1 Corinthians 7
OGC**Butler’s Comments
Chapter Seven THE PROBLEMS OF SEXUALITY AND MARRIAGE
IDEAS TO INVESTIGATE:**
Why should we accept the advice of a bachelor (Paul) on the subject of marriage?
Are the unmarried of 1 Corinthians 7:8; 1 Corinthians 7:25; 1 Corinthians 7:32; 1 Corinthians 7:34, those who have never been married?
What does the word separate mean in 1 Corinthians 7:10; 1 Corinthians 7:15?
Since Paul had no command from the Lord concerning the unmarried, are we still bound to obey his opinion? 1 Corinthians 7:25
Since God saw that it was not good for man to be alone (Genesis 2:18) and created a woman to be his wife, why does Paul say he who refrains from marriage will do better? 1 Corinthians 7:38
APPLICATIONS:
Biblical principles enunciated on the subject of marriage have the authority of God whether spoken by the married or the unmarried counselor.
Marriage is the only God-ordained relationship in which human sexual drives are to find expression and satisfaction.
If you want a happy marriage; do not neglect to afford your spouse all the physical satisfaction desired, along with love and the spiritual aspects of marriage.
The Holy Spirit of God not only approves of, but insists on, proper and regular sexual expression in marriage.
God’s word warns that the human sexual drive is exceedingly strong.
God’s word warns against remaining unmarried too long.
Anyone married to an unbeliever should go to great extremes to preserve the marriage.
Christians married to non-Christians will at least afford the unbelievers in that household more godliness than they would get where there are no Christians in the family at all.
If divorce comes in the marriages of believers or unbelievers, Christians must be involved in finding and guiding the fallen to the highest possible good for the persons and the society. This will most likely involve remarriage of divorced individuals, both believers and unbelievers.
In imminently distressful times the advice of the Holy Spirit of God, through the wisdom of the apostle Paul, is, do not marry.
Christians may, and must, serve God in whatever circumstances they may find themselves.
Christians are not to insist on changed circumstances in order to serve the Lord.
APPREHENSIONS:
What provoked Paul to write this dissertation on Christian marriage?
Was Paul saying in 1 Corinthians 7:1 that men should never touch women?
Is relaxation from the temptation to illicit sexual expression the only reason men and women should marry?
What spiritual symbolism is to be found in human marriage?
Does the Holy Spirit, through Paul, command sexual regularity within marriage? Why?
Is celibacy a miraculous gift from God? What kind of gift is it? How does one know if he has this gift or not?
Could the unmarried of 1 Corinthians 7:8 be applied to those who had been previously married and then divorced?
Paul emphasizes that the human sexual drive is very strong-how strong?
What should Christians do who are married to unbelievers? What if the unbeliever divorces the believer? May a believer ever divorce a spouse? When? Why?
May a believer, having divorced, or having been divorced, remarry? Under what conditions?
Would a minister of the gospel sin if he solemnized the marriage where one spouse has been previously divorced? Both spouses divorced? One prospective spouse is an unbeliever? Both are unbelievers?
Is divorce an unforgivable sin?
Would enforced celibacy produce the highest spiritual good in lives of individuals or society as a whole?
Should Christians really not try to change their circumstances in order to serve the Lord? What about Christian slaves?
Is the unmarried life preferable for anyone who wants to devote full attention to serving the Lord? For whom is it preferable?
Who should marry in the Lord?
**Applebury’s Comments
CHAPTER SEVEN**
Analysis
A.
Paul now turns his attention to a matter about which the church had written (1 Corinthians 7:1-9).
Their first question was about the advisability of remaining unmarried. It may have been framed like this: Is it better to remain unmarried than to assume the responsibilities of marriage?
The apostle answers the question, recognizing that there are two sides to the problem (1 Corinthians 7:1-6).
a)
He says, It is good for a man not to touch a woman, that is, the unmarried state is commendable (1 Corinthians 7:1). This is not to say that it is superior or to imply that marriage is in any way wrong.
b)
Low moral standards with which they were perfectly familiar and about which he had written in Chapter s five and six form a basis for considering the advisability of marriage (1 Corinthians 7:2-6).
(1)
Because of fornication which reflects the generally low state of morals in Corinth, a man is to have his own wife, and a woman is to have her own husband. This in no way overlooks the very high regard with which he viewed marriage, but it does consider the problem as Christians faced it at Corinth.
(2)
Each man is to have his wife, and each woman her own husband. Thus marriage, in accord with the original plan for the home, was a safeguard against the temptations involved in their society.
(3)
Husband and wife have mutual obligations.
(a)
The husband is to give the wife what is due her.
(b)
The wife is to give the husband what is due him.
(4)
This involves the principle of the right over the body:
(a)
The wife does not have the right over her own body; that belongs to the husband.
(b)
The husband does not have the right over his own body; that belongs to his wife.
(5)
A possible exception to this principle:
(a)
The general practice: Do not defraud one another.
(b)
Exception: By mutual consent for a limited time for a holy purpose such as a season of prayer, they may separate and then be together again.
(c)
The reason for this restriction: That Satan not tempt them because of incontinency.
(d)
This temporary separation is a matter of permission, not commandment.
Returning to the main problem about marriage, the apostle expresses his personal preference, yet recognizes that all are not alike in this matter (1 Corinthians 7:6-7).
a)
I wish that all were as myselfunmarried. This must be understood in the light of the peculiar problem at Corinth and his own self-control which he recognizes is a gift from God, but all do not possess it.
b)
Each one has his own gift from God; Paul’s enabled him to withstand temptation in the midst of low moral conditions; another’s enabled him to assume the responsibilities of family life in times of distress.
He sums up what he has said in answer to their question; Addressing both those who have never married and widows who may be eligible to remarry he says,
a)
It is good for them to abide unmarried just as he is.
b)
If they lack continency, it is better for them to marry than to suffer uncontrollable desires.
B.
He now turns his attention to those who are already married (1 Corinthians 7:10-24).
The married state is not to be set aside (1 Corinthians 7:10-16).
a)
He gives an order that is in accord with what the Lord had already said (1 Corinthians 7:10-11).
(1)
The wife is not to depart from her husband.
(2)
What to do if she should depart: Remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husbandno suggestion here that God sanctions her being joined to another.
(3)
The same rule is for the husband: He is not to leave his wife.
b)
As an inspired apostle, he gives additional instruction to those who are married (1 Corinthians 7:12-16).
(1)
He considers what must have been a very real problem to thema Christian married to an unbeliever.
(a)
If a brother has an unbeliever for a wifethis is assumed as a real possibilityand she is wiling to live with him, he is not to leave her.
(b)
If a Christian woman has a husband who is not a believerthis also is assumed as a real possibilityshe is not to leave him.
(c)
The reason for this instruction is seen in the fact that the sacredness of the marriage relation is guaranteed in the one who is a believer; otherwise, the children would also be unclean.
(2)
What if the unbeliever should depart? That is also considered as a real possibility. The answer: Let him depart.
(a)
The brother or sister is not under obligation to maintain a home under such conditions.
(b)
God intended that there should be peace in the home.
(3)
After discussing these real possibilities, he returns to his original instruction not to set aside the marriage relationship and presents a great challenge to the believer (1 Corinthians 7:16).
(a)
How do you know whether or not you may save your husband?
(b)
How do you know whether or not you may save your wife?
He sets forth the rule that he follows in all the churches (1 Corinthians 7:17-24).
a)
Whatever one’s state may be, as the Lord distributed His gifts and God has extended His call, live in it.
b)
Its application to circumcision.
(1)
Status as to circumcision or uncircumcision is not to be changed.
(2)
The thing that matters is keeping the commandments of God.
c)
Its application to slavery.
(1)
Status as to slavery or freedom not to be changed unless freedom should be possible.
(2)
The principle involved: the slave becomes the Lord’s freedman.
(3)
Don-’t become slaves of men.
d)
Let each man abide with God in the state in which he was called.
C.
Paul’s judgment as an inspired apostle concerning the unmarried (1 Corinthians 7:25-40).
It is goodhe doesn-’t say that this is the only thing or that it is required or that it is the superior wayfor a man to be as he is (1 Corinthians 7:25-28).
a)
This is not a commandment; it is the advice of one who has obtained the mercy of the Lord to be an apostle and who is trustworthy.
b)
This does not set aside the marriage relationship except in the situation which they were facingthe distress that is upon us.
c)
He advises the married to remain married and the unmarried not to seek a wife.
d)
Marriage, however, is not a sin, but it will be accompanied with distress.
He would have them free from cares involved in marriage (1 Corinthians 7:29-35).
a)
The fashion of the world is changingmarriage according to the divine plan is limited to this life (1 Corinthians 7:28-31).
b)
He would have them free from domestic cares that they might be free to attend to the things of the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:32-34).
c)
He is not forbidding marriage lest by so doing he might cause them to sin (1 Corinthians 7:35).
His advice to fathers concerning their daughters of marriageable age (1 Corinthians 7:36-38).
a)
Marriage is not a sin; if he so determines, let them marry.
b)
It may be better, if he does not give her in marriage.
His advice as one who has the Spirit of God to direct him as to the remarriage of a widow (39-40).
a)
The wife is bound to the husband as long as he lives.
b)
If he is dead, she is free to marry, only in the Lord.
c)
In his opinion, she is happier if she abides as she is.
d)
This he says as one who has the Spirit of Godit is the inspired directive on the subject of marriage.
Text
1 Corinthians 7:1-9. Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 But, because of fornications, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. 3 Let the husband render unto the wife her due: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4 The wife hath not power over her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power over his own body, but the wife. 5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be by consent for a season, that ye may give yourselves unto prayer, and may be together again, that Satan tempt you not because of your incontinency. 6 But this I say by way of concession, not of commandment. 7 Yet I would that all men were even as I myself. Howbeit each man hath his own gift from God, one after this manner, and another after that.
8 But I say to the unmarried and to widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. 9 But if they have not continency, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
Questions
How did Paul happen to write on the subject of marriage?
What expression does Paul repeatedly use to show possible connection between topics in this part of the letter?
What are the topics which he discusses?
What may have been the question of the Corinthians that called forth Paul’s answer?
What was Paul’s answer to their question?
Simply stated, what is meant by the answers?
Is there anything in his answer that could possibly be construed to say that the unmarried state is superior to the married?
What is the background against which Paul advised them to marry?
What can be said of Paul’s high regard for marriage?
What are the obligations of each partner in marriage?
What principle given by Paul in the Philippian letter is there that would save many marriages?
To whom does the right over the body of wife or husband belong?
What guiding principle must be observed here?
On what condition and for what purpose does Paul say that there may be separation of husband and wife?
How does the example of Jesus show that there may be times when one needs to be entirely alone with God?
What danger do some people face from Satan?
Why does Paul say, by concession, not commandment?
Why did Paul wish all men were as himself ?
What can we safely conclude about Paul’s marital status?
What about his love for the family? How does he show it?
Under what circumstances is it better to marry?
What is the relation of Paul’s instruction to what had been said by the Lord?
What did Jesus teach about marriage?
How long is the marriage contract in force?
Why did Moses permit the Jews to divorce their wives?
What can be said about the innocent party in divorce cases?
What principle of interpretation is violated in going to Matthew nineteen rather than First Corinthians seven for instruction about marriage for Christians?
What should Christian people do who find themselves divorced and remarried without knowing what the Word of God said about it?
Should such couples separate?
How does the divorce rate in this country affect the problem of juvenile delinquency?
What rule is given for the one who is married to an unbeliever?
How are we to understand Paul’s statement, to the rest say I, not the Lord?
How are we to understand the remark, the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife?
Does this have anything to do with the personal salvation of the unbelieving husband?
What should be the hope of the believer who is married to an unbeliever?
What is meant by not under bondage in such cases?
What rule did Paul give for all the churches to follow?
What bearing does the fact that God called us in peace have on our obligation to preserve the marriage?
What was the Christian slave to do about his situation?
Why did Paul remind them that they had been bought with a price?
Why did Paul say he had no command of the Lord about virgins?
How are we to regard his opinion?
To what distress did Paul refer when he advised the Corinthians to put off getting married?
What had the disciples thought about the kingdom before Pentecost?
What about the view of some that the apostles expected the return of Christ in their lifetime?
What distress did the Corinthians face?
Is it wrong for young people to marry during times of war or depression?
How does Paul’s teaching help those who remain unmarried?
- What did he mean by fashion of this world?
What was the duty of fathers toward unmarried daughters?
For how long is a wife bound to her husband?
Under what conditions did the inspired apostle indicate that she was free to remarry?
For Discussion
How can prayer and Bible study be used to keep the home together?
How can the Christian ideal for the home be best presented to the young people of the church?
1 Corinthians 7:1-9
**Butler’s Comments
SECTION 1
The Purity of Marriage** (1 Corinthians 7:1-9)
7 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote. It is well for a man not to touch a woman. 2But because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 3The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4For the wife does not rule over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not rule over his own body, but the wife does. 5Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement for a season, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self-control. 6I say this by way of concession, not of command. 7I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.
8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do. 9But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.
1 Corinthians 7:1 a Provocation for This Discussion: Paul was not married when he wrote this epistle to the Corinthians (see 1 Corinthians 7:7-8). Many people have difficulty accepting advice on marriage from a bachelor. It is possible that Paul had previously been married. Some scholars think Paul implies a former marriage by his question in 1 Corinthians 9:5 about his right to be accompanied by a wife as other apostles did. It is doubtful that he could have been a member of the Sanhedrin (if he was) had he been unmarried. This chapter does seem to be written by someone who knew by experience the intimacies and problems of married life. He may have been a widower. And no one has ever glorified marriage more than the apostle Paul (cf. Ephesians 5:22-23). His great tribute to Timothy’s mother and grandmother shows something of the esteem with which he looked upon marriage and the home. But whether he was married or not makes no difference. He was an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ and therefore what he teaches, even about marriage, is to be believed, trusted and obeyed.
The Christians of Corinth had previously written to Paul asking questions about sexuality and marriage. These questions would have been provoked by their constant exposure to three conflicting ideologies in respect to sexuality and marriage: (1) Jewish Christians in the Corinthian church would consider celibacy inimical to godliness. The idea of not marrying was so foreign to the Jewish mentality that the Old Testament does not even have a word for bachelor. The godly life for the Jew meant not only marriage, but children; (2) Apparently there was already some kind of Christian asceticism or monasticism among some Christians at Corinth. They believed that the most spiritual people were those who were celibates. Some were teaching that those who abstained from physical marriage were the holiest of people, and if men and women insisted on marriage they should unite only in a spiritual marriage, a sort of Christian brother-sister platonic relationship. Such a marriage would not permit sexual intercourse. Paul warned Timothy that such a teaching was a denial of the faith and demonic in origin (1 Timothy 4:1-5). The same apostle wrote, Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled. (Hebrews 13:4), and, … each one of you know how to take a wife for himself in holiness and honor. (1 Thessalonians 4:4). This has been an ever recurring departure from scriptural truth. One large segment of Christendom today teaches that celibacy is the holiest state of all and that those who minister must be unmarried; (3) and finally, these Christians of Corinth were trying to practice the holiness of the gospel surrounded by the loose and wicked morals of Greco-Roman culture. Rape, fornication, homosexuality and other perversions were glorified in the theatre and in the cultic religions of that world. From the context of this chapter, it appears these three cultural factors provoked the Christians at Corinth to write to the apostle for his inspired guidance.
1 Corinthians 7:1 b - 1 Corinthians 7:2 Pressure of Desire: Paul’s statement, It is well for a man not to a touch a woman. uses the Greek present middle infinitive, haptesthai, for the word touch. This word, in the middle voice, would be more accurately translated, cling to, fasten oneself to, assimilate to oneself. In other words, Paul is not stating that men should never touch a woman at allhe was revealing (because of stressful circumstances at the time he wrote) that the wisest thing for a man to do was not fasten himself to a woman in marriage. Paul’s command, as is clear later in the context, hinges entirely on the circumstances Christians were about to face in the Roman persecutions (1 Corinthians 7:26).
But there is an even stronger stress that might override the dreadful separation of husband and wife by martyrdom. That stress would be the drive to fulfill the human sexual urge (1 Corinthians 7:2; 1 Corinthians 7:5; 1 Corinthians 7:9; 1 Corinthians 7:36). God created the sexual drive in mankind, and it is good so long as it is fulfilled within biblically sanctioned marriage. So Paul writes, But because of fornication (the word for temptation is not in the Greek text), each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. Sexual immorality (fornication) was not only practiced almost universally in first century Greco-Roman society, it was glorified in art and religion. Paul plainly states that one, (if not the one) primary reason for marriage is to guard against succumbing to the temptation for illicit sexual intercourse! He reemphasizes this in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9. The Greek verb echeto, translated have, is in the imperative mood, and means Paul is giving a command herenot simply making a suggestion. Now, of course, Paul did not think relaxation from the temptation to illicit sexual intercourse was the only basis upon which Christian marriage is founded. He certainly emphasizes agape (Godlike love) (see Ephesians 5:22-33; Colossians 3:18-19) in marriage. The Bible also indicates that human marriage is to serve the even higher spiritual goal of exemplifying to the world the commitment and intimate relationship of believers to Christ (cf. Ephesians 5:22-33; Isaiah 54:4-8; Isaiah 62:1-5; Ezekiel 16:1-34; Hosea, Chapter s 1-3). On the other hand, it may surprise even Christians to know that the Bible says little about a man and a woman loving one another as a* prerequisite* to marriage. The Bible says a great deal about love within a marriage. In the Old Testament marriages were most often arranged by godly parents. The young couple then married and learned to love one another during the marriage. Most of them never went through the alleged experience of falling in love before marriage, Love is not an accident. No one falls into love. True love is from the willnot from the emotions. True love is caring and doing good for another even when one does not feel like caring. A man or woman must know what love is and how to love before marrying or the marriage will fail. Love doesn-’t happenit is not something one waits to experienceit is something done, something practiced.
The apostle’s statement that each should have his own wife or husband incidentally eliminates polygamy as a Christian option. Paul did not mean that every man and woman must marry since he cites celibacy as the most viable choice in light of first century circumstances (1 Corinthians 7:26).
1 Corinthians 7:3-7 Practical Direction: Paul here reinforces his teaching that the pressure of sexual desire is the main reason to seek marriage. The Greek words Paul used to give directions about sexual needs in marriage are interesting. Literally, he would say, To the wife let the husband pay the good affection due her, and likewise also the wife to the husband. The Greek word apodidoto (pay) is an imperative verb and is therefore a command. The use of the word pay implies obligation. The word eunoian is a Greek word literally meaning, well-minded but is here used to connote (as 1 Corinthians 7:4 indicates) the conjugal duties involved in marriage. God instituted marriage as the state in which man and woman are privileged to fulfill sexual desires. But within that state there are also certain duties! When God created man he saw that it was not good for man to be alone so he created woman (see Genesis 1:27-28; Genesis 2:18-25). It is clear from Paul’s instruction here that sexual intercourse within marriage is not sinful, and is not restricted to procreative purposes. Sexual intercourse, as befits a happy, godly and uninhibited marriage, is the God-ordained right of each partner in a marriage. Less than this (especially for a Christian) is to miss the mark of God’s will. Marriage is God’s practical way for men and women to enjoy their sexual desire in wisdom, health (both physical and psychological) and social order. Any other application of the human sexual drive results (as history verifies) in mental and physical sickness and social chaos.
In 1 Corinthians 7:4 Paul states a principle which is at variance with modern self-assertion hucksters. J. B. Phillips translates, The wife has no longer full rights over her own person, but shares them with her husband. In the same way the husband shares his personal rights with his wife. In the Greek text the word used is exousiazei, and is literally, authority. That is stronger than the English translation, full rights. It could be translated rule. In marriage each partner surrenders to be ruled by the other. Paul specifies this in regard to their bodies (Gr. somatos), but in other epistles he applies it to the whole realm of married life (cf. Ephesians 5:21 ff.; Colossians 3:18-19). In marriage, both husband and wife give up exclusive rights to their own bodies (and lives), agreeing to share them fully and freely with their partner. The happiest marriages are those characterized by complete liberty, few inhibitions, and absence of any guilt complex about sexuality within the will of God. The cause of much marital trouble today is selfishness, not only, but certainly foremost, in the area of sexuality. The Greek word exousiazei is in the present tense indicating that this reciprocal surrendering of husband and wife to one another is a continuing and permanent relationship. The New Testament teaches that marriage was intended by God to be a permanent relationship between one man and one woman in which the two, by surrendering all personal rights to one another, become one.
Paul’s teaching here should convince anyone that he was not a Woman-hating antagonist of marriage nor victorian in his attitude toward sexuality in marriage. He may have been a bachelor all his life; he definitely believed he was led by God to advise celibacy, because of the exigencies of the times, for those who could endure the single life. But he does not enjoin bachelorhood or celibacy as an absolute commandment of God.
In 1 Corinthians 7:5 Paul states one exception to the sexual responsibilities of Christian husbands and wives. But even in this one exception Paul is quick to limit sexual abstinence lest Satan tempt a man or a woman through lack of self-control! Once again, emphasis is placed on marriage as God’s primary provision for the controlled practice of the human sexual drive. The apostle’s one exception is in case one of the partners in a marriage wants to devote himself completely to prayer. But Paul warns against any lengthy abstinence even for prayer! The RSV translates the Greek word apostereite, Do not refuse one another.. The KJV translates it, Defraud ye not one the other.. Actually the Greek word is more emphatic than refuseit is often translated, rob, despoil, defraud, leave destitute. The idea is that lengthy abstinence by one married partner in sexual intimacy will leave the other partner robbed, defrauded and destitute, and clearly vulnerable to Satan’s temptation to illicit sexual gratification. This, too, is an apostolic command, for the Greek verb apostereite is in the imperative mood. There may come times when a personal time for seeking the Lord comes before the one dearest on earth (one’s spouse), but only for a limited time. Church work cannot be used as an excuse for neglecting one’s marriage. What is accomplished for the kingdom of God if one’s marriage partner is tempted and lost?
The English word concession (RSV) in 1 Corinthians 7:6 is not a good translation of the Greek word sungnomen. The Greek literally means, to think the same as. In 2Ma. 14:31 it is translated aware. It could be translated, with understanding. To translate the word concession or permission (KJV) implies that the rigid apostolic standard in human sexuality was celibacy but that Paul would concede to the less holy relationship of marriage by bending the revelation of the Holy Spirit slightly. But that cannot be correct. To Paul marriage was God-ordained. What Paul is saying here is precisely the same thing the Lord said to the Twelve in Perea (see Matthew 19:1-12). Paul was aware that the majority of humanity would never have the gift to remain celibate without being tempted to fornication. He was writing with understanding of that fact and so, he declared, I wish that all were as I myself (celibate) am. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of anotherand I do not say that celibacy is an absolute command of God.
Jesus made plain the high ideal for human marriage (Matthew 19:3-9) and his disciples jumped to the hasty conclusion that every man should be celibate (Matthew 19:10-12). Jesus replied, Not all men can receive this precept, but only those to whom it is given. He said there were a few men who had to be celibate because of circumstances beyond their control; and there were a few men who were able to remain celibate by their own choice, for the sake of the kingdom of God. But Jesus recognized that most men are not able to receive the condition of celibacy. Jesus made it plain that celibacy is not a matter of divine commandment but a matter of capability. Here (1 Corinthians 1:6-7) Paul says celibacy is a matter of being gifted (Gr. charisma).. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another.. Some people have charisma to remain celibate and some people have charisma to marry. The word special as in the RSV, or the word proper as in KJV, is not in the Greek text. Celibacy is not a special gift like speaking in a foreign language, prophesying, interpreting, healing, etc. (see I Cor. ch. 12-14). It is apparently an innate ability. Regarding the matter of celibacy (Matthew 19:10-12) Matthew reports Jesus as saying, ho dunamenos chorein choreito, the one with the ability to have this, let him have it! There are some with the ability and some who do not have it. When God made man, he saw that it was not good for man to dwell alone so he made a helper fit for him (Genesis 2:18). Some people may be able to find completion and fulfillment without a marriage partnerbut not many. Applebury states the meaning of 1 Corinthians 7:6-7 clearly: Each one has his own gift from God; for one it may be the gift of continence; for another it may be the ability to bear patiently and lovingly the responsibilities of the home with Christian consideration for the other partner. Those who have innate ability to remain celibate in life apparently do not have the ability to deal with the responsibilities of married life. This text, incidentally, proves that the word charisma does not always refer to special, miraculous gifts. There are some gifts from God (Gr. charisma) with which individuals are born (see Romans 12:4-13). God gives every human being some charisma! In special, miraculous gifts men exercised no decisions; these gifts came by divine intervention of the natural order; they were exercised by the operation of the Holy Spirit. But in the matter of marriage or celibacy, it is clear men are called upon to make their own choice, based upon the teachings of the apostles and their own evaluations of their innate capabilities.
1 Corinthians 7:8-9 Passion Disciplined: Paul addresses the remarks in these verses to the unmarried males (Greek, agamois, masculine, dative, plural, noun) and to the widows (Greek, cherais, feminine, dative plural, noun). It is addressed to unmarried males because in ancient times only men were allowed to take the initiative in choosing marriage partners. Unmarried males could mean either bachelors or widowers. Paul, under the direction of the Holy Spirit (see 1 Corinthians 7:40), states it would be well (Gr. kalon) for anyone unmarried at that time (for reasons of the impending distress 1 Corinthians 7:26) to remain even as he was. Paul does not say in the text that he was unmarried. The Greek text is, kalon autois estin ean meinosin hos kago, or well for them it is if they remain as I also am being. We assume he was single from the context. Some think Paul had been previously married and was a widower at the writing of I Corinthians. In stating that celibacy would be good, Paul is not saying that marriage would be bad. There seem to be only two reasons Paul has for celibacy being goodbecause of the impending distress and because the celibate is able to concentrate more fully on the things of the kingdom of God than the married person is (1 Corinthians 7:25-35).
Paul is quick, however, to qualify his statement that celibacy is good. Celibacy is good only if a person is able to exercise sexual self-control. The Greek phrase is: ei de ouk enkrateuontai, gamesatosan, or, However, if they have no self-control, let them marry. The Greek verb enkrateuontai means literally, continuing power within since it is in the present tense. There can be no doubt that the power within is self-control over sexual impulses. The context demands that interpretation, The apostolic wisdom in the matter is: It is better (Gr. kreisson, more profitable) to marry than to be inflamed. There is no word for passion in the Greek text as in the RSV translation. There is only the word purousthai in the Greek text which literally means, to burn. Again, the context demands we interpret Paul to mean burn with sexual passion. For those able to live a constant life of sexual sublimation, the unmarried state is good. But for those who cannot, it is more profitable to marry.
Paul wrote to the young evangelist (we presume Timothy was unmarried) that the theology which forbade marriage was a theology departing from the faithin other words, apostasy (1 Timothy 4:3). In a later section of this chapter we will be asking whether Paul’s statement to Timothy means no one has the right to forbid marriage to those never previously married, or does it mean that no one has the right to forbid marriage to any one in an unmarried state regardless of past circumstances. But one thing is certain, Paul agrees with the rest of Biblical teaching that marriage is a godly estate.
Marriage is the only human relationship in which sexual intercourse is approved by God! The person who cannot sublimate sexual urges, fulfilling them in something higher, should get married. It should be noted that Paul advises marriage when it is first apparent that a person is not able to control sexual urgesnot after sexual experimentation has occurred. This may seem to some that Paul is taking a rather crude view of marriage. But Paul enunciates some of the highest ideals and purposes for marriage in all the Bible (cf. Ephesians 5:21 ff.). What Paul says in our text here shows that God is aware of the significance and power of human sexuality. The sexual urge in mankind, if not the strongest, is certainly one of the most powerful. And that is undoubtedly God’s will in order to motivate man to be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth (cf. Genesis 1:28; Genesis 9:1, etc.). The Greek word gamesatosan is in the imperative mood in this text. That is more than a suggestion; they should marry is an apostolic command! It is crucial to later comments on remarriage that this command be remembered. Certainly, those who have once been married and later widowed or divorced would be as apt to burn with passion as those who have never been married. If those who once were married now burn with passion in an unmarried state, it would be better for them, too, to get married. It does not seem in keeping with God’s grace to forbid divorced persons to remarry, placing them in the position of burning with passion until they engage in illicit sexual intercourse.
Applebury’s Comments
Things About Which They had Written (1-9)
*Commentary
Now concerning things whereof ye wrote.*Up to this point Paul had been writing about things that had been reported to him by those of the house of Chloe. These things were division, neglect of duty in relation to moral issues, going to court before pagan judges, and the abuse of the body which the Lord intended to be a temple of the Holy Spirit.
The Corinthians, evidently desiring additional information on certain matters, had written to the apostle. Was this in response to what he had taught in the lost epistle or was it because they felt a need for more information than they had received when he was present with them? There is no good way for us to answer these thought provoking questions. Interpretation of his answers does not depend on our knowledge of what prompted them to ask for the information.
They were concerned about the problem of marriage. We can not be sure just what other questions were asked, but it may be that the rest of the book is given over to the answer of their questions. It is possible, of course, that their only question was about marriage. The rest of the book, then, is additional help which he knew they needed as they faced the problems of their day. We might also ask if Chapter s twelve through fifteen come under the heading of things about which they had written? In all probability they do, but we cannot be sure. The expression, now concerning is an indication that all this section may have been written in response to their letter. See 1 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Corinthians 7:25; 1 Corinthians 8:1; 1 Corinthians 12:1; 1 Corinthians 16:1.
The topics discussed in this section pertain to marriage, idolatry, worship, the Lord’s supper, spiritual gifts, the resurrection, and the collection for the saints.
*It is good for a man not to touch a woman.*The question back of this answer was something like this: Is it commendable for a Christian not to marry? Or it may have been framed like this: Is it better to remain unmarried than to assume the responsibilities of marriage in this time of distress. The answer is: It is commendable for a man not to touch a woman. This is to those who had never married. It simply states that the unmarried state is commendable. It does not say that the unmarried state is superior to the married state or that there is anything wrong about marriage, for marriage is honorable (Hebrews 13:4).
*But, because of fornication.*The low state of morals in Corinth was well known. Paul’s answer takes this into consideration as well as what he had just written in Chapter s five and six on the subject. This is not to say that the only reason for getting married is to avoid immoral relationships. Some have taken this as an indication of Paul’s low estimate of marriage. On the contrary, we should remember what he wrote to the Ephesians on the subject (Ephesians 5:22-23). See also 2 Corinthians 11:1-3. The relation of husband to wife is like that of Christ to the church. The husband is to love his wife, and the wife is to be faithful to her own husband. No one has ever glorified marriage more than the apostle Paul.
Two things were faced by the church at Corinth that led to Paul’s answer: (1) the prevalence of the sin of fornication, and (2) the fact that some of them did not have the gift of continence such as he had.
*each man his own wife, each woman her own husband.*Paul upholds the original standard for the home as seen in Genesis 2:18-25. He most assuredly forbids immoral conduct. Faithfulness to the marriage vows is required of both husband and wifenothing one-sided about this. Each one has an obligation to the other. The husband is to give to the wife what he owes her, and the wife is to give to the husband what she owes to him. This regulation points to the cause of so much marital troubleselfishness on the part of husband or of wife. While Paul is speaking in this context about sex, the problem is far greater than that one issue. It involves every relationship of husband and wife. In lowliness of mind each counting other better than self is a principle that would save many a marriage (Philippians 2:3). When each partner is concerned about the other more than self, the problems of married life are greatly reduced.
*power over her own body, power over his own body.*How many think about this when they enter into the marriage contract? As to the Christian’s body, Paul said, you are not your own. The body is the Lord’S. As to partners in marriage, neither husband nor wife can say, I have the right over my own body. That right, Paul declares, belongs to the other partnerthe wife over the husband’s body and the husband over the wife’s body. With selfishness excluded and love serving as the guiding principle of married life, this is an ideal arrangement. It cannot be safely ignored except at the peril of the marriage itself. Paul adds, Defraud not one another. Do some husbands or some wives cheat in this matter? Check the divorce records for the answer.
*except it be by consent for a season.*An exception to the principle just announced is granted. This exception, however, is under rigid regulations. It must be by mutual consent and for a holy purpose, and it can be for a limited time only. Selfishness is ruled out. This can-’t be a whim of either partner; both are to agree to it. Where love for each other and unselfishness govern the actions of husband and wife, such agreement should not be difficult to arrange.
*that ye may give yourselves unto prayer.*Just what situation would make it desirable for husband or wife to be relieved of the home responsibilities in order to give one’s self to prayer is not stated. It may be entirely personal, for the Lord must come before even the dearest one in the earthly relationship. But the need to be alone in prayer is not to be prolonged indefinitely; it is for a limited time only. It would be quite easy for a selfish person to pretend that his desire to attend to religious duties is adequate reason for avoiding responsibilities that belong to the home life. God ordained both the home and the church relationship, and it is not necessary to neglect one to care for the other except, as Paul indicates, for a brief season.
Prayer in the home by both husband and wife is essential to the best relationship in the home. Children should be reared in the atmosphere of prayer. They should learn that prayer is the holy privilege which God gives to His children to talk to Him at any time about anything anywhere. This puts a grave responsibility on parents to conduct themselves and their families in such a manner that they can really pray together. A quarreling family, a nagging wife, or an abusive husband will make it utterly impossible to maintain an atmosphere of prayer about the home. There are times when each person needs to be alone with his God. Jesus often withdrew alone to a quiet place to pray. If Our Lord needed this quiet time for meditation and prayer, how much more do we need it? Paul recognized such a need, but he reminded the church that this did not free them from other responsibilities within the family. After the brief time that was mutually agreed upon, husband and wife were to be together again.
*that Satan tempt you not.*Satan’s power to temp either husband or wife is an important factor in all that Paul has said on the expediency of marriage. Lack of self-control in sexual matters is Satan’s invitation to attack. The wise husband or the wise wife will guard the one he or she loves to prevent this from happening. Sex can become the most degrading thing in the experience of man and woman, but when it is controlled by Christian love and an unselfish spirit, it can became a beautiful relationship which God has granted to husband and wife.
*concession, not commandment.*What Paul has said about agreement as to a time of prayer is not be taken as a command. It is permissive. It is left to the intelligence of husband and wife. Perhaps no two people are alike in their ability to exercise self-control in these matters. No general command could be given to regulate such periods of devotion to prayer. Therefore the apostles says that this suggestion is a matter of concession, not commandment.
*I would that all men were even as I myself.*Paul evidently is referring to his gift of continence which was a gift from God. This in no way condemns another who may not possess such a gift. Each one has his own gift from God; for one it may be the gift of continence; for another it may be the ability to bear patiently and lovingly the responsibilities of the home with Christian consideration for the other partner.
Jesus mentioned those who make themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake (Matthew 19:12). This is undoubtedly the same gift that Paul possessed. He was content to give all his time and concern to the preaching of the word of the cross. He in no way, however, leaves room for one to assume that he was not entirely in favor of marriage within the regulations of the Lord.
This passage is sometimes used to raise the question about Paul’s marital status. Was Paul a married man when he wrote this? Had he ever been married? We have no good answer to these questions. Some assume that his remark about giving his consent to the death of Stephen (Acts 22:20) meant that he was a member of the Sanhedrin and that would require him to be a married man. There is no real evidence that he was ever a member of that body. He could have agreed to what was being done without being an official. He mentions his right to lead about a wife that is a believer (1 Corinthians 9:5), but this does not indicate that he was or ever had been married. It seems quite certain that he was not accompanied by a wife at the time of his writing to the Corinthians.
Paul’s great love for Timothy (1 Timothy 1:2) and his beautiful tribute to Timothy’s home background show something of the esteem with which he looked upon home ties.
Whether he was married or not makes no difference in what he teaches on the subject for he writes as the apostle of Christ. Hence what he says is Christ’s teaching given through His inspired apostle.
*to the unmarried and to widows.*This returns to the question about which they had written: Is it commendable not to marry? The answer, given after explaining regulations for marriage, is yes. Later in this chapter he discusses the situation which the Corinthians faced that had a bearing on his answer. They were living in times of distress. If, however, they did not possess the God-given gift of continence he says, Let them marry. In other words, they are not to assume that there is something superior about refraining from marriage; marriage is commendable and so also is the unmarried state.
*better to marry than to burn.*The burning desire of one who does not possess the gift of continence is to be quenched within the God-given regulations for husband and wife, not in the sinful practice of fornication. See notes on 1 Corinthians 6:16.
Text
1 Corinthians 7:10-24. But unto the married I give charge, yea not I, but the Lord, That the wife depart not from her husband 11 (but should she depart, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband); and that the husband leave not his wife. 12 But to the rest say I, not the Lord: If any brother hath an unbelieving wife, and she is content to dwell with him, let him not leave her. 13 And the woman that hath an unbelieving husband, and he is content to dwell with her, let her not leave her husband. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15 Yet if the unbelieving departeth, let him depart: the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us in peace. 16 For how knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O husband, whether thou shalt save thy wife? 17 Only, as the Lord hath distributed to each man, as God hath called each, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all the churches. 18 Was any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Hath any been called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised. 19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing; but the keeping of the commandments of God. 20 Let each man abide in that calling wherein he was called. 21 Wast thou called being a bondservant? care not for it: nay, even if thou canst become free, use it rather. 22 For he that was called in the Lord being a bondservant, is the Lord’s freedman: likewise he that was called being free, is Christ’s bondservant. 23 Ye were bought with a price; become not bondservants of men. 24 Brethren, let each man, wherein he was called, therein abide with God.
1 Corinthians 7:10-16
**Butler’s Comments
SECTION 2
The Permanence of Marriage** (1 Corinthians 7:10-16)
10 To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband 11(but if she does, let her remain single or else be reconciled to her husband)and that the husband should not divorce his wife.
12 To the rest I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. 13If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. 14For the unbelieving husband is consecrated through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is consecrated through her husband. Otherwise, your children would be unclean, but as it is they are holy. 15 But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. For God has called us to peace. 16Wife, how do you know whether you will save your husband? Husband, how do you know whether you will save your wife?
1 Corinthians 7:10-14 Command: God’s commandment has always been that each human marriage is to be permanentuntil death separates one member of the marriage. That has been God’s will from the beginning of creation (cf. Matthew 19:8). Paul reinforces that by stating, To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord.. Paul uses the Greek word parangello which means, a proclamation, a command or commandment. strictly used of commands received from a superior and transmitted to others (see Acts 5:28; Acts 16:24; 1 Thessalonians 4:2; 1 Timothy 1:5; 1 Timothy 1:18; Luke 5:14; Luke 8:56; 1 Timothy 6:13; 1 Timothy 6:17 for usage of the word parangello). Paul charges that the wife should not divorce her husband. The RSV translates the Greek word choristhenai as separate, but it is the same Greek word used by Matthew in reporting (Matthew 19:6) Jesus-’ statement about divorce. Paul is not talking here about separation without divorce. All through this context he is talking about divorce, the dissolution of a marriage.
Apparently in Corinth, new converts to Christ were leaving their believing partners, or unbelieving partners were leaving their believing partners, and completely dissolving the marriages by divorce. When Christians marry non-Christians, or when one unbeliever in a marriage becomes a believer and the other partner does not, there will always be difficulties. But, according to the apostle Paul, they are not insurmountable difficulties. The difficulties of such an unequally yoked marriage are not necessarily such as should call for divorce. The ideal situation, of course, is that both partners in a marriage be Christians. People who are contemplating marriage can and should choose Christian partners before. Love is not blind! Infatuation and emotionalism is blind. Love is not something one falls into but is something one wills, decides and does, and does constantly in spite of emotions or circumstances!
Marriage as an institution predates all other institutions. It was sanctioned by God before the Law of Moses or the Christian dispensation. God’s will is that marriage should be permanent, no matter who is involved. When it comes right down to it, there is no essential difference between a Christian marriage in a church and a pagan marriage in the living room of a justice of the peace. There is no differentiate in God’s will that every marriage be permanent until death. Marriage is not a sacrament of the church performed exclusively by and for the church. Marriage is for the maintenance of human social structure. It is an institution established by God to be practiced by the entire human race. When a man and woman sincerely agree to become husband and wife, and obey the social and civil laws for marriage in their community, they are husband and wife regardless of their religion! Marriage can only be made permanent through unreserved faith in Jesus Christ by both partners. It can never be made permanent by civil law or force. Jesus made that plain in Matthew 19:3-12. When men have hard hearts they will rebel against all that God has sanctified, including the permanence of marriage. The law is laid down for the lawless and disobedient (1 Timothy 1:8-9) and the civil state must legislate and enforce laws which will keep sinful and wicked people from perverting marriage until they destroy social order.
In a world where the majority of human beings are not Christians, God’s ideals for marriage are seldom considered. Sometimes a Christian will compromise principle and marry a non-Christian. Sometimes, after two non-Christians are married one becomes a Christian. What is the Lord’s will in such circumstances? God’s will is always for the permanence of marriage. In any circumstance that would threaten to dissolve a marriage, God’s will is for reconciliation (reunion, coming back together). While it is possible that a marriage might have to be dissolved for continued sexual unfaithfulness (see Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:9) or because of unsolicited desertion (1 Corinthians 7:15) it is certainly not what God desires. He wants repentance, forgiveness and reconciliation.
Nor does the Lord desire that the conversion of one marriage partner precipitate the dissolution of a marriage. Paul says, If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. The Greek verb translated consents is suneudokei and means willingly resolves to dwell (Gr. oikein) with her without coercion.
There are several reasons the Lord demands permanence in marriage. We have already stated onethe need of stability in the social structure. Another reason is discussed in 1 Corinthians 7:14the power marriage has to sanctify unbelievers. Paul’s instruction to the Corinthian Christian married to an unbeliever is that the believer should sanctify the unbeliever through the permanence of the marriage. The unbeliever is in a set apart circumstance (at least that much set apart from the world) by being married to a believer. So, the marriage of an unbeliever to a believer can become a powerful tool. When a man is converted, as head of the house he should lead his family to the Lord (e.g. the Philippian jailer and Cornelius). When a wife is the Christian and the husband an unbeliever, she has to be content with a slower process. Peter says that wives should submit themselves to their husbands; the husbands will more readily be won to Christ this way than through nagging, complaining or arguing (1 Peter 3:1-2). Children who have even one Christian parent are at a great advantage over children reared in non-Christian homes. So, children are set apart from total worldliness by just one Christian parent. God’s will is that marriage with just one Christian partner be permanent wherever and whenever human beings are agreeable. Of course, Paul does not mean that any unbelieving spouse or child is saved by association. Being married to a Christian or being born by a Christian parent does not guarantee salvation. But it does mean, where one marriage partner is a Christian, the unbelievers in the home will undoubtedly hear the gospel or see it being lived out there more clearly and often than anywhere else!
1 Corinthians 7:15-16 Concession: But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate (divorce) let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. The Greek words chorizetai and chorizestho in 1 Corinthians 7:15 should be translated, But if the unbelieving partner divorces, let him (or her) be divorced. There is no word in the Greek text for desiresthat is supplied by the translators. And, as we have pointed out above, Matthew used the word chorizetai to describe the Lord’s discussion of divorce (not separation). There may be cases where one partner, not at all seeking to do God’s will, may dissolve the marriage (for any number of so-called reasons) while the other partner may not be able to stop the dissolution. When the unbelieving partner in a marriage has a heart so hardened by sin he or she puts asunder (the meaning of the Greek word chorizetai) or divorces the believing partner, then the believing partner (brother or sister) is not bound. What does Paul mean by, not bound? At least he means the Christian brother or sister is not bound to the divorcing-unbeliever as a spouse. Most civil societies (some with more latitude than others) have laws permitting divorce. When an unbeliever sues in civil court for dissolution of a marriage from a believer, and it is granted, there is nothing legal a believer can do to maintain the bonds of that marriage. Therefore, the believer is not bound to that marriage. But the big question is: Since a believer is not bound to a marriage he or she was forced by civil law to dissolve (when the believer was unwilling to have it dissolved), may the divorced believer remarry?
Paul has already admitted the reality that there is a possibility of the dissolution of marriages even where one party does not want it to be so. The unbeliever who has caused divorce has sinned. He or she must become a believer, repent and be immersed in water in order to be forgiven. The question remains, however, does the New Testament absolutely and unequivocally forbid remarriage with a different partner after divorce? (see Matthew 5:31-32; Matthew 19:1-12; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18; 1 Corinthians 7:15; 1 Corinthians 7:39; Romans 7:3-4). Actually, there are no absolute or unequivocal directions in this matter of remarriage. What each Christian believes or practices he does so by his inference or deductions from certain principles. It is the opinion of this writer that remarriage is not only possible for those who have violated the will of God and dissolved marriages by divorce, but that God desires remarriage in such a case for both believer and unbelieverfor both the guilty party and the innocent party. The following deductions have brought this writer to his opinion:
a.
God made marriage for the whole human race.
b.
Divorce is a sin; marriage is not a sin.
c.
Very few men or women have the gift to remain sexually celibate.
d.
Paul emphatically states, more than once, that enforced sexual continence (celibacy) when a person does not have self-control is dangerous to one’s salvation (1 Corinthians 7:2; 1 Corinthians 7:5; 1 Corinthians 7:9; 1 Corinthians 7:36; 1 Thessalonians 4:3-8; 1 Timothy 5:14, etc.).
e.
It is illogical to reason that a person who is divorced, when he or she is unwilling to be divorced, may be considered an adulterer or adulteress should they marry another partner. People cannot be made to be adulterers against their will! Society may gossip and stigmatize an innocent person in a divorce situation, but he cannot be an adulterer unless he has an attitude of promiscuitya heart that is against permanence in marriage.
f.
When there is a divorce there is no longer a marriage, neither in God’s eyes nor in man’s eyesTHERE IS A SIN IN GOD’S EYES FOR WHICH SOMEONE MUST REPENT (preferably a repentance resulting in remarriage to the same partner). But unless there is a reconciliation of the divorced persons, the marriage is over. They are no longer married to one another.
g.
There are two circumstances preceding a divorce in which, I believe, God considers one party in the divorce innocentsexual unfaithfulness and desertion. In both circumstances one party has to be unwilling to the dissolution of the marriage. It is, therefore, this writer’s opinion that the innocent party is most certainly free to remarryguided by his knowledge of the revealed will of God about marriage and his own conscience.
It is, further, the opinion of this writer that God desires remarriage even for the guilty party in divorce rather than trying to force him or her to a life of celibacy which he may not be able to endure without burning with passion. I believe God and Christ are interested in producing the highest good in every person’s life and in society in general. That is the spirit behind any Old Testament legislation or New Testament principle (for example, The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath).
a.
For the maintenance of social order, if an unbeliever cannot be controlled from promiscuous sexual intercourse by self-control, he or she should be married according to the laws of human responsibility and to keep society from degenerating to the level of animals.
b.
Paul points out in several places that while Christians are controlled by the highest principle, divine love, the non-Christian must be controlled by civil law, enforced by civil authorities (cf. 1 Timothy 1:8-11; Romans 13:1-7).
c.
What practical or ultimate good is going to be served by forcing those once divorced to remain celibate the rest of their lives? There really is no legislation to that effect anywhere in the Bible. There is certainly no civil law to that effect. If all Christians lived by the law of divine love, Christian husbands and wives would never divorce one another. But some Christians do not live on that planethey fallthey divorce one another. Are they to be banned to a life of celibacy for the rest of their natural lives? Is that seeking their highest good? What if they do not have the gift of sexual self-control? Should a minister of the gospel not also seek the highest good in every fallen person’s life?
d.
Would enforced celibacy really heal the problems faced by children when divorce occurs? What if a husband is left with small children to rear? What if a wife is? Who shall support them financially? Are they better served to be reared without a father or without a mother?
e.
Would enforced celibacy heal the results of divorce? Will the church be able to support both materially and psychologically, all broken homes? Should Christians leave the healing of divorce in Christian homes to the civil state?
f.
Would enforced celibacy heal the problems of temptation and incontinence? (1 Corinthians 7:2; 1 Corinthians 7:5; 1 Corinthians 7:9; 1 Corinthians 7:36). Suppose we paraphrase Jesus thus, Is it lawful to do good through the institution of marriage or to tempt to promiscuity through enforced celibacy? Marriage was made for man, not man for marriage! Enforced celibacy in prisons merely intensifies sexual crimes! Christians who say those once delivered should never remarry need to look at what happens in prison among men and women separated from heterosexual marriage!
g.
In no sense of the word do I condone divorce for any cause. I do not even condone loveless marriages whether the partners remain legally and outwardly married until they die. Both of these situations are certainly less than God’s ideal.
h.
But, neither do I think a minister of the gospel is partaking of the sin of divorce by performing marriage vows (since he is authorized by the civil authorities to do so) for couples who are unbelievers; for couples where one is a believer and another an unbeliever; for couples where either one or both parties have previously been divorced. God does not approve of divorce; I do not approve of divorce. God knows that all people do not have the gift of sexual self-control without burning; that is revealed truth and experiential truth. God does approve of marriage; I approve of marriage. As a minister, I have had nothing to do with their divorce; but I can have something to do with their remarriage, and, perhaps, repentance.
i.
And, of some significance, in every marriage I perform I may, in a positive way, be able to instruct and exemplify the Christian gospeland in a negative sense I may not give anyone an opportunity to criticize the church for lack of compassion and understanding.
j.
When I stand for marriage and the responsibilities that go with it, I am standing for law and order in the lives of unbelievers who will not be controlled by divine love but must be controlled by civil legislation.
k.
Is divorce a sin for which there can be no repentance (and no forgiveness) and no restoration? If a person embezzles, is imprisoned, released and states that he is of a different attitude, is he never to be allowed to handle an employer’s money again? Should a divorced person never be allowed to handle marriage again?
1 Corinthians 7:10-24
Applebury’s Comments
Directions for the Married (10-24)
*Commentary
Unto the married, I give charge.*Paul, speaking as an apostle of Christ, gives direction to those who are already married. It is in complete agreementhow could it be assumed to be otherwise since he is writing under the direction of the Holy Spiritwith what the Lord had said. This is a good answer to those who assume that the red letter sections of the New Testament are superior to the words of the apostles. Actually, their words are the words of Christ as He spoke them by His Spirit through the apostles (John 16:14).
*but the Lord.*The apostle gives us the inspired interpretation of what Jesus said on this matter as recorded in Matthew 19:3-9. Jesus spoke to men who were under the jurisdiction of the law of Moses. He reminded them that the marriage law that had been in force since the beginning was still in force. Moses had made certain exceptions because of the hardness of their hearts, but this did not annul the original law of marriage. Jesus reminded them that the one who put away his wife except for fornication and married another committed adultery, that is, the wife so put away was stigmatized by his act as an adulteress. See Romans 7:3. The one who married a wife put away in this manner also committed adultery.
This inevitably raises the question of the right of the innocent party to remarry. To refuse the innocent one the right to marry again, it is said, is unfair. Perhaps this is true, but who is to decide the question of innocence? What did the inspired apostle say as he interpreted the word of Our Lord on this subject? The answer is given in just two places in the New Testament. Paul discusses it in the Roman letter. There he says that a woman is bound to the husband while he lives (Romans 7:2). To make the matter clear beyond the possibility of misunderstanding, he adds, if the husband die, she is discharged from the law of the husband. The only other reference to the duration of the binding effect of marriage is in First Corinthians chapter seven. The same law is upheld, A wife is bound so long time as her husband liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is free to be married (1 Corinthians 7:39).
Many commentators assume that the innocent one is given the right to marry again. Every one acting on such opinion should for his own sake weigh carefully what Paul has said on the matter. Consider this also: The nineteenth chapter of Matthew which gives Jesus-’ teaching on marriage and divorce also tells what He said to the rich young ruler about eternal life. Because they were living under the law of Moss, Jesus told him to keep that law. When the people on the Day of Pentecostthe beginning of the Christian ageasked what to do to be saved, they were told by the inspired apostles to repent and be baptized for the remission of their sins (Acts 3:28). Now if we do not go to Matthew nineteen for the answer to the important question about what to do to be saved, why should we do so to the neglect of the apostle’s inspired interpretation of what Jesus said on the matter of marriage and divorce? This seems to be a valid argument, and it should be considered by those who would interpret Matthew nineteen as permitting remarriage under the gospel covenant.
*That the wife depart not from her husband.*No exception allowed by this categorical statement! The same rule applies to husband: that the husband leave not his wife. I understand this to say clearly that remarriage is not permitted under the regulations of the New Covenant. The law that was ordained in the beginning and upheld by Jesus is in force in the Christian age.
This presents a real problem on which the apostle did not write. What is one to do who may have divorced and remarried without knowing what the New Testament teaches on the subject? What I say here can only be expressed as an opinion based on what the Bible says in general about forgiveness of sin. Suppose that divorce and remarriage is a violation of the law of God. It then become a sin to do so. And if this is true, there is only one thing to do about it: repent and pray God if perchance the thought of the heart may be forgiven (Acts 8:22). This would, of course, require baptism in the case of those who have not been baptized (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16). John says, If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). Since there is a question about the matter, the conscientious Christian couple who may be involved, it would seem, should determine not to repeat the mistake and ask God to forgive if they have violated His law.
Should such couples separate? This is another problem on which we do not have Scriptural teaching. In so many cases, it would be impossible to do so. The sinif it is a sinis in the divorcing and remarrying. Perhaps it would be better not to try to return to the former partners, since in so many cases it could not be done anyway. The alarming problem of divorce with its effects on the children of the nation should cause Christian people to avoid the appearance of approving it. The church should hold before its young people, by teaching and by the example of elders and deacons, the ideal marriage relations as ordained by God in the beginning.
*if she should depart.*This directive is clear enough. She is to remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. This is in accord with the above interpretation of remarriage. It is not permitted by the inspired teaching of the New Testament. The wife who leaves her husband is not free to marry another man while her husband lives, only if he is dead. The same rule applies to the husband; he is not to leave his wife.
*But to the rest say I, not the Lord.*Some have assumed that Paul is giving his private opinion which is not substantiated by the Lord. On the contrary, he is speaking as the Lord’s inspired apostle. The Lord through His inspired apostle is giving additional information to guide those who find themselves in a situation which did not exist during His personal ministry. The church was not established until the day of Pentecost. Now a situation arises that calls for inspired instruction. What is the Christian to do who finds himself married to an unbeliever? If the unbelieving partnerhusband or wifeis willing to maintain the home, the Christian is not to leave husband or wife. This answers the contention of some who say that marriage is not valid before the Lord unless both parties are Christians. The facts are that the law of marriage was given in the beginning and was upheld by the Lord in His teaching to the Jews and is, undoubtedly, to be looked upon as valid for allChristian and non-Christian.
*For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife.*The rule applies to either party, husband or wife. Marriage is holy, and the unbelieving partner in this holy relationship is sanctified in the believer, that is, the marriage relationship is sacred because of the one partner that belongs to the Lord. If this were not so, the children of such marriages would be unclean, but now they are holy. That is to say, the marriage is in accord with the holy regulations of the Lord; the children of such marriages are not to be considered as being born out of wedlock.
A word of caution must be given here: This matter of sanctification has to do with the sanctity or the marriage relationship. It does not say that an unbeliever who is married to a Christian is saved from his sins just because he is married to a believer. Salvation and sanctification in respect to sin are, after all, personal issues. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, said Jesus (Mark 16:15-16). When we remember that Paul was speaking about the sacredness of the marriage relationship and not personal salvation, there is no problem.
*Yet if the unbelieving departeth.*This action is on the part of the one who has not submitted to the law of Christ. The Christian is not to initiate the action andalthough it is not so stated in this contextis surely not to be the cause of the unbeliever departing. Who but the Lord can really know whether or not the believer may be guilty of such conduct or attitude as to actually cause the unbeliever to depart? The Christian is under obligation to conduct himself in accord with the obligations involved in the marriage contract even if he is married to an unbeliever (1 Corinthians 7:3-5). This may often present a very difficult problem to the Christian; but, if he really wants to honor his Lord, he can find grace to cope with the situation.
*not under bondage in such.*Some assume that this frees the believer to remarry. However, the rule is plainly stated without exceptions in 1 Corinthians 7:39: A wife is bound for so long time as her husband liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is free to be married. In verse eleven, Paul had said that the one who departs is to remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. Some, of course, will argue that these rules do not apply to the case in hand. But when the whole body of instruction for marriage is considered, it is difficult to find a valid reason for assuming that remarriage is permitted except when one partner is dead.
What, then, is meant by not under bondage? No one is bound to maintain an impossible situation. An unbeliever who will not submit to the law of Christ will do as he pleases. Even the most loving Christian wife or husband may not be able to maintain the home if the unbeliever decides to leave. Let him depart; that may well be all one can do.
*but God hath called us in peace.*This is a difficult passage. Does it mean that the believer is not under obligation to live with an unbelieving husband or wife unless there can be peace in the home? Surely it is hard to have a home without peace. Or does it mean that the believer is under obligation to maintain peace in the home if at all possible? Probably the latter, because of the reason suggested in the next sentence.
*For how knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband.*This, of course, applies also to a husband who is a believer The whole issue is just this: Are you really interested in the salvation of the unbeliever? Too often the interest is in getting rid of the other partner, using his unbelief as a pretext. Taken with the statement about peace, this would seem to say that the Christian is to maintain peace in the home with a view to winning his unbelieving partner to the Lord. Unless one can live as a real Christian under such trying conditions, there is little reason to expect the unbeliever to change.
*And so I ordain in all the churches.*The rule applies to all the churches, Corinth included. Each was to live in the state in which he was called, that is, in whatever state one found himself on becoming a Christian, let him be content with it and live as a Christian without disrupting such things as marriage, bondage, status as Jew or gentile. This rule is given to those who may have assumed that they were freed from the marriage vows by becoming Christians.
*Circumcision.*The meaning of circumcision is to be taken from its use in the case of Abraham who was found righteous because of his faith in God before he was commanded to be circumcised (Romans 4:9-12). Circumcision become a mark that indicated that God acknowledged his righteousness. To many, this became a mark of acceptance by the Lord regardless of their actual status before Him. In itself, then, circumcision counted for nothing. The real question was the attitude of the heart (Romans 2:28-29). Since this was true, the Christian was not to be concerned about such outward marks.
*Wast thou called being a bondservant?*One did not need to change even slavery in order to become a Christian. But see the beautiful story of Onesimus, the runaway slave who became a Christian (Philemon 1:1-11). What does Paul mean by saying, use it rather? Some suggest that he is saying that a slave is to use his slavery to the credit of the cause of Christ (Ephesians 6:5-6). On the other hand, it is more likely that he is saying if the opportunity to become free presents itself, use it. Human bondage cannot long endure where there is an atmosphere of Christian freedom. If the truth as Christ taught it were actually accepted by men everywhere, freedom would spread to all human relationships. The only true freedom is found in being Christ’s bondservant.
*Ye were bought with a price.*This is the second time that Paul has reminded his readers of this. See 1 Corinthians 6:20. Actually they belonged to the Lord, for He bought them with His precious blood. They were not to be slaves to the sin of immorality. Even if they were in human bondage, they were the Lord’s freedmen.
*become not bondservants of men.*The Christian is not to have his conduct regulated by human masters. Christ has given h m direction through the inspired apostle whether he is a slave or a free man. No human bondage is to supersede this divine relationship.
*therein abide with God.*Heaven is the Christian’s home. He should learn to live with that thought in mind. On earth he has a work to do, glorifying God in the body. The thought of abiding with God in this life helps to bear the trials and hardships that come to His children.
Text
1 Corinthians 7:25-40. Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: but I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be trustworthy. 26 I think therefore that this is good by reason of the distress that is upon us, namely, that it is good for a man to be as he is. 27 Art thou bound unto a wife? Seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. 28 But shouldest thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Yet such shall have tribulation in the flesh: and I would spare you. 29 But this I say, brethren, the time is shortened, that henceforth both those that have wives may be as though they had none; 30 and those that weep, as though they wept not; and those that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and those that buy, as though they possesed not; 31 and those that use the world, as not using it to the full: for the fashion of this world passeth away. 32 But I would have you to be free from cares. He that is unmarried is careful for the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord: 33 but he that is married is careful for the things of the world, how he may please his wife, 34 and is divided. So also the woman that is unmarried and the virgin is careful for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married is careful for the things of the world, how she may please her husband. 35 And this I say for your own profit; not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is seemly, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction. 36 But if any man thinketh that he behaveth himself unseemly toward his virgin daughter, if she be past the flower of her age, and if need so requireth, let him do what he will; he sinneth not; let them marry. 37 But he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power as touching his own will, and hath determined this in his own heart, to keep his own virgin daughter, shall do well. 38 So then both he that giveth his own virgin daughter in marriage doeth well; and he that giveth her not in marriage shall do better. 39 A wife is bound for so long time as her husband liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is free to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord. 40 But she is happier if she abide as she is, after my judgment: and I think that I also have the Spirit of God.
1 Corinthians 7:17-40
**Butler’s Comments
SECTION 3
The Pressures of Marriage** (1 Corinthians 7:17-40)
17 Only, let every one lead the life which the Lord has assigned to him, and in which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches. 18Was any one at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was any one at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision. 19For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God. 20Every one should remain in the state in which he was called.21 Were you a slave when called? Never mind. But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity. 22For he who was called in the Lord as a slave is a freedman of the Lord. Likewise he who was free when called is a slave of Christ. 23 You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men. 24So, brethren, in whatever state each was called, there let him remain with God.
25 Now concerning the unmarried, I have no command of the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy. 26I think that in view of the present distress it is well for a person to remain as he Isaiah 27:1-13 Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be free. Are you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage. 28But if you marry, you do not sin, and if a girl marries she does not sin. Yet those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. 29I mean, brethren, the appointed time has grown very short; from now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none, 30and those who mourn as though they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those who buy as though they had no goods, 31and those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it; for the form of this world is passing away.
32 I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; 33but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, 34and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please her husband. 35I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord.
36 If any one thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his betrothed, if his passions are strong, and it has to be, let him do as he wishes; let them marryit is no sin. 37But whoever is firmly established in his heart, being under no necessity but having his desire under control, and has determined this in his heart, to keep her as his betrothed, he will do well. 38So that he who marries his betrothed does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better.
39 A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. If the husband dies, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord. 40But in my judgment she is happier if she remains as she is. And I think that I have the Spirit of God.
1 Corinthians 7:17-24 Discomfiture: Some, after having become Christians, were discomfited about their circumstances. Some were apparently convinced that becoming a Christian meant circumstances should change along with changes in behavior. Paul has just discussed the matter that a marriage should not be broken up just because one spouse has become a Christian and the other has not. Wanting to reinforce this principle, Paul states: Only, let every one lead the life which the Lord has assigned to him, and in which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches. Paul does not forbid improving one’s circumstances, but he does make it a rule for the church-universal that a Christian is supposed to make the most of his circumstances, whatever they are (unless they are sinful). No violent changes in one’s day-by-day circumstances are to be made just because he has become a Christian. The Christian can glorify God in most every circumstance of life. This applies to one’s job, marital status, social status, or nationality. These circumstances are said by Paul to be assigned (Gr. emerisen, divided, apportioned) by the Lord. Indeed, the circumstances of our lives are regulated by the providence of God. We are citizens of a particular nation by the providence of God. We are surrounded by opportunities or lack of opportunities by the providence of God. But in whatever circumstance we find ourselves, we are to be content (cf. Philippians 4:11 ff.). We are not responsible for our circumstancesbut we are responsible for our attitudes and actions within those circumstances. It is often a temptation for the new Christian to make violent changes in his circumstances or surroundings. He may want to quit his job, move from his neighborhood, break away from his social circle, and try to make a whole new set of circumstancesa whole new life for himself. But God wants the believer to be a believer in spite of and surrounded by his assigned circumstances. Paul states a number of analogies in order to illustrate his principle.
Strange as it may seem, some of the Jews in Corinth who had become Christians thought they should have the mark of circumcision removed. Jews who wanted to copy Greek ways in the Maccabean era instituted a process for removing the appearance of circumcision (see 1Ma. 1:15; Josephus, Antiquities, 12:5:1). Others in Corinth, Christian Gentiles, thought they should submit to the rite of circumcision. The Judaizers in the earliest days of the church tried to make circumcision a dogma to be obeyed by everyone wishing to become a Christian (cf. Philippians 3:2; Acts 15:1 ff.). Circumcision and uncircumcision are used frequently to symbolize Jewish and Gentile cultural habits. That may even be the case here. Paul certainly practiced many Jewish mores himself as a Christian. He did not violently renounce his Jewishness when he became a Christian. One should not divest himself of his nationality, his culture, or his physical circumstances (so long as they are not sinful) when he becomes a Christian. In whatever circumstance one is when called by the gospel to become a Christianlet him remain.
Again, if man finds himself in the circumstances of slavery when he responds to the gospel and becomes a Christian, he is not to take any violent or socially-destructive means to change his circumstances. Christianity stands for civil order. It does not condone anarchy in any form or for any reason. Jesus, under Roman rule, said: Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and unto God the things that are God’S. Peter wrote, Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do wrong. (1 Peter 2:13-14). Read what Paul said in Romans 13:1-7; remember the examples of Daniel, Nehemiah, and Esther; see what God said to the Jewish prisoners of war in Jeremiah 29:1-8. Of course the Bible teaches by precept that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. God never intended that any man should be exploited or enslaved by another. But then God never intended that any man should live in a society that worships sacred cows and monkeys while millions of people starve to death. Yet, in slavery or freedom, in poverty or plenty, every man’s first responsibility is to obey the gospel. Circumstances are irrelevant to faith and love for God. Paul says never mind about circumstances. The Greek phrase could be translated, It must not matter to you what your circumstances are.
Some commentators hold that the Greek sentence (1 Corinthians 7:21 b) all-’ ei kai dunassai eleutheros genesthai, mallon chresai, should be translated: And even if you become able to be free, rather remain as you are and use it. Others hold the translation should be: But if you become able to be free, use the opportunity and become free. Since either translation might fit the grammatical construction, we must beware of being dogmatic as to its interpretation. On the one hand, the immediate context seems to demand the meaning: Even if a Christian slave has an opportunity to become a free man he should remain a slave and make use of that lot in life to serve God. On the other hand, the overall context of Christian morality would seem to demand the meaning: And every Christian slave who has an opportunity to become a free man should avail himself of this opportunity to use in the service of Christ. Paul certainly would not advocate any Christian slave running away from his master or using violent means to obtain freedom. Paul personally sent a runaway slave (Onesimus) back to his master (Philemon). But in this case both the master and the slave were Christians and Paul exhorted such brotherhood as would practically erase the distinction between slave and master. Paul did not usurp Philemon’s right to have his bondservant returned to his service. Wilbur Fields says in his commentary on Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, (College Press), As Christians, we have come so far in our revulsion against slavery that Paul’s attention to Philemon’s legal rights as master seems to us more a violation of Onesimus-’ greater right to be free than a necessary preservation of Philemon’s rights. The Christian should read the following on slavery (Deuteronomy 23:15-16; Galatians 3:28; Colossians 3:22-25; Colossians 4:1; Titus 2:9-10; 1 Timothy 6:1-2; Ephesians 6:5-9; and the entire book of Philemon). We should attempt to keep our subjective feelings about slavery at a minimum in trying to decide what Paul meant here. Paul is emphatic about the principle, Every one should remain in the state in which he was called. He repeats it three times (1 Corinthians 7:17; 1 Corinthians 7:20; 1 Corinthians 7:24)! 1 Corinthians 7:22 seems to reinforce this principle. But our interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7:22 will depend on our interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7:21. What Paul seems to be saying in all this is what we have said at the outset: God wants the believer to be a believer in spite of and surrounded by his assigned circumstances. Whether a Christian is a bondservant or a freeman makes no differencelet him remain there with God (1 Corinthians 7:24).
Any person who becomes a Christian while a slave is set free from the bondage of sin by Christ. This is the only freedom that really matters for eternity. And any person who becomes a Christian while a freeman is in bondage to the Lord Jesus Christ and has no spiritual rights of his own. Christians belong to Jesus as purchased slaves. He is their Master. They are to do what Christ commands; they are to serve Christ. Christians are not to surrender control of their minds or actions to anyone but Jesus. Christ is the Christian’s only Master (see 1 Corinthians 6:20). Paul is referring to the Christian’s need to keep from letting some external circumstance or some threat of a fellow man usurp the right of Christ to absolute ownership.
Biblical history documents a number of examples of men and women who served God in spite of difficult circumstances. Joseph, sold in slavery, unjustly imprisoned, became second ruler in Egypt; Daniel, taken to Babylon as a prisoner of war, became third ruler in Babylon and, later, in Persia; Esther, a maiden among the exiled Jews, became queen of Persia; Mordecai, Esther’s uncle, became a minister of the Persian government; Nehemiah, also of the Jewish exiles, became the king’s cupbearer. It is also significant that neither John the Baptist nor Jesus insisted that people change their occupations (soldiers and tax-collectors), residences or cultural traditions (so long as they were not sinful) as a requirement for discipleship. Peter did not require Cornelius to resign his commission as an officer (centurion) in the Roman army to become a Christian; Paul did not require Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:1-52) nor the Philippian jailor (Acts 16:1-40) to change their circumstances when they became Christians.
We must not miss the fact that the main subject being discussed by Paul in this context is marriage. He is stating a general principle and citing various areas of applicationbut the main application is to marriage. If a person becomes a Christian while married to an unbeliever, the new Christian is not to seek dissolution of the marriage. The Christian is free from such a marriage only if the unbeliever divorces the Christian. Paul suggests that by keeping the marriage intact, the believer is able to have such sanctified influence on both unbelieving spouse and any children to the marriage there exists the best possibility of turning the whole family to Christ. Biblical examples might be cited for this principle: Joseph married an Egyptian priest’s daughter (Genesis 41:45), retaining his strong faith and bringing up his children in the faith: Boaz married Ruth who was a Moabitess, and she became an ancestress of Christ; Rahab, a Canaanite harlot, married an Israelite (Salmon, Matthew 1:5), and became an ancestress of Christ; Esther, a Jewess, married a heathen emperor, and saved her people. Believers do not seek to reform individuals by social upheaval; they seek to reform society by converting individuals to Christ!
1 Corinthians 7:25-31 Distress: This paragraph plainly states Paul’s primary purpose for advocating that it is well for the unmarried and the widows to remain single as he did (1 Corinthians 7:8). His primary purpose is not that celibacy is spiritually superior to marriage. Celibacy was enjoined in this apostolic reply to the Christians at Corinth in 56-57 A.D. because of the stress-laden circumstances coming upon Christians in the latter half of the first century. Persecution of Christians under Nero had already begun in 54 A.D. These persecutions continued for forty more years until they reached an intensity in 81-96 A.D. under Domitian that saw hundreds of thousands of Christians die. Simply because they were Christians, and would not worship the Roman emperor, people from all across the Roman empire were hunted down as conspirators and seditionists, enslaved and worked to death in mines and on galley-ships, starved to death by social ostracization, and slain by the thousands in gladitorial games in Roman arenas. Practically all the writers of the New Testament predicted the fiery ordeal that was about to come (indeed, had already begun) upon first and second century Christians. Paul predicted the Jewish persecution, the destruction of Judaism, and the consequent distress upon Christians in Hebrews chapter 10, in II Thessalonians chapter 2, and in 1 Timothy 4:1-5; 2 Timothy 4:1-8. Peter predicted it in 1 Peter 4:12-19. John predicted and described it in Revelation Chapter s 1 through Revelation 20:6 (see Twenty-Six Lessons on Revelation, by Paul T. Butler, pub. College Press).
Paul addresses those who had never been married in 1 Corinthians 7:25. He uses the Greek word parthenon (almost always translated virgin) translated unmarried in the RSV. Paul says there is no specific commandment of the Lord for his emphasis on celibacy. He gives his judgment (Gr. gnomen, understanding, mind) as one by the Lord’s mercy appointed as trustworthy. Judgment is a better translation than opinion (RSV), and Paul is giving a judgment which should be heeded because the Lord has declared him trustworthy. It is apostolic advicenot apostolic commandmentwhich his Corinthian audience, especially, would well have practiced. He had wisdom and revelation about their coming fiery ordeal which they did not have.
The phrase impending distress (Gr. enestosan anagken) might well be translated present distress (as in KJV). The Greek word enestosan is a perfect participlea combination of en and histemi. It could be translated imminent, right here, or at hand. Paul was not talking of the end of the world. He had already cautioned the Thessalonians not to think of the Second Coming of Christ in connection with the impending distress coming upon first and second century Christians (2 Thessalonians 2:1-12). Paul is suggesting unusual life-styles in view of imminently unusual circumstances much in the same way Jesus warned his disciples about their reactions to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. (Matthew 24:1-34; Luke 21:1-33; Mark 13:1-31; see The Gospel of Luke, by Paul T. Butler, pub. College Press). Paul’s understanding in the matter of marriage was that in view of the imminent stresses or pressures (Gr. anagke) a first century Christian should remain in whatever marital state he was. If the Christian was married, he should not seek to be free; if the Christian was not married, he should not seek to be married. That was wise advice for the exegencies of those times (or any similar times afterward), but only if the Christian is able to exercise sexual self-control (1 Corinthians 7:2; 1 Corinthians 7:9; 1 Corinthians 7:36).
In 1 Corinthians 7:28 Paul reassures the Corinthians that marriage is not a sinnot even if it is done against his wise advice about the imminent distress to come upon Christians. He goes on to point out that the distress to come will, of necessity, intensify the focus of married people on things of the world and perhaps divert their priorities away from pleasing the Lord. Those who went against Paul’s wisdom and married were going to have worldly (Gr. sarki, fleshly, physical) troubles. They would have to worry about another mouth to feed when as Christians they would be forced to starve; they would worry about seeing a beloved mate or child tortured to death in the arena. These anxieties and many others would constantly plague Christians during the great tribulation period of Roman persecution. Paul was trying to keep Christians from having to bear such burdens. The apostle reiterates that the imminent distress has grown very near. The Greek participle sunestalmenous is a perfect tense verb combined of two words, sun (together) and sustello (draw, contract, compact, tighten). The time of distress of which he had spoken earlier was almost there.
Paul now gives admonitions directing attitudes and behavior in anticipation of the stressful times coming upon the Corinthian Christians. First, those who were married were to make certain their first priority was serving the Lord. The married Christians would have to prepare themselves to deny the very strong temptation to compromise their faith in Christ should harm be threatened toward a spouse or child. Paul is not saying that in times of persecution married people should neglect domestic duties or the responsibilities of marriage. He has just admonished married Christians not to neglect conjugal responsibilities (1 Corinthians 7:3-5). He wrote to Timothy (1 Timothy 5:8) that anyone who does not provide for his own family has denied the faith and is worse than a heathen. Second, Christians must have the attitude that they will not mourn the loss of earthly things. They are not even to grieve the loss of loved ones as others do who have no hope (1 Thessalonians 4:13). Paul reported that some Christians joyfully accepted the plundering of their property (Hebrews 10:32-34). The apostle John predicted how the pagan world would mourn the loss of material wealth at the destruction of the Roman empire (Revelation 18:9-19). Third, Christians who might have occasion to rejoice in earthly circumstances should not do so, but should remember that worldly pleasures are transitory (see 2 Corinthians 4:16-18; 1 Timothy 6:6-19). Fourth, those who make purchases should not do so merely to accumulate things. Whatever is purchased is only acquired in order to be used up in serving the Lord. Only that which is done to serve Christ will last for eternity. The Greek word katechontes would make the phrase read, let those who buy be as those who do not consider their purchases as their possessions. Such earthly goods as a man has are not histhey are a trust, a stewardship from the real Owner of all things. Fifth, let those who use this world, use it sparingly. So long as Christians are residing in this world they must necessarily use certain parts of this world. They must eat to maintain the physical body, they must clothe that body, and there are certain earthly institutions with which they must be associated, but Christians are not to use this world any more than they have to while they serve God. The Greek word katachromenoi means, much use, over use, using to the utmost. Christians are to consider themselves just pilgrims or temporary residents of this world. The Christian’s permanent dwelling place is not here. He is not to settle down herenot to find security here. J. B. Phillips paraphrases, … indeed their every contact with the world must be as light as possible..
The reason for these five admonitions is this world is programmed for destruction. The word form (RSV) in the Greek text is schema; it is the word from which we get the English word schematic. It means, a plan, an outline, a blueprint, a design. Everything in this present existence is designed to pass away. Even the institution of marriage is designed for this world only (Matthew 22:30). Men and women should not get so attached to anything in this cosmic (Gr. kosmos, world-order) scheme of things, not even to marriage, that they cannot serve God without compromise. Not only is this world programmed to pass awayit is presently doing so. The Greek verb paragei (passing away) is present tense meaning action is presently going on. This agrees with Paul’s statement in 2 Corinthians 4:16-18 that the outer nature (the physical) is wasting away while the inner nature (spiritual) of the Christian is being renewed every day. It is the invisible, spiritual nature that is permanentthe physical is transitory.
1 Corinthians 7:32-35 Deviation: The pressures of marriage, especially in distressing times of social upheaval, might make some Christians deviate from giving first priority to the Lord’s will in their lives. Paul’s desire in setting forth his wisdom about celibacy is that the Corinthian Christians not yet married may keep themselves free from divided loyalties. The word translated anxieties is amerimnous in Greek and means literally, not divided in mind.
The unmarried man separates his mind from other things and gives it to the things of the Lord. He is under no obligation to provide sustenance, safety and security for a wife. The unmarried man may concentrate all his faculties on being acceptable to the Lord. But the married man separates his mind from the Lord’s service in order to concentrate on physical things that he may acceptably fulfill his obligations to his wifeand divided he is. The Greek phrase kai memeristai is translated by the RSV as connected to 1 Corinthians 7:33, and his interests are divided. The best and most ancient Greek manuscripts indicate this translation is to be preferred over the KJV which translates it, There is difference also between a wife and a virgin making it the beginning sentence of 1 Corinthians 7:34.
The same attitudes may be found in the unmarried woman and the virgin (note: Paul distinguishes between the unmarried and the virgin; the unmarried probably referring to widows and women whose unbelieving husbands have divorced them; the virgin referring to those who had not yet been married). Unmarried women separate themselves unto the Lord, dedicating both body and spirit to Christ; but the married woman has to concentrate on many physical things in order to fulfill her marital obligations. There is nothing necessarily sinful in fulfilling one’s marital commitments. Paul even exhorted husbands and wives to do so (1 Corinthians 7:3-7). But, he warned, stressful circumstances will always tend to intensify the temptation for a Christian married person to let priorities be diverted from the spiritual and focused on the physical. Martha (probably the wife of Simon the leper, see Matthew 26:6-12; Mark 14:3) was distracted with much serving (Luke 10:40), while Mary, the unmarried sister, sat at the feet of Jesus and chose the best part, (see Luke 10:38-42).
So Paul’s advice to these Corinthians, is, if they were presently unmarried (whether widowed, divorced or virginal), do not seek to be married. Paul’s advice was for their own benefit. He had nothing to gain from thus advising them. Neither did he intend to restrict their freedom to make their own choice by claiming any personal authority over these Corinthian Christians. The English word restraint is from the Greek word brochon which literally describes a noose, a slipknot, a halter, by which animals were caught and tethered. They are not to think they are tied to Paul’s advice. But if they are wise and if they want what is well-planned or in good form (Gr. euschemon), and if they want to be in a position to give unencumbered (Gr. aperispastows, undistracted, undivided) devotion to the Lord, they will do as Paul advises.
Consider how dangerous it would be to marry, just for the sake of appearances, someone whose idea of loyalty to Christ is not your own! God did not create us for marriage at any price! Paul gives three advantages of celibacy: (a) Freedom from troubles due to distressing times; (b) relief from anxiety about the things of the world on which a bread-winner must necessarily concentrate; (c) freedom from distractions in order to serve the Lord more fully and intently. These three attitudes may be achieved whether married or unmarried, of course, but with much less difficulty and with more time for the Lord when not marriedespecially if there are times of social distress like war, persecution, economic depression, etc. Remember, God forbade the prophet Jeremiah to marry (Jeremiah 16:1-4) because of the distressing times in which he lived.
1 Corinthians 7:36-40 Postscript: In these verses, the apostles make a brief summary of this whole dissertation on marriage in view of imminent distress.
The RSV has done an injustice to 1 Corinthians 7:36 in its translation. First, the Greek word parthenon should be translated virgin, and not betrothed. The Greek word used specifically for betrothed is mnesteuo and is found in Matthew 1:18; Luke 1:27; Luke 2:5. Second, the Greek phrase, ean e juperakmos, should be translated, if she is past the apex of her puberty or as the KJV translates it, if she pass the flower of her age. The Greek word huperakmos is a combined word; from huper, meaning, beyond, and akme (English, acme), meaning, apex, highest point of anything, full bloom of the flower.
While the RSV translation makes it appear Paul is directing this last advice toward a young man acting in an unseemly manner (Gr. aschemonein, again the word is a derivative of schema, meaning, not according to design or plan) toward the young lady to whom he is betrothed, the better translation would have Paul advising fathers in their attitudes toward virgin daughters well past the age of puberty. Young ladies of that age might be placed in great danger of succumbing to temptation to fulfill strong sexual urges illicitly should their fathers not permit them to marry.
Marriage customs of that century forbade the young maiden to make any arrangements for marrying a man. She could not even agree to marry a man without her father’s approval. It was understood in that culture that the father made all the choices of a marriage partner for his daughter and all the arrangements. If the father said she could not marryshe could not marry! Paul is directing his trustworthy advice toward Christian fathers with daughters of marriageable age, who have reached sexual maturity and, perhaps, have shown signs of sexual desire about to get out of control (see 1 Corinthians 7:37).
The RSV translates the latter half of 1 Corinthians 7:36, … if his passions are strong. but the Greek text does not have a pronoun in this phraseit has a 3rd person, singular, present subjunctive form of the verb, is, or, to be. The pronoun is merely understood. It could just as well be understood to be her as it could be his. We believe 1 Corinthians 7:36 should read, in its entirety, thus: If any father thinks he is behaving in any unseemly manner toward his virgin daughter, if she is in (present tense verb) the age of sexual desire, and the man (father) thinks she ought to marry, let the father do as he wishes; the father does not sin if he gives her to marry (Gr. gameitosan, give in marriage) a man. This certainly fits the following verses more accurately.
The father who is firmly established in his mind (Gr. kardia, heart), is under no necessity, for his wishes in this matter are under his own authority. If the father decides in his own mind to keep his virgin daughter from marrying, he will do well. The Greek words thelematos (will) and exousian (authority) should not be translated, as the RSV does, as desire and control. The RSV implies in its translation that Paul is talking about sexual desires under control, but Paul is really talking about a father’s will or choice about his marriageable daughter being within his own authority and not someone else’S.
1 Corinthians 7:38 should be translated, So the man (father) who gives his virgin daughter in marriage (Gr. gamizon) does well, and the man (father) who does not give in marriage (Gr. ho me gamizon) will do better.
The apostle’s final word on marriage is that Christians are to strive for God’s highest ideal. That ideal is one man and one woman married until death separates them (see Matthew 19:1-9). This was God’s ideal from the beginning of creation. But because man rebels against God and God’s ideals, a lesser ethic must be enforced upon rebels. Laws of divorcement may be written to protect those who are divorced against their will. However, for Christians, God expects his ideal to be lovingly chosen, and practiced.
A wife is bound to her husband as long as he lives. The Greek verb dedetai (bound) is in the perfect tense and means that once bound, that binding is to continue. If the husband dies (Gr. koimethe, sleeps), the Christian woman is free to be married to whom she wishes, only (Gr. monon) in the Lord. Paul has already (1 Corinthians 7:10-16) discussed the hardships in a marriage where one person is a believer and the other an unbeliever. Now he insists that when a Christian woman (and it would also apply to a man) loses her spouse in death, she ought to limit her freedom to remarry to spiritual considerations. She should marry only a Christian. For a Christian to step into any relationship outside the will of God is not only to involve oneself in tragedy, and to jeopardize one’s soul, but perhaps to bring sorrow into the whole Christian community and into the lives of a generation yet to be born. Christians are not to be mismated with unbelievers in any venture in life (2 Corinthians 6:14-18; 2 Corinthians 7:1). In Paul’s instructions to Timothy about the conduct of Christian widows (1 Timothy 5:9-16) he urged the younger widows to marry. But Paul qualifies even that instruction with this answer to the Corinthians. It is better to remain single if marriage outside the will of God is contemplated.
To sum up, Paul answers the questions of the Corinthian Christians, who are facing imminent distress, that it would be better for those spiritually strong who, by the grace of God, have their sexual drive under control to remain unmarried. All others should marry. They should marry in the Lord. If a Christian’s unbelieving spouse divorces her she is free (to remarry) and if a Christian’s spouse dies, she is free. The married life is the norm. Celibacy is the exception, and in no way superior to marriage.
In all he wrote here to the Corinthians, Paul claims to have the approval of the Holy Spirit. The following comment on 1 Corinthians 7:40 is good:
He wanted to assure the Corinthians that he was not speaking from human bias and prejudice. That this danger existed is proved by the number of modern Christians who have accused him of just this vice. I think is probably to be taken as meiosis, a figure of speech which emphasizes something by saying less than is meant. Paul believed that his advice had been given under the guidance of the Spirit of God. This does not mean that it was advice for all people in all times. Under other circumstances wise and spiritual men have differed radically from the advice given in this chapter. It does mean that his advice was best under the circumstances then existing. The one point of permanent validity must not be overlooked. The decisions of Christians in all spheres of life should be made in the light of their primary devotion to God in Christ Jesus. If Christians in all ages would make their decisions in view of that which would be most helpful for them in serving the Lord, there would be fewer mistakes to regret.
Commentary on 1 & 2 Corinthians, pg. 126, by Fred Fisher, pub. Word Books, 1975
1 Corinthians 7:25-40
Applebury’s Comments
Concerning the Unmarried (25-40)
*Commentary
Now concerning virgins.*Up to this point Paul has answered the questions about the expediency of marriage and has given direction to those who are already married. His third topic deals with unmarried daughters who are still under the direction of their fathers. A closing statement on marriage gives his inspired advice to widows whose husbands are dead and who might want to remarry.
The term virgin is both masculine and feminine in Greek. It is used with reference to men in Revelation 14:4. The consensus of commentators is that the term in this context refers to unmarried daughters.
*no command of the Lord.*Once again he must remind his readers that the Lord had not spoken on this matter but that He is now doing so through His inspired apostle.
*I give my judgment.*The apostle expresses his inspired opinion based on accurate knowledge. He certainly does not set up his opinion as a mere man against the command of God. He is speaking as one who has obtained mercy of the Lord. It was by the mercy of the Lord that he received his apostleship (I Rim. 1 Corinthians 1:12-14). The expressed opinion or judgment of the apostle is therefore equal in authority to the command of the Lord, since it is delivered by the Lord through His trustworthy servant.
*by reason of the distress that is upon us.*Many assume that Paul was thinking of the end of the world and the second coming of Christ when he wrote these verses, but there is no good reason to do so. It is a fact that the apostles along with the other disciples of Jesus thought that He was to set up a temporal kingdom while He was on earth. Some came to take Him by force and make Him their King after the feeding of the five thousand (John 6:15). Even James and John who may have been cousins of Jesus sent their mother to ask that one of them might sit on the right hand and the other on the left in His kingdom (Matthew 20:20-28). They undoubtedly thought of the kingdom as an earthly one that would restore the glory to Israel which had been known in the days of David and Solomon. Jesus could not grant such a request for the position of honor in the kingdomthe spiritual onewas for those for whom it had been prepared by the Father, that is, the humble who like Jesus were great because they were servants. The Emmaus disciples had hoped that Jesus would redeem Israel from Roman bondage (Luke 24:21). The apostles persisted in this concept of the kingdom until Jesus, after the resurrection, corrected their views (Acts 1:6). After Pentecost, when the kingdom had come in truth and Jesus had been declared to be at the right hand of God (Acts 2:33), no apostle is on record as assuming that Christ was to come in his life time. Despite this fact, commentators persist in saying that the apostles expected Him to return in their day. It is true that some of the church people had misunderstood Paul on the matter and that he had written to the Thessalonians to correct their misunderstanding (2 Thessalonians 2:1-5). To say that he wrote what was not true is to question his inspiration.
What then did Paul mean by the distress that was upon the Corinthians? The distress was not impending, but present. We know for one thing that Christian people were being subjected to persecution of various sorts. See the history of persecution in the book of Acts. Paul had met Priscilla and Aquila when he was at Corinth. They had recently come from Rome because Caludius had commanded all Jews to leave Rome (Acts 18:1-3). Wars, depressions, responsibilities of caring for a homeall these might have been in the apostle’s mind when he mentioned the distress that they faced. Our own history during times of war and depression proves the correctness of the point Paul was making, for many marriages failed that were entered into in those times of distress. Good sound advice is offered in these circumstances: If one is married, he is not to be loosed from the marriage bond; if one does not have a wife, he is not to seek one.
*But shouldst thou marry.*This is to men and unmarried women. If in face of distress they should marry, they have not sinned. The apostle is writing to spare them inevitable pressures that attend the establishment and maintenance of a home.
*the time is short.*Some read into this expression the assumption that Paul was speaking of the end of the world and second coming of Christ. I disagree. He is stating a fact that all of us should be aware of at all timeslife in this world is transitory. The time that anyone may have at any period is indeed brief. The whole concept of time as it relates to man’s existence on this earth is limited. Peter reminds us that one day as the Lord looks upon it is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day (2 Peter 3:8).
*those that have wives may be as though they had none.*Marriage is for this life, not for eternity. Jesus said, in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels in heaven (Matthew 22:30). The point is that the length of time that one is married is short at best, for it is temporal, limited to this life. The time in which we are to serve the Lord is also short, and one must not, in this brief time of service, love father or mother or wife or children more than the Lord (Luke 14:26).
*those that weep, as though they wept not.*The apostle moves from the subject of marriage to other transitory situations of this life. Weeping and rejoicing will not go on forever for the child of God. In heaven there is no mourning nor crying nor pain any more (Revelation 22:4). One cannot use to the fullest the things he possesses in this lifefood, shelter, and things for bodily comfort are used on a day to day basis. See Jesus-’ remarks about such things in Matthew 5:25-34.
*the fashion of this world passeth away.*Commentators in general assume that Paul is speaking about the second coming of our Lord. Not necessarily so. He is pointing to a well known fact that this world with its customs is transitory. Marriage is for this life. Why then be overly concerned about getting married? Not that marriage is wrong, but that Paul is concerned that the brethren who face some unusual distress be spared the added burden of family cares. Note what Jesus said about those with families at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem (24:19). All who know anything of the pressures of war or economic depression know how hard these situations are on those with families. The very young and the very old often suffer beyond measure in such times of distress. Paul’s concern was that they be free from added cares.
*unmarried, married.*All that has been said on this subject is now applied to the two classes, whether the unmarried be unmarried men or unmarried women. The simple facts are that married people must give some time to family cares; the unmarried may have no such problems. They are free to give their time to the Lord’s work without distraction.
*not that I may cast a snare upon you.*Once again, the apostle is careful to remind the reader that marriage is not wrong even in times of distress. He is not setting it aside and thereby setting a snare to catch some in sin because of incontinency. This he had already explained (1 Corinthians 7:2-5).
*unseemly toward his virgin.*The marriage of daughters was in that culture under the control of the father. This is, therefore, advice to fathers about letting their daughters marry. Any other construction of the meaning of the passage is open to serious question. Plummer reminds us that it is wholly improbable that this refers to the prospective bridegroom or to some kind of spiritual betrothal between unmarried persons (I. C. C., First Corinthians, p. 159).
*the flower of her age.*That is, if she is a mature young woman of marriageable age.
*if need so requireth.*There may have been many reasons why it might have been advisable for the father to grant his consent to the marriage of a grown daughter. It might well be that he was unable to support her and that she would, therefore, be happier if she were permitted to establish her own home. Under such circumstances it was not a sin for the father to let the young couple marry.
On the other hand, the father who did not find it necessary to give such consent and who was able to exercise his will in the matter did well to keep his virgin daughter at home. This is in accord with what has been said about the advisability of remaining unmarried during times of great distress. It also assumes that the father had the right to exercise his will in the matter. Perhaps some were slaves and couldn-’t do so. We must read these instructions in the light of the culture under which they were given, not of our own. Paul put his approval on the one who gives his daughter in marriage, and adds that the one who does hot give his daughter in marriageunder the circumstances he has just describedshall do better.
*A wife is bound for so long time as her husband liveth.*Paul has discussed the unmarried man and the unmarried woman. He has also discussed the duties and responsibilities of the father of the unmarried daughter. There remains one more class, the woman whose husband had died and who might want to marry again. He now gives instruction to those in this situation. He reminds the reader that this applies to the one whose husband is dead since the marriage vow is in force while the husband lives. Dead means physically dead, not spiritually dead. Some have imagined that if the husband is not a Christian and therefore spiritually dead, the wife is freed from the marriage vow. This seems absurd in the light of 1 Corinthians 7:14.
*only in the Lord.*This may mean that she is free to marry one who is in the Lord, that is, a baptized believer. Be not unequally yoked with unbelievers (2 Corinthians 6:14) does not necessarily refer to marriage. Christian people will be far better off in their desire to serve the Lord if they do have Christian partners, but Paul has indicated that the believer who is married to the unbeliever may use that situation to win the unbeliever to Christ (1 Corinthians 7:16).
A second possible meaning, though less likely, is that she is to remember that marriage is to be in accord with the regulations of the Lord for this sacred institution.
*she is happier.*Remarriage, even though one may have a Scriptural right, does not always solve the problems of loneliness or other issues that may cause one to seek remarriage. This seems to be particularly true of those who are older. The apostle’s advice is that greater happiness will accompany the unmarried state. The case of younger widows is different. When they have waxed wanton against Christ, they desire to marry (1 Timothy 5:11). Some of these become not only idle but tattlers and busybodies. Paul adds, I desire therefore that younger widows marry, bear children, rule the household, give no occasion to the adversary for reviling: for already some are turned aside after Satan (1 Timothy 5:13-15).
*I think I also have the Spirit of God.*This does not imply any doubt in the apostles mind as to his inspiration. On the contrary, he is sure that he has the Spirit of God directing him. Others might have been claiming it, but the apostle of Christ could say, I think that I also have the Spirit of God.
Summary
In this chapter Paul begins to answer the questions which the Corinthians raised in their letter to him. The questions were about (1) marriage, (2) things sacrificed to idols, (3) matters of public worship, and perhaps (4) the other topics discussed in the rest of the letter: spiritual gifts, the resurrection, and the collection for the saints. Paul approaches the problem of marriage from the background of the loose moral condition that prevailed in Corinth and from his discussion of the sins of fornication and abuse of the body in the preceding Chapter s. The unmarried state is excellent, or honorable. Nevertheless, because it may present temptation to those who do not have the gift of continence, he recommends the married state also. The mutual obligations of husbands and wife are not to be set aside except by mutual consent, and that only for a time, that Satan tempt them not. Paul wished that all had this gift, but he recognized that all are not alike in this respect. His instruction about marriage is to be considered in relation to the individual case. It applies equally to the unmarried and to widows. It does not set aside the law of marriage, although the unmarried state is recommended for those who are able to accept this advice because of the peculiar distress which the people of Corinth were facing. Married couples are given specific instructions: They are to remember the command of the Lord that the wife is not to depart from her husband. In accord with the instruction which the Lord had given, she is reminded that if she should depart she is to remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. With the general statement about marriage, Paul turns to the case of a believer being married to an unbeliever. Is separation permitted in this case? The answer is clear: the believer is not to leave the unbeliever. The marriage is made holy in the believer, and there is no reason for dissolving it. If, however, the unbeliever should depart, he is to be allowed to do so. The law of marriage does not imply that the brother or sister is placed under obligation to go along with the one who leaves. Neither does it say that the believer is free to remarry. Such freedom is brought about by the death of husband or wife. But God called them in peace. Every effort should be made to preserve the home, but if the unbeliever insists he is to be allowed to leave. The believer must consider, however, the possibility of saving his unbelieving partner by refusing to take the initiative in breaking up the home. This may call for great Christian grace, but it is worth it if one soul can be saved. Becoming a Christian is no reason for seeking separation from an unbelieving husband or wife. For example, the one who is called in circumcision or even in slavery is advised not to let his status as Jew or even slave matter. It is his relation to Christ that counts. Of course, if a slave can obtain freedom, it is well to do so, but it is not essential to his becoming a Christian. The purpose of Paul’s advice was to spare them unnecessary anxiety under the peculiar circumstances of their day. This should not be regarded as a great hardship since the fashion of the world is changing and will some day give place to the permanent state in eternity where they neither marry nor are given in marriage. This instruction was not intended to prevent marriage, but to make it possible for them to serve the Lord without distraction. Two possible attitudes of a father toward his unmarried daughter are given. If the daughter is old enough to be married and he is disposed to consent to her marriage, let him so do; it is no sin. On the other hand, if he is in position to exercise his will in the mattersomething denied to many who were slavesand he is disposed to keep his daughter at home, let him do so. So the one who gives his daughter in marriage does well, but the one who does not give his daughter in marriage does better, for he spares her the anxiety of homemaking in troublous times. Concluding the discussion, Paul says that a wife is bound to her husband as long as the husband lives, but if he should die she is free to marry, only in the Lord. The law of the Lord regulating marriage applies at all times. Some assume that this means she is free only to marry one who is in the Lord. This instruction is so important that Paul closes it with the reminder to his readers that he has been directed by the Spirit of God in writing it.