1 Corinthians 7

1 Corinthians 7:1

III. APOSTOLIC ANSWERS TO CHURCH QUESTIONS (Chaps. 7-14) A. Concerning Marriage and Celibacy (Chap. 7) 7:1 Up to this point, Paul has been dealing with various abuses in the church at Corinth which he had heard of by direct report. Now he is about to answer questions which the saints at Corinth sent to him. The first has to do with marriage and the single state. He therefore first lays down the broad principle that it is good for a man not to touch a woman. To touch a woman, in this case, means to have a physical relationship. The apostle does not imply that the unmarried state is holier than marriage, but simply that it is better to be unmarried if one desires to give oneself to the service of the Lord without distraction. This will be explained in later verses. 7:2 Paul recognizes, however, that the single state carries with it tremendous temptations to impurity. Thus he qualifies the first statement by saying: Because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. For each man to have his own wife means monogamous marriage. Verse 2 establishes the principle that God’s order for His own people continues to be what it always was, namely, that a person should have only one spouse. 7:3 In the married state, each one should render to his partner the obligations of married life, since there is a mutual dependence. When it says: Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, it means, Let him carry out his obligations to her as a husband. She should, of course, do likewise to him. Note the delicacy Paul uses on this topic. There is no coarseness or vulgarity. How different from the world! 7:4 In marital union there is a dependence of the wife upon the husband and vice versa. In order to carry out God’s order in this holy union, both husband and wife must recognize their interdependence. 7:5 Christenson writes: In plain language this means that if one partner desires the sexual relationship, the other should respond to that desire. The husband and wife who adopt this down-to-earth approach to sex will find it a wonderfully satisfying aspect of their marriagefor the simple reason that the relationship is rooted in reality, and not in some artificial or impossible ideal. Perhaps when some of these Corinthians were first saved, they began to think that the intimacies of married life were not consistent with Christian holiness. Paul will disabuse their minds of any such idea. Here he firmly tells them that Christian couples are not to deprive one another, that is, to deny one’s partner’s rights as far as the other partner’s body is concerned. There are only two exceptions. First of all, such an abstinence should only be by mutual consent so that the husband and wife may give themselves to fasting and prayer. The second condition is that such abstinence should only be temporary. Husband and wife should come together again, lest Satan tempt them for their lack of self-control. 7:6 Verse 6 has given rise to a great deal of speculation and controversy. Paul says: But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment. Some have taken this to mean that the apostle did not consider the foregoing words to be inspired by God. Such an interpretation is untenable, since he claims in 1Co_14:37 that the things which he was writing to the Corinthians were the commandments of the Lord. We feel rather that the apostle was saying that under certain circumstances, it was all right for a married couple to abstain from the marriage act, but that this abstinence is a permission, not a commandment. Christian people do not have to refrain from this act in order to give themselves undividedly to prayer. Others feel that verse 6 refers to the whole idea of marriage, that is, that Christians are permitted to marry but are not commanded to do so. 7:7 Paul now begins advice to the unmarried. It is clear, first of all, that he considered the unmarried state preferable, but he recognized that it could be followed only as God enabled. When he says: For I wish that all men were even as I myself, it is obvious from the context that he means unmarried. There is much diversity of opinion as to whether Paul had always been a bachelor, or whether he was a widower at the time he wrote this. However, for present purposes, it is not necessary to settle the debate, even if we could. Where Paul says: But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that, he means that God gives grace to some to remain unmarried whereas He definitely calls others to the married state. It is an individual matter, and no general legislation can be adopted which can be applicable to all. 7:8 Therefore he advises the unmarried and the widows to remain even as he is himself. 7:9 However, if they lack the power of self-control in the unmarried state, then they are permitted to marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion. This passionate burning involves the very grave danger of falling into sin. 7:10 The next two verses are addressed to married couples, where both partners are believers. Now to the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord simply means that what Paul was teaching here had already been taught by the Lord Jesus when He was on earth. Christ had already given an explicit command on this subject. For instance, He had forbidden divorce except on the ground of unfaithfulness (Mat_5:32; Mat_19:9). The overall instruction that Paul gives is that a wife is not to depart from her husband.7:11 However, he recognizes that there are extreme cases where it might be necessary for a wife to leave her husband. In such a case, she is obligated to remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband.

Separation does not break the marriage tie; rather it gives opportunity for the Lord to heal the differences that have come between and to restore both parties to fellowship with Him and with one another. The husband is commanded not to divorce his wife. No exception is made in his case. 7:12 Verses 12-24 deal with the problem of a marriage where only one party is a believer. Paul prefaces his remarks with the statement: But to the rest I, not the Lord, say. Again, we strongly emphasize that this does not mean that what Paul is saying represents his own viewpoints and not the Lord’s. He is simply explaining that what he is about to say had not been previously taught by the Lord Jesus when He was here on earth. There is no instruction in the Gospels similar to this. The Lord Jesus simply did not take up the case of a marriage where only one member was a believer. But now Christ has instructed His apostle in this matter and so what Paul says here is the inspired word of God. But to the rest means to those whose partners are not believers. This passage does not condone a Christian’s marrying an unsaved person. It probably has in view the situation where one of the partners was saved after marriage. If any brother has a wife who does not believe, and she is willing to live with him, let him not divorce her. In order to appreciate this passage of Scripture properly, it is helpful to remind ourselves of God’s commandment to His people in the OT. When Jews married heathen wives and had children by them, they were commanded to put both the wives and the children away. This is clearly seen in Ezr_10:2-3 and Neh_13:23-25. Now the question has arisen in Corinth as to what a wife who had been converted should do about her husband and children, or what a man who has an unbelieving wife should do with her. Should he put her away? The answer is obviously negative. The OT commandment no longer applies to the people of God under grace. If a Christian has a non-Christian wife, and she is willing to live with him, he should not leave her. This does not mean that it is all right for a man to marry a non-believer, but simply that being married to her when he was converted, he should not leave her. 7:13 Likewise, a woman who has a non-Christian husband who is willing to live with her should stay with her husband. Perhaps by her meek and godly testimony before him, she will win him to the Lord. 7:14 Actually the presence of a believer in a non-Christian home has a sanctifying influence. As mentioned before, to sanctify means to set apart. Here it does not mean that the unbelieving husband is saved by his wife, neither does it mean that he is made holy. Rather it means that he is set apart in a position of external privilege. He is fortunate to have a Christian wife who prays for him. Her life and testimony are an influence for God in the home.

Speaking from a human point of view, the likelihood of that man being saved is greater when he has a godly, Christian wife than if he had an unbelieving wife. As Vine puts it: He receives a spiritual influence holding the possibility of actual conversion. The same would hold true, of course, in the case of an unbelieving wife and a Christian husband. The unbelieving wife would be sanctified in such a case. Then the apostle adds: otherwise your children would be unclean; but now they are holy. We have already mentioned that in the OT the children were to be put away as well as the heathen wife. Now Paul explains that in the dispensation of grace, children born of a marriage where one partner is a believer and the other is not are holy. The word holy comes from the same root word translated sanctified in this verse. It does not at all mean that the children are made holy in themselves, that is, that they necessarily live clean and pure lives. Rather it means that they are set apart in a place of privilege.

They have at least one parent who loves the Lord, and who tells them the gospel story. There is a strong possibility of their being saved. They are privileged to live in a home where one of the parents is indwelt by the Spirit of God. In this sense, they are sanctified. This verse also includes the assurance that it is not wrong to have children when one parent is a Christian and the other is not. God recognizes the marriage, and the children are not illegitimate. 7:15 But what should be the attitude of a Christian if the unsaved partner desires to leave? The answer is that he or she should be allowed to depart. The expression a brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases is very difficult to explain with finality. Some believe that it means that if the unbeliever deserts the believer, and there is every reason to believe that the desertion is final, then the believer is free to obtain a divorce. Those who hold this view teach that verse 15 is a parenthesis, and that verse 16 is connected with verse 14 as follows:

1. Verse 14 states that the ideal situation is for a believer to remain with an unbelieving partner because of the sanctifying influence of a Christian in the home.
2. Verse 16 suggests that through staying in the home, the believer may win the unbeliever to Christ.
3. Verse 15 is a parenthesis, allowing the believer to be divorced (and possibly to remarry) if he or she is deserted by the unbeliever. The hope of eventual salvation is connected with continued union rather than with the unbeliever’s leaving the home. But other Bible students insist that verse 15 deals only with the subject of separation and not with divorce and remarriage. To them, it simply means that if the unbeliever departs, he should be allowed to do so peacefully. The wife is not under any obligation to keep the marriage together beyond what she has already done. God has called us to peace, and we are not required to use emotional displays or legal processes to prevent the unbeliever from departing. Which is the right interpretation? We find it impossible to decide definitely. It does seem to us that the Lord taught in Mat_19:9 that divorce is permitted where one party has been guilty of unfaithfulness (adultery). We believe that in such a case, the innocent party is free to remarry. As far as 1Co_7:15 is concerned, we cannot be positive that it permits divorce and remarriage where an unbeliever has deserted his Christian partner. However, anyone who is guilty of this form of desertion will almost inevitably enter into a new relationship very soon, and thus the original union will be broken anyway. J. M. Davies writes: The unbeliever who departs would very soon be married to another, which would automatically break the marriage bond. To insist that the deserted party remain unmarried would put a yoke upon him/her which in the majority of cases, they would not be able to bear. 7:16 One’s understanding of verse 16 varies somewhat depending on the interpretation of verse 15. If a person believes that verse 15 does not sanction divorce, he points to this verse as proof. He argues that the believer should permit separation but should not divorce the unbeliever because that would prevent the possibility of the restoration of the marriage union and the likelihood of the unbeliever’s being saved. If, on the other hand, a person believes that divorce is permitted when a believer has been deserted, then this verse is linked with verse 14, and verse 15 is considered as a parenthesis. 7:17 There is sometimes a feeling among new converts that they must make a complete break with every phase of their former life, including institutions such as marriage which are not in themselves sinful. In the newfound joy of salvation, there is the danger of using forcible revolution to overthrow all that one has previously known. Christianity does not use forcible revolution in order to accomplish its purposes. Rather, its changes are made by peaceful means. In verses 17-24, the apostle lays down the general rule that becoming a Christian need not involve violent revolution against existing ties. Doubtless he has marriage ties primarily in view, but he also applies the principle to racial and social ties. Each believer is to walk in accordance with the calling of the Lord. If He has called one to married life, then he should follow this in the fear of the Lord. If God has given grace to live a celibate life, then a man should follow that calling. In addition, if at the time of a person’s conversion, he is married to an unsaved wife, then he need not overturn this relationship, but should continue to the best of his ability to seek the salvation of his wife. What Paul is stating to the Corinthians is not for them alone; this is what he taught in all the churches. Vine writes: When Paul says, and so ordain I in all the churches, he is not issuing decrees from a given center, but is simply informing the Church at Corinth that the instructions he was giving them were what he gave in every church. 7:18 Paul deals with the subject of racial ties in verses 18 and 19. If a man was a Jew at the time of his conversion, and bore in his body the mark of circumcision, he need not take a violent revulsion at this and seek to obliterate all physical marks of his former way of life. Likewise, if a man were a heathen at the time of his new birth, he does not have to seek to hide his heathen background by taking on the marks of a Jew. We might also interpret this verse to mean that if a Jew were converted, he should not be afraid to live on with his Jewish wife, or if a Gentile were converted he should not try to flee from that background. These external differences are not what really count. 7:19 As far as the essence of Christianity is concerned, circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. What really counts is keeping the commandments of God. In other words, God is concerned with what is inward, not with what is outward. The relationships of life need not be violently forsaken by the entrance of Christianity. Rather, Kelly says, by the Christian faith, the believer is raised to a position where he is superior to all circumstances.7:20 The general rule is that each one should remain with God in that state in which he was called. This, of course, only refers to callings that are not in themselves sinful.

If a person were engaged in some wicked business at the time of conversion, he would be expected to leave it! But the apostle here is dealing with things not wrong in themselves. This is proved in the following verses where the subject of slaves is discussed. 7:21 What should a slave do when he is saved? Should he rebel against his owner and demand his freedom? Does Christianity insist that we go around seeking our rights? Paul gives the answer here: Were you called while a slave? Do not be concerned about it. In other words, Were you a slave at the time of your conversion?

Do not be needlessly concerned about that. You can be a slave and still enjoy the highest blessings of Christianity.But if you can be made free, rather use it. There are two interpretations of this passage. Some feel that Paul is saying, If you can become free, by all means avail yourself of this opportunity. Others feel that the apostle is saying that even if a slave could become free, Christianity does not require him to avail himself of that freedom. Rather he should use his bondage as a testimony to the Lord Jesus.

Most people will prefer the first interpretation (and it is probably correct), but they should not overlook the fact that the second would be more nearly in accord with the example left to us by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. 7:22 He who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman. This does not mean a man who was freeborn but rather one who was made free, that is, a slave who obtained his freedom. In other words, if a man was a slave at the time of his conversion, he should not let that worry him, because he is the Lord’s freedman. He has been set free from his sins and from the bondage of Satan. On the other hand, if a man were free at the time of his conversion, he should realize that from now on he is a slave, bound hand and foot to the Savior. 7:23 Every Christian has been bought at a price. He henceforth belongs to the One who bought him, the Lord Jesus. We are to be Christ’s bondslaves and not become slaves of men.7:24 Therefore, no matter what one’s social state was, he can consistently remain with God in that state. These two words with God are the key which unlocks the whole truth. If a man is with God, then even slavery can be made true freedom. It is that which ennobles and sanctifies any position in life.7:25 In verses 25-38, the apostle is addressing himself to the unmarried, whether male or female.

The word virgins can be used to apply to either. Verse 25 is another verse that some have used to teach that the contents of this chapter are not necessarily inspired. They even go to such extremes as to say that Paul, being a bachelor, was a male chauvinist and that his personal prejudices are reflected in what he says here! To adopt such an attitude, of course, is to deal a vicious attack on the inspiration of Scriptures. When Paul says he has no commandment from the Lord about virgins, he simply means that during the Lord’s earthly ministry He did not leave any explicit instruction on this subject. Therefore Paul gives his own judgment, as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy, and this judgment is inspired of God. 7:26 In general, it is good to be unmarried, because of the present distress. The present distress refers to the sufferings of this earthly life in general. Perhaps there was a special time of distress at the time Paul wrote this letter. However, distress has continued to exist and will last until the Lord comes. 7:27 Paul’s advice is that those who are already married should not seek to be separated. On the other hand, if a man is loosed from a wife, he should not seek a wife. The expression loosed from a wife here does not only mean widowed or divorced. It simply means free from the marriage bond, and could include those who never married. 7:28 Nothing Paul says should be construed to indicate that it is a sin to marry. After all, marriage was instituted by God in the Garden of Eden before sin ever entered the world. It was God Himself who decreed: It is not good that man should be alone (Gen_2:18). Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled (Heb_13:4). Paul elsewhere speaks of those who forbid to marry as being a sign of latter-day apostasy (1Ti_4:1-3). Thus Paul states, But even if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. New converts to Christianity should never think that there is anything wrong in the marriage relationship. Yet Paul adds that those women who do marry will have trouble in the flesh. This may include the travail connected with childbirth, etc. When Paul says But I would spare you, he may mean (1) I would spare you the physical suffering which accompanies the marriage state, particularly the troubles of family life, or (2) I would spare the reader the enumeration of all these troubles. 7:29 Paul would like to emphasize that because the time is short we should subordinate even these legitimate relationships of life in order to serve the Lord. Christ’s coming is near, and although husbands and wives should perform their mutual duties with faithfulness, they should seek to put Christ first in all their lives. Ironside expresses it in this way: Everyone is to act in view of the fact that the time is indeed fleeting, the Lord’s return is nearing, and no consideration of personal comfort is to be allowed to hinder devotion to the will of God. W. E. Vine says: The meaning is not, of course, that a married man is to refrain from behaving as a husband should, but that his relationship to his wife should be entirely subservient to his higher relationship with the Lord … who is to have the first place in the heart; he is not to permit a natural relation to obstruct his obedience to Christ. 7:30 The sorrows and joys and possessions of life should not be given a place of undue consideration in our lives. All these must be subordinated in our endeavor to buy up the opportunity to serve the Lord while it is still day. 7:31 In living our lives on earth, it is inevitable that we have a certain amount of contact with mundane things. There is a legitimate use of these things in the life of the believer. However, Paul warns that while we may use them, we should not misuse them. For instance, the Christian should not live for food, clothes, and pleasure. He may use food and clothes as essentials but they should not become the god of his life. Marriage, property, commerce, or political, scientific, musical, and artistic activity have their place in the world, but all may prove a distraction to spiritual life if allowed to do so. The expression the form of this world is passing away is borrowed from the theater and refers to the changing of scenes. It speaks of the transience of all that we see about us today. Its short-lived character is well expressed in Shakespeare’s famous lines: All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances, and one man in his time plays many parts.7:32 Paul wants the Christians to be without care. He means the cares that would unnecessarily hinder them from serving the Lord. And so he goes on to explain that he who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lordhow he may please the Lord. This does not mean that all unmarried believers actually do give themselves undistractedly to the Lord, but it means that the unmarried state provides the opportunity for so doing in a way that the married state does not. 7:33 Again this does not mean that a married man cannot be very attentive to the things of the Lord, but it is a general observation that married life requires that a man please his wife. He has additional obligations to think of. As Vine has pointed out: In general, if a man is married, he has limited his range of service. If he is unmarried, he can go on to the ends of the earth and preach the gospel.7:34 The unmarried woman cares about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But she who is married cares about the things of the worldhow she may please her husband. A word of explanation is needed here also.

The unmarried woman, or the virgin, is able to give a greater portion of her time to the things of the Lord. The expression that she may be holy both in body and in spirit does not mean that the unmarried state is more holy, but simply that she can be more set apart in both body and spirit to the work of the Lord. She is not essentially purer, but her time is freer. Again, she who is married cares about the things of the world. That does not mean that she is more worldly than the unmarried woman, but that her day must necessarily be devoted in part to mundane duties such as care of the home. These things are legitimate and right, and Paul is not criticizing them or depreciating them; he is merely stating that an unmarried woman has wider avenues for service and more time than a married woman. 7:35 Paul is not setting forth this teaching in order to put people under a rigid system of bondage. He is merely instructing them for their own profit so that when they think of their lives and of the service of the Lord, they may judge His guidance in the light of all this instruction. His attitude is that celibacy is good, and enables a person to serve the Lord without distraction. As far as Paul is concerned, man is free to choose either marriage or celibacy. The apostle does not want to put a leash on anyone or to put them into bondage. 7:36 Verses 36-38 are perhaps the most misunderstood verses in this chapter, and perhaps in the entire Epistle. The common explanation is this: In Paul’s day a man exercised rigid control over his home. It was up to him whether his daughters married or not. They could not do so without his permission. Thus these verses are taken to mean that if a man refuses to allow his daughters to marry, that is a good thing, but if he allows them to marry, then he is not sinning. Such an interpretation seems almost meaningless as far as instruction for the people of God in this day is concerned. The interpretation does not fit in with the context of the rest of the chapter, and seems hopelessly confusing. The RSV translates virgin as betrothed. The thought would then be that if a man marries his betrothed or fiance9e, he does not sin; but if he refrains from marrying her, it is better. Such a view is loaded with difficulties. In his commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Kelly presents an alternate view which seems to have great merit. Kelly believes that the word virgin (parthenos) may also be translated virginity. Thus the passage is not speaking about a man’s virgin daughters, but about his own virginity. According to this interpretation, the passage is saying that if a man maintains the unmarried state he does well, but if he decides to get married, he does not sin.John Nelson Darby adopts this same interpretation in his New Translation: But if anyone think that he behaves unseemly to his virginity, and if he is beyond the flower of his age, and so it must be, let him do what he will, he does not sin: let them marry. But he who stands firm in his heart, having no need, but has authority over his own will, and has judged this in his heart to keep his own virginity, he does well. So that he that marries himself does well: and he that does not marry does better. Looking at verse 36 in greater detail then, we take it as meaning that if a man has come to full manhood, and if he does not feel that he has the gift of continence, he does not sin in marrying. He feels that the need requires him to do so, and so he should do what he wishes in this case, that is, get married. 7:37 Nevertheless, if a man has determined to serve the Lord undistractedly, and if he has sufficient self-control so that there is no necessity for his marrying, if he has determined to maintain the unmarried state, and this with a view to glorifying God in service, then he does well.7:38 The conclusion is that he who gives himself in marriage does well, but he who maintains the unmarried state for greater service for the Lord does better.7:39 The last two verses of the chapter contain advice to widows. A wife is bound by law to her husband as long as he lives. The law referred to here is the marriage law, instituted by God. If a woman’s husband dies, she is at liberty to be married to another man. This same truth is enunciated in Rom_7:1-3, namely, that death breaks the marriage relationship. However, the apostle adds the qualification that she is free to marry whom she wishes, only in the Lord.

This means, first of all, that the person she marries must be a Christian, but it means more than this. In the Lord means in the will of the Lord. In other words, she might marry a Christian and still be out of the will of the Lord. She must seek the guidance of the Lord in this important matter and marry the believer whom the Lord would have for her. 7:40 Paul’s frank judgment is that a widow is happier if she remains unmarried. This does not contradict 1Ti_5:14 where Paul expresses his judgment that younger widows should marry. Here he is stating his general ideain 1 Timothy a specific exception. Then he adds, I think I also have the Spirit of God. Some misunderstand these words to mean that Paul was not sure of himself in stating these things! Again we protest vigorously against any such interpretation. There can be no question as to the inspiration of what Paul wrote in this portion. He is using irony here. His apostleship and his teaching had been under attack by some at Corinth.

They professed to have the mind of the Lord in what they were saying. Paul is saying in effect, Whatever else others may say of me, I think that I also have the Spirit of God. They profess to have Him but surely they do not think that they have a monopoly on the Holy Spirit.We know that Paul did indeed have the Spirit in all that he wrote to us, and that the path of happiness for us is to follow his instructions.