article24

§19 Regarding “Mixed” Marriages (1 Cor. 7:12–16)

Having directed remarks to unmarried Christians and to Christians married to each other, Paul writes to the rest, or those Christians who are married to unbelieving partners. Paul works from the assumption that divorce is contrary to the teaching of the Lord (7:10–11); yet as he reflects on the situation in Corinth, he recognizes and reasons that the involvement of an unbelieving partner in a marriage creates a different set of circumstances. Paul’s advice to the Christian partners is that they remain in their marriages if their non-Christian spouses agree. Paul’s reasoning supports or maintains Christian freedom—freedom to remain in an agreeable marriage or freedom to divorce in situations where the non-Christian partner will not accept the faith of the Christian—although the ideas of reconciliation and peace (God’s work) are at the foundations of his thought. Peace, not the conflict of a divorce, is the characteristic of Christian life. Moreover, as Paul elaborates his thinking, he ponders not only the role of the believer and the presence of the unbeliever in such marriages but also the circumstances or state of the children of these unions.

7:12–13 / The form of Paul’s remarks is notable, because he plainly states that he is offering his own advice, not a further word or command from the Lord. Yet his advice is not simply reasonable thinking, for, as he will reveal later in 7:40, Paul understands his reasoning in relation to such circumstances to be inspired or informed by God’s Spirit at work in him. Paul’s thinking is formed not by a principle, no matter how ethical, but by the reality of God. Moreover, Paul shifts the viewpoint from “a/the wife,” in the preceding verses, to any brother, although he will reverse the angle of vision before ending his observations, writing to a woman whose husband is not a believer. Although the church has attempted to work from these lines in formulating policies about so-called mixed marriages, the present verses do not deal with the majority of interfaith marriages as we know them in the late twentieth century. Paul is writing to first-century, first-generation converts, many of whom had religious backgrounds in paganism and many of whom might have spouses who were not believers. Today only a small number of Christians in mixed marriages become Christians through conversion while their spouses remain in another religion. The closest Paul comes to offering advice on mixed marriages as we encounter them is in 7:39, where he instructs Christian women to marry Christian men.

In relation to the Corinthian situation, these verses are simple and clear. Believers are to remain in their marriages if their nonbelieving partners agree. Paul’s teaching excludes the possibility of the Christian member of a marriage initiating a divorce from a nonbeliever, especially because the spouse is an unbeliever.

7:14 / Portions of verse 14 are enigmatic and difficult to comprehend, although other elements are straightforward. Because of the situation that Paul has described in verses 12–13, one should probably understand that Paul assumes that non-Christian spouses are involved in pagan religions. Thus he makes this exceptional series of statements to recognize that no pagan deity plays a part in the Christians’ dealings with pagan spouses. His reference to the children of mixed marriages illustrates the ultimate power of the Lord. In brief, he assures the Corinthians that Christians are not defiled by pagan spouses; rather, the Christian’s presence in the family and the Spirit’s presence in the life of the believer sanctify the relationship. Paul does not attempt to explain the mechanics of such an operation of sanctification. He observes that the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her … husband, and that the children … are holy. God graciously works to bring about the sanctification of the non-Christian spouse and the children through the believer in the family.

The Greek verb hagiazō, translated “has been sanctified,” is a perfect (past completed action) passive (the subject is acted on rather than acts). Thus, this mention of sanctification refers to a present reality accomplished in the past without specifying when and how the action took place. The implication of the passive is that God did the work. In attempting to understand what Paul thinks about sanctification that would have led him to refer to the unbelieving marital partner as having been sanctified, Conzelmann (p. 122) writes:

The world is desacralized. By this means freedom is brought to light. Through the believing partner, the marriage between a pagan and a Christian is withdrawn from the control of the powers of the world. In living together with the world, the “saints” are the stronger party. The decisive idea lies not in an ontological definition of the state of the non-Christian members of the family, but in the assertion that no alien power plays any part in the Christian’s dealing with them.

7:15 / Three related statements form this striking verse. First, Paul says that should the non-Christian spouse act to end the marriage, the Christian should let it be. Second, in these situations, Christian husbands or wives are not bound, or literally enslaved; they are not reduced to being victims of circumstances. They are free, apparently, from the marital vows that were broken by the nonbeliever’s actions. Third, Paul explains that God calls Christians to peace. Neither fighting against a divorce nor suffering the stigma, circumstances, and aftermath of a divorce are God’s will for the Christian who is married to an unbelieving spouse. God’s peace is relational, and it does not exist in or promote the presence of destructive strife. Paul’s words here recognize the freedom of the believers despite the difficulties of divorce that may affect their lives. God’s peace is to be the end result of both marriage and divorce.

7:16 / In turn, verse 16 summarizes the intention and motive of Paul’s teaching that, if possible, Christians should remain married to non-Christian spouses. Critical editions of the Greek text suggest the two sentences are questions, to be rendered as in the NIV, although other translations make statements out of these lines. Yet the energy of the argument at this point favors the form of a set of rhetorical questions that are designed to drive home Paul’s point. Nevertheless, the basic sense of the sentences is clear, and either way, what Paul says may seem peculiar at a glance: Do Christian husbands and wives have the power to save their spouses? Certainly not. One sees from Paul’s total writings that he does not think humans ever save themselves or one another; God does the saving through Christ. These lines are best and only understood to say that God may work through a Christian spouse (as is explicit in v. 14) to save an unbelieving partner. A sensible paraphrase of Paul’s rhetorical appeal might read, “How will you ever know, if you don’t give it a chance, whether God will work through you to save your spouse?”