WTJ 77 (2015): 237-50

CURSE REDUX? 1 CORINTHIANS 5:13, DEUTERONOMY,

AND IDENTITY IN CORINTH

uy

P r e n t is s W

ateks

t first glance, 1 Cor 5:1-13 seems to have little to do either with Scripture or identity form ation. Eor one thing, foe chapter lacks a citation
form u la o f any k in d .1 E u rth erm o re, th e two-fold p ro b le m of
a heinous and public instance o f (v. 1) and of the C orinthian comm unitys response to this circum stance (v. 2) dom inates this chapter.^ Such
concerns seem far-removed from foe pro]ect of identity confirm ation.3
O n fu rth er consideration, however, this portion o f Pauls letter evidences
n o t only an exam ple of Pauls sophisticated engagem ent with Scripture, but
also illustrates foe way in which Paul was engaged in confirm ing foe Christian
identity o f believers in C orinth. These two concerns, far from ru n n in g in
parallel and non-intersecting lines in 1 Cor 5, are intersecting, even mutually
reinforcing. In this chapter, Paul employs Scripture to foster the conversion of
the im agination.^ This apostolic objective, furtherm ore, far from lying at foe
periphery of the argum ent in 1 Cor 5, sits comfortably at its center.
We trill undertake to dem onstrate this point along three lines. Eirst, we trill
observe that in V 13, foe conclusion to ?auls argument, he is explicitly referencing
an expulsion form ula drawn from LXX Deuteronomy.3 Carefully following
foe work o f both Brian s. Rosner and Richard B. Hays along these lines, we trill
explore foe purposes for which Paul has so engaged this portion of Scripture.6
Guy Prentiss Waters is theJames M. Bairdjr. Professor of New Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary
injackson, MS.
1 Christopher D. Stanley, Paul and the Language ofScripture, SNTSMS 74 (Cambridge: Cambridge University ?ress, 1992), 195n44. Stanley properly notes, however, that 1 Cor 5:13 offers a
nearly verbatim quotation (adapted to suit its second-person plural context) ofD eu t 17.7 / 19.9
/ 21.21 / 22.21 / 22.24 / 24.7 (ibid). Dieter-Alex Koch includes 1 Cor 5:13 (Deut 17:7 inter alia)
in a table o f ungekennzeichnete Zitate, noting that it lacks eine Einleitungsformulierung (Die
Schrift als Zeuge des Evangeliums: Untersuchungen zur Verwendung und zum Verstndnis der Schrift bei
Paulus, BHT 69 (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1986), 23, 271.
2 See Gordon Fee, TheFirstEpistleto the Corinthians, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 196.
3 1 am grateful to Bernard Aubert for his suggestion o f the phrase identity confirmation.
4 Richard B. Hays, The Conversion of the Imagination: Paulas Interpreter ofIsraels Scripture (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 24.
5 The phrase is that o f Brian s. Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics: A Study of 1 Corinthians 5-7,
AGJU 22 (Eeiden: Brill, 1994; repr.. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), 61.
6 In addition to Hays, Conversion of the Imagination, and Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics, see

WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

Second, we wid address a problem posed by R osners and Hayss work bnt
unaddressed by to To be sure, ? a u ls citation of Deuteronom y is indicative of
? a u ls conviction that his Gentile Corinthian readers have been taken up
into Israel in such a way that they now share in Israels covenant privileges
and obligations.^ This citation is furtherm ore indicative of ? a u ls conviction
that the im m oral offender was guilty of covenant disloyalty.* But, given Pauls
understanding o ^ e s u s death as eschatologically curse-bearing (Gal 3:13; cf.
1 Cor 5:7b), what does it m ean that an individual is to be removed from the
eschatological comm unity (10:11b, ) on
behalf of which Jesus bore covenant and eschatological curse? In light of ?a u ls
understanding of all that had transpired in redemptive history, how are we to
understand this individuals transfer back into the realm of curse?
Third, we will argue that in V 5, recognized by many to stand in close relationship with V. 13, ?aul provides an answer to this complex of uestions^ Verse 5
answers these questions n o t directly b u t indirectly. H ere Paul is form ing the
C orinthians eschatological rensibilities.^ H e is providing an answer to the
question, W hat is the significance and im port o f the removal o f an offender
from the eschatological covenant community? More broadly, he is helping toe
Corinthians to understand what it means to live, as that eschatological covenant
community, betiveen the death and resurrection of Christ and what Paul calls
in V 5 toe day of the L ord ( ).
1 Verse 13 Deuteronomic E x k o m m u n ik a tio n sfo r m e l

Such recent critical editions of the GNT as NA28 and UBS* acknowledge a
precise verbal correspondence between Pauls words in 1 Cor 5:13b and LXX
Richard B. Hays, First Corinthians, Int (LouIsvIllc:Jc)hn Knox, 7 ;) and Roy E. Ciampa and Brian
S. Rosner, The First Letter the Corinthians, Pillar New d'estament Commentary (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 2010).
7 Hays, Conversion ofthe Imagination, 23. It will be in 1 Cor 10 that ?aul will provide extended
and explicit consideration o f this point; so Richard B. Hays, Echoes 0/Scripture in the Letters 0/P a u l
(New H aven:ale University Press, 197 ,( 8 .
8 Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics, 91; cf. Hays, Conversion o/the Imagination, 24.
Bij deze exegese is ook ^ zeer wel te verenigen met het van vs 13,
het eerste is de geestelijke achtergrond van hettw eede (F. w. Grosheide, De eerste Brie/aan de Kerk
te Korinthe, Commentaar op het Nieuwe Testament [Kampen: j. H. Kok, 1957], 144). Cf. Schrge,
Der erste Brie/an die Korinther, EKKNT 7 /1 (Zurich: Benziger, 1991), ^^5, 394; Koch, Die Schrift als
Zeuge, 278n2.
10 That Paul is doing so stands independently ofth e question whether Paul is writing this epistle,
in part, to correct what has been termed the Corinthians over-realized eschatology; so Anthony
Thisehon, Realized Eschatology at Corinth, N T S 24 (1978): 510-26; and Thiseltons subsecjuent
qualification, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 40; see
also Eee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 12. Note the trenchant dissent o f Hays, Conversion o/the
Imagination, 6-7; and the a lte rn a tiv e proposed by Ciampa and Rosner, First Letter to the Corinthians,
4-5, 179. On the degree to which Pauls reasoning in this epistle is eschatological in nature, see
David Garland, 1 Corinthians, BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 16-17.

CORINTHIANS 5:13, DEUT1:RONOM, AND IDENTITY IN CORINTH

D eut 17:7. Scholars recognize th at o th e r D euteronom ic texts correspond

verbally to those o f ?aul in V. 13b. At least six texts have been proposed as
candidates: LXX D eut 17:7 ( ) , 1: 1(
), 21:21 ( ), 22:21
( ) , 22:24 ( ),
and 24:7 ( ).12W ithin Deuteronomy, avariant
of this phrase appears in LXX D eut 13:6 ( ).
^ o b l a t i o n s em erge from a consideration of these six Deuteronom ic
texts. First, each is identical to the other; there are no variations of word choice,
word order, num ber, or tense. Second, with respect to these particular phrases,
the fX X m anuscript tradition is remarkably stable.13
With the exception o f a contextually m andated change o fnum ber (),
1 Cor 5:13c ( ) is verbally identical with these
six D euteronom ic com m ands.1* Noftvithstanding the absence of an introductory citation formula, Rosner has conrincingly argued that V 13c is a citation
and n o t merely an allusion or parallel.13 Both the precision of the verbal
correspondence, and the fact that the Greek verb is a New Testament
hapax legomenon com m end this verse as Fauls intentional and explicit use of
the form ula from Deuteronomy.13
To recognize this relationship raises two further questions. First, how widely
has Paul cast his n e t within Deuteronom y? L he engaging one, some, or all
of these texts? Second, for w hat purpose(s) has Paul chosen this particular
Deuteronom ic text at this im portant, concluding]uncture of his argument?
First, which o f these six D euteronom ic texts is Paul referencing in 1 Cor
5:13c? O ne way to answer this question is by com paring the D euteronom ic
contexts of each of these imperatives with the Pauline context of V. 13c. Two of
the D euteronom ic imperatives (22:21; 22:24) entail the expulsion of a sexual
offender from the community of Israel, and it is precisely such an offense that
is in view in 1 Cor 5.17A further clue emerges from the offenders sin that Paul

11 Koch recognizes this 'act, but declines to specify which other texts may be in view (Die Schrift
als Zeuge des Evangeliums, 13, 18, 23, 102, 188, 2?1); cf. Hans Lietzmann, An die Korinther,
(Tbingen: Mohr Si ebeck, 125 ,( 6 . Identifying the relationship as one o f allusion or parallel,
E. Earle Ellis sees Deut 22:24 or possibly Deut 24:7 as back o f Pauls text (Pauls Use ofthe Old
Testament [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1057], 153).
12 See representatively Peter s. Zaas, Cast Out the Evil Man from Your Midst (1 Cor 5:13b),
JBL 103 (1984): 259n2.
13 Koch notes that Deut 17:7c, with other LXX texts cited by Paul, stimm [t] ... mit dem berlief
erteil Wortlaut der LXX in seiner ltesten erreichbaren Gestalt berein (Die Schrift als Zeuge, 102).
14 A few NT MSS render the imperative as an (imperatival) future indicative () or as a
present imperative ().
Rosner, Paul, Scripture, andEthics, 61-64, responding to the proposals ofE. Earle Ellis, Richard
Longenecker, and Harold Ulonska.
16 Rosner, Paul, Scripture, andEthics, 63.
17 Hays, Conversion of the Imagination, 22.

^ S T M IN S T E R THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

specifies in V. I .18 This instance of is one in which

(. 1). Com m entators have noted several ?entateuchal texts that
verbally approxim ate ? a u ls words in 1 Cor 5:1, indicating that these texts have
inform ed Pauls moral assessment of this situation in CorinthLev 18:18; 20:11;
Deut 22:30 (=LXX 23:1), 27:20. A s R o s n e r has noted, these two Deuteronomic
references are especially compelling.20 The D euteronom ic prohibition (Deut
22:30; cf. 1 Cor 5:1) is contextually proximate to the Deuteronom ic imperatives
to expel the offender (Deut 22:21; 22:24; cf. 1 Cor 5:13c). The offense in view,
furtherm ore, subjects one to curse (Deut 27:20); this is perhaps the reason
P a u l curses the sinner in 1 Corinthians
2
Thus, it appears that Paul in this chapter is certainly engaging texts in Deut
22, and perhaps Deut 27:20. T hat Paul is n o t merely engaging this one chapter is evident from his vice list in V. 11 (
).22 This list is i m ^ r t a n t for our consideration of
the Scripture text cited in V 13c. Five o f these vices not only find a parallel in
Deuteronomy, but also, according to Deuteronomy, warrant exclusion from
the covenant community.23 Fornication corresponds to Deut 22:20-22, 30. While
greed has no parallel in Deuteronomy, itis paired with robbers in 1 Cor5:9.24
Greed may find concepftial pairing, then, with the final item in this list, theft,
which corresponds to Deut 24:7. Idolatry corresponds to Deut 17:2-7. Reviling
corresponds to Deut 19:15-19. Drunkenness corresponds to Deut 21:20-21.
W hether or not Paul has crafted his vice list both to echo the ar^m en tativ e
structure o f this portion of the epistle and to follow the canonical order of
[these vices] occurrence in Derrteronomy, two matters are clear.25 First, Paul
signals in V. 11 what we have argued is evident on other g ro u n d s -th a t Paul is
self-consciously citing Deuteronomy in V. 13c.26 Second, and perhaps more im^ rta n tiy , V. 11 indicates that Pauls engagem ent of Deuteronomy in this chapter
is not confined to an isolated verse. Pauls argum ent is thick with Deuteronomic
references that bear out the apostles sustained engagem ent with that book of
Scripture throughout 1 Cor 5 (w. 1, 11, 13). This is not necessarily to deny the
presence in this chapter of other influences from elsewhere within Scripture,
18 Zaas has argued that there is a word-play between pomos and poneros that serves to join
w. I and 13 byway o f V .( Cast Out the Evil Man, 259).
19 So Schrge, Der erste Brief an die Korinther, 269,370; Thiselton, First Epistle to the (Corinthians, 386.
20 Rosier, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics, 82; cf. Ciampa and Rosner, First Letter to the Corinthians, 200.
21 Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics, 82.
22 On vice lists in ancient literature, see Raymond E. Collins, First Corinthians, SP 7 (Collegeville,
MN: Liturgical Press, 1999), 218-19. On the vice lists of 1 Cor 5-6 in articular, see Zaas, Catalogues
and Context: I Corinthians 5 and 6, N rF S34 (1988): 622-29. On these vices respective treatments
in this episde, see Garland, 1 Corinthians, 189.
28 Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics, 70. See the tables in Garland, Corinthians, 189; Ha)s, First
Corinthians, 88.
24 Hays, First Corinthians, 88.
25 For the preceding suggestions, see Hays, First Corinthians, 88.
28 Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics, 70.

CORINTHIANS 1: , D E U T E R O N O ^ , ANH IDENTITY IN CORINTH

241

or even from outside Scripture . is to say that the form of Pauls argum ent in
1 Cor 5 compeis us to reflect further on what ways Deuteronomy has prorided
?aul both the vocabulary and categories with which he reasons in this chapter.
O ur second and final question is, For what purpose (s) has Paul chosen these
particular D euteronom ic texts at the im portant, concluding ju n c tu re of his
argum ent (v. 13c)? To p u t the question ano th er way in light of our conclusions
above, Why are the D euteronom ic expulsion texts im portant to Paul in 1 Cor
5? As both Rosner and Hays have observed, Pauls argum ent surely assumes an
identity beUveen Israel and the C orinthian church as covenant com m unity^
Paul will formally articulate this identity in 1 Cor 0 , but it is palpably present
already in 1 Cor 5. Paul here is transferring elements of Israels identity to that
of the Corinthian church. Like Israel, these Gentile believers are in covenant
with God, u n d er obligation to God to pursue holiness, and subject to exclusion
from foe covenant com m unity for gross and scandalous immoral behavior.
T hat Paul is reflecting along these lines is corroborated by foe way in which
he addresses the situation in Corinth. T he occasion for Pauls argum ent, to
be sure, is foe behavior o f a single C orinthian offender (v.l, ; V. 2,
' ; V. 3, ). At foe same time,
Pauls interest in foe m atter is broader than either a single person or even a
single offense.^ This fact is apparent from foe m ovem ent in this chapter from
specificity to generality. Paul speaks in V. 5 o f h anding over to Satan such a
o n e (). Paul warns foe Corinthians n o t to associate with im m oral
people (), before broadening fois list to include the greedy, thieves,
and idolaters (v. 10), that is, anyone who is called a b ro th e r ( 5
) and nevertheless is sexually immoral, greedy, an idolater, a reviler, a drunkard, or a thief (v. II). The closing imperative of V. 13, therefore,
can be restricted neither to this particular offender n o r to this particular class
of sexual offenders. It applies to a whole range of persons and offenses ^ t h i n
foe com m unity T hat Paul has this concern for the Corinthian community as a
whole corroborates our findings above: Paul identifies the church in Corinth
with I s ra e l-G o d s covenant people called n o t only to m aintain certain moral
standards b u t also to expel notorious riolators of the same.
II. Curse R edux?

This identification bettveen Israel and the C orinthian community, however,

raises a problem. We may begin to understand the problem by considering what
27 Ibid., 68-81; Hays, Conversion ofthelmagination, 23. Ciampa and Rosner argue that people are
excluded [in Deuteronomy] because Israel is the sanctified (holiness m otif), covenant (covenant
motif) community (corporate responsibility motif) o f the Lord, the holy God, and that Paul
has adopted these motifs and applied them to the church (First Letter to the Corinthians, 1 9 ? - 8 ) .
Although Ciampa and Rosner do not expressly say so, this transferal o f motifs predicates Pauls
prior identification o f Israel and the church as G ods covenant community.
28Jerome Murphy-OConnor, 1 Corinthians 5:3-5, RB 84 (1977): 244.

WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

the im port was, according to Deuteronomy, o ^ m t m n h t y expulsion. As Deut

27:20 indicates, tile offense of 1 Cor 5:1 was one that not only suh]ected the
offender to commttnity removal (as D eut 22:21) but also to covenant curse.
In this instance, to be removed from the community meant to be placed outside
the realm within which divine blessing was operative, and to be consigned to
the realm of covenantal curse.
In light o f the identity that ?U11 has eMablished between Israel and the
Corinthian community in 1 Cor 5, we are bound to understand the removal of
the Corinthian offender along the same lines. This particular removal entails
placem ent u n d er covenant curse. Given ? a u ls categorical application of the
D euteronom ic co^^n^t-rem oval form ula to a wide range of offenses, one may
conclude that to be removed from foe New Covenant community in the fashion
delineated in 1 Cor 5 is to be consigned to covenant curse.
Pauls own argum ent in 1 Cor 5, perhaps unintentionally, raises a significant
problem in connection with fois line of reasoning. In V. 6a, Paul admonishes
foe Corinthians for their boasting ().29 De warns them in V. 6b using
either a maxim or proverb or a standard m e ^ l o that of a little leaven
leavening foe whole lump.^ In light o f this state of affairs, Paul exhorts foe
com m unity in V. 7a to cleanse out foe old leaven, in order that you may be
a new lum p,j'ust as you are unleavened. This com m and evokes foe Feast of
Unleavened Bread which, in turn, naturally evokes foe immediately preceding
Feast o ^ s s o v e r (Exod 12:18-2031 . (13:7
It is Passover that Paul explicitly evokes in V. 7b (
). In the context o f P auls argum ent, Christ as Passover provides a
furth er ground for the preceding im perative.^ Pauls im m ediate interest in
conjoining Christ and Passover is in the prom otion of the moral purification
of the Corinthian community.33 Paul does so in the way in which he represents
Christ as the Passover sacrifice, as the verb surely indicates (cf. LXX Exod
12:22). Associating the death of Christ on the cross with the Passover lamb in
fois fashion in tro d t^es at th isju n ctu re not only foe idea of sacrifice, but
also of covenant (cf. 11:25,
').34 Paul therefore once again identifies foe Corinthian Christians with
29 W hether the Corinthians boasting is confined to the m ans particular sin (as Eee, FirstEpistle
to the Corinthians, 215) or not (as (iampa and Rosner, First Letter the Conthians, 213) is immaterial
to our point. See the discussion in Thiselton, FirstEpistle to the Conthians, 388 .0
' Thiselton, FirstEpistle to the Conthians, 400.
31 On this m otif in 1 Corinthians, seejam es K. Howard, Christ Our ?assover: A Study of the
?assover-Exodus Them e in I Corinthians, E v Q 4 l (1969): 07-108. Thiselton notes how Zeph 1:12
hecame tfte hasis, in suhsequentjewish interpretation, o f understanding the purging o f the house
o f all leaven ...a s a symbol o f moral purification (First Epistle the Conthians, 400).
2 ' vertalen we door want ook (Grosheide, De eerste Befaan de Kerk te Konthe, 146).
Schrge, Der erste Bef an dieKonther, 382. On the connections between the Passover ritual
o f cleansing and Pauls argument here, see Howard, Christ Our Passover, 100-102.
34 Hans Conzelmann, 1 Conthians, ttans.James w. Leitch; Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress,
1975), 99. Conzelmann astutely observes that it is presupposed that the Corinthians are familiar
with Jewish Passover usage (98n48).

1 CORINTHIANS 5:13, DEUTERONOMY, AND IDENTITY IN CORINTH

the eoYenant community, Israel, and here relates Christ to the Passover sacrifice
as antitype type.^ T hat Paul is reasoning typologically is evident n o t only
from the way in which oth er NT writers reason similarly concerning the Passover (cf. Jo h n 1:29; Mark 14:24), but also from the immediate context of Pauls
argum ent. Pauls statem ent about Christ as Passover sacrifice logically grounds
the prior exhortation to cleanse out the old [] leaven, in order that
you m aybe a new [^] lum p,]ust asyou are unleavened (5:7a). The contrast
b e ^ e e n old and new, as R. A. Harrisrille has persuasively argued, is decidedly an eschatological contrast o f aeonic proportions.The newness of the
community is on the order o f the new creation that the Corinthian Christians
are in Christ (2 Cor 5:17; cf. Gal 6:15).7 Also telling is the way in which Paul
prefaces the com m and to remove the old leaven in the preceding verse with
an adm onition regarding the C orinthians boasting (). Boasting, as
Paul has earlier argued, is characteristic of flesh ( , 1:29; cf. 3:1-3),
that is, o f sinful hum an existence in this present age (cf. 1:20, 21; 2:6). This
caution regarding boasting in V 6, then, provides an eschatological context for
Paul com m and in V 7 to cleanse out the old leaven.
Christ is, therefore, the eschatological Passover sacrifice. Using the possessive
p ronoun , Paul emphasizes that this sacrifice has particular reference to
the C orinthian com m unity Paul later in this epistle speaks of Christs death as
for our sins (15:3, ), w hether or not this particular
dimension of Christs death is in the foreground in 1 Cor 5:7.3SIn any case, Paul
understands Christs death here in 1 Cor 5:7 as redemptive, analogous to foe
redem ption of Israel from bondage in Egypt, and as haring particular reference
to the C orinthian community.
In another epistle, Paul speaks of Christs death as redemptive, and proceeds
to specify that redem ption in terms o f curse-removal; see Gal 3:13a,
. Time
prevents us from exploring all foe exegetical questions occasioned by this statem ent, but we may draw a fow observations pertin en t to Pauls argum ent in 1
Cor 5.39 First, Paul speaks o f his hearers as haring preriously been u n d er the
35 The antitype the Passover lamb under the law (Heinrich A. . Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Epistles to the Corinthians, trans. D. Douglas Bannerman [New York: Eunk Sc
Wagnalls, 1890], 116). PaceConzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 99n50.
36 Roy A. Harrisville, The Coneept olNewness in the NT,JBL 74 (1955): 69-79, as summarized
in Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 404.
37 Although the word that Paul uses in both 2 Cor 5:17 and Gal 6:15 () is not identical
with that which Paul uses here in 1 Cor 5:7, the two words are surely synonymous. Robertson and
Plummer note the verbal connection () with Rom 6:6, Eph 4:22, and Col 3:9 (Archibald T
Robertson and Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle ofSt. Paul to
the Corinthians, ICC; 2nd ed. [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1914], 102).
38 Some later MSS contain the preposition prior to the possessive in V 7. This fact may
be indicative o f an early scribal interpretation o f Pauls words in V 7 along these lines. See the
discussion in Schrge, Der erste Brief an die Korinther, 382-83.
3 On which see Guy Prentiss Waters, TheEnd ofDeuteronomy in theEpistles ofPaul, WUNT 2/221
(Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 80-112.

244

WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

curse of the law. Second, Christ has red eem ed them from that curse, and
has done so by becom ing a curse on our behalf. Third, as ?aul goes on to say
in Gal 3:13b, Christ did so precisely in accordance with the Mosaic Law itself
( , ). The passage that
?aul cites is Deut 21:23. Christ has borne, and believers have been redeem ed
from, Deuteronomic curse.
We are now in a position to appreciate the problem that Pauls argum ent in
1 Cor 5 brings to the surface. The Corinthian community is one that is said to
have been redeem ed from D euteronom ic curse. This redem ption is owing to
the eschatological ?assover-sacrificial death of Christ. Paul, in V. 13, however,
invokes a D euteronom ic excom m unication form ula to remove an offender
from the Corinthian community. The effect of this removal is to relegate the
individual to the realm of curse. W hat are we to make of an individual who
once was included within the com m unity said to have been redeem ed from
curse and who now, by apostolic in u n c tio n no less, is consigned to curse?
In light of the accomplished, eschatological, curse-bearing death of Christ for
the community of believers, how are we to explain this apparently anomalous
state of affairs? Furtherm ore, i^em o v alfro m the (pre-eschatological) Israelite
com m unity m eant death, then what does removal from the eschatological
com m unity entail for foe offender?^ Does Paul provide us any guidance in
answering this question?
111. Another Look a t Verse 5

Paul in fact does provide such guidance in V . M though it does not verbally
cite or allude to Deuteronomy, V . constitutes what Grosheide has properly
called de geestelke achtergrond (the spiritual background) of Pauls Deuteronom ic com m and in V. 13 Pauls statements in V 5, then, provide unique
insight into and are integrally related to Pauls engagem ent of Deuteronom y
in this chapter.
The im m ediate context of V. 5 is a profoundly eschatological one. Leaving
aside consideration of the question w hether the plirase with the power of the
Lord Jesus Christ ( , V. 4) modifies foe
preceding genitive absolute (when you are gathered together) or the following infinitive (hand over),42 we may note that foe L ordjesus power in this
On the death f the one removed in en]unetin with the evenant curses, see Jeffrey H.
Tigay, Deuteronomy, JPS Torah C o n te n ta r }( Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 19131 ,( ;
Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics, 66.
41 Grosheide, De eerste Befaan de Kerk te Korinthe, 144. See . abo^'e.
42 han Havener, A Curse tor Salvation I Corinthians 5:1-5, in Sin, Salvation, and the spirit:
Commemorating the Fiftieth Year of the Liturgical Press, ed. Daniel Durken ty^ollegeville, MN: Liturgical
Press, 1979), 336. For the related but distinct syntactical (Question o f the relationship o f the clause
in the name o f the Lord Jesus to the clauses around it, see Ernest-Bernard AIlo, Saint Paul:
Premire pitre aux Corinthiens, EBih (Paris: t^ahalda, 1956), 121; Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 97;

CORINTHIANS 5:13, DEUTERONOMY, AND IDENTITY IN CORINTH

CDnnetion is none oth er than the power of the Holy spirit, so 2 Cor 13:4:
, .43 This power of the Holy
Spirit is, in the C orinthian eorrespondenee, an esehatological power, u p o n
his resurreetion, Paul later argues, Jesus assum ed a spiritual body (
7, 1 Cor 15:44a), that is, a body indwelt, inhabited, and empowered
by the Holy Spirit. Jesus, furtherm ore, as last Adam became life giving Spirit
( 15:45 ,
1
b), such that the Lord is the Spirit (
, 2 Cor 3:17 ) A e t h e r qualifying the assembly or the
assemblys action in expelling the offender, the phrase the power of the Lord
Jesus Christ indicates that Paul understands this ecclesiastical removal (and
others of like kind, V 11) in esehatological terms.
Pauls statements in V. 5, then, are both integrally tied byway of V. 13 to the
broader pattern o f engagem ent with D euteronom y in 1 Cor 5, and situated in
an esehatological context. They are therefore well positioned to answer the
questions we have posed above regarding the curse to which the offender
is assigned. In the interests o f answering those questions, we will take up in
succession three m atters relating to the interpretation of V. 5: (1) the m eaning
of flesh () and S /sp irit () in V 5 and the related question of the

() and S /sp irit () inv. 3; (2) the m eaning of

the phrase handing over such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh
(v 5a) ;a n d (3) the m eaning of the phrase in order that [his/the] S/spirit may
be saved on the Day o f the L ord (v. 5b).
First, what is the m eaning o f flesh and S /sp irit in V 5? There are at least
three positions represented in the literature.^ T here is, first, an anthropological understanding of these two terms. Flesh and spirit correspond to the
corporeal and non-corporeal dim ensions o r parts of the hum an person, the
physical flesh and hum an spirit, respectively.46 O n this reading the flesh
and spirit in riew in V 5 are those of the offender. The destruction is of his
corporeal humanity; correspondingly, the salvation is of his soul, his inner
self. The problem with this view is two-fold. First, this reading of flesh and
spirit m ust supply an im plied possessive (his) that is n o t present in the
Greek text. T hat Paul does not so qualify these two nouns suggests an alternative
Murphy-OConnor, 1 Corinthians 5:3-5, 2 3 4 0 - ; Simon }. Kistemaker, Deliver This Man to
Satan (1 Cor 5:5) :A Case Study in Chureh Disripline, M S /3 (1992): 39-40; Michael D. Goulder,
libertines? (1 Cor 5 -6 ), N ovT 4l (1999): 339; and Thiselton, FirstEpistle to the Corinthians, 393-94.
This prepositional phrase could modify either ?aul, the offender, or the Corinthian assembly.
Resolution o f this uestion is not necessary for foe work we are presently undertaking.
43 Fee, FirstEpistle the Corinthians, 206. Eee, however, reaches this conclusion on other grounds,
citing 2:4-5; 4:19-20.
44 See further, Richard B. Gaffin jr., Resurrection and Redemption, 2nd ed. (Fhillipsburg, NJ:
?resbyterian 8c Reformed, 1987), 78-97.
45 Eor a survey o f opinion, see Barth Campbell, Elesh and Spirit in 1 Cor 5:5: An Exercise in
Rhetorical Criticism o f foe NT," JE I S 36 (1993): 331-42.
46 So C. K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (New York: Harper 8c Row, 1968), 126;
Kistemaker, Deliver This Man, 44.

WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

interpretation. Second, this reading may suggest that ?aul understands eschatological salvation (on the day o f the L ord, V. 5b) to he non-corporeal in
nature, an impossible proposition in view of what Paul will go on to say about
the resurrection body in 1 Cor 15.47
A second understanding of these two terms is ecclesiological. The flesh and
spirit refer, in the first instance, to the church in Corinth.4Flesh then refers
to the fleshly orientation of the clmrch, absorbed as it is by boasting, whereas
Spirit is the Holy Spirit resident in the community of faith.4 The absence of
any possessive pronoun modifying either noun renders this riew plausible. It is,
nevertheless, unlikely. First, it is unclear from the text precisely how the removal
of the offender will produce fee desired result, fee destruction of the flesh, feat
is, according to one proponent, the d e l e t i o n of the churchs sinful attitude.^
Second, there is fee affirmation, o th e r^ se unprecedented in Paul, feat fee spirit
himself will be saved on the Day of the Lord. Even understanding this statem ent in terms of the Spirits willingness to remain in fee community and thus
keep them for the day of the L ord does not alleviate this difficulty^
A third and com pelling understanding of these two terms is eschatological.
The flesh and Spirit refer, in the first instance, to the two orders characterized by sin, curse, and death, on the one hand, and righteousness, blessing, and
life, on the other.^ Each corresponds to the First and L a t Adams, respectively
(cf. 1 Cor 15:22). W hen Paul pairs these two terms, they customarily bear this
eschatological sense.
Paul therefore does not engage in the anthropological compartmentalization of the offender in V. 5. O n the contrary, he describes the offender in relation to each of these orders.^ As ^ l r ^ t y O Coimoi' has aptly paraphrased, the
47 Note the equally implatisible proposal o f Havener who apparently understands spirit to he
the spiritual body o f I Cor 15 (Curse for Salvation, 340).
48 This riew dates back to Tertullian, Pud. 13, cited in Campbell, Flesh and Spirit, 333nl4.
49 Garland, 1 Corinthians, 174.
50 Ibid.
51 Ihid. N ote the hybrid riew of Hans von Campenhausen, who regards Spirit to be the Hoi)
Spirit, but flesh to refer to the offender {Ecclesiastical Authority and spiritual Power in the Church of
the First Three Centuries [Stanford: Stanford Unhersity ?ross, 1969], 134-35n50, cited in Campbell,
Flesh and Spirit, 3 3 3 n l3). Cf. A d el^ a rb ro Collins, The Function o f E ^ 0 ]^ u n ic a t io n in
Paul, H T R 73 (1980): 259-61.
52 See, representatively, foe discussion of Herman N. Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline ofHis Theology,
trans.John R. de Witt (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 6468. For a defense o f this position with
respect to V. 5, see Anthony s. Thiselton, The Meaning o f SARX in I Corinthians 5.5: A Fresh
Approach in foe Light o f Logical and Semantic Factors, S /T 2 6 (1973): 204-28; Victor C.Pfitzner,
Purified Com m unity-Purified Sinner: Expulsion from the Community According to Matthew
18:15-18 and 1 Corinthians 5:1-5, ABR 30 (1982): 46; N. Georgejoy, Is the Body Really to Be
Destroyed? (1 Corinthians 5.5), B T 39 (1988): 433-34; Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians,
390-400; Fee, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 212.
53 In vs 3 werd een tegenstelling gemaakt tussen en , hier echter tussen en
, waardoor we genoodzaakt worden onder te verstaan het zondige vlees, de zondige
natuur (Grosheide, De eerste Brief aan de Kerk te Korinthe, 143).

1 CORINTHIANS 5:13, DEUTERONOMY, AND IDENTITY IN CORINTH

247

two terms speak of the whole person as viewed from different angles. Spirit
m eans the whole person as o riented towards God. Flesh m eans the whole
person as oriented away from God.54 The destruction and salvation that
Paul describes therefore have reference to the one indiridual with respect to
these aforem entioned dimensions of flesh and Spirit.
O ne objection to this riew stems from Pauls term inology in w . 3-4. In V
3, Paul describes him self as one who is absent in the body, but present in s /
spirit ( ). In V. 4, Paul m entions the
presence of my S /sp irit ( ) in the C orinthian assembly.55
Does this term inology n o t require the kind o ^ th r o p o lo g ic a l reading of V. 5
that we have above rejected? In fact, although Paul is speaking personally, he
is not speaking dualistically. In V 3, Paul is stressing that he is physically absent
from the Corinthians, but he is very m uch present am ong them in and by the
Holy Spirit, who, Paul argues in 1 Cor 6, 10, and 12, indwells each heliever,
unites each believer to Christ, and brings these believers into relationship and
com m union one with another.5T hat Paul, in the very next clause, references
the Spirit (with the power o f o u r Lord Jesus) only confirms this reading.
Given this understanding of flesh and Spirit in V 5, what does Paul have
in m ind by handing over [the offender] to Satan for the destruction of the
flesh? The clause for the destruction of the flesh likely expresses foe purpose
o f the handing over to Satan.5^ The handing over to Satan is undoubtedly
Pauls explanation of the significance of the removal o f the offender from the
C orinthian community. W hat does this particular expression communicate?
The verb is one that Paul elsewhere uses of G odsjudicially giving
over sinners to fu rther sin (Rom 128 ,26 ,24 and
), o f G ods giving over Jesus to
death on foe cross (1 Cor IL23; ^ 4:25; 8:32).58 Satan is, Paul writes, the
god of this world (2 Cor 4:4). To h and over to Satan is, in this context, to
com m it a person to foe realm of Satan.
Some interpreters believe that committal to this realm necessarily entails not
only the physical suffering but also foe death o f the one so co m m itted ^ It has
also been argued that this death follows upon foe pronouncem ent o f a curse
upon the offender.Some appeal to Greco-Roman andje^rish magical curse
54 Murphy-OConnor, I Corinthians 5:3-5, 42, as cited in Eee, First Epistle the Corinthians, 212.
55 On the difficulties presented by this verse in particular and some o f the positions represented
in the literature with respect to this puestion, see Graham A. Cole, Short Comments: I Cor 5:4 ...
with my spirit, ExpT98 ( 205
:( 87
.
56 See Eee, First Epistle the Corinthians, 204-5. Eee offers a different rationale than the one
suggested above. Cf. Thiselton, First Epistle the Corinthians, 301.
57 Grosheide, De eerste Briefaan de Kerk te Korinthe, 143. Eee notes that it may express either
purpose or result, expressing a preference for the latter (FirstEpistle the Corinthians, 209 and n67).
58 Scholars note that the same verb is used in L X X ^ b 2:b o f the Lords handing over Job
to Satan.
59 Havener, Curse for Salvation, 341; See the literature cited in Ridderbos, Paul, 471nl28.
60 James T. South, A Critique o f the Curse/Death Interpretation o f 1 Corinthians 5.1-8, NTS
30 (1903): 540.

WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

form ulae as prodding background and lending support to this in te^retatio n .^

At least one interpreter has argued that the curses of Deut 27 are being invoked
with the purpose or result of the death of the expelled offender.^
At first glance, the phrase for the destruction of the flesh may seem to
com m end this interpretation, ?aul emphasizes, however, that what is destroyed
is flesh (). In view is not the offenders corporeality so m uch as his participation and involvement in sin.^ ?aul indicates that Satan is the instrum ent
of this destrr^tion (; cf. 10:10). ? 1 does not specify the mechanism or
m ethod by which Satan brings to pass this destruction of the flesh. It may or
may not involve physical suffering, as the conceptual parallel in 2 Cor 12:7 may
suggest. It certainly seems to be corrective or instructive, as the verbal parallel in 1
Tim 1:20 indicates ( 5 , 5 ).64
T hat such destruction of the flesh is indeed a rem edial process is also
evident from the concluding part o f ? a u ls statem ent in 5:5b, '
(
In an admittedly difficult locution, but one that
deftly expresses the c h a to lo g ic a l contrast with the destruction of the flesh,
?aul stresses that the ultimate purpose of handing over this individual to Satan
is his salvation. ?aul desires that, on the Day of the Lord, this individual will be
found am ong the num ber of the saved, who will be presented blameless on
that day (1:8).67T hat day, which Paul elsewhere emphasizes is a day of ultimate
Jr^ g m e n t (4:5) and of divine wrath (Rom 2:5, 8), has not yet occurred. The
position o f the offender is a dire one. fie is to be excluded ffom the esch ato
logical community, and is no longer reckoned am ong the n u m ber of those
for whom the crucified and risen Christ has borne curse in ^ d g m e n t. De is
to be formally expelled through form ulations drawn from the Deuteronom ic
61 On whih see further ibid., 541-43; A. Collins, Eunction of E xoinm unieation, 255-56.
Collins elaims that (hec<>Roman magie eonstitutes only a partial background to 1 Cor 5:5, and
points to the Qumran literature as providing a eloser parallel (pp. 261-63).
62 Gran Forkman, The Limits of the Religious Community: Expulsionfrom the Religious Community,
within the Qumran Sect, within Rabbinic Judaism, and within Primitive Christianity, ConBNT 5 (Lund:
Gleerup, 1972), 143; cf. South, Critique o f the Curse/Death, 544.
63 Thiselton, First Epistle the Corinthians, 3 6 ; James T South, Disciplinary Practices in Pauline
Texts (Lewiston, NY: Mellen, 1992), 43, cited in Thiselton, First Epistle to the Corinthians, 397. See
here the especially illuminating explanation o f Grosheide, De eerste Brief aan de Kerk te Korinthe,
143-44.
64 Pace A. Collins, Function o f Excomm unication, 258. See the discussion in George w.
Knight, Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 111-12.
65 The phrase is Fees (First Epistle to the Corinthians, 210); cf. ( ,aF)vh1.s phrase, medicnale
remedium,cited in Meyer, Epistles to the Corinthians, 114. After all, Fee notes, the further instruction
in V. 11, that they are not to associate with this man, not even to eat with him, implies that no
immediate death is in purview (FirstEpistle to the Corinthians, 212). See further South, Critique o f
the Curse/Death, 556-59; Joy, Is the Body to Be ~
43T 35.
The last [of the two telic statements in V 5] expresses the final design of the whole measure
of the handing over (Meyer, Epistles to the Corinthians, 113).
67 As Fee notes, Paul does not intend that he must wait until the final Day to be saved (First
Epistle to the Corinthians, 213).

CORINTHIANS 5:13, DEUTERONOM, AND IDENTITY IN CORINTH

curses, He will be outside the ed ii^n g and caring enrironm ent of the church
where God is at work.^ Even so, the position of the offender is not a hopeless
one. His expulsion from the community is n o t designed to be an act of final,
eschatologica^udgm ent. T h a ^ u d g m e n t awaits the Day of the Lord. And it
may be that the offender, upo n repentance, will find him self am ong those who
are saved on thatday.^
IV Conclusions
At one level, ? au ls argum ent in I Cor 3: - is remarkably sttaightforward
a notorious and scandalous m oral offender must be p u t out of the C orinthian
community. Two factors contribute to the complexity of the argum ent. Eirst,
presupposing the identity of the Corinthian com m unity with Israel, ?aul proceeds to fram e n o t only the offense (and o th er offenses) in D euteronom ic
terms, b u t also the re uisite sanction. Second, Pauls argum ent is thoroughly
eschatological, n o t least in his description o f Christ as a typological Passover
sacrifice.
These two factors raise a host of questions relating to this expulsion. W hat
are we to make of an individual, once included in the community belonging
to Christ who has borne curse for his people, now to be removed from that
community into the dom ain of curse? Does Paul understand the execution of
the sentence of exclusion to entail the death of the offender?
Pauls argum ent in V 5 provides an echatological answer to these eschatologeai questions. The offender is indeed being com m itted to the realm of sin,
curse, and Satan. This committal may, but need not, entail his tem poral death.
Its proxim ate purpose is that he would be delivered from the dom inion of the
flesh (), and that, on the Day o f the Lord, the day of final, eschatological
j'udgment, the Spirit m ight be saved, that is, th ath e, as an indiridual, might be
found to be s a v e d -o n e whose life exhibited the holiness befitting one indwelt
by the sp irit of the risen Christ.
Paul understands the D euteronom ic curses to have found their typological
fulfillment in the cursing of Christ at the cross. This likely goes some distance
to explain why Paul does n o t insist on the tem poral penalties that would have
accom panied the execution of these curses in ancient Israel. Nevertheless, Paul
goes out of his way to pronounce the expulsion in clear D euteronom ic terms.
Why does he do this wfrltin the eschatological community? Paul will develop
the answer in 1 Cor 1 0 -lik e Israel of old (o u r fathers, 10:1), the church is
a ^rilderness community, having been redeem ed from bondage in Egypt, but
n o t yet having arrived in the Prom ised Land. As the offender ofv. 1 and the

68 Ciampa and Rosner, First Letter to the Corinthians, 208.

69 Leaving open the uestion whether 2 Cor 2:5-12 reeounts the reeovery o f this offender,
on whieh see Robertson and ?lummer. First Epistle to the Corinthians, 100; Colin G. Kruse, The
Offender and the O ffenee in 2 Corinthians 2:5 and 7:12, E vQ 88 (1988): 129-39.

250

WESTMINSTER THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

com m unitys response to him (w. 2, 6) indicate, the Christian community is

incompletely sanctified, and is presently in a place of danger and threat. The
prospect of expulsion from the community (v. 13) and its remedial purposes (
5) are necessary com ponents of this m ode o ^ c iia to lo g ic a l existence. These
are hardly the sole or even prim ary weapons in the apostles arsenal. W hat
dom inates this chapter, and what Paul hoped would dom inate the minds ofhis
readers, is an echatological and ecclesial identity forged by Scriptr^e.^

70 I ^ grateful to Luke B. Bert for his editorial assistanee with this artiele.


Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may priut, dow nload, or send artieles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international eopyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your resp ective ATT,AS subscriber agreem ent.
No eontent may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s) express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.
This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS eollection with permission
from the eopyright holder(s). The eopyright holder for an entire issue ajourna!
typieally is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, tbe author o fth e article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use covered by the fair use provisions o f tbe copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright hoider(s), please refer to the copyright iaformatioa in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).
About ATLAS:
The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously
published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initia funding from Liiiy Endowment !).
The design and final form ofthis electronic document is the property o fthe American
Theological Library Association.