Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Corinthians 5:10
Yet not altogether the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
10. or with the covetous ] The word used here in the original is derived from two Greek words signifying to have more. Hence it signifies (1) one who has more than enough, (2) who desires more than enough of whatever kind, (3) one greedy after money. In some passages it, and the substantive and verb of similar derivation, are used of sensual sin, as in Eph 5:3; 1Th 4:6. In this verse, as well as in Eph 5:5, and Col 3:5, these words are connected with idolatry; either (1) because the love of riches is a kind of idolatry (1Ti 6:17) or (2) because the idolatrous rites of heathenism were so frequently stained with sensual indulgence. The verb formed from it generally signifies to overreach, take advantage of. Thus in 2Co 2:11 it is translated ‘get an advantage of,’ in 1Co 7:2 ‘defraud,’ and in 1Co 12:17-18 ‘make a gain of.’ Dean Stanley illustrates its use by the word covet as used in the Tenth Commandment; first in the ordinary sense of covetousness, ‘thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house,’ and next in the sense of sensual desire, ‘thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife.’ We may also compare the words greed and greedy, which coming from the Anglo-Saxon grdan to cry, and kindred with the Gothic greitan, the Lowland Scotch greet, and the Italian gridare, words of similar signification, have diverged from one another in sense, and are used, the former exclusively of gain, the latter of the indulgence of appetite.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Yet not altogether … – In my direction not to company with them, I did not mean that you should refuse all kinds of contact with them; that you should not treat them with civility, or be engaged with them in any of the transactions of life, or in the ordinary contact of society between man and man, for this would be impossible – but that you should not so associate with them as to be esteemed to belong to them, or so as to be corrupted by their example. You are not to make them companions and friends.
With the fornicators – Most pagans were of this description, and particularly at Corinth. See the introduction to this Epistle.
Of this world – Of those who are out of the church; or who are not professed Christians.
Or with the covetous – The avaricious; those greedy of gain. Probably his direction in the former epistle had been that they should avoid them.
Or extortioners – Rapacious persons; greedy of gain, and oppressing the poor, the needy, and the fatherless, to obtain money.
Or an idolater – All the Corinthians before the gospel was preached there worshipped idols.
Then must ye needs … – It would be necessary to leave the world. The world is full of such persons. You meet them everywhere. You cannot avoid them in the ordinary transactions of life, unless you either destroy yourselves, or withdraw wholly from society. This passage shows:
(1) That that society was full of the licentious and the covetous, of idolaters and extortioners. (Compare the notes at Rom. 1.)
(2) That it is not right either to take our own lives to avoid them, or to withdraw from society and become monks; and therefore, that the whole monastic system is contrary to Christianity; and,
(3) That it is needful we should have some contact with the people of the world; and to have dealings with them as neighbors, and as members of the community. How far we are to have contact with them is not settled here. The general principles may be:
(1) That it is only so far as is necessary for the purposes of good society, or to show kindness to them as neighbors and as members of the community.
(2) We are to deal justly with them in all our transactions.
(3) We may be connected with them in regard to the things which we have in common – as public improvements, the business of education, etc.
(4) We are to endeavor to do them good, and for that purpose we are not to shun their society. But,
(5) We are not to make them our companions; or to associate with them in their wickedness, or as idolaters, or covetous, or licentious; we are not to be known as partakers with them in these things. And for the same reason we are not to associate with the frivilous in their gaiety; with the proud in their pride; with the fashionable in their regard to fashion; with the friends of the theater, the ballroom, or the splendid party, in their attachment to these amusements. In all these things we are to be separate; and are to be connected with them only in those things which we may have in common with them; and which are not inconsistent with the holy rules of the Christian religion.
(6) We are not so to associate with them as to be corrupted by their example; or so as to be led by that example to neglect prayer and the sanctuary, and the deeds of charity, and the effort to do good to the souls of people. We are to make it a great point that our piety is not to suffer by that contact; and we are never to do anything, or conform to any custom, or to have any such contact with them as to lessen our growth in grace; to divert our attention from the humble duties of religion; or to mar our Christian enjoyment.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 10. For then must ye needs go out of the world.] What an awful picture of the general corruption of manners does this exhibit! The Christians at Corinth could not transact the ordinary affairs of life with any others than with fornicators, covetous persons, extortioners, railers, drunkards, and idolaters, because there were none others in the place! How necessary was Christianity in that city!
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world; I did not intend that admonition as to such persons as were no Christians, no members of the church (so this term world is used, Joh 15:19; 17:14; and so it is to be interpreted here). He extendeth this admonition to other scandalous sinners, such as covetous persons, by which he understandeth such as by any open and scandalous acts discover their too great love of money, whether by oppression, or by cheating and defrauding, &c.;
or extortioners, such as exact more than their due; or with idolaters, by which he understandeth such as worship images: and under these few species of scandalous sinners here mentioned, the apostle understands all others alike scandalous.
For then must ye needs go out of the world; for (saith he) you could have no commerce nor trading with men in the world, if you might keep no company with such as these. Which is true at this day, when the world is much more Christianized than it was at that time.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
10. Limitation of theprohibition alluded to in 1Co 5:9.As in dissolute Corinth to “company with no fornicators,”c., would be almost to company with none in the (unbelieving) worldye need not utterly (“altogether”) foregointercourse with fornicators, c., of the unbelieving world (compare1Co 10:27 Joh 17:15;1Jn 5:18; 1Jn 5:19).As “fornicators” sin against themselves, so “extortioners”against their neighbors, and “idolaters” against God. Theattempt to get “out of the world,” in violation of God’swill that believers should remain in it but keep themselves from itsevil, led to monasticism and its consequent evils.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world,…. By “the fornicators of this world” are meant, such as were guilty of this sin, who were the men of the world, mere worldly carnal men, who were never called out of it, or ever professed to be; in distinction from those that were in the church, that had committed this iniquity; and the apostle’s sense is, that his former prohibition of keeping company with fornicators was not to be understood as referring to such persons as were, out of the church, as if no sort of civil conversation and commerce were to be had with men of such, and the like infamous characters; or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters: that is, of this world; for this clause is to be understood of each of these; so we read n of
, “the covetous of the world”; by the covetous are meant, either such who are given up to inordinate lusts, who work all uncleanness with greediness, and can never be satisfied with their filthy enjoyments; or such who are greedily desirous of riches and wealth, and of increasing their worldly substance by any method, right or wrong; and who not only withhold that which is meet from others, but will not allow themselves what is proper and necessary: “extortioners” are either “ravishers”, as the word may be rendered: such who by force violate the chastity of others, youths or virgins; or robbers, who, by violence and rapine, take away that which is the fight and property of others; or such who oppress the poor, detain their wages by fraud, or lessen them, and extort that by unlawful gain, which is unreasonable: idolaters are those who worship the false deities of the Heathens, or any idol, graven image, or picture of God, or men, or any creature whatsoever, or any but the one Lord God. The apostle, under these characters, comprises all manner of sin against a man’s self, against his neighbour, and against God; against himself, as fornication; against his neighbour, as covetousness and extortion; and against God, as idolatry: and since the world abounded with men guilty of these several vices, all kind of civil correspondence with them could not be avoided,
for then must you needs go out of the world; meaning not out of Greece, or of any of the cities thereof, into other parts, but out of the world itself; they must even destroy themselves, or seek out for a new world: it is an hyperbolical way of speaking, showing that the thing is impracticable and impossible, since men of this sort are everywhere; and were all trade and conversation with them to be forbidden, the families of God’s people could never be supported, nor the interest of religion maintained; a stop would soon be put to worldly business, and saints would have little or nothing to do in the world; wherefore, as the Arabic version reads it, “business would compel you to go out of the world”.
n Zohar in Exod. fol. 31. 2.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Not altogether ( ). Not absolutely, not in all circumstances. Paul thus puts a limitation on his prohibition and confines it to members of the church. He has no jurisdiction over the outsiders (this world, ).
The covetous ( ). Old word for the over-reachers, those avaricious for more and more (, , to have more). In N.T. only here, 1Cor 6:10; Eph 5:5. It always comes in bad company (the licentious and the idolaters) like the modern gangsters who form a combination of liquor, lewdness, lawlessness for money and power.
Extortioners (). An old adjective with only one gender, rapacious (Matt 7:15; Luke 18:11), and as a substantive robber or extortioner (here and 6:10). Bandits, hijackers, grafters they would be called today.
Idolaters (). Late word for hirelings () of the idols (), so our very word idolater. See 1Cor 6:9; 1Cor 10:7; Eph 5:5; Rev 21:8; Rev 22:15. Nageli regards this word as a Christian formation.
For then must ye needs ( ). This neat Greek idiom of with the imperfect indicative (, from , to be under obligation) is really the conclusion of a second-class condition with the condition unexpressed (Robertson, Grammar, p. 965). Sometimes is used also as in Heb 10:2, but with verbs of obligation or necessity is usually absent as here (cf. Heb 9:20). The unexpressed condition here would be, “if that were true” (including fornicators, the covetous, extortioners, idolaters of the outside world). means in that case.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Idolaters [] . Only twice outside of Paul ‘s writings : Rev 21:8; Rev 22:15. This is the earliest known instance of the use of the word. For the collocation of the covetous and idolaters, compare Col 3:15; Eph 5:5. New – Testament usage does not confine the term to the worship of images, but extends it to the soul ‘s devotion to any object which usurps the place of God.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
Comments
1) Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world. The Bible describes as fornication and adultery, not only illicit carnal, sexual relations, but also covetousness and acts of self will against a Christian pattern of conduct set forth by our Lord. Of this Jas included friendship of the present world order as enmity with God and spiritual adultery. Jas 4:4-5; 1Jn 2:15;
2) Or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolators. (Greek he tois pleonektais kai arpaksin he eidololatrais) or with the covetous ones and rapacious or idolatrous ones – to some extent each child of God may be guilty of these.
3) For then must ye needs go out of the world. It would be necessary to take ones self completely out of the midst of the present world order to be where no one was guilty of spiritual adultery or spiritual fornication. Paul desired the brethren to recognize that he was not teaching that sinless perfection was required before they could worship or observe the Lords Supper.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
10. Since you would have required. It is as to this clause especially that interpreters are not agreed. For some say, “You must sooner quit Greece.” Ambrose, on the other hand, says, “You must rather die.” Erasmus turns it into the optative, as if Paul said, “Would that it were allowable for you to leave the world altogether; (296) but as you cannot do this, you must at least quit the society of those who falsely assume the name of Christians, and in the meantime exhibit in their lives the worst example.” Chrysostom’s exposition has more appearance of truth. According to him, the meaning is this: “When I command you to shun fornicators, I do not mean all such; otherwise you would require to go in quest of another world; for we must live among thorns so long as we sojourn on earth. This only do I require, that you do not keep company with fornicators, who wish to be regarded as brethren, lest you should seem by your sufferance to approve of their wickedness.” Thus the term world here, must be taken to mean the present life, as in Joh 17:15
I pray not, Father, that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest deliver them from the evil.
Against this exposition a question might be proposed by way of objection: “As Paul said this at a time when Christians were as yet mingled with heathens, and dispersed among them, what ought to be done now, when all have given themselves to Christ in name? For even in the present day we must go out of the world, if we would avoid the society of the wicked; and there are none that are strangers, when all take upon themselves Christ’s name, and are consecrated to him by baptism.” Should any one feel inclined to follow Chrysostom, he will find no difficulty in replying, to this effect: that Paul here took for granted what was true — that, where there is the power of excommunication, there is an easy remedy for effecting a separation between the good and the bad, if Churches do their duty. As to strangers, the Christians at Corinth had no jurisdiction, and they could not restrain their dissolute manner of life. Hence they must of necessity have quitted the world, if they wished to avoid the society of the wicked, whose vices they could not cure.
For my own part, as I do not willingly adopt interpretations which cannot be made to suit the words, otherwise than by twisting the words so as to suit them, I prefer one that is different from all these, taking the word rendered to go out as meaning to be separated, and the term world as meaning the pollutions of the world “What need have you of an injunction as to the children of this world, (Luk 16:8,) for having once for all renounced the world, it becomes you to stand aloof from their society; for the whole world lieth in the wicked one. ” (297) (1Jo 5:19.) If any one is not satisfied with this interpretation, here is still another that is probable: “I do not write to you in general terms, that you should shun the society of the fornicators of this world, though that you ought to do, without any admonition from me.” I prefer, however, the former; and I am not the first contriver of it, but, while it has been brought forward previously by others, I have adapted it more fully, if I mistake not, to Paul’s thread of discourse. There is, then, (298) a sort of intentional omission, when he says that he makes no mention of those that are without, inasmuch as the Corinthians ought to be already separated from them, that they may know that even at home (299) they required to maintain this discipline of avoiding the wicked.
(296) “The rendering of Erasmus is as follows: “ Alioqui utinam videlicet e mundo exissetis;” — “Otherwise I would, truly, that you had departed out of the world.”
(297) “ Car tout le monde est mis a mal;” — “For the whole world is addicted to evil.”
(298) “ En ceste sentence;” — “In this sentence.”
(299) “ C’est a dire, entr’eux;” — “That is to say, among themselves.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(10) Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world.This is a limitation and explanation of the command given not to associate with fornicators. It would have been almost impossible for the command to be literally obeyed without the Christian withdrawing altogether from the business of life, so the Apostle explains that it is the fair fame and purity of the Church which he is anxious to preserve. There are so many fornicators, and covetous, and idolaters in this world (i.e., the heathen world) that men must meet with them. But the Christian must tolerate no such sins among themselves; they must exclude from the social circle any brother who, bearing the name of Christ, indulges in the vices of the heathen world. The Church is to be the light of the world, and not the recipient of the worlds darkness.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
10. Of this world In Paul’s last epistle the prohibition of associating with the sensualists had been apparently over interpreted, so as to make any association in the dissolute world of Corinth impracticable. This at once produced a stern asceticism, and overlooked the true field of discipline, which was to preserve both the purity and the reputation for purity of the holy Church.
Or with He now extends the rule to other vices than incontinence.
Covetous Overreachers in business.
Extortioners Rapacious men of all classes, embezzlers, pillagers, robbers.
Idolaters Image worshippers. Said by Grotius to be the first time the word occurs in any document extant.
Go out world And St. Paul here clearly assumes that it is the Christian’s duty to stay in the world. Christianity allows no right to shut one’s self up in a monastery, convent, or cave; no right to become a monk or a nun.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous and extortioners, or with idolaters. For then it would be necessary for you to go out of the world.’
He points out that he was not talking about dealings with non-Christians when he said avoid such people. Otherwise Christians would never have anything to do with any non-Christians, for they all disobey the commandments. Thus, while their ways must not be followed, and their sins must not be partaken of (Eph 5:7; 1Ti 5:22), Christians may have general dealings with them and befriend them. Judgment of them can be left to the judgment of God.
This does not necessarily mean that his teaching had not been clear. It may well be that he had expressed it clearly in a general sense but that it had been distorted by his critics who had wanted to bring him into disrepute, which they had done by deliberately misinterpreting what he had said.
Now he includes not just sexual immorality but also misbehaviour of any kind. If they were to avoid all immoral people, all greedy and ambitious people, all deceivers, cheats and blackmailers, and all idolaters, there would be no one left for them to keep company with in everyday life. And that would make life impossible. The only way to achieve it would be to leave the world altogether, and as slaves or employees many of them could not do that.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Co 5:10 . More precise negative explanation of the rule laid down in the said letter, . ., which had been misinterpreted among the Corinthians (as Paul gathered probably from their letter to him) into a prohibition of association with fornicators among those who were not Christians ; perhaps from a disposition to connive at the offenders within the bosom of the church itself.
. . . .] is dependent on .; it stands in a relation of opposition to the preceding , and explains what that did not mean. “I wrote to you to refrain from intercourse with fornicators , (i.e.) not absolutely [827] with the fornicators of this world .” An entire cessation of intercourse with in that sense of the word, it would, of course, be impossible to establish, seeing that you cannot go out of the world; but what I meant was Christians given to fornication, 1Co 5:11 . Comp Plato, Pol. v. p. 454 C: . , . . [829] The instead of is correct enough (in opposition to Rckert), because . . . . . conveys something which is objectively denied, a definition of the notion of , which does not occur . Comp Buttmann, neut. Gr. p. 334 [E. T. 389]. The conception is a different one, e.g. , in Plato, Pol. iv. p. 419 A: . Commentators often supply after ; so, among the rest, Olshausen; not (wrote I, meant I): with the fornicators of this world in general . But what an arbitrary separation this is of the mutually connected words ! And the interpretation in question has this, too, against it, that . . does not refer to the world in general, but to those who were non-Christians (see below), so that the “ in general ” would be logically incorrect. Rckert takes as an intensified negative like that in Rom 3:9 (comp Luther), and supplies after it: “ By no means did I write; i.e. , the import of my prohibition was by no means, to have no intercourse with the fornicators of this world .” But so understood, the words would lend countenance to intercourse with fornicators not Christian, which cannot be Paul’s meaning. His intention is merely to set aside the misinterpretation which had been put upon his words, as if he had meant thereby to enforce an absolute cessation of intercourse with unchaste men outside the Christian society. Lastly, Billroth is wrong in rendering, after Chrysostom and Theophylact ( ): “ not, of course, with the fornicators of this world .” In that case, we should have had at least , for the sense would be, as Theophylact himself states: . , .
] who belong to this ( ante-Messianic ) world , not, like the Christians, to the Messiah’s kingdom as its future members; hence it is the (Theodoret) who are here denoted, whose opposite is the in 1Co 5:11 . To understand it of mankind in general , Christians and non-Christians together (Pott, Hofmann, al [832] ), is, seeing that is joined with it, contrary to the apostle’s mode of using language (Gal 4:3 ; Col 2:8 ; Eph 2:2 ; 1Co 3:19 ; 1Co 7:31 ; 2Co 4:4 ), and contrary also to the context (1Co 5:11-12 ). Afterwards, when Paul is thinking of the world of men in general , he purposely omits the .
. . [833] ] We may suppose that Paul, in the passage of his former letter now alluded to, had warned them not merely against , but also against those guilty of the other kinds of vice indicated here, and yet more specifically in 1Co 5:11 . Hence: “ with the fornicators of this world, or not to overlook the others, with whom also I forbade you to hold intercourse with those greedy of gain, and violently grasping at it .” These two, connected with each other as general and particular by (see the critical remarks), are conceived of as belonging together to one category. It is otherwise in 1Co 5:11 , where each of these sins is viewed by itself. As to ., the essential characteristic of which is violence , comp Luk 18:11 ; Soph. Phil. 640: .
. . is to be understood again after . and . See 1Co 5:11 .
. . [835] ] for so (were you absolutely and entirely to break off from the heathen fornicators, etc.) you must needs go out of the world ( , Theophylact), since nowhere could you be perfectly relieved from casual contact with such non-Christians. I should thus have demanded what was impossible. As regards the direct , comp 1Co 7:14 ; Rom 3:6 ; Rom 11:6 ; Rom 11:22 . It is attested by B, Chrysostom, and Theodoret. In place of it, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Rckert, and Hofmann read , which has, indeed, the preponderance of evidence in its favour, but must be considered as an emendation. The strangeness of the conclusion is not conveyed by the (Hofmann, following the mistake of Hartung), but by the case itself assumed, in which the merely introduces what was indubitably involved in the supposed protasis (comp Baeumlein, Partik. p. 19 ff.). See against Hartung, Ellendt, Lex. Soph. I. p. 214.
[827] The phrase , which is common with Greek writers (Lobeck, Paral. p. 57), would have been still stronger if used in place of , altogether, absolutely . See generally on 1Co 9:22 .
[829] . . . .
[832] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.
[833] . . . .
[835] . . . .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
Ver. 10. Yet not altogether, &c. ] Here he lets them know that in that former epistle (not extant now) he meant not that they should wholly sever themselves from those wicked that are yet without the Church (for that they cannot do), but from profligate professors, discinct Christians, that they may be ashamed.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
10. ] limits the prohibition , which perhaps had been complained of owing to its strictness, and the impossibility of complying with it in so dissolute a place as Corinth, and excepts the fornicators of this world , i.e. who are not professing Christians : not under all circumstances with the fornicators of this world: so Theophr. C. P. vi. 25, cited by Wetst. on Rom 3:9 , , .
, not , because not the whole context of the prohibition is negatived, but only one portion of it, and thus . . . . . stands together as one idea. So Thucyd. i. 51, . See more examples in Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. p. 125, 6.
. , belonging to the number of unbelievers, Christians who were being expressly excluded. So Paul ever uses this expression, ch. 1Co 3:19 ; (2Co 4:4 😉 Eph 2:2 .
and are joined by , as belonging to the same class that of covetous persons; being an avaricious person, not a lascivious one, as sometimes rendered (e.g. Conybeare, vol. ii. p. 41, edn. 2), nor does it seem to have any where merely this meaning; see Eph 4:19 and note. Compare on the other side Stanley’s note here, which however has not convinced me. The root of the two sins being the same, viz. lust or greed, they come often to be mentioned together and as if running into one another. See Trench, N. T, Syn. pp. 91, 2. On , Stanley remarks, “It is difficult to see why it should be expressly introduced here, especially if has the meaning of sensuality.” Certainly: but not, if . retains its proper meaning, as containing the key to on the one hand, and on the other.
. ] For in that case ye must go out of the world , as Chrys. and Theophyl., . The past ., as , al., because the necessity would long ago have occurred and the act have passed.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Co 5:10 gives the needful definition of the above injunction. is best understood as by Er [859] ( non omnino ), Cv [860] ( neque in universum ), Mr [861] , Bt [862] , Ed [863] , El [864] , as not absolutely, not altogether , negativing and making the inhibition a qualified one: “I did not altogether forbid your holding intercourse with the fornicators of this world”. To make the emphasise the (as in Rom 3:9 ) “Assuredly I did not mean to forbid association with fornicators outside the Church” (Lt [865] ) is to lend the passage the air of recommending association with unconverted profligates! What applies to one sort of immorality applies to others: . , “or with the covetous and rapacious, or with idolaters”. The (from and : see parls.) are the self-aggrandising in general; , those who seize with violence; sins of greed are frequent in commercial cities. “Idolaters”(the first appearance of the word in literature: cf. notes on 1Co 8:1 and 1Co 10:19 ) included the entire pagan world; Cor [866] idolatry was specially associated with sensual sin. . . ., “since in that case” the logical consequence of absolute non-intercourse “you were bound to go out of the world!” (Thp [867] ). One could not pursue any avocation at Cor [868] without daily contact with such sinners. , in the impf [869] tense of the unfulfilled condition (implied in ); for the omission, common with vbs. of this nature, of the of contingency, see Wr [870] , p. 382, and cf. Heb 9:26 . For the principle implied as against the cloister see Joh 17:14-19 .
[859] Erasmus’ In N.T. Annotationes .
[860] Calvin’s In Nov. Testamentum Commentarii .
[861] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[862] J. A. Beet’s St. Paul’s Epp. to the Corinthians (1882).
[863] T. C. Edwards’ Commentary on the First Ep. to the Corinthians . 2
[864] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians .
[865] J. B. Lightfoot’s (posthumous) Notes on Epp. of St. Paul (1895).
[866] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[867] Theophylact, Greek Commentator.
[868] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[869]mpf. imperfect tense.
[870] Winer-Moulton’s Grammar of N.T. Greek (8th ed., 1877).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
world. Greek. kosmos. App-129.
covetous. Greek. pleonektes. Elsewhere, 1Co 5:11; 1Co 6:10. Eph 5:5.
extortioners. Greek. harpax. Elsewhere, 1Co 5:11; 1Co 6:10. Mat 7:15. Luk 18:11.
idolaters. Greek. eidololatres. Elsewhere, 1Co 5:11; 1Co 6:9; 1Co 10:7. Eph 5:5. Rev 21:8; Rev 22:15.
must ye needs = ye ought to.
out of. App-104.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
10.] limits the prohibition, which perhaps had been complained of owing to its strictness, and the impossibility of complying with it in so dissolute a place as Corinth, and excepts the fornicators of this world, i.e. who are not professing Christians: not under all circumstances with the fornicators of this-world: so Theophr. C. P. vi. 25, cited by Wetst. on Rom 3:9, ,- .
, not , because not the whole context of the prohibition is negatived, but only one portion of it, and thus . . . . . stands together as one idea. So Thucyd. i. 51, . See more examples in Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. p. 125, 6.
. , belonging to the number of unbelievers,-Christians who were being expressly excluded. So Paul ever uses this expression, ch. 1Co 3:19; (2Co 4:4;) Eph 2:2.
and are joined by , as belonging to the same class-that of covetous persons;- being an avaricious person, not a lascivious one, as sometimes rendered (e.g. Conybeare, vol. ii. p. 41, edn. 2), nor does it seem to have any where merely this meaning; see Eph 4:19 and note. Compare on the other side Stanleys note here, which however has not convinced me. The root of the two sins being the same, viz. lust or greed, they come often to be mentioned together and as if running into one another. See Trench, N. T, Syn. pp. 91, 2. On , Stanley remarks, It is difficult to see why it should be expressly introduced here, especially if has the meaning of sensuality. Certainly: but not, if . retains its proper meaning, as containing the key to on the one hand, and on the other.
.] For in that case ye must go out of the world,-as Chrys. and Theophyl., . The past ., as , al., because the necessity would long ago have occurred and the act have passed.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Co 5:10. ) and that.- , not altogether) What is here said is not a universal, but a particular negative, Rom 3:9, note.- , of this world) [there is no place wherein you may not fall in with the covetous and extortioners, etc.-V. g.] In antithesis to a brother, 1Co 5:11.[41]-, extortioners) He gives them this name rather than that of thieves; because their theft is not apparent. [They are included by implication, who try to get the property of others, either by violence or injustice.-V. g.]-He mentions three kinds of flagitious crimes, which are committed against the man himself, against his neighbour, and against God.- , for then must ye needs) Others have written [42] [Ye ought to have gone out, etc.], for , but the present is also used, 1Co 7:14, . What is written without express limitation, should not be always taken absolutely, if there should follow from it any unsuitable consequence. In the present day there is room for this paraphrase; otherwise you must needs go out of a land inhabited by Christians. They are therefore especially to be avoided, who among Christians wish to be considered virtuous above others, and yet are fornicators, etc.-) you must needs. For thus all intercourse as citizens would be done away with: That, which is evangelical perfection to monks, is absurd (, out of place) and unsuitable in the eyes of Paul.-, of the world) which abounds in profligate men.
[41] , covetous) Those greedy of gain for themselves.-V. g.
[42] So ACD()G Vulg. both Syr. and Memph. Versions. But B (judging from silence) favours Rec. Texts reading, .-ED.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Co 5:10
1Co 5:10
not at all meaning with the fornicators of this world,- He now modifies the command so as to apply to fornicators in the church and not to those in the world.
or with the covetous-The covetous are those who seek to obtain what is anothers in an unlawful way. The man who sacrifices honesty to the acquisition of wealth is heinous in the sight of God. He cannot be a Christian and should not be recognized as such.
and extortioners,-An extortioner is one who by power or threats takes what is not his own or more than is right. The man who takes advantage of anothers poverty, or his necessities, to obtain exorbitant gain, is an extortioner.
or with idolaters;-Prior to the preaching of the gospel in Corinth, by Paul, all the inhabitants therein, with the exception of a few Jews, were idolaters.
for then must ye needs go out of the world:-He did not mean to so treat those guilty of the sins just mentioned. They were so common among the people that if they refused to associate with them it would be like going out of the world, withdrawing as a recluse, having no association or dealing with mankind.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
world
kosmos = mankind. (See Scofield “Mat 4:8”).
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
altogether: 1Co 10:27
of this: 1Co 1:20, Joh 8:23, Joh 15:19, Joh 17:6, Joh 17:9, Joh 17:15, Joh 17:16, 2Co 4:4, Eph 2:2, 1Jo 4:5, 1Jo 4:7
for: Mat 5:14-16, Joh 17:15, Phi 2:15, 1Jo 5:19, Rev 12:9
Reciprocal: Jdg 20:7 – ye are all Pro 5:22 – sins Luk 12:15 – Take 1Co 5:11 – fornicator 1Co 6:9 – fornicators Eph 5:3 – fornication Col 3:5 – fornication
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Co 5:10. This verse is given to clarify a statement in the former epistle as to whom they were to avoid in their associations. The world is so full of such characters as are named, that if Christians were required to avoid all of them, they would have to go out of the world; that is, cease to live in any populated country.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Co 5:10. not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, and extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. Observe the cautionnot altogether restricting the allowed intercourse with them to what was necessary and safe. The collocation of the covetous and extortioners with fornicators and idolaters sounds strange to us; but it is a favourite classification with our apostle (Eph 5:3; Col 3:5). Perhaps the explanation of this may be found in Gal 5:19-21, where these are all ranked under the head of works of the flesh, any one of which might, according to individual bent, stir up another.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Vv. 10. The , and, which begins this verse in the T. R., is too little supported to be authentic.
The words naturally have the effect of an explanatory apposition added to the at the end of 1Co 5:9, in this sense: When I spoke of fornicators in my letter, I did not thereby mean all the fornicators of this world in general. After all attempts to explain this differently, it seems to me that this is the interpretation which holds good. Only, it logically implies that by the phrase, the fornicators of this world, Paul denotes, not only those who are without the Church, but those also who profess the gospel. It is the only way of explaining the , which is not the absolute negative, like , absolutely not, but, on the contrary, a restricted negative (not absolutely, not entirely): I wrote to you to break with fornicators, not with fornicators in general, which would oblige you to go out of the world, but with those only who profess the gospel. This is the meaning adopted by Neander, Hofmann, and others. It is objected that the phrase, the fornicators of this world, must be exclusive of those of the Church. Why so? The idea is simply, not generally with all the fornicators living with you in this world. Such is evidently the meaning of the word world in the following sentence. Meyer has thought that it is to mark the difference between these two meanings given to the word world that Paul rejects the , this, in the following sentence. But it may also be to avoid an awkward and useless repetition. As to those who, like Meyer, de Wette, Edwards, hold that the fornicators of this world must here be necessarily contrasted with those of the Church, they are thrown into embarrassment by the , and they apply it solely to the limitation of relations with these fornicators: I meant you not to have relations too complete () with non-Christian fornicators, which would authorize restricted relations, without which life in the world would be impossible. But this meaning is not natural; for what Paul here distinguishes is not the greater or less degree of intimacy in relations to impure heathen; he is contrasting with the relation to impure heathen, which he authorizes, the relation to impure Christians, which he forbids.
We do not take account here of the interpretations which separate from , connecting the former with the verb , and the latter with the verb ,a separation far from natural,nor of that of Rckert, who understands almost as if it were , absolutely not, though Paul knows perfectly the use and meaning of this form; comp. 1Co 16:12. However this may be, the view of the apostle remains substantially the same: the rupture which he demands is not applicable to the vicious in general, but only to those who lay claim to the name of Christians.
To libertinism Paul adds covetousness as to earthly goods, and that in the two forms of , which, to have more, uses fraudulent and indelicate processes, like usury, and that of , injustice by violent means. These two words are connected, not by , or, but by , and, as two species of one and the same genus.
Idolaters, as such, would seem to be an impossibility in the Church; but there might be Corinthians who, after believing, had kept up habits of idolatry; and chap. 8 will show us that many of them could not bring themselves to give up the banquets to which they were invited in idol temples. These three vices, fornication, covetousness, idolatry, are related, as Estius and Edwards observe, the first to the individual himself, the second to his neighbours, the third to God.
It is evident that in a city like Corinth, to break off all connection with persons of these three categories would have been for a man to condemn himself to live as a hermit. This is probably what the Corinthians had retorted with a measure of irony; and so the apostle, no less than they, rejects an idea so absurd. The majority of the Mjj. read , ye would need, which gives a simple sense. T. R. with P and Chrysostom reads , ye need, a form which is also, though less easily, intelligible: Since, if it is so, ye need… Calvin, starting from this reading, has given the sentence a quite different meaning: For ye need really to separate yourselves from the world (morally). But the particle , then, indicates, on the contrary, a consequence from what precedes.
And now Paul establishes his true thought.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
not at all meaning with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous and extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of this world [In this earlier Epistle the apostle had directed that fornicators and other backsliders inside the church, should be treated as outcasts, since they were so regarded of God (Eph 5:5; Gal 5:19-21). But he had been misunderstood, and had been thought to say that fornicators, etc., outside the church were to be wholly avoided; a very impractical precept, which could only be obeyed by migrating to another planet, since this world is steeped in sin–comp. Joh 17:15]:
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
10. Not (to associate) with fornicators of this world, for the covetous are extortioners or idolaters. Since, moreover, you ought to come out from the world; as the very word church (ecclesia) means the called out, of course, responsive to the call, we all come out from the world.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 10
Yet not altogether, &c. The sense is, that he did not mean to cut them off from all communication with vicious men, who were of this world,–that is, who were not of the church,–and whose vices, of course, did not compromise the purity and character of the church; but only, as is explained in the 1 Corinthians 5:11, from every such one, who is called a brother; that is, who, being joined with them in name, would bring upon them the reproach of his sins. Thus it seems that special precautions are necessary to avoid countenancing the sins of those, who make pretensions to piety.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
1Co 5:10. Not altogether. The words not to be mixed up etc. in the earlier letter are not to be understood universally, as referring to all fornicators without exception. Whether these words had been actually misunderstood, and the misunderstanding made known to Paul either orally (e.g. 1Co 1:11) or by letter, (1Co 7:1,) we do not know. Perhaps some had wilfully misinterpreted them, to make them appear impracticable. In either case he naturally deals with the matter here.
Of this world: 1Co 3:19; 1Co 7:31; Eph 2:2; Joh 8:23; Joh 11:9; Joh 12:25; Joh 12:31; Joh 16:11; Joh 18:36.
World: 1Co 1:20 : all the complex realm of things around us, looked upon as existing in space. It then denotes, in contrast to those who belong to the coming age, men and things around so far as they do not submit to Christ. As an outward distinction, it denotes those outside the community which professes to have been saved from the world. So here. Paul’s words about fornicators are not to be taken universally, i.e. of those who belong to the world around us, but only of professing Christians.
Or etc.: other sins mentioned in Paul’s letter.
Covetous: greedy for material good. It will be discussed under Eph 5:5.
Grasping: who with violence take other men’s goods.
Since, if so, etc.: such a universal prohibition would forbid all intercourse with men around; which would be evidently impracticable. And this impracticability proves sufficiently that Paul’s former words are not to be thus understood.
Fuente: Beet’s Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament
5:10 Yet not {h} altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.
(h) If you should utterly abstain from such men’s company, you should go out of the world. Therefore I speak of those who are in the very bosom of the Church, who must be brought back into order by discipline, and not of those who are outside of the Church, with whom we must labour by all means possible, to bring them to Christ.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
However, Paul hastened to clarify that in writing what he had he did not mean a believer should never associate with fornicators outside the church. He did not mean either that they should avoid contact with unbelievers who were sinful in their attitudes and actions toward people and God. Even our holy Lord Jesus Christ ate with publicans and sinners. Such isolationism would require that they stop living in the real world and exist in a Christian ghetto insulated from all contact with unbelievers. This approach to life is both unrealistic and unfaithful to God who has called us to be salt and light in the world (Mat 5:13-16; Mat 28:19-20). Many Christians today struggle with an unbiblical view of separation that tends more toward isolationism than sanctification.
Some interpreters view this discipline as excluding the offender from the community of believers gathered for worship: excommunication. [Note: E.g., Fee, The First . . ., p. 226.] Others view it as social ostracism.
"The Apostle is not thinking of Holy Communion, in which case the mede ["not even"] would be quite out of place: he is thinking of social meals; ’Do not invite him to your house or accept his invitations.’" [Note: Robertson and Plummer, p. 107.]
In 2Th 3:14 Paul used the same phrase (Gr. sunanamignusthai, lit. mix up together), translated "to associate with" (1Co 5:9), with regard to busybodies in the church. There not associating was to be the last resort of faithful believers in their social dealings with their disobedient brethren (cf. 1Th 4:11-12; 1Th 5:14). They were not to treat them as enemies, however, but as brothers. Probably Paul had the same type of disciplinary behavior in view here. I tend to think it means excommunication and social ostracism in view of the next verse.