1 Corinthians 5:1

1 COR. 5

This entire chapter is devoted to the case of the incestuous member of the church in Corinth, the woman involved having apparently no connection with the church; as no rebuke or teaching of any kind concerning her is recorded.

It is actually reported that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not even among the Gentiles, that one of you hath his father's wife. (1 Corinthians 5:1)

"Paul was vitally concerned about a new morality!"[1] The old morality of the Corinthians had already been discredited, exposed and revealed in the degradations and shameful debaucheries which invariably resulted from it. The new morality had come to Corinth in the preaching of Jesus Christ. Chastity, sobriety, honesty, truthfulness and kindness were among the features of the new ethic which came to mankind through Jesus Christ, that ethic being the only "new morality" ever heard of on earth.

"Paul was also relevant in his preaching!"[2] He pointed the finger of divine condemnation squarely at the offender, also making the whole congregation to blame for the complacency with which they had looked upon so brazen a resurgence of the old morality.

Fornication ... is here used as a general term for all sexual vice, incest being the specific sin here. For further elaboration of this subject, see my Commentary on Hebrews, p. 325. "Shocked as Paul was at this sin, he was even more shocked by the attitude of the Corinthian church,"[3] which condoned it and went on being puffed up with pride. Johnson thought that they might have been "even proud of their liberty";[4] and Guthrie also believed that their leaving such a glaring sin uncondemned was "Presumably on the ground of their `liberty' in Christ."[5]

Not even among the Gentiles ... does not mean that incest was not practiced by the Gentiles, but that such vice was unacceptable among them. The feelings, even of pagans, were shocked by it; and Cicero spoke of such a crime (near Corinth), saying, "Oh, incredible wickedness, and, except in this woman's case, unheard of in all experience."[6]

Hath his father's wife ... "Hath refers not to just one trespass, but to a life of sin."[7] Speculations on the circumstances attending this sin, as to the question of whether the father was alive, or divorced, or the question of whether the incestuous couple were married or not, are all fruitless. The relationship itself was sinful, no matter what the circumstances; and if it had been profitable to know more of the details of this sordid incident, it is safe to conclude that Paul would have provided them. Some have identified the man who "suffered the wrong" (2 Corinthians 7:12) as the father in this case; and; if correct, this would prove that the father was alive. Farrar was of this opinion.[8] Lipscomb expressed the opinion of McGarvey and many others that, "From the complete silence as to the crime of the woman, it is inferred that she was a heathen."[9]

[1] Donald S. Metz, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1968), p. 346.

[2] Ibid., p. 347.

[3] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), p. 49.

[4] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 601.

[5] Donald Guthrie, The New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 1058.

[6] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 165.

[7] F. W. Grosheide, The New International Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953), p. 120.

[8] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 166.

[9] David Lipscomb, Commentary on First Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 72.