Biblical Passage

[Satish]

Following are the verses from Corinthians 5: 1-5

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.

Please explain the fifth verse.

Thanks and God bless!
Satish

[DavidFilmer]

Hello, Satish!

In the passage you describe, a fornicator was having relations with his step-mother. The other members of the early Corinthian community tolerated and maybe even approved of this situation!  The early Corinthian community had MANY, MANY problems.

Paul insists that the man be "delivered unto Satan." This means that he is to be cast out (by Paul’s authority) from the Christian community (we use the word "excommunicated" today). God dwells among the faithful (the “Body of Christ”) - so to be excommunicated is to be cast into the realm of the unbelievers (delivered unto Satan) and denied the Grace of the Church.

(Paul also says to Timothy, "Some, by rejecting conscience, have made a shipwreck of their faith, among them Hymenaus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme.” [1Tim 1:19-20] This is the same thing.)

Paul hopes that this will lead to the "destruction of the flesh" whereupon the Spirit will return to righteousness. This seems hard to understand at first (and maybe even cruel), but it becomes easier if we consider it more closely. Consider the parable of the Prodigal Son. He had basically excommunicated himself from his Father’s home, and had led a life of debauchery which led him ever deeper into sin and despair, but he eventually came to his senses and returned to his Father. This is what Paul expects the fornicator to do.  We see this situation so often today: so many good Christian brothers and sisters can tell you stories of how their lives were once be consumed by sin, but they finally hit “rock bottom” and realized that they needed the Grace of God! This is what Paul expects to happen to this fornicator.

[Satish]

Hi David,
Thanks for the explanation.
God Bless
Satish

[jesusandyou]

The price we pay for the sin. Once you are saved you have more responsibility to lead a holy life. If you are crossing the lines then Lord may take your spirit by leaving your flesh to the dead. That means you are dead literally.

[DavidFilmer]

jesusandyou, are you saying that if a Christian begins to "backslide" then God will kill him to prevent him from falling too far into sin? That's a very, um, unique intrepretation of this Scripture (and a very, um, unique theological viewpoint). But I don't think the passage cited bears it out - the fornicator was already engaged in this serious sin. God should have, um, killed him a long time ago.

It is not God who is judging here, it is Paul ("I ... have judged him already, as if I were present").

Paul doesn't say God will "deliver such an one unto Satan," but he instructs the Community at Corinth to do this. jesusandyou, do you suggest Paul is instructing the Corinthians to murder the fornicator?

[Melody]

Dear Satish,

Firstly, nice to see you back after so long

About your question, I agree with what David wrote in his first post. That's the correct Catholic point of view.

It's important to read & understand Scripture in context and not take it literaly otherwise we will end up contradicting God (eg. in this case, why would the God of life, through Paul, ask for the death of a human?)

Paul used what is called as "Apostolic Authority" when he wrote these verse & gave this order. It is not something we ourselves can do today (i.e. we cannot make judgements on whom should be excommunicated or not).

Blessings,

Melody

[Satish]

Thanks Everybody!

In 2 Corinthians 2:5-11, Paul gives the answer why he had done this.

5If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you, to some extent--not to put it too severely. 6The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient for him. 7Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. 8I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him. 9The reason I wrote you was to see if you would stand the test and be obedient in everything. 10If you forgive anyone, I also forgive him. And what I have forgiven--if there was anything to forgive--I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake, 11in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes.

Praise God
God bless!
Satish

[DavidFilmer]

The passage from 2Cor is sometimes cited as a "companion passage" to 1Cor 5:1-5 - a reconciliation as an outcome of the earlier excommunication. At one time, I agreed with the view that this passage was specifically written with the fornicator in mind. But in recent years I have come to believe that, while the passage does deal with the issue of reconciliation (and thus could extend to the fornicator when the time came), I don't think that this is an instruction to receive the fornicator back into the Community.

I now believe the words were written in a different context. We don't know exactly what happened the day that Paul's scathing first epistle

• arrived in Corinth and was read aloud to the assembly for the first time. Can you imagine how those people (who thought themselves to be quite righteous) reacted at hearing such blistering criticism???
  
  Some in the assembly were surely humbled, and fell upon their knees in repentance. But others, I'm sure, were proud and indignant, and asked "Who does this guy think he is, saying all these things?"  And I'm sure that some spoke against Paul, and perhaps even called for him to be stoned upon his next visit.
  
  Of course, the leaders of the Corinthian community would have needed to take some action to bring those proud and arrogant hotheads into line.
  
  This all seems perfectly sensible. Now consider this situation and read the verses (with a little of the context that preceded the citation by Satish):

  For I decided not to come to you again in painful circumstances. For if I inflict pain upon you, then who is there to cheer me except the one pained by me? And I wrote as I did that when I came I might not be pained by those in whom I should have rejoiced, confident about all of you that my joy is that of all of you. For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you with many tears, not that you might be pained, but that you might know the abundant love I have for you. If anyone has caused pain, he has caused it not to me, but in some measure (not to exaggerate) to all of you...

  The context of this passage leads me to believe that the offenders in question were those whose spoke against Paul after receiving his first epistle
• . The concept could extend to the fornicator mentioned in 1Cor, but I don’t believe these two passages are related.

• Yes, I know that it wasn't his first epistle – it was (at least) his second, but it's the first one WE have.[/i]