them that are without) The knowledge concerning the destruction or salvation of the Gentiles is a matter reserved for God alone.—κρινεῖ, shall judge) Rom 2:16. Supply, and this judgment we in all humility leave to God. Thus the and, that follows, more closely coheres with this clause.—καὶ, and) an Epiphonema[45] suited to both parts of this chapter. The particle ΚΑῚ with the whole sentence is quoted here, from the LXX., Deu 17:7; Deu 19:19; Deu 24:7, ΚΑῚ, and so. But the phrase, as it is written, is not prefixed here, and this is the case either for the sake of severity [c. 1Co 4:21], or because ἐξαρεῖτε, Heb. ובערת, is used by Moses for taking away a wicked man from among the people by capital punishment, by the apostle for taking away a wicked man from the Church by excommunication.—ΤῸΝ ΠΟΝΗΡῸΝ, the wicked person) 1Co 5:2; 1Co 5:9.—ὑμῶν αὐτῶν, from among yourselves) So it is found in the LXX. often. The antithesis in this passage is, those that are without.

[45] An exclamation after a weighty demonstration or narration. Append.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_5:13. But of those that are without God is judge,not I and not you. This statement appears more weighty and striking when taken as a sentence by itself, than as a continuation of the question (and still in dependence upon οὐχί; so Lachmann, Rückert, Olshausen, Hofmann). The accentuation κρινεῖalthough preferred by Luther, Grotius, Estius, Wetstein, Bengel, Valckenaer, al[850], Lachmann, Scholz, Rückert, Olshausen, Tischendorf, Ewald, Hofmann (in accordance with Arm., Copt., Vulgate, Chrysostom, al[851])is to be rejected, because it is clear from the context, that so far from there being any necessity for the reference to the last judgment which would give occasion for the future (Rom_3:6; Rom_2:16), on the contrary the present κρίνει (Erasmus, Castalio, Beza, Calvin, al[852], Pott, de Wette) corresponds in much the most natural way to the preceding ΚΡΊΝΕΙΝ and ΚΡΊΝΕΤΕ. According to this view, then, the future judgment is neither exclusively pointed to by ΚΡΊΝΕΙ, nor is it thereby excluded; but the judgment of those who are non-Christians is described generally as a matter for God, whenever and however it may take place.

Paul has now ended his more definite explanation and correction as regards that misunderstood statement in his letter, 1Co_5:9. But for the Corinthians what more direct inference could be drawn from this explanation, than the duty of expelling the offender already spoken of, whom they should indeed have excluded before (1Co_5:2)? Hence the apostle adds, without further preface (note, too, the aorist), the brief categorical command: ἐξάρατε Κ.Τ.Λ[853] This injunction corresponds so exactly to the LXX. version of Deu_24:7, that it must be set down as simply arbitrary to deny that the form of expression here was purposely selected from remembrance of that passage. Μωσαϊκὴν τέθεικε μαρτυρίαν, θείῳ νόμῳ βεβαιώσας τὸν λόγον. Theodoret. Hofmann conjectures that Paul wrote καὶ ἐξαρεῖ τε, and that this meant: and no less will He (God) also take away the wicked one (those who are wicked in general) from the midst of you; but this is neither critically establishedsince the Recept[854] καὶ ἐξαρεῖτε is on critical grounds to be utterly rejectednor grammatically admissible, for the assumed use of καὶ … τέ is foreign both to Attic prose and to the N. T.;[855] nor, finally, is it in accordance with the context, for τὸν πονηρόν manifestly refers to the specific malefactor of 1Co_5:2, and to his exclusion from the church; comp Augustine: τὸν πονηρόν, quod est hunc malignum.

ὑμῶν αὐτῶν] is more expressive than the simple ὑμῶν: out of your own midst, in which you have hitherto tolerated him. Bengels comment hits the mark: antitheton externos.

[850] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

[851] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

[852] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

[853] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[854] ecepta Textus receptus, or lectio recepta (Elzevir).

[855] The apparent proof-passages from Greek writers are either founded on corrupt readings or are deprived of their force when correctly explained. See especially Bornemann, ad Anab. i. 8. 3; Kühner, ad Memor. iv. 2. 28; Hartung, Partikell. I. p. 113 ff.; also Krüger on Thuc. i. 9. 3. The atque etiam would have been rendered by καὶ … δέ. With respect to the occurrence of καί τε and καί … τε, without a corresponding καί after it, in Homer, Herodotus, etc., see Nägelsbach on the Iliad, p. 176 f., ed. 3; and on the whole subject, comp. Matthiae, § 626, p. 1504 f.

REMARK.

Paul has ended what he had to say against the party-divisions in chap. 4. That the evils censured in chap. 5 (and 6) had any connection in point of principle with the party-divisions, is a view which finds no trace of support in the apostles way of speaking of them. Hence, too, it is impossible to prove that the persons at whom Pauls censures were levelled belonged to any one special party, and if so, to which. In particular, we must refrain from attempting to refer the πορνεία in question, and its odious manifestation, to one definite party, and to the principles held by it, whether to the Pauline section (Neander), or the Christ-party (Olshausen, Jaeger, Kniewel), or the Apollonians (Räbiger). This much only may be regarded as certain, that the misuse of Christian freedom, so far as that in principle lay at the root of the mischief (1Co_6:12), cannot be charged upon the Petrine party.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vv. 13 justifies by a remark, and moreover by a Scriptural quotation, the distinction laid down in 1Co 5:12. There are two domains, each subject to a different jurisdiction: the Christian judges the Christian; the man of the world is judged by God. It is needless to say that this contrast is only relative. The unfaithful Christian is also judged by God (1Co 11:30-32); but he has at the same time to do with another judge, the Christian community to which he belongs; while the non-Christian can sin without being subjected to any judgment of the latter kind. It seems at the first glance as if this saying were in contradiction to that of our Lord: “Judge not....Why seest thou the mote in thy brother’s eye?” (Mat 7:1-3). But when Jesus speaks thus, the judgment which He would exclude is that of secret malevolence, which condemns precipitately, on simple presumptions, or putting a malignant construction on motives. St. Paul is equally averse to such judging, 1Co 13:7. The judgment he lays on the Christian as a duty is that of charity, which, in view of notorious facts, seeks the best means to bring a brother back to himself who is self-deceived as to his spiritual state, and to save him (1Co 5:5). The former of these judgments is accompanied with a haughty joy, the other is an act of self-humiliation and mourning (1Co 5:2). The first proposition of 1Co 5:13 might be made the continuation of the second question of 1Co 5:12 : “Do not ye judge...and does not God judge?” But the affirmative meaning seems simpler.

The verb κρινει might be a future (κρινεῖ): “God shall judge;” the words would then refer to the last judgment. But, after the presents κρίνειν, κρίνετε, the verb is rather a present (κρίνει), the present of the idea and competency: “It is God who is their Judge.”

The final proposition, containing a Scripture quotation, is usually separated from what immediately precedes, to form, as it were, a last peremptory order summing up the whole chapter. It is clear that in this sense the καί, and (before the imperative ἐξάρατε or the future ἐξαρεῖτε), is out of place. It is omitted therefore in the Alex. and Greco-Latin readings, which evidently proceed on this interpretation. But what is overlooked in adopting this sense is the close connection established by the last words: ἐξ ὑμῶν αὐτῶν, from among yourselves, with what immediately precedes (1Co 5:12-13 a): “Thou shalt take away the wicked, not from human society, as if thou hadst to judge also them that are without, but from the midst of thyself, from those that are within.” Such then is the Scriptural justification of the distinction laid down by Paul, 1Co 5:10-13 a, between the judgment of those without and of those within. As Israel was bound to cut off the malefactor, not from heathen nations, but from its own midst, so with the Church. From this point of view we cannot but adopt the καί, and, of the T. R. and of the Byzantines, to which must be added the support of the Peschito, a support by no means to be despised, notwithstanding all that Westcott and Hort say: “And finally, you remember the Bible rule...!” This is the final proof.

The same reason which led to the suppression of the καί, and, no doubt led also to the change of the future ἐξαρεῖτε, ye shall take away, into the aor. imperative ἐξάρατε, take away! Once this last word was held to be the summary of the chapter, it is evident the imperative alone was suitable. If, on the contrary, the explanation here proposed is the true one, the future ought to be preserved, as giving more literally the formula quoted; comp. Deu 17:7-12; Deu 22:21; Deu 24:7. It has been suspected that the reading ἐξαρεῖτε, ye shall take away, was borrowed from these passages; but the text of the LXX. has in all these sentences the sing. ἐξαρεῖς, thou shalt take away. Why should the Byzantine copyists have transformed it into a plural?

The term take away, like that of judge (1Co 5:12), should be determined by what precedes. The means of execution, of which the apostle is thinking, can only be the two indicated by himself, that of mourning, 1Co 5:2, which appeals to the intervention of God (with or without the παραδιδόναι), and that of the personal rupture, indicated 1Co 5:11, which plunges the sinner into isolation. Such are the weapons of Christian discipline, which correspond to Israelitish stoning; Paul knows no others, when once the first warnings have failed. The very act of delivering to Satan, which he does as an apostle, not without the co-operation of the Church, is not essentially different from the judgment which it should itself have carried out according to 1Co 5:2.

Rückert, who always takes a very close grip of questions, does not think that the term τὸν πονηρόν, the wicked, can possibly designate any other than the incestuous person. These last words would thus be the summary of chap. 5: “Exclude that guilty one!” But then, how explain the two passages, 1Co 5:6-13 a, which seem to deviate from the subject properly so called? The first, according to him, is intended to prove the necessity of the exclusion; the second, its possibility; then, lastly, would come the final order, as an abrupt conclusion. This is able, but inadmissible. The passage 1Co 5:6-8 has a wholly different meaning, as we have seen. The passage 1Co 5:9-13 is introduced, not by a logical connection, but by an accidental circumstance, the misunderstanding on the part of the Corinthians. The τὸν πονηρόν, the wicked, does not therefore refer in the least to the incestuous man personally, but, as in the precepts of Deuteronomy, to the whole category of the vicious who are within. Paul does not return to the case of the incestuous man, but continues to treat the general subject of discipline to which he had passed from 1Co 5:6.

Ecclesiastical Discipline.

Let us briefly study the few passages of the New Testament which bear on this subject.

Mat 5:22. Jesus here distinguishes three judicial stages: the judgment (κρίσις), the Sanhedrim, and the Gehenna of fire. These phrases are borrowed from the Israelitish order of things, in which they denote the district tribunal, the superior court, and, finally, the immediate judgment of God. If we apply these terms to the new surroundings which are formed about Jesus, and regard the first as brotherly admonition, the second as that of the heads of the future community of which the little existing flock is the germ, the third as God’s judgment falling on the incorrigible sinner, we shall have a gradation of punishments corresponding, on the one hand, to the received Israelitish forms, and, on the other, to the passages of the New Testament, including that which we are explaining.

Mat 18:15-20. Here is the fullest passage. Jesus begins with admonition; there are three degrees of it: 1. personal,—as it is a private offence which is in question, the offended man takes the initiative; then 2. it takes a graver character by the addition of two witnesses; 3. it is the whole assembly together which admonishes the culprit. In the second place, admonition is followed by judgment; the dealing of the Church having failed, the offended person and every member of the congregation regard the brother, now recognised to be guilty, as a heathen or publican, which, in Jewish language, signifies that they break off all personal connection with him. Finally, the Church does not yet abandon the guilty man; it prays that he may repent, or, if not, that God may punish him visibly. Two or three brethren are sufficient to carry out this appeal to God effectually. The last stage, final perdition, is not here mentioned by Jesus; but it had been indicated by Him in the saying Matthew 5.

2Th 3:6; 2Th 3:14-15. The first stage, that of warning, is here satisfied by the apostle’s own letters; comp. 1Th 4:11; 1Th 4:2 and 1Th 3:6-12. The second stage, that of judgment, begins at 1Th 5:14. It is the σημείωσις, the public declaration, probably a communication from the rulers of the flock regarding what has taken place, and the invitation to the congregation to break off private relations with the culprit, without however ceasing to love him, and to act accordingly by praying for him and seeking to bring him back. The apostle stops here, like Jesus, in the second passage of Matthew.

Rev 2:19-22. A false prophetess, whom the bishop has not checked, is to be punished by a disease sent by the Lord. This threat corresponds to the judgment whereby Paul gives over the incestuous person to Satan; and John’s position in delivering this message is not without analogy to Paul’s in our chapter. With this punishment coming directly from the Lord might be compared the punishment drawn down by profane communions, of which mention is made in chap. 11 of our Epistle. But we would not anticipate the explanation of the passage.

It is clear that the means of excommunication cannot be supported by any passage of the New Testament, but that the Church is not for all that defenceless against the scandals which arise within it. After admonitions, if they are useless, it has two arms: 1st. humiliation, with prayer to God to Acts , 2 nd. private rupture. The use of these means depends on individual believers, and may dispense with all decision by way of a numerical majority. And how much ought we to admire the Lord’s wisdom, who took care not to confide the exercise of discipline to such uncertain hands as those of the half plus one of the members of the Church. To be convinced of this, it is enough to cast our eyes on the use which the Church has made of excommunication. There is not on the earth at this hour a Christian who is not excommunicated: Protestants are so by the Roman Church; the Roman Church by the Greek Church, and vice versa; the Reformed by the Lutherans, who refuse to admit them to their Holy Supper; the Darbyites by one another. Is there not then enough here to cure the Church of the use of this means? “The weapons of our warfare,” says St. Paul, 2Co 10:4, “are not carnal, but are powerful by God.” It is certainly probable that the incestuous member of the Corinthian Church, visited with judgment from above, and abandoned for the time by all his brethren, did not present himself at the love-feast and the Holy Supper. And even at this hour it is hard to believe that a scandalous sinner, with whom the most of his brethren have broken, and for whom they besiege the throne of God, would have the audacity to present himself with them at the holy table; but if he chooses, he should have it in his power as Judas had. If the Church lives, the Lord will show that He also is living. Excommunication may have been a measure pedagogically useful at a time when the whole Church was under a system of legality. Now the Church has recovered consciousness of its spirituality; ought not its mode of discipline to follow this impulse, and return to the order of primitive spiritual discipline?

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_5:13

But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

God, and not the church, is the judge of those who are without. The verb may be accented so as to express either the present or the future. God judges (κρίνει); or, God will judge (κρινεῖ). The present gives the better sense, as expressing the divine prerogative, and not merely the assurance of a future judgment. Therefore put away, literally, according to the common text (καὶ εξαρεῖτε), and ye shall put away; which seems to have been borrowed from Deu_24:7. The better reading is (ἐξάρατε) put away. It is a simple imperative injunction, or necessary application of the principle of Christian communion just laid down. This passage is not inconsistent with the interpretation given to 1Co_5:3-5. In consequence of their neglect of duty, Paul determined to deliver the incestuous member of the Corinthian church to Satan. He calls upon them to recognize the validity of that sentence, and to carry it into effect. The sentence was pronounced they, so far as it involved their communion, were to execute it.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

put away from among yourselves that wicked--Sentence of excommunication in language taken from Deu 24:7.

Next: 1 Corinthians Chapter 6

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

13. Put away that wicked person. This is commonly explained as referring to the person who was guilty of an illicit connection with his mother-in-law. For as to those who understand the expression to mean — “Put away evil or wickedness,” they are refuted by the Greek words made use of by Paul, the article (τὸν) being in the masculine gender, But what if you should view it as referring to the devil, who, undoubtedly in the person of a wicked and unprincipled man, is encouraged to establish his throne among us? For ὁ πονηρος (the wicked one) taken simply and without any addition, denotes the prince of all crimes, rather than some wicked man. If this meaning is approved of, Paul shows how important it is not to tolerate wicked persons, as by this means Satan is expelled from his kingdom which he keeps up among us, when indulgence is given to the wicked. If any one, however, prefers to understand it as referring to a man, I do not oppose it. Chrysostom compares the rigor of the law with the mildness of the gospel, inasmuch as Paul was satisfied with excommunication in case of an offense for which the law required the punishment of death, but for this there is no just ground. For Paul is not here addressing judges that are armed with the sword, but an unarmed multitude that was allowed merely to make use of brotherly correction.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(13) God judgeth.—In the best MSS. the verb is in the future tense: God will judge. He is the judge of the whole earth; we are to leave the heathen world in His hands.

Therefore put away . . .—Better omit “therefore.” The Apostle in this passage adopts the form of pronouncing sentence on great criminals, with which especially the Jewish converts would be familiar (Deu_13:5; Deu_17:7; Deu_24:7).

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But them that are without God judgeth,.... Or "will judge", in the great day of judgment; wherefore though such persons did not fall under the censures and punishment of the apostle, nor of a church of Christ, yet they shall not go unpunished; God will call them to an account for their fornication, covetousness, idolatry, extortion, &c. and will judge, condemn, and punish them, according to their works; and therefore since they do not fall under the cognizance of the churches of Christ, they are to be left to the tribunal of God; and all that the saints have to do is to watch over one another, and reprove, rebuke, and censure, as cases require, and as the case of this church did.

Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person; not that wicked thing, as some read it, but that wicked one; meaning not the devil, who is sometimes so called; a sense of the words proposed by Calvin, not asserted; but that wicked man, that, incestuous person, whom the apostle would have removed from among them, by excommunication; which was what became them as a church to do, and which lay in their power to do, and could only be done by them, and was to be their own pure act and deed: reference seems to be had to those passages in Deu 17:7 where the Septuagint render the phrase, , "thou shalt put away that wicked one among yourselves".

Next: 1 Corinthians Chapter 6

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

Ver. 13. Therefore put away] Gr. εξαρειτε, Ye will put away, q.d. I hope ye will, though hitherto ye have not. Soft words and hard arguments do soonest prevail, especially when we reprove or admonish not in our own, but in God’s words, as here the apostle doth out of Deu 13:1-5. Some warmth must be in a reproof, but it must not be scalding hot. Aegros, quos potus fortis non curavit, ad salutem pristinam aqua tepens revocavit, saith Gregory. They that could not be cured with strong potions, have been recovered with warm water. Gentle showers, and dews that distil leisurely, do comfort the earth, when dashing storms drown the seed.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But them ... - They who are unconnected with the church are under the direct and special government of God. They are indeed sinners, and they deserve punishment for their crimes. But it is not ours to pronounce sentence upon them, or to inflict punishment. God will do that. our province is in regard to the church. We are to judge these; and these alone. All others we are to leave entirely in the hands of God.

Therefore - Greek “And” (καὶ kai). “Since it is yours to judge the members of your own society, do you exercise discipline on the offender and put him away?”

Put away from among yourselves - Excommunicate him; expel him from your society. This is the utmost power which the church has; and this act the church is bound to exercise upon all those who have openly offended against the laws of Jesus Christ.

Remarks On 1 Corinthians 5

1. A public rumor with regard to the existence of an offence in the church should lead to discipline. This is due to the church itself that it may be pure and uninjured; to the cause, that religion may not suffer by the offence; and to the individual, that he may have justice done him, and his character vindicated if he is unjustly accused; or that if guilty he may be reclaimed and reformed - Offences should not be allowed to grow until they become scandalous; but when they do, every consideration demands that the matter should be investigated; 1Co 5:1.

2. People are often filled with pride when they have least occasion for it; 1Co 5:2. This is the case with individuals - who are often elated when their hearts are full of sin - when they are indulging in iniquity; and it is true of churches also, that they are most proud when the reins of discipline are relaxed, and their members are cold in the service of God, or when they are even living so as to bring scandal and disgrace on the gospel.

3. We see in what way the Christian church should proceed in administering discipline; 1Co 5:2. It should not be with harshness, bitterness, revenge, or persecution. It should be with mourning that there is necessity for it; with tenderness toward the offender; with deep grief that the cause of religion has been injured; and with such grief at the existence of the offence as to lead them to prompt and decided measures to remove it.

4. The exercise of discipline belongs to the church itself; 1Co 5:4. The church at Corinth was to be assembled with reference to this offence, and was to remove the offender. Even Paul, an apostle, and the spiritual father of the church, did not claim the authority to remove an offender except through the church. The church was to take up the case; to act on it; to pass the sentence; to excommunicate the man. There could scarcely be a stronger proof that the power of discipline is in the church, and is not to be exercised by any independent individual, or body of people, foreign to the church, or claiming an independent right of discipline. If “Paul” would not presume to exercise such discipline independently of the church, assuredly no minister, and no body of ministers have any such right now. Either by themselves in a collective congregational capacity, or through their representatives in a body of elders, or in a committee appointed by them; every church is itself originate and execute all the acts of Christian discipline over its members. (See the supplementary note on 1Co 5:4.)

5. We see the object of Christian discipline; 1Co 5:5. It is not revenge, hatred, malice, or the more exercise of power that is to lead to it; it is “the good of the individual” that is to be pursued and sought. While the church endeavors to remain pure, its aim and object should be mainly to correct and reform the offender, that his spirit may be saved. When discipline is undertaken from any other motive than this; when it is pursued from private pique or rivalship, or ambition, or the love of power; when it seeks to overthrow the influence or standing of another, it is wrong. The salvation of the offender and the glory of God should prompt to all the measures which should be taken in the case.

6. We see the danger of indulging in any sin - both in reference to ourselves as individuals, or to the church; 1Co 5:6. The smallest sin indulged in will spread pollution through the whole body, as a little leaven will effect the largest mass.

7. Christians should be pure; 1Co 5:7-8. Their Saviour - their paschal lamb, was pure; and he died that they might be pure. He gave himself that his people might be holy; and by all the purity of his character; by all the labors and self-denials of his life; by all his sufferings and groans in our behalf, are we called on to be holy.

8. We are here presented with directions in regard to our contact with those who are not members of the church; 1Co 5:10. There is nothing that is more difficult to be understood than the duty of Christians respecting such contact. Christians often feel that they are in danger from it, and they are disposed to withdraw almost entirely from the world. And they ask with deep solicitude often, what course they are to pursue? Where shall the line be drawn? How far shall they go? And where shall they deem the contact with the world unlawful or dangerous? - A few remarks here as rules may aid us in answering these questions.

(I) Christians are not wholly to withdraw from contact with the people of this world. This was the error of the monastic system, and this error has been the occasion of innumerable corruptions and abominations in the papal church - They are not to do this because:

It is impossible. They must needs then, says Paul, go out of the world. Because religion is not to be regarded as dissocial, and gloomy, and unkind. Because they have many interests in common with those who are unconnected with the church, and they are not to abandon them. The interests of justice, and liberty, and science, and morals, and public improvements, and education, are all interests in which they share in common with others. Many of their best friends - a father, a mother, a son, a daughter, may be outside of the church, and religion does not sever those ties, but binds them more tenderly and closely. Christians are inevitably connected in commercial dealings with those who are not members of the church; and to cease to have any connection with them would be to destroy their own business, and to throw themselves out of employment and to break up society. It would prevent the possibility of doing much good either to the bodies or the souls of people. The poor, the needy, and the afflicted are, many of them, out of the church, and they have a claim on the friends of Christ, and on their active beneficence. It would break up and destroy the church altogether. Its numbers are to be increased and replenished from age to age by the efforts of Christians; and this demands that Christians should have some contact with the people of the world whom they hope to benefit. An effort to withdraw wholly from the world injures religion. It conveys the impression that religion is morose, severe, misanthropic; and all such impressions do immense injury to the cause of God and truth.

(II) The principles on which Christians should regulate their contact with the world, are these:

They are not to be conformed to the world; they are not to do any thing that shall countenance the views, feelings, principles of the world “as such,” or as distinguished from religion. They are not to do anything that would show that they approve of the special fashions, amusements, opinions of the people of the world; or to leave the impression that they belong to the world. They are to do justice and righteousness to every man, whatever may be his rank, character, or views. They are not to do anything that will be calculated to give an unfavorable view of the religion which they profess to the people of the world. They are to discharge with fidelity all the duties of a father, husband, son, brother, friend, benefactor, or recipient of favors, toward those who are out of the church; or with whom they may be connected. They are to do good to all people - to the poor, the afflicted, the needy, the widow, the fatherless. They are to endeavor so to live and act - so to converse, and so to form their plans as to promote the salvation of all others. They are to seek their spiritual welfare; and to endeavor by example, and by conversation; by exhortation and by all the means in their power to bring them to the knowledge of Christ. For this purpose they are kept on the earth instead of being retrieved to heaven; and to this object they should devote their lives.

9. We see from this chapter who are not to be regarded as Christians, whatever may be their professions; 1Co 5:11. A person who is:

(1)A fornicator: or,

(2)Covetous; or,

(3)An idolater; or,

(4)A “railer;” or,

(5)A drunkard; or,

(6)An “extortioner,” is not to be owned as a Christian brother.

Paul has placed the covetous man, and the railer, and extortioners, in most undesirable company. They are ranked with fornicators and drunkards. And yet how many such persons there are in the Christian church - and many, too, who would regard it as a special insult to be ranked with a drunkard or an adulterer. But in the eye of God both are alike unfit for his kingdom, and are to be regarded as having no claims to the character of Christians.

10. God will judge the world, 1Co 5:12-13. The world that is outside the congregation - the mass of people that make no profession of piety, must give an account to God. They are traveling to His bar; and judgment in regard to them is taken into God’s own hands, and He will pronounce their doom. It is a solemn thing “to be judged” by a holy God; and they who have no evidence that they are Christians, should tremble at the prospect of being soon arraigned at His bar.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Take away. This passage is differently understood by commentators. By some it is understood thus: expel the evil one from among you, that is, the incestuous man. (Estius) --- By others, it is understood to be spoken in a general sense, meaning, take away the evil of sin from among you. (Calmet)

====================

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

But them that are without God judgeth; for heathens that live brutish and scandalous lives, God will judge them; the church hath nothing to do with them, they never gave up themselves to them, and are only under the justice of God in the administrations of his providence.

Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person: do you, therefore, what belongs to you to do. This incestuous person, besides his subjection to God’s judgment, who is the Judge of all, whether within or without the church, is subjected also to your judicature; therefore use that power which God hath given you, and put away from amongst you that evil person. The conclusion of this discourse helps us clearly to understand those former precepts, Purge out the old leaven, 1Co 5:7, and: Let us keep the feast, not with the old leaven, 1Co 5:8; that they are not so properly to be interpreted of particular Christians’ purging out their lusts and corruptions, (though that be every good Christian’s duty), as of every Christian church’s duty to purge themselves of flagitious and scandalous persons.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

13. God judgeth—Many pagan Corinthians may have been far more corrupt than this incestuous Church member. But they could not be expelled the Church, for they were already without its pale. Nor had the apostle any miraculous power to emaciate their bodies or blind their eyes. If he had possessed such power he would have also had a stupendous amount of penal work on his hands. Judgment enough was impending over them, from inflicting which the apostle was exempt by God’s own power.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

God judgeth. To that "judgment of God". (Rom_1:29) Christians must leave them. They have no jurisdiction over them. The mention of "judging" forms a natural transition to the next chapter. Therefore . The word is omitted in the best manuscripts. The command is more abruptly forcible without it. Put away from among yourselves that wicked person. The command would come the more powerfully because it is a direct reference to the language of Deu_17:7 Deu_24:7. The explanation, "Put away the evil one (i.e. the devil) from among you!" is adopted by Calvin, but is too general.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Them that are without God will judge - The passing sentence on these he hath reserved to himself. And ye will take away that wicked person - This properly belongs to you.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

But them that are without God judgeth . [These facts showed that the apostle had referred to those within the church; the discipline of those without is exclusively in the hands of God.] Put away the wicked man from among yourselves. [A summary command as to him and other wicked men.]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

13. Them that are without God judgeth. The unconverted are left in the hands of God. He will judge them according to their deeds. We are not to seek to inflict punishment on them by shunning them, but rather to go to them in the love of Christ to try to lead them to repentance. Therefore put away, etc. A summary order to execute discipline upon the incestuous offender, an order that we know from the second letter was obeyed.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

13. ἐξάρατε אABCDFG, Vetus Lat. Vulg. The rec. καὶ ἐξαρεῖτε is supported by E and the Peshito. It comes probably from the LXX. of Deu 17:7 (where, however, many ancient copies have ἐξαρεῖς).

13. ἐξάρατε. The abruptness and energy of this verse is much increased by the change of tense and by the omission of καί, involved in the reading adopted in the text. The present imperative refers to continued, the aorist to sharp, sudden, decisive action. See Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, § 21, 2, and Winer, Gr. Gr., Part III., § 42, 3. This use of the present and aorist imperative is well illustrated by ch. 1Co 15:34, Joh 2:16, and Act 12:8.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

13.] But those who are without God judgeth. The pres. κρίνει both expresses better the attribute and office of God, and answers better to the other presents than the future κρινεῖ. I have therefore retained it. The future perhaps came from Heb 13:4. ‘To judge those without, is God’s matter.’ These remarks about judging form a transition point to the subject of the next chapter. But having now finished his explanation of the prohibition formerly given, and with it the subject of the fornicator among them, he gives, before passing on, a plain command in terms for the excommunication (but no more: not the punishment mentioned in vv. 3-5) of the offender. And this he does in the very words of Deu 24:7 (from which the reading καὶ ἐξαρεῖτε has come).

ὑμῶν αὐτῶν is in Deut., but need not therefore lose its emphatic force: from among your own selves.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

13. ὁ Θεὸς κρίνει. The verb is certainly to be accented as a present: it states the normal attribute of God. And the sentence is probably categorical; ‘But them that are without God judgeth.’ This is more forcible than to bring it under the interrogative οὐχί; ‘Is it not the case that you judge those who are within, while God judges those who are without?’ But WH. and Bachmann adopt the latter.

ἐξάρατε τὸν πονηρόν. A quotation from Deu 17:7, bringing to a sharp practical conclusion the discussion about the treatment of πορνεία, and at the same time giving a final rebuke to them for their indifference about the case of incest. The offender must be at once expelled. Origen adds that we must not be content with expelling the evil man from our society; we must take care to expel the evil one (τὸν πονηρόν) from our hearts. Note the double ἐξ: the riddance must be complete. See on 3:18.

Vulg. Arm. Copt. Aeth. take κρινει as a future. ἐξάρατε (א A B C D* F G P, Vulg.) rather than καὶ ἐξαρεῖτε (D 3 E L), or καὶ ἐξάρατε (17). The verb occurs nowhere else in N.T., but is very frequent in LXX.

* There is also the case of Callias, who married his wife’s mother. Andocides (b.c. 400), in his speech on the mysteries, asks whether among the Greeks such a thing had ever been done before.

אԠא (Fourth century.) The Sinaitic MS., now at St Petersburg, the only MS. containing the whole N.T.

L L (Ninth century). Codex Angelicus; At Rome.

P P (Ninth century). Porfirianus Chiovensis. A palimpsest acquired in the East by Porphyrius Bishop of Kiew. Lacks 7:15 ὑμᾶς ὁ θεός-17 περιπάτει: 12:23 τοῦ σώματος-13:5 οὐ λογί-: 14:23 τὸ λαλεῖν μή. A good type of text in St Paul’s Epistles.

A A (Fifth century.) The Codex Alexandrinus; now at the British Museum.

B B (Fourth century.) The Vatican MS.

C C (Fifth century). The Codex Ephraem, a Palimpsest; now at Paris. Lacks 7:18 ἐν ἀκροβυστίᾳ-9:6 τοῦ μὴ ἐργάζεσθαι: 13:8 παύσονται-14:40 ἀλλὰ ἕτερα.

D D (Sixth century.) Codex Clarmontanus; now at Paris. A Graeco-Latin MS. 14:13 διο͂ ὁ λαλῶν-22 σημεῖον ἐστίν is supplied by a later but ancient hand. Many subsequent hands (sixth to ninth centuries) have corrected the MS. (See Gregory, Prolegomena , pp. 418-422).

E E (Ninth century). At Petrograd. A copy of D, and unimportant

F F (Late ninth century). Codex Augiensis (from Reichenau); now at Trin. Coll. Cambr. Probably a copy of G in any case, secondary to G, from which it very rarely varies (see Gregory, p. 429).

G G (Late ninth century). Codex Boernerianus; at Dresden. Interlined with the Latin (in minluscules). Lacks 1Co 3:8-16, 1Co 6:7-14 (F).

17 17. (Ev. 33, Act_13. Ninth century.) At Paris (Nat. Gr. 14). See Westcott and Hort., Introd. §§ 211, 212.

* What Augustine says of Carthage was still more true of Corinth; circumstrepebal me undique sartago flagiiosorum amorum (Conf. iii.1).

* Evans thinks that ὡς παρών does not mean ‘as if I were present in the body,’ but ‘as being really present in the spirit.’ His spirit had at times exceptional power of insight into the state of a church at a distance: οὐκ ὡς ἀπόστολος ἀλλʼ ὡς προφή̔της εἶπεν (Orig,).

* Renan, Godet, and Goudge regard the expression as meaning sentence of death by a wasting sickness. Espulsion is not mentioned here; hence the sharp command in v. 13.

* ἀπὸ τοῦ κρείττονος ὀνομάσας ὄλου τοῦ ἀνθρώπον σωτηρίαν (Orig.). There was no need to add the ψυχή and the σῶμα. The penalty is for the good of the community as well as of the offender. A shepherd, says Origen, must drive out a tainted sheep that would infect the flock.

† The resemblance of this passage to various forms of magic spells and curses is sometimes pointed out. The fundamental difference is this, that all such spells and curses aim at serious evil to the persons against whom they are directed. The Apostle aims at the rescue of the offender from perdition. Moreover, he desires to rescue the Corinthian Church from grave peril.

M M (Ninth century). Harl. 5913 * at the British Museum. Contains 15:52 σαλπίσει to the end of 16. The MS. also contains fragments of 2 Corinthians and (in some leaves now at Hamburg) of Hebrews.

* Some Latin texts omit the nagative, making the statement sarcastic (Lucif. Ambrst. and MSS. known to Augustine). The οὐ may easily have been lost owing to the preceding Κυρίου or Χριστοῦ.

† If he had meant materies gloriandi, he would probably have said that they had none, οὐκ ἔχετε καύχημα. Like οὐκ ἐπαινῶ (11:17, 22), οὐ καλόν is a reproachful litotes.

* The Vulgate has the curious rendering, ut sitis nova conspersio. This rare substantive is found, with the same unexpected meaning, twice in Tertullian (Marcion. iv. 24, Valent. 31), in the sense of a lump of dough, and once in Irenaeus (v. 14:2), probably as a translation of φύραμα.

* In Mar 14:12 the AV. has ‘kill the Passover,’ with ‘sacrifice’ in the margin; in Luk 22:7, ‘kill,’ without any alternative; here ‘sacrifice,’ with ‘slay’ in the margin: the R.V. has ‘sacrifice in all three places.

† On the general relation between the two traditions see J. Kaftan, Jesus u.Paulus, pp. 59-69.

* It is possible that these two words are meant to prepare for what follows. Perhaps the Apostle saw that there had been some shuffling and evasion about the injunction in the former letter. They said that they did not understand it, and made that an excuse for ignoring it. How St Paul heard of the misinterpretation of his earlier letter we are not told. Zahn suggests the Corinthians’ letter, of which he finds traces even before 7:1 (Introd. to N.T. p. 261).

*

There is little doubt that a number of the Apostle’s letters have perished, especially those which he wrote in the early part of his career, when his authority was less clearly established, and the value of his words less understood; 2Th 2:2, 2Th 3:17. See Renan, S. Paul, p. 234.

Ramsay points out the resemblance between this passage (9-13) and 2 Thessalonians, which guards against misconception of his teaching that had arisen owing to the strong emphasis which he had laid on the coming of the Kingdom (Pauline Studies, p. 36).

* Abbott, Johan. Gr. 2691, gives other examples.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Wicked [πονηρον] . Mischievous to the Church. See on Luk 3:19. The usage of the Septuagint emphasizes the idea of active harmfulness. The word has, however, in some passages, the sense of niggardly or grudging, and the Hebrew word which is usually translated by ponhrov mischievous, is sometimes rendered by baskanov malignant, with a distinct reference to the "evil" or "grudging eye." This sense may go to explain Mt 20:15, and possibly Mt 6:19, and Mt 7:11.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.