Remove Unrepentant Sin – 1 Corinthians 5:1-13

[Transcript]

Class, I hope you’ve enjoyed the journey so far. In the first four chapters, we took a deeper look at unity, factions, what it means to be a fool for Christ, how we should build carefully, and how we should regard our leaders.

Chapter five is the first in a volley of rebukes from Paul that addresses interpersonal issues within the Corinthian church. Some of these concerns civic matters, and others concern marriages. However, the issue at hand in this chapter stands apart from the others. A man was sleeping with his stepmother. According to the Law of Moses, this was considered incest (See Leviticus 18-20). But even outside of the Jewish/Christian faith, it was condemned.

“And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.” – 1 Corinthians 5:2

Paul spent little time addressing the unnamed man’s sin but instead aimed at the sin of the church. They tolerated and even seemed untroubled by his behavior. Did the man and his stepmother own any responsibility here? Yes, but the church was even more wrong for their silence. Upfront, let’s identify a few markers that set this apart as a sin that required immediate removal from fellowship.

First, this was public. The present tense of the verb akouetai (“it is reported”) leads some commentators to conclude that the report was actively spreading.^[1] The Lexham English Bible says it like this.

“It is reported everywhere that there is sexual immorality among you…” 1 Corinthians 5:1 (LEB, emphasis added)

Second, the nature of the sin was distasteful even to outsiders. Paul didn’t focus on this for long, but when writing to Timothy, he emphasized that we should uphold good reputations with outsiders (1 Timothy 3:7).

These two factors coupled meant that the reputation of the entire Body of Christ was marred. This gave Paul the leeway to bypass the initial steps of church discipline in Matthew 18 and go straight to excommunication.

I think this strikes a big problem. Paul said, “Ought you not rather to mourn?” That question makes me wonder why I’m not more grieved. I know there’s a problem of desensitization, I get that, but I also believe that the closer I get to the Lord, the more my heart will break like his over sin. Why am I not grieved like I think I should be? The answer is simple. I’m not as close to the Lord as I think I am. It’s the same for any of us.

“…you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.” – 1 Corinthians 5:5

This is an interesting phrase. Paul only used the terminology of handing over to Satan in one other place.

“of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.” – 1 Timothy 1:20 (NKJV)

Though this seems to be a sudden and harsh treatment, the only thing uncommon about it is Paul’s phrasing. This is the final action of all efforts to reconcile a believer who remains unrepentant. The unrepentant brother or sister is removed from the fellowship. That’s what Jesus meant when He said to treat such a person as a Gentile or tax collector (Matt. 18:17). Now, this wasn’t a call to hatred, but instead a call to love them with the Gospel. Give them the Gospel and call them to repentance. Once they repented, they would be invited back into fellowship.

The practice of excommunication also has Old Testament roots. If you’ve read the Torah, you know there are numerous reasons that a person would be put “outside the camp.” If anything, the New Covenant has eased this practice by limiting it only to unrepentance.

Why did Paul skip to the final step? Jesus outlined three clear steps in Matthew 18, yet Paul ignored them and jumped to the end. It would seem that swift action is appropriate in cases of such severity, where the reputation of the church is being smeared and there’s no apparent willingness within the congregation to deal with it.

I think it’s important to note something. Paul wrote this to the entire church, not just the elders. And it’s easy to rush past an important aspect of what’s happening here. In verse four, Paul said when you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus… deliver this man to Satan. This isn’t a unilateral decision to for a pastor or a group of elders to make. It’s a church-wide decision. That doesn’t absolve the elders of any responsibility. Indeed it would be their job to present the problem and recommend the course of action. But as a whole, it is the congregation’s responsibility to put a person out of fellowship for unrepentant sin.

The harsh phrasing Paul used—“deliver this man to Satan”—is a New Testament parallel to putting someone outside the camp. The wilderness was considered a place of demons, the domain of Azazel (See Leviticus 16). The concept is that within the community of faith, there is protection from the evil one. For Paul, being put outside the church community was equivalent to being banished to Satan’s domain. You’re vulnerable, unprotected, and an easy target for Satan’s schemes when you’re outside of the fellowship.

“Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.” – 1 Corinthians 5:7

While it might seem unusual to mention Passover during this correction, Paul didn’t see it that way. He viewed the entire Christian life as a Passover celebration. For Passover, the Jews were to remove all leaven (yeast) from their houses during the seven days of the feast. Leaven symbolized sin and is symbolically used throughout much of Scripture for that purpose (except one Kingdom parable in Luke 13:20-21).

Paul’s comparison of Christ as our Passover lamb is the most explicit parallel made in the New Testament. Other passages make the comparison, only more subtly. In Paul’s reasoning, since Christ is our Passover lamb, and we have been covered with His blood, we should diligently remove leaven from our lives. Hence, “a little leaven leavens the whole lump.” Even a little sin will multiply and spread throughout the whole congregation.

I think it’s important to note the community aspect of this conversation. Paul is instructing the church, not just individual believers. Of course, there is application for individual believers, but the instruction is to the body as a whole: clean out the leaven. Don’t permit unrepentant sin to go unchecked in your fellowship. Engage with people who are struggling. Call them to accountability. Start the process of discipline that Jesus outlined in Matthew 18. Don’t wait for things to get so bad that drastic action has to be taken.

This is an appropriate place to talk about the importance of uniting with a local church. Whether it’s through a membership process or some other way, whatever that way is, it’s a method for knowing who has say in these matters and who doesn’t. If discipline rests in the authority of the congregation, then it becomes important that the congregation has some kind of threshold. You must be this tall to ride this ride… or something. Some churches will have a lower threshold, others will have a higher one. Regardless of where it is, the threshold is to prevent unsaved or immature people from having a say in the matters of the church. No system is perfect. It’s actually impossible to stop it entirely. So, given that the New Testament doesn’t offer a defined way to do this, local churches have the authority to decide where their threshold will lie. And whatever the threshold is for the church you decide to unite with, you should cross it or find a church with a threshold that you can cross with a good conscience.

“But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one.” – 1 Corinthians 5:11

Judging others is always a contentious topic. No one wants to be judged. Also, everyone makes judgments. If you’re under the microscope, you want mercy. If you’re the one peering into the microscope, you want justice. We judge others by their actions, but when it comes to being judged, we want to be judged by our intentions.

Paul made it clear that we should make righteous judgments within the congregation. Even the often misunderstood passage in Matthew chapter seven teaches us to make righteous judgments. Many read Matthew 7:1 and stop.

“Judge not, that you be not judged.” – Matthew 7:1 (NKJV)

However, if you keep reading, the teaching is that unrighteous judgments will be rendered back with the same measure. Therefore, make righteous judgments. Don’t judge others before you judge yourself with the same standard.

“Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” – Matthew 7:5 (NKJV)

So, in the Corinthian case, Paul instructed them (and us) to judge a brother or sister who is unrepentant over their sin and cut them off from fellowship. Don’t even eat with anyone who professes to believe, yet continues in unrepentant, public sin. It’s not complicated, but it is controversial.

Why controversial? Our problem, in my judgment, is that we think we can be more gracious than God. Would we actually say that out loud? No. But by our actions that is basically what we’re telling ourselves. And that’s what the Corinthians seemed to be doing. It had to be clear to them that the sin of this man and his stepmom was heinous. I can’t imagine a scenario where it didn’t at least raise their eyebrows. Why wouldn’t they say something? I mean, it could be that he was a person of influence. People of influence sometimes feel entitled to do more outrageous things because of the clout they have earned in the community. That would be a speculation. The only thing that’s not speculative is that for whatever reason, the Corinthians decided that they would extend grace to them.

When we do as the Corinthians did and tolerate unrepentant sin, we de facto declare that we are more gracious than the Lord. What must recognize that He IS a gracious God, and that if He prescribes disfellowship for the unrepentant sinner, that IS the gracious thing to do! It’s gracious for the body of Christ and ultimately gracious toward the sinner. It preserves the congregation; it presses the sinner toward repentance.

However, your jurisdiction as a judge is limited to the congregation. We are not given license to judge unbelievers.

“For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. ‘Purge the evil person from among you.’” – 1 Corinthians 5:12-13

It doesn’t take long in church life to hear someone say, “A sin is a sin,” or “All sin is the same to God.” However, this is only partially true. Let’s address the accurate part first. In the broadest sense, any sin makes you a lawbreaker, from pencil theft to genocide. Breaking God’s law renders you unrighteous and separated from Him. Therefore, from a broad perspective, all sins make you equally unrighteous and equally cut off from fellowship with the Lord.

But that is where the similarity ends.

First, there is a sin that Christ said is unforgiveable. Blaspheming the Holy Spirit won’t be forgiven in this age, or the age to come (Matt. 12:31-32). Christ, Himself, singled out one sin as different from the rest. Second, within the scope of human relationships, different sins have different impacts. If your neighbor steals your work gloves, that theft creates a small ripple. You may never know they were stolen and think you lost them. But if your neighbor steals your life savings, the impact is life changing. Same sin, different effects. Not even lost people would equate those two sins.

Additionally, insisting that all sin is the same to God infers that the Lord is either blind to or purposely ignores the relational impacts of different sins. Since we serve a God who keeps each of our tears in a bottle (Psalm 56:8), we must refute any hint that He is unconcerned or blind to how different sins impact our lives.

So, why do we distinguish between public and private sin? Why wouldn’t we disfellowship individuals who are unrepentant for gluttony or profanity? While we shouldn’t claim we would never do that, disfellowshipping is connected to the impact on the community, both within the church and outside. A person’s overeating will likely never have the same impact as an ongoing sexual affair. When unrepentant sin risks causing outsiders to blaspheme the Lord, disfellowship should be considered.