1 Corinthians 7:1

1 Corinthians 7:1–24

9/3/2012

Click here to read today's passage on Bible Gateway.

Commands of Jesus vs. Commands of Paul
Okay. Wow. Today again is crammed full of good and important stuff. A lot of it today is fiercely practical stuff about relationships, marriage, and sex. I think things are pretty straightforward in most of those areas, so I'm going to leave all of that for you to think about and study. If you have any questions on the practicalities or anything that's unclear, be sure to let me know and I'd be happy to try to clear things up.

I want to deal here with an issue that is perhaps less practical, but has more chance to be misunderstood and really confusing. Let's look a minute at 7:10-12:

"To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife.
To the rest I say (I, 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."

So what's going on with this "I, not the Lord" business? Paul is making a distinction here between actually words/commands spoken by Jesus and those that are true and right, but not specifically given by Jesus:

"Paul’s parenthesis, “not I, but the Lord” (v. 10), alludes to words of the earthly Jesus widely known in early Christian tradition (cf. Mark 10:11–12)." [1]

The first "charge" Paul gives is one that Jesus has already specifically given. It has come "from the Lord". The second charge, however, did not come straight from Jesus. The context in which Jesus addresses the matter is not focused on the practical outworkings of every situation the might occur within a church. Paul, however, IS concerned with those practical outworkings and gives an authoritative ruling on what believers should do. Is Paul saying that his command carries less authority than the one from Jesus? I don't think so. I think he's mostly pointing out the difference to make sure people don't get confused and think that Jesus said the second thing too. This kind of thing happens all the time, even today. A person hears something good or reads it in a Christian book and later can't really remember and starts to think something along the lines of "I THINK Jesus said something about that...." Paul is making sure that they understand the the command is coming from him, not from an unknown saying of/writing about Jesus. The authority is still there, otherwise Paul wouldn't be writing it! Kruger explains it well:

"As Paul gives commands concerning marriage in verse 12, he offers the parenthetical terms “I, not the Lord.” Although some have understood this to be Paul’s making a distinction between his own lesser authority and Jesus’s higher authority, a closer reading of the passage reveals the opposite. Paul’s statement simply means that he has no direct command from Jesus on this particular subject and therefore must speak “on his own authority.” This makes it clear to the Corinthians that Paul has the apostolic authority to issue binding commands and thereby to speak for Jesus on topics that have not been directly addressed by him." [2]

This is why the NLT phrases it differently and a little more clearly as:

"Now, I will speak to the rest of you, though I do not have a direct command from the Lord." (emphasis mine)

Again - this isn't really dealing with the actual content of what Paul is "charging" them with, but the wording in the ESV can make the issue a little confusing and rightly understanding these things can have a big impact on how we understand and view the authority of the Bible and the Biblical writers.

Questions? Comments?

[1] Craig Blomberg, 1 Corinthians, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994), 134.
[2] Michael J. Kruger (2012-04-05). Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books (Kindle Locations 4995-5001). Good News Publishers/Crossway Books. Kindle Edition.

Andrei

9/3/2012 07:20:19 pm

I had a request for some clarification at the marriage part (v. 7-15). I'm pretty sure I'm missing most of the context. . . Paul makes it seem like marriage is strictly for people whose sexual desires are stronger than their self-control. And then in verses 8-9, it seems like he is saying that being single should be your #1 option... BuT, if you can't control your sexual desire, then your fallback option is to get married??? From what I've learned in church about marriage so far, I'll assume that perspective is wrong? LoL? He says it is a 'concession, not a command', so I guess it's not that binding or anything. But his language is perfectly plain and clear on this in this section, so I was wondering what to make of it.

Also, what should we make of verses 12-16? First off, I've heard a lot of people in church say that you shouldn't try to marry an unbeliever; there is potential for so many problems, etc... if that is the case, then what is a potential situation where marrying an unbeliever would have God's blessing or something? Is it just a case of, 'you've chosen to marry an unbeliever and it comes with many consequences. Good luck.'? What does it mean for an unbelieving husband or wife to be made 'holy'? Wouldn't that only come from them accepting Christ? And what is verse 15 saying about 'separation?' It sounds like a loophole for divorce if you're married to an unbeliever and they want to go their own way or something.

Also, how situational are his commands and teachings here? Is it something that he is telling the Corinthians that we shouldn't necessarily apply to our own lives? If this is the case to any extent, what should be the procedure that we take on extrapolating and applying Biblical teaching?

Greg

9/4/2012 04:08:13 am

Lots of good and important questions. I'll start with the last one first. I would be VERY careful of assuming things are situational unless it is specifically said to be. If we start assuming things are only situational, where does it stop? We can talk our way out of doing almost anything the Bible says. This passage lacks any clear markers that Paul is saying this only to the Corinthians. Yes, the letter is written to them, but the commands are phrased universally. The situation of the letter is specific, but the commands are universal. If we take this section to be situational, we would have to do so for the previous writing about unity as well. There are I think a few cases in the NT where commands are more situational, but they are few in my opinion and it doesn't mean you don't have to do anything - it means you have to do more work to understand how it applies to us today in a different situation. That being said, now I'll deal with the other questions:

1. Singleness/Marriage: Definitely hard. There have been a lot of books written on this, but here's what Paul is saying: Some people are called to be married (most, in fact) and some are called to be single. Marriage is a good and God-ordained thing since the time of Adam and Eve. It is not good for a man to be alone (as it says in Genesis). Most people are called to be married. I think that if you are single and longing to be married and worried that God might be "calling you to singleness", I would say that you're not. That isn't to say that you will end up getting married; a calling to singleness means that you have no desire to be married and don't obsess about it. That being said, Paul is of the opinion (and so am I) that life is a lot less complex when you're single. You don't have to worry about pleasing a spouse and providing for kids. You are free to do any and all to serve God without having to consider someone else. But again, it has to do with desire. If you burn with the desire to be married (either sexually or emotionally or whatever), you are not free to serve God only because you obsess about it. If you have to support your singleness with pornography,etc. you need to get married. I wouldn't call anything a fallback option - as Paul says, "each person has their own gift". Paul wishes for the sake of the Gospel that everyone were unfettered by spouses and children and free to give all their time in service to God, but also realizes that is not the case - some are gifted with singleness and some with marriage. As for contradicting teaching in church, I'm not sure if I can speak to that. I don't know what you've heard so I can't say whether it was wrong or not. I can only say that this is what the Bible says and that a lot of people avoid preaching on this chapter precisely because it's difficult. On to other things.

First of all, your first statement is correct. In 2 Corinthians we'll see that we shouldn't be "unequally yoked" with unbelievers. What Paul is talking about here primarily is a couple that were both unbelievers and one of them becomes a Christian later. That being said, even though it isn't good or Biblical, this section would also apply to those that chose to marry an unbeliever. For an unbelieving spouse to be "made holy" means that if at all possible, you should retain the sanctity of the marriage vows and remain married to an unbeliever. By doing so, that spouse may be won over to Christ through the influence of their spouse. That would also be the case with the reference to "holy" children - raise them in God, don't just leave them with an unbelieving spouse.

As for the last one, I think that you're understanding it correctly. Paul is saying that if your spouse is and unbeliever and has set it in their mind to leave, what can be done? You're not going to sue them to say married or something. He's saying it to soothe the consciences of those in that situation I think. The Bible is very clear on marriage and God's feelings about divorce, etc. so I think there were probably a lot of Christians that were very stricken with guilt that their unbelieving spouse had left or divorced them. What Paul is saying here is essentially "what could you have done?". The spouse probably wasn't expecting to be married to a Christian. If the issue is something else, work with all your might to be a good example to them and have a good marriage. But if the issue is Jesus, what can you do? You can't deny your Savior. Again, I think you're basically understanding the issue, but I wouldn't call it a "loophole" - that is not the type of thinking Paul is shooting for here - he's trying to be comforting to those who are very concerned about breaking God's commandments and not being able to do anything to change that.

Great questions! If I didn't explain something well, please ask for more clarification and I'll try my best to answer. Thanks Andrei!

Andrei

9/4/2012 07:25:44 pm

Thanks Greg, appreciate the clarification. I think I have a few more questions, but one of my questions was about this part:

"Most people are called to be married. I think that if you are single and longing to be married and worried that God might be "calling you to singleness", I would say that you're not. That isn't to say that you will end up getting married; a calling to singleness means that you have no desire to be married and don't obsess about it."

I was wondering where I should look in the Bible where it talks about this? Is it also in 1 Corinthians? Thanks.

Greg

9/5/2012 03:00:29 am

I'm basically just expanding on what Paul says here in 1 Cor. 7. I probably didn't say it very well. I say that "most people are called to be married" not from a Biblical passage, but from observation. The fact is, most people get married. Maybe "called" isn't the right word to use here. What I'm saying is that if you think you're called to singleness but think about marriage and sex all the time, you're not. Doug Wilson actually does a better job of explaining it I think and separates "singleness" and "celibacy". Read this and let me know if you still have questions - sorry for being confusing!

"As is the nature with all individuals, Paul thinks in terms of his own giftedness. He wishes that all men had his gift; he is a contented man, and he sees the blessing in what has bestowed on him. He doesn’t have the burdens and responsibilities of married life, and he doesn’t have the distractions of sexual temptation. Paul’s gift here is a rare one, and it is the gift of celibacy. This is quite distinct from the mythical gift of “singleness” that many young men today think they have. If it needs to be supported by porn, it isn’t the gift of celibacy.

At the same time, Paul is good about not being imperialistic with his own gifts. He enjoys it, and wishes other men could enjoy it too, but he knows that God is the one who apportions all gifts. He has given a handful of individuals the gift of celibacy. So if someone happens to find himself in a single state—unmarried or widowed—Paul’s advice is to remain in that state (again, in the light of the impending distress mentioned in v. 26). Nevertheless, present distress or not, impending persecution or not, if a person cannot contain himself sexually, then they need to marry. As Paul puts it, famously, it is better to marry than to burn. It would be better to go into a persecution with the responsibilities of a wife and family than to go into a persecution with a pattern of fornication on your conscience." (http://www.dougwils.com/Grace-and-Peace/celibacy-and-singleness.html)

Comments are closed.

1 Corinthians 7:1–24

Archives