1 Corinthians 5

sexual immorality
While some translations simply have “immorality” here, the term here refers specifically to “sexual immorality” (πορνεία; porneia), and is the term from which “pornography” is derived. It was used to describe practices of sexual perversion such as fornication, adultery, and prostitution (the related term πόρνη [pornē] means “prostitute”). As here, it referenced any sexual behavior outside the sanctity of marriage. The nuance is clarified by the context, but now it also appears in the word Paul chose to name the Corinthians’ issue. The clarity of this term is important in part because the same root appears in verse 11, where the term is distinguished from what might be called “general immorality” (e.g., covetousness, idolatry, etc.). Were it left to say “immorality,” one might wonder how “immorality” differs from “covetousness,” for example. Also, the chapter reveals that Paul is speaking specifically about the sin of sexual immorality that he has written them about in the past (v. 9). He has told them to disassociate themselves with people who claim Christ and yet engage in sexual immorality, so by not removing this sexually immoral man from their assembly, they are directly violating what Paul called them to do.

puffed up
The phrase “puffed up” is a literal translation of the Greek term φυσιόω (physioō). It is also the consistent gloss for the term throughout this translation (cf. 1 Cor 4:18, 19; 5:2; 8:1; 13:4; Col 2:18). The consistency in 1 Corinthians helps readers to discern both Paul’s development of this theme and the emptiness of this kind of arrogance, for it is not based on anything real. Paul’s opponents are not truly strong, only “puffed up” in their thinking. This is why Paul says that when he comes to visit them, he will find out not their words, but their true power, or lack thereof (v. 19). In the immediate context, Paul is saying that actual reality is that there is open sin in the congregation (v. 1), and yet they have become “puffed up” and have not lived rightlhy according to that reality and mourned.

present:
The translation here placing a colon after “present” helps to show that verses 4–5 stand as the pronoucement of judgment which Paul mentions in this verse. The use of an infinitive to begin verse 5 (παραδοῦναι; paradounai) indicates the completion of this judgment.

deliver
While some translations add “I have decided to…” in italics before “deliver” here, the infinitive verb (παραδοῦναι; paradounai) is best understood with more of an imperatival force (i.e., “[you are] to deliver…”). Paul is instructing the Corinthian believers how to deal with this man in his absence (cf. v. 4). The imperatival force of this infinitive is conveyed with the simple imperative in English, “deliver.”

Passover lamb
This is the Greek word πάσχα (pascha), which is a Greek transliteration of the Hebrew word פֶּסַח (pesach; “Passover”). Depending on context, this can refer to the Passover festival (e.g., Matt 26:2), the Passover meal (e.g., Matt 26:19), or even the Passover lamb (as it does here; also cf. Luke 22:7). The nuance in translation helps readers better understand Paul’s awareness that Christ is the believer’s Passover lamb, sacrificed for their sins, and in light of that there is a duty to clean out the leaven in their midst as in the original Passover ceremony (Ex 12:19; 13:7; Deut 16:3).

sexually immoral
Refer to the discussion on verse 1 above.

sexually immoral
Refer to the discussion on verse 1 above.

But now
“But now” literally translates the Greek phrase νῦν δὲ (nyn de). With this opening phrase, Paul is contrasting the present epistle with something he had written earlier (cf. vv. 9–10) not as a contradiction but as a clarification. He is writing now to clear up a false misconception and enforce exactly what he meant by his prior instruction not to associate with sexually immoral people, viz., that this referred to sexually immoral and otherwise wicked and rebellious people who called themselves true believers.

I am writing
The Greek phrase behind “I am writing” here is the word ἔγραψα (egrapsa), which is in the aorist tense (usually translated as past tense in English). Here, however, Paul is using this tense to describe what he is presently doing. Thus, this is an example of what is called an epistolary aorist by grammarians, where the writer of an epistle describes the timing of something not from his own perspective, but from the perspective of his readers (cf. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 562). But because a past tense translation here could lead a reader to conclude that Paul is referring again to a previous letter, it is translated with an English present tense for the sake of clarity. Because the Corinthians had taken something from a previous letter the wrong way, Paul is here providing a necessary clarification.

Are you not to judge…
The fronting of “not” (οὐχὶ; ouchi) in the Greek text implies an intended positive response to the question. Thus, Paul phrases it like this for rhetorical effect. By asking the question in this way, He assumes they know the answer already. This sense is communicated in English with the familiar structure, “Are you not…,” which likewise expects an affirmative answer.

will judge
The Greek verb form used here (κρίνει; krinei) can either be read as a present tense or future tense, depending on the accent marks. Since early manuscripts did not include such accents, it is understood through context that this judgment of the outsider is future (cf. 1 Cor 6:2; see also Metzger, TCGNT, 486). Since the judgment in the context of the church involves a purging from church community, the judgment of the outsider would involve a purging from the world or the presence of Christ in it (cf. 2 Thess 1:6–10; 2 Pet 3:7, 13; Rev 20:11–21:4).