Sticking Out Like a Sore Thumb
A verse-by-verse explanation of this section.
An overview of the principles and applications from this section.
Tying the section to life with God.
Historical, geographical, and grammatical enrichment of the commentary.
Suggested step-by-step group study of the section.
Zeroing the section in on daily life.
“Marriage… is a blessing for which good men dwelling with affectionate wives praise God every day they live. Marriage and the Sabbath are the two choice boons of primeval love that have come down to us from paradise… Oh, the joy, the true, pure, elevated peace and joy which many of us have received through that divinely ordained relationship! We cannot but bless God every time we repeat the dear names of those who are now parts of ourselves.”
C. H. Spurgeon
Marriage is an institution observed by most of the human race. Yet, a number of important features make the Christian concept of marriage unique. In this passage, Paul focused on some practical matters related to Christians and marriage.
Sticking Out Like a Sore Thumb
H ave you ever thought you stuck out like a sore thumb? I guess most people find themselves standing out in a crowd from time to time. Most of the time, it is quite embarrassing.
I remember a pastor friend and his wife once telling me about a time when they stuck out. They had just moved from Dallas, Texas, to a small city in the South. When they first arrived, a kind family hosted a reception for the new pastor and his wife. The invitations read, “Come to our house and meet our new pastor.” At the bottom of the invitation the instructions were written: “Dress—Casual.”
“That's great,” my friend thought to himself. He had been in a coat and tie all week. Now he had a chance to dress like he enjoyed it in Dallas. He and his wife donned blue jeans, snakeskin jackets, and big cowboy hats. That was how they dressed casually in Dallas.
But when the hostess of the reception opened the door, they learned something very quickly. She appeared in an evening gown and her husband stepped out in a suit and tie. Dressing casually in this town meant something slightly less than a tuxedo.
That evening the new pastor and his wife felt like they stuck out like a sore thumb. Everyone looked at them and rolled their eyes. As they shook hands, everyone tried their best to look straight in their eyes and not to give them the once-over.
“It was a nightmare,” the wife told me. “I'm still embarrassed when I see those people.”
As western culture continues to change by moving away from its Christian roots, Christians are going to feel like that new couple in town. In many ways, our lifestyles will seem increasingly odd and old-fashioned. This is especially true in the Christian practice of marriage. I cannot tell you how many people react with disbelief when I tell them that my wife and I have been married for twenty-five years. “Now you don't hear that very often these days,” they reply.
It's true. As Christians commit themselves to observing what Paul said in this chapter about marriage, we will stand out from the crowd. We will stick out like a sore thumb.
Issues Related to Marriage
MAIN IDEA: Who should marry? Who should remain single? How should husbands and wives relate to one another? These practical matters occupied the apostle Paul throughout chapter 7.
General Outlooks on Marriage (7:1–9)
SUPPORTING IDEA: In this chapter Paul began to respond to a number of issues which the Corinthians had raised in their letter.
7:1. The apostle focused on a particular statement sent to him. The fact that the Corinthians questioned Paul regarding this matter indicates that they disagreed over this issue. Some members of the Corinthian church had gone to the opposite extreme of those who had justified prostitution (6:12–20). They claimed that it was good for a man not to marry. The NIV translation obscures the meaning of the statement. The NRSV (“It is well for a man not to touch a woman”) and NASB (“It is good for a man not to touch a woman”) translate more literally (“touch” rather than “marry”) this statement that sexual relations in and of itself are not good. It is stated without qualification, implying that the best choice for everyone in every circumstance is to abstain from sexual relations.
Some interpreters have understood this as Paul's own position. This position is less than convincing. In light of Paul's love for the Old Testament Scriptures that advocate marriage and children as blessings from God, it seems unlikely that Paul himself would have suggested celibacy for all people. In fact, Genesis 2:18 says, “It is not good for the man to be alone.” He knew that God himself ordained marriage for the betterment of humanity. Like Jesus before him, Paul saw celibacy as an unusual condition. He probably paraphrased the position of others in this way to contrast it with the Old Testament outlook.
7:2. In contrast to the categorical denial of sexual relations, Paul insisted that each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The verb “have,” used in a sexual context, does not suggest initiating a marriage, but continuing a sexual relationship. It is best to understand Paul not as exhorting unmarried people to marry, but rather married people to continue sexual relationships with each other (cf. 1 Cor. 5:1). In support of this view, the Corinthian statement spoke of men and women in general, but Paul selected a more specific word for males which the NIV rightly translates husband.
Paul went on to state his pastoral reason for this viewpoint. He focused on the fact that there was so much immorality. This is most reasonably seen as a reference to the Corinthian church's problems with prostitution (6:15–16) and incest (5:1). While some within the church justified incest and visiting prostitutes, others advocated abstinence even within marriage.
In Paul's mind there was a connection between these two problems. He believed that these opposite problems were caused by certain Corinthians who refused to have sexual relations with their spouses. To avoid the sexually immoral use of prostitutes, Paul insisted that married couples should fulfill each other's needs.
Some scholars believe that a faction of women within the Corinthian church may have advocated abstinence within marriage, and that Paul mainly addressed them here. If this is correct, then this division within the church would not only have split the body of believers, but the families within that body by estranging husbands from wives. Thus, Paul may have been working to reconcile families as well as to protect the sanctity of the church.
7:3–4. Marriage protects against the temptations of immorality only when it functions properly. For this reason, Paul spoke explicitly about the marital duty that enjoins partners. The Bible often speaks of sexual relations as a privilege and blessing (Prov. 5:18–19; Song 4:9–16), but married couples also have a duty not to refrain from sexual relations without just cause (Exod. 21:10).
The Corinthians were defrauding each other of their sexual rights, so Paul pointed out the obligations to sex that married couples bear. He also let them know that these obligations were mutual—the husband has a duty to have sex with his wife just as she has a duty to have sex with her husband. Neither partner has the right without good cause to refuse the other.
Paul expressed his view in a remarkable way. The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband, or as the NASB puts it, “The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does.” Unfortunately, these words have been used to justify physical abuse by husbands against their wives. They have also been used to compel women to submit to their husbands’ sexual desires even when these women suffer from physical impairments and illnesses. We must recognize, however, that other teachings of Scripture, such as self-protection and the principle of love, inform us of limitations on Paul's statement.
Paul emphasized complete parity and mutuality of authority by adding, The husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Wives have the same authority over their husbands’ bodies that husbands have over their wives’. Sexual relations must be mutually agreeable. Couples should strive toward the ideal of marriage as they evaluate their specific situations and responsibilities.
7:5–6. In the Christian ideal, spouses must not deprive partners sexually except by mutual consent and for a time, and only for special religious purposes: that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Throughout the Old Testament, times of special religious devotion, such as prayer and fasting, included sexual abstinence (1 Sam. 21:4–5). Paul made it apparent that such practices were to be carried over into the New Testament as well.
Once the time of special religious devotion is over, the couple must return to normalcy so that Satan will not tempt them to be involved in illicit sexual relations. The longer couples abstain from sex, the greater the risk that one partner will fall into sexual immorality. In allowing couples to abstain from sexual relations for a time by mutual consent, Paul made a concession. He by no means intended to command periods of abstinence. His command was that they not deprive each other.
7:7. Paul also qualified his affirmation of marriage by admitting that in one sense he wished all men were as he. By the phrase as I am, Paul apparently referred to his unmarried status, and may also have meant to include the fact that he did not “burn with passion” (cf. 7:8–9).
Not much is known about Paul's marital history, though it is likely that he was married at one time because marriage was required of rabbis in his day. If Paul was an ordained rabbi, he must have been married for a while, but nothing is known about what happened to his wife. She may have died, or she may have left him when he converted to Christianity. Whatever the case, Paul was single and free from burning sexual passion when he wrote this letter, and he admitted that he saw advantages in this condition.
Even so, Paul recognized that God does not call all people to single lives unburdened by sexual passion, but each man has his own gift from God. In other words, God blesses one person with the call to be single, and another he calls to marriage.
While it is true that some gifts are greater than others (1 Cor. 12:31), this greatness does not depend upon an inherent superiority of the gift, but on the benefit it brings to the church (1 Cor. 14:1–4). In the particular time and situation that Paul addressed in Corinth, it appeared to him that singleness without sexual passion offered more benefits to the church than did marriage. This does not mean that he thought celibacy was necessarily a superior gift to marriage in all instances, and it does not diminish the high value of the gift of marriage. Instead, celibacy was more beneficial in Corinth's particular situation.
Further, by pointing out that God gifts different people in different ways, Paul subverted any possibility that reproach might fall on those who married. Thus, he removed the opportunity for those who remained single to become prideful in their ability to resist passion.
7:8. Paul concluded his general outlook on marriage by applying his views to the unmarried and the widows. He advised that it is good for them to stay unmarried. The language “it is good” again alludes to Genesis 2:18 where God said of Adam's singleness, “It is not good” (author's emphasis). In contrast with Genesis 2:18, Paul said that remaining single is good. Paul's viewpoint did not contradict Genesis. Genesis sets up marriage as a creational pattern that remains ordinary, proper, and good for human life in general. Yet, Paul recognized that celibacy had certain benefits over marriage in some situations. He did not state these benefits or situations, but revealed several complex ideas underlying his preference for singleness in 7:29–35.
7:9. Nevertheless, Paul also recognized that reality is usually not ideal. So, he conceded a hierarchy of preferences, with celibacy being the most desirable for the unmarried Corinthians. But “the unmarried and the widows” (7:8) were to marry if they could not control themselves sexually. Marriage was not as advantageous as celibacy, but it was better than burning with passion. Literally, Paul did not say, “If they are not able to control themselves,” but “If they do not control themselves,” that is, “If they lose control and fall into sexual immorality.” Paul did not suggest that marriage would eliminate lustful thoughts, but that it could help believers abstain from sexual immorality.
Divorce (7:10–16)
SUPPORTING IDEA: Paul addressed divorce between two believers and divorce between a believer and an unbeliever.
7:10–11. Paul began by addressing divorce between two believers. He introduced his command with the notation that Jesus himself authorized his viewpoint. As an apostle, Paul had the responsibility to establish moral guidelines for the church. He did not need to appeal to Jesus (not I, but the Lord), but he did so here to give his words extra weight. The most relevant teaching of Christ on this subject appears in Mark 10:11–12 (see also Matt. 19:9).
Paul first stated the general policy to be followed: a wife must not separate from her husband. He followed with similar instructions to men: a husband must not divorce his wife. The terms separate and divorce were not distinguished in Paul's day as they are in many cultures today. To separate was to divorce. Jesus made fornication a legitimate grounds for divorce (Matt. 19:9). Paul argued that desertion was also grounds for divorce (7:15). With these exemptions in mind, Paul stated plainly that believers must not practice divorce.
Paul was realistic enough to know that illegitimate divorces happen among believers. For cases of illegitimate divorces, he offered two choices:remain unmarried or be reconciled to the original spouse. Paul did not comment on what to do if attempts to reconcile are rebuffed. The rest of Scripture and prudence must guide believers in such situations.
7:12–13. Paul then addressed the rest, that is, believers married to unbelievers. In contrast with his previous directives, Paul admitted that this teaching was his own, not from the Lord. This qualification does not lessen the authority of the teaching because as an apostle Paul spoke on behalf of the Lord (14:37). Paul meant that, to his knowledge, Jesus had not spoken about marriages between believers and unbelievers during his earthly ministry.
Paul taught that believers should not divorce their unbelieving spouses if the unbelievers are willing to live with the believing spouses. This rule applies equally to men and women. Often religious differences between spouses will lead to serious tensions in the home, but Paul plainly stated that religious differences per se are not legitimate grounds for divorce.
7:14. Paul justified his position in two ways. First, the unbelieving husband and unbelieving wife have been sanctified through the believing wife and husband. The term sanctified denotes being made special or set apart for God's use or purposes (cf. 1 Tim. 4:5; Heb. 9:13; 1 Pet. 3:15). It does not mean that these unbelievers were redeemed or justified in Christ. If they had been redeemed or justified, they would not have been called unbelieving. Rather, through the believing spouses, the unbelieving spouses participate in the community of the sanctified people of God.
This sanctification process is different in each marriage. Some unbelieving spouses will eventually become believers through their association with their believing spouses (7:16). Others will not respond to this influence. In the very least, these unbelievers come into contact with the gospel and Christian graces in ways that ordinary people never experience.
Paul's viewpoint on the sanctification of unbelieving spouses does not rest on a long-standing or well-known tradition. Moreover, experience tends to convince many believers that they have little or no influence over their unbelieving spouses. For these reasons, Paul defended his position by noting a belief that he and the Corinthians shared. He said that otherwise (i.e., if it were not true that unbelieving spouses are sanctified) the children of these marriages would be unclean. But it was inconceivable both to the Corinthians and to Paul that the children of believers could be anything but holy.
The apostle's words assume a teaching that appears throughout the Bible: the children of believers are special in God's eyes, even though they are not redeemed. The term holy derives from the same root as sanctified earlier in this verse. These children are not necessarily believers, but they are the expected heirs of the covenant relationship which their believing parents enjoy with God (Ps. 89:29; Rom. 11:28).
7:15. Despite the potential for positive influence from believers in mixed marriages, Paul knew the reality that unbelievers often do not want to remain in these marriages. For this reason, he added that if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. Believers are under no obligation in such circumstances to hold their marriages together. One interpretation of this verse suggests that to oppose the unbeliever's pursuit of divorce is to neglect the fact that God has called us to live in peace. Alternatively, the believer's call to live in peace may be seen as his or her call to remain with an unbelieving spouse.
In many Christian traditions, this passage has been used to support the idea that desertion is a legitimate ground for divorce. Since one who fails to provide for his families is “worse than an unbeliever” (1 Tim. 5:8), some believe that desertion may be legitimate grounds for divorce even when the deserting partner claims to be a believer. The act of desertion presumably disproves his or her profession of faith.
7:16. Why did Paul call for hesitation over divorcing unbelievers? In effect, he said that we cannot know how God will use us in the lives of unbelieving spouses. Often, believing spouses become the instruments through which unbelievers come to faith.
Stay Where You Are (7:17–24)
SUPPORTING IDEA: Paul digressed to discuss a guiding rule established for all the churches: each believer should retain the place in life that the Lord has assigned to him and to which God has called him.
7:17. Throughout this passage Paul spoke of God's calls to believers, calls both to salvation and to various tasks. This emphasis on “call” expanded his statement in verse 15 that “God has called us to live in peace.” Believers live in peace partly by knowing and following God's call.
It is important to remember that Paul did not suggest that believers should never change their status. He said that they should seek to know how God has called them, and to retain the places God has assigned them. His general rule was: Christians should remain as they are in relationships and service unless God assigns them new tasks.
7:18–19. Regarding circumcision, Paul stated plainly that a man should not automatically seek to change his condition. He insisted that circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Throughout his ministry, Paul opposed Jewish Christians who wanted to force Gentile converts to be circumcised. He reminded the Corinthians that he always defended the uncircumcised in the church, not allowing others to convince them that being circumcised was meritorious for salvation or for status in the church (cf. Gal. 6:13). At other times, Paul encouraged uncircumcised Gentile believers not to despise their Jewish brethren (Rom. 11:13–18).
Whether circumcised or uncircumcised, believers should remain as they are and not let others press them to change. No one should take pride in his circumcised or uncircumcised status. At one point, Paul encouraged Timothy to be circumcised for the sake of peace in the church, though never allowing that circumcision might be thought meritorious for salvation. In general, however, he believed that the uncirmcumcised should remain so. The only truly important thing is obedience to God's commands (cf. Rom. 2:25–29).
By comparing marriage and circumcision, Paul indicated that marital status was insignificant for a person's standing before God and within the church. Just as believers should not change the status of their circumcision to gain approval before God or man, they should not change their marital status for these reasons.
7:20. This verse serves mainly a rhetorical function, reasserting Paul's main point. Its repetition here and in verse 24 emphasizes that this is the primary thing Paul intended this entire section to prove.
7:21. Regarding slavery, Paul reminded the Corinthians that he had a similar policy. If someone was a slave when he or she became a believer, then that person should not feel compelled to change his social status. Paul conceded, If you can gain your freedom, do so. He knew that slavery is not the ideal condition for human beings, and he wished that no one be enslaved to anyone but Christ (Rom. 6:18; Eph. 6:6). Nevertheless, he insisted as a general policy, Don't let it trouble you.
One cannot help but wonder how the suggestion that slaves obtain freedom accords with Paul's argument that each believer should remain as he was called. In some cases, however, there are legitimate reasons to change one's situation. For example, freedom is objectively better than slavery, and marriage is better than falling into sin (7:9).
7:22. Paul explained why slaves should not be despondent with their condition: Any believer who is a slave is the Lord's freedman. In a day when slavery was widespread throughout the Mediterranean world, Paul gave great comfort to those who were unable to become legally free. He pointed to their inner spiritual condition of freedom in Christ. The status of slave carries no dishonor; rather, slaves are equal in Christ to those of higher social status in the church (cf. Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11). In fact, Paul raised the status of slaves by asserting that the believing slave ought to consider himself a freedman, and the free man ought to consider himself Christ's slave. In Christ, the ground is level. Every believer is both free man and slave.
7:23. It would have been difficult for a slave to accept Paul's viewpoint. So Paul closed this discussion by repeating a doctrine he had mentioned in 6:20: all believers have been bought at a price —the price of Christ's blood. Believers have been set free from sin's dominion through the death of Christ. This spiritual freedom came at the price of Christ's sacrificial death. Consequently, believers must not become slaves of men.
Paul spoke metaphorically here. He did not want slaves within the church to accept the outlook of those who would have enslaved them, tyrannizing them with false views that Christian slaves were not equals to Christian masters (Rom. 6:16; Phlm. 16). Instead, he wanted them to think of themselves, whatever their condition, as free men and women because Christ had set them free at the cost of his own blood. As in 6:20, Paul also emphasized that Christ's purchase of the church meant that the church's new identity in Christ required different behavior on the part of believers.
7:24. Affectionately calling the Corinthians brothers, Paul repeated the general rule of remaining in the station to which one is called. Yet, he added that Christians must live as responsible to God. These words draw attention to the fact that one can know when to change his or her situation only if he or she depends on God. No rule can cover all the circumstances involved in such decisions.
Virgins and Marriage (7:25–28)
SUPPORTING IDEA: Paul applied the principle developed in the previous section to the question of whether virgins should marry. He told the unmarried not to change their stations to improve their status. Moreover, because of the crisis in Corinth, he encouraged them to remain unmarried unless God called them to do otherwise.
7:25–26. In verse 25 Paul responded to a different question from the Corinthians’ letter. The term virgins probably refers to virgin women who were engaged but not yet married (see 7:36). Apparently, there was a controversy in the Corinthian church over whether engaged couples should go ahead and marry. Paul admitted that Jesus had not taught on the matter (no command from the Lord). Quite possibly, Paul meant that the Corinthians’ present crisis presented a unique problem which neither Jesus nor the Old Testament had addressed. Even so, Paul's view as an apostle was authoritative. By the Lord's mercy, he was trustworthy to speak sound advice.
By qualifying his answer with the words I think, Paul offered a preference or opinion, not an absolute rule. In effect, Paul said that the rule of “remaining as you are” which he had just illustrated should also be applied to those contemplating marriage. Remaining unmarried is good (7:26). Paul did not contradict God's assessment of singleness and marriage in Genesis 2:18: “It is not good for the man to be alone.” He made it clear that his preference stemmed from the unique circumstances which the church, and perhaps only the Corinthian church, faced in his day. He said that the unmarried should remain unmarried because of the present crisis (7:26).
It is difficult to know for certain what Paul meant by the present crisis. Paul may have been pointing to the crisis associated with the return of Christ. In this passage he referred to the nearness of Christ's return.
A more likely understanding is that Paul referred to famines in Greece that caused great trials for the people of Corinth. Some of the Corinthian Christians were hungry as they came to the Lord's supper (11:21,34), and historical research has demonstrated that famines were occurring in the land near this time. In light of the hardships these famines caused the church, Paul strongly suggested that unmarried people should remain unmarried.
In support of this reading, note that Paul nowhere suggested that virgins should never marry, or that this judgment was to be perpetual. In fact, in 7:36 he qualified his advice by suggesting that it might be better to marry people who were getting on in years. This suggests that Paul did not advise perpetual singleness but a temporary moratorium on weddings.
7:27. Paul expanded his advice by telling those bound to wives not to seek a divorce. Paul did not use the word married (NIV) here, but rather the phrase “bound to a woman/wife” (cf. NASB and NRSV “bound to a wife”). In all likelihood, Paul had in mind those who were betrothed or promised in marriage. In ancient Israel betrothal was practically equivalent to marriage (see Deut. 22:23–24).
Paul did not want betrothed parties to break off their engagements, but only to postpone them. Further, he did not want those who had been released from marital obligations to look for a wife. The NIV is somewhat misleading here in its reference to the unmarried. As the NASB (“Are you released from a wife?”) and NRSV (“Are you free from a wife?”) reflect, the text literally speaks to those who have been released from women/wives. His main points were that those already engaged should not yet wed, and that those who had broken off their engagements should not yet seek to enter new marriage contracts.
7:28. Though he thought marriage inadvisable because of the present crisis, Paul conceded that it was no sin (have not sinned). Yet, those choosing marriage were to do so with eyes wide open to the troubles in this life they would face. Though “in this life” is a common translation (NIV, NASB, NRSV), the KJV renders the phrase more literally as “in the flesh.” The KJV translation should be preferred here since Paul did not mean that married life is always more difficult and troublesome than single life. After all, God ordained wives to be partners of their spouses, not hindrances (Gen. 2:18).
Given the famines in the area, Paul probably meant that marriage would make it harder to put food on the table. This is especially understandable when one considers that marriage leads to children, and therefore to more mouths to feed. Such lack of food would truly be “trouble in the flesh.” Paul encouraged caution to those who were unmarried because he wanted to spare them these troubles. His sensitivity to the practical needs of the Corinthians was evident, yet he was also plainly aware that he needed to allow them to follow God's call in such matters on an individual basis.
The Implications of an Eternal Perspective (7:29–35)
SUPPORTING IDEA: Paul wanted the Corinthians to discard their worldly perspectives that emphasized personal spiritual status and led to arrogance and divisions. He taught them to adopt an eternal perspective, which would help them weather their time of crisis.
7:29–31. Paul's reference to the Corinthians as brothers reflected his deep concern for their well-being. His concern caused him to ponder the conditions of life faced by all believers—married, divorced, widowed, engaged, and single alike. He began and ended with acknowledgments that this life is fleeting: time is short… this world in its present form is passing away.
Between these opening and closing thoughts, the apostle reflected poetically on the nature of life in this fleeting time. His poetry followed the patterns of parallelism found in Old Testament poetry. Because this material is poetic, it is not surprising to find that the apostle spoke in hyperbole. He mentioned several kinds of people: those who have wives, those who mourn, those who are happy, those who buy something, and those who use the things of the world. As in 5:1 and 7:2, those who have wives probably does not refer to the engaged virgins, but to those who maintain sexual relationships with their wives.
All of these activities are legitimate and honorable in Paul's view, but they are oriented toward this earthly life. Paul was concerned that believers not invest themselves too deeply in such matters. For this reason, he balanced each category of activity by encouraging an eternal perspective. Christians should live as if they have no wives, no mourning, no happiness, no permanent possessions, and no engrossments.
Paul's words should not be taken in an absolute sense. Elsewhere he affirmed balanced views of marriage responsibilities and sexuality (Eph. 5:22–33), happiness (1 Thess. 5:16), mourning (Phil. 3:18), and possessions (1 Tim. 6:8). In this passage, he reminded all Corinthians that these legitimate aspects of life are not everything.
Paul defended this attitude in verse 31: the world to which these things belong is passing away. To handle matters of this life properly, Christians must remember that these things are not permanent. On the one hand, believers live in this world with its pleasure, pain, and responsibilities. On the other hand, they belong to the next world that will replace this life forever. This is why Paul described his own life in paradoxical terms: dying but living, beaten but not killed, sorrowful but rejoicing, poor but making others rich, having nothing but owning everything (2 Cor. 6:9–10).
7:32. Paul continued to address all varieties of Corinthians by explaining that he gave the instructions in 7:29–31 in order to keep them from anxiety. He wanted them to be free from concern. The word translated “free from concern” is amerimnous, which may be positive (“caring”) or negative (“worrying or being anxious”). The same is true of its cognate verb merimnao, here translated “is concerned.” Given the fact that Paul said he wants people to be amerimnous, it seems best to understand a negative force in this passage.
Traditionally, amerimnous has been taken to mean “free from concern over worldly matters.” This reading probably arose because of the context of the immediately preceding verses (7:29–31). As a result, merimnao has been interpreted positively in reference to “the Lord's affairs,” but negatively in reference to affairs of this world (7:33). Paul did not offer this qualification, however, and the word itself does not mean this. Moreover, people in every station of life, whether married or unmarried, are susceptible to concern and anxiety when they lose the eternal perspective.
As Paul pointed out, even an unmarried man may worry over the Lord's affairs. Elsewhere in this letter, Paul made it clear that the Corinthians placed heavy emphasis on human merit (4:7). The Corinthians: misunderstood what it meant to be “in Christ” (15:18–22); thought their spiritual gifts were meritorious and status-worthy (12:1–31); and strove for spiritual status through their own efforts and associations (3:21; 5:6). Because they thought pleasing God depended on their own works, they had good reason to worry about pleasing him.
7:33–34a. Paul declared that a married man without an eternal perspective has even more trouble than an unmarried man because he must worry about pleasing his wife as well as the Lord. To fulfill their moral responsibilities, married men must pay attention to all kinds of things that may distract them from their efforts to please the Lord. The affairs of this world crowd their lives and their interests are divided. If they lack an eternal perspective, they worry about pleasing God and about very real problems like putting food on the table even in times of famine.
7:34b. Similarly, an unmarried woman or virgin (engaged woman) who lacks an eternal perspective may worry that her efforts to please the Lord will fail, or will not be enough to satisfy his holiness. It is the duty of unmarried women to refrain from fornication, to be devoted to the Lord in… body as well as in spirit. This was probably hard to do in the sexually loose world of Corinth, particularly for those who had once been part of the promiscuous crowd. Keeping sexually pure was certainly as stressful as it was difficult, especially for those who thought their acceptability before God depended upon it. While a married woman had an outlet for her sexual needs, she also had the added worries of nurturing a relationship with her husband and of fulfilling her household responsibilities.
7:35. Paul did not encourage the postponement of marriage or the adoption of an eternal perspective in order to restrict the Corinthians’ behavior. He did not intend them to interpret 7:29–31 as instructions against conjugal relations, mourning, happiness, or participation in the marketplace or in life. Given the Corinthians’ propensity to twist Paul's words, Paul was probably wise to make this point explicitly. Paul knew that postponing marriage and adopting an eternal perspective would benefit the Corinthians by helping them live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.
Though the NIV uses the word devotion here and the word devoted in verse 34, this is somewhat misleading since the Greek words euparedron (“devotion” NIV) and hagios (“devoted” NIV) are completely unrelated. Paul certainly did not mean to say that postponing marriage would help engaged virgins refrain from fornication. In fact, he apparently intended euparedron (“devotion” NIV) to refer to men and women, whether married or unmarried. The devotion of which he spoke was probably the eternal perspective he encouraged and the willingness to alter behavior on the basis of that new perspective, such as by postponing marriage.
Final Concessions (7:36–40)
SUPPORTING IDEA: Paul intended to help the Corinthians live in proper devotion to the Lord, not to restrict them by giving them new rules to follow. To make sure they understood this, he offered two final concessions regarding marriage between those who were already engaged and those who had been widowed.
7:36. Paul acknowledged that “better” is not necessarily the only right choice. Paul advised singleness over marriage for the time of the present crisis, but the fact that God ordained marriage meant that its legitimacy could never be denied. So Paul once again qualified his advice, suggesting that the marriage of engaged women who were getting along in years not be postponed. Anyone is somewhat ambiguous here. It may refer either to a young woman's fiancé or to her father. The NIV and NRSV understand fiancé, and are most likely correct given that 7:25–28 put the responsibility for keeping or breaking engagement on the groom. Whether Paul referred to fathers, fiancés, or both, however, the basic idea is the same. If someone is convinced that marriage is right before God, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning.
7:37–38. At the same time, the man who has decided not to marry the virgin… also does the right thing. Refraining from marriage is right only if the decision is settled in the man's own mind. Paul found this qualification so important that he rephrased it several times. There must be no compulsion. The person must have control over his own will, and must have made up his mind not to marry.
Apparently, some members of the Corinthian church sought to control others in these matters, perhaps by pressuring them to pursue the “highest” spiritual status. Paul knew the error of such concepts of status, and he refused to let Christians dominate and abuse their brothers’ and sisters’ freedom of conscience. Paul had expressed strong personal feelings about postponing marriage. Yet, he knew each individual had to settle this issue personally.
Many aspects of Christian living are of this nature. Advice may be given, but in the end each Christian must make a decision in good conscience before God. For this reason, Paul closed his discussion of this matter on a conciliatory note. Those who married did right, and those who did not did even better. Both options were acceptable.
7:39–40. In 7:8 Paul had advised “the unmarried and the widows” that it was “good for them to stay unmarried.” In these verses Paul returned to matters concerning widows. He began with the well-known policy that marriage bonds continue throughout life, but only until the death of a spouse (cf. Rom. 7:2). Paul went on to say that, upon the death of her husband, a widow is free to marry.
In much the same way, Paul told Timothy that he wanted young widows to remarry (1 Tim. 5:14). The only qualification he offered was that the new husband must belong to the Lord. Later, Paul reiterated that Christians should be bound only to other Christians (2 Cor. 6:14). He did not want believers to divorce unbelievers, but he also did not want believers knowingly to marry unbelievers.
As he had done a number of times in this chapter, Paul allowed marriage, but clearly made known his own judgment or opinion that a widow would be happier if she stayed as she was (i.e., unmarried). Clearly this was occasional advice tailored to Corinth's peculiar situation. Paul did not give contradictory advice to the Corinthians and to Timothy (1 Tim. 5:14). Because his opinion may have sounded contrary to general biblical principles favoring marriage, Paul wanted to make sure that no one dismissed his opinion too quickly. Thus, he reminded the Corinthians that he also had the Spirit of God.
In this passage Paul did not command the Corinthians authoritatively as he did on other matters, but these final words appealed to the Corinthians to take Paul's opinions very seriously.
MAIN IDEA REVIEW: Who should marry? Who should remain single? How should husbands and wives relate to each other? These practical matters occupied the apostle Paul throughout chapter 7.
This chapter touches on several important aspects of Christian marriage. In the Corinthians’ world, the temptation to depart from biblical teaching on marriage confronted the Christian church on every side. In our world, the same is true. We must look carefully at the apostle's words to evaluate our own outlooks and practices in marriage.
PRINCIPLES
APPLICATIONS
Some people love to drive old cars. I have friends who spend lots of time and money renovating and driving around in antique automobiles. They enjoy it, but I have seen people stop and stare at them like they're crazy. All dressed up in costumes from the earlier decades of this century, they drive about with big smiles on their faces. Meanwhile, modern, faster cars line up behind them waiting for the opportunity to pass and go on their way unhindered by these throw-backs to yesteryear.
Let us face it. When Christians today take seriously the teachings of this chapter and apply them to marriage, they seem as out of touch with the modern world as antique car enthusiasts. People gawk at us, waiting for us to move our jalopies so they may go on their way unhindered.
Despite the attitudes of the world, we must look at Christian marriage not as a jalopy but as a precious antique, a treasure from the past. In the beginning God ordained marriage and commanded it in Scripture. This gift from God is not to be despised, but cherished as the blessing of our Creator.
Knowing the great value of marriage, we have to be careful when we apply Paul's principles from this chapter. We cannot simply reiterate Paul's advice because our situation is not the same as the situation in Corinth. It is simply not true that, as a general rule, Christians ought to be single, or that widows ought not to remarry. Paul believed that marriage was a great blessing, but he also recognized that sometimes conditions in life compel us to postpone our pursuit of this blessing. For this reason, we must gather from Paul's specific teaching on marriage the principles he held that led him to issue this advice. Knowing his fundamental principles, we then have to use our own judgment to know how to apply these principles in our own lives.
Paul's first principle was that married people should maintain healthy sexual relationships with their spouses. They should not abstain from sex unless they do so temporarily by mutual consent for the purpose of prayer. We should realize, as Paul did, that poor sexual relationships in marriage make spouses more susceptible to sexual temptations. Healthy sexual relationships in marriage satisfy normal sexual needs, thereby guarding against adultery.
Regarding divorce, Paul taught that believers may not divorce other believers except in the case of marital infidelity. (Some also believe that if an unbeliever abandons a believer, the abandoned spouse may also remarry.) If believers divorce for any other reason, they must remain unmarried or be reconciled. Besides learning legitimate regulations for divorce, we ought to realize from this that God considers marriage sacred. We ought to respect our marriages, not taking them lightly as the world often does, and to see them as lifelong covenants and commitments.
Regarding widows, we ought to learn from Paul that their marital obligations died with their spouses. They are free to remarry without condition, just as single people. Virgins, too, may marry at will. We should include all legitimately single people in this category even if they have previously fallen into sexual sin, as long as they have repented. Of course, any Christian who marries must marry a believer.
Lord Jesus, we live in a day when the ideals of Christian marriage are attacked on every side. Teach us your ways for marriage and grant us strength to delight in the treasure. Amen.
A. Unmarried (7:8,11,32,34)
The word translated “unmarried” (agamos ) appears in the New Testament only in 1 Corinthians 7. Traditionally, it has been understood as a generic term referring to anyone not currently married. This would include single men and women, widowed men and women, and divorced men and women. Others, however, have suggested that agamos probably does not include people who have never been married, but only unmarried people who used to be married. The suggestion has also been made that agamos was not only a generic term for formerly married people, but also the typical word used in the New Testament period for “widower.”
B. Virgins (7:25,28,34,36–38)
Most likely, the term parthenos applied not only to virgins, whether male or female, but also to engaged women. Thus, the NRSV translates “fiancée” in 7:36–38. The NRSV is almost certainly correct in its assessment of these verses. The groom, not the bride's father, appears to have had control over whether or not he married in 7:27–28, though this does not preclude the possibility that the groom, the bride, and the bride's father all needed to agree. The moral responsibility for marriage also falls on the bride (“she has not sinned,” 7:28), but nowhere is there explicit mention that the bride's father has not sinned, or even takes part in the decision process. This context favors the reading that the groom, not the bride's father, is the subject of 7:36–38, and therefore that parthenos here means “fiancée.”
C. Divorce (7:27)
The marriage contract between a groom and a bride was considered so binding that to break that contract was considered divorce. Matthew's gospel illustrates this well in that Joseph, who had not yet married Mary, sought “to divorce her” (Matt. 1:19). Moreover, the context of 7:25–28 deals with virgins (“now about virgins,” 7:25), so it seems much better to understand 7:27 also to apply to female virgins and their male counterparts. Thus, divorce here refers to the breaking of the marriage contract prior to the consummation of the marriage.
A. INTRODUCTION
B. COMMENTARY
C. CONCLUSION: JALOPIES?