1: Now concerning the things you wrote to me
about[1] It
is good for a man not to touch[2]
a woman [remain celibate] 2: But
because of porneia let each have his
wife[3]
and let each have her husband[4] 3:
Let husbands yield as indebted [to] wives good will [5]
and likewise also wives to husbands 4: Wives have not exousiazo idios soma [authority over her own body] indeed the husband and
likewise also the husband has not exousiazo
idios soma [6] [authority
over his own body] indeed the wife[7] 5:
Withdraw ye not one from the other except [perhaps] it be with consent for a
time so that scholazo [you can resort to][8]
fasting and prayer and [then] come together again[9]
that Satan tempt you not for your lack of self-control 6: But I speak
this by permission and not of
commandment[10]
7: For I would that all people were even as I myself But everyone has their
own gift from God[11]
one indeed after this manner and another after that 8: I say therefore
to the unmarried and widows It is good for them if they abide even as I[12] 9:
But if they will not contain [themselves][13]
let them marry for it is better to marry than to burn [with unbridled passions][14] 10:
And to the married I command yet not I
but the Lord Let not the wife depart from her husband 11: But and if
she depart let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband and let not
the husband put away his wife [15]12:
And to the rest speak I not the Lord If any brother has a wife
that believes not and she be pleased to dwell with him let him not put her away
13: And the woman who has a husband that believes not and if he be
pleased to dwell with her let her not leave him 14: For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife
and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband[16] else
were your children unclean but now are they holy 15: But if the
unbelieving depart let them depart A brother or a sister is not under bondage
in such cases but God has called us to peace[17] 16:
For how do you know O wife whether you shall save your husband or how do you know
O husband whether you shall save your wife[18] 17:
But as God has distributed to every one as the Lord has called every one so let
them walk And so ordain I in all churches 18: Is any one called being
circumcised let them not become uncircumcised [19] Is
any called in uncircumcision let them not be circumcised[20] 19:
Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing but the keeping of the
commandments of God [is what counts] 20: Let everyone abide in the same
calling wherein they were called 21: Are you called being a slave Care
not for it but if you may be made free use it rather 22: For they who
are called in the Lord being slaves are the Lord’s freedmen Likewise also they
who are called being free are Christ’s [slaves] 23: You are bought with a
price be not ye the slaves of men 24: Brethren let everyone wherein they
are called therein abide with God[21] 25:
Now concerning virgins I have no
commandment from the Lord[22]
yet I give my judgment as one who has
obtained mercy from the Lord to be faithful 26: I suppose therefore that
this is good for the present distress[23] I
say that it is good for one so to be 27: Are you bound to a wife seek
not to be loosed Are you loosed from a wife seek not a wife 28: But and
if you marry you have not sinned and if a virgin marry she has not sinned
Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh but I spare you[24] 29:
But this I say brethren[25] the
time is short It remains that both they who have wives be as though they had
none[26] 30:
And they who weep as though they wept not and they that rejoice as though they
rejoiced not and they that buy as though they possessed not 31: And they
that use this world but not abusing it for the fashion of this world passes
away[27] 32:
But I wish you to be without worry He who is unmarried cares for the things
that belong to the Lord how he may please the Lord 33: But he who is married
cares for the things that are of the world striving to please his wife 34:
There is difference also between a wife and a virgin The unmarried woman cares
for the things of the Lord that she may be holy both in body and in spirit but
she who is married cares for the things of the world how she may please her
husband[28] 35:
And this I speak for your own profit not that I may cast a noose upon you but
for that which is seemly and that you may attend upon the Lord without
distraction 36: But if any be accustomed to acting unseemly toward their
virginity if they be over-ripe and so it ought to be [then] do what they desire
They sin not let them marry 37: Nevertheless whoever stands steadfast in
their hearts having no necessity but having control over their own desires and
have so decreed in their hearts that they will guard their virginity do well 38:
So then they that give [themselves] in marriage do well but they that give [themselves]
not in marriage do better 39: A wife is bound by the law as long as her
husband lives but if her husband be dead she is at liberty to be married to
whom she will only in the Lord 40: But she is happier if she so abide
after my judgment if she remains unmarried and I think also that I have the Spirit of God
[1] This is a reference to a letter or
letters written to Paul, from the Christians in Corinth. We have no way of
knowing the exact contents of the letter(s), but from Paul’s answer, we can
infer that the question[s] had to do with several issues. One was whether it
was better for Christians to marry or to remain unmarried. And Paul begins his
response with that concern. Even though the context of Paul’s answer seems to
address sexual relations within marriage, it is doubtful a letter focusing solely
on intimate relations between spouses would have been dispatched to the
apostle, but rather questions concerning the advisability of marriage itself.
It makes much more sense to interpret Paul’s answer in light of relationships
and co-habitation between spouses, i.e., marriage itself, rather than focusing
solely on the conjugal aspects of marriage, which translators have consistently
chosen to do with this passage. Other issues addressed in this chapter are divorce,
Judaism, and slavery.
[2] It is
certain that celibacy in general is not being promoted by the apostle (the
entire passage deals with the special circumstance of the “present
distress”—the terrible persecution Christians were experiencing at the time), the
fact that Paul advises believers to remain unhampered by marriage during this
time is significant. The word “touch” in this verse could also be translated “cling
or adhere to.” Although men are told that finding a [godly] wife is a good
thing, scripture holds no such advice for women concerning husbands. Without
dispute, for both women and men, a happy marriage is a blessing from God. But nowhere
in scripture, are believers commanded to seek out a spouse. The traditional-role-religionist
and complementarian focus on getting married is at odds with scripture on this
subject. Complementarianism appears to have such an obsession with marriage, it
could legitimately be called a marriage cult. Conversely, the Jews believed that
if they reproduced themselves (had two children), they had been obedient to the
command to “Be fruitful and multiply.” Although daughters tended to be married
off at young ages, sons typically waited until they were older. We observe [that
in the ancient culture] the pressure to marry was often limited to marrying off
daughters, while men were simply advised that they did good if they chose to marry.
The Old Testament example of Rachel and Leah illustrates the cultural pressure to
find husbands for daughters. Rachel was beautiful and therefore highly marriageable
(and she already had a suiter), while her sister Leah was not. Laban, desperate
not to have an “old maid” on his hands pulled the wool over Jacob’s eyes and
tricked him into marrying the older, not so beautiful, sister first.
[3] Strong’s reference G 1135, gune, refers to women whether married or
unmarried. There is no evidence for commentator James Strong’s unfounded assertion
that the word, gune, refers
“specially” to wives. Context alone
determines how gune should be
translated. In the first two verses of 1 Corinthians 7, the word gune, is seen referring to both wives
and then to women in general, whether married or unmarried.
[4] Polygamy was common among the Jews, and
since the first Christians were Jews, polygamy was also common among early
Christians. Verses one and two are a clear reference the number of wives a
Christian husband should have. The husband should have his wife (singular), and
the wife should have her husband (singular)—total equality of the sexes is seen
in this passage as well—equality in both essence and function. These verses
leave no room for interpretation and clearly refer to monogamy. It is the
second such reference, in the New Testament, of husbands only having one wife.
The first came from Jesus. Paul also wrote about it to Timotheos. A husband cannot cling to (adhere to) “a” wife while, at
the same time, having multiple wives. Although it appears polygamy became the
norm early on (including among God’s people), the first chapter of Genesis, the
Mosaic Law, the words of Jesus, and Paul’s instruction to Timothy, all clearly
reveal that God’s plan, from the beginning, was that marriage is for one man
and one woman—only. One wife at a time is permitted. There can be no essential
or functional differences, either implied or inferred, when we read the exact
same command given to both women and men—they were each to have only one
spouse.
[5] What is due benevolence (opheilema eunoia)? The word, opheilema means to be under obligation
to or indebted to. And eunoia, which
is only used twice in the New Testament and is translated as “benevolence” in 1
Corinthians 7:3 and as “good will” in Ephesians 6:7. There is no biblical
ground for assigning a sexual/conjugal connotation to the word eunoia. Thayer defines the word as
simply kindness and good will. Benevolence has never been a euphemism for what
James Strong referred to as “conjugal
duty.” Just because the apostle goes on to advise marriage for those who
are excessively tempted by porneia,
does not mean he further emphasizes “conjugal
duty” to married couples. The
marriage bed is not only holy, it is also personal and private. There is no biblical ground for supposing Paul thought it
his business to meddle in the very personal issue of how often a married couple
should or should not engage in intimate relations with one another (indeed it
is not even physically possible, due to health reasons for some married couples
to do so). “Due benevolence,” must therefore refer to the special kindness,
consideration, loyalty, and faithfulness that should exist in every marriage.
Beyond that, there does not exist one set of rules for married Christians and a
different set of rules for unmarried Christians. Spouses are bound, even
indebted to one another (along with all Christians), to exercise kindness and
good will one towards the other. That, and only that, can be interpreted to be
what the apostle meant by the words “due benevolence.”?
[6] The context of verse four, seems to
speak [at least in part] to the giving or withholding of sexual relations, but
that does not shore up theology which teaches that the term “due benevolence” should
be interpreted as “conjugal duty.”
[7] How
does this clear statement of functional equality (mutual submission) between
husbands and wives reconcile with Bruce Ware’s doctrine of trinity marriage
(where marriage allegedly mirrors the alleged eternal, pre-incarnate, authority
structure within the Godhead as a pattern for human hierarchy in marriage?) and
the complementarian doctrine of the husband “playing the role” of Jesus and the
wife “playing the role” of the church? Where are scriptural examples of how the
church has power over Christ? How does this compare with
traditional-role-religion interpretations of Ephesians Chapter five?
[8] Paul gives his approval for husbands
and wives to absent themselves from one another, at their mutually consented
leisure, for the purposes of fasting and prayer, but not for living apart in
general. The Greek word translated “give yourselves to” is, scholazō, which is only used twice in
the New Testament. In Matthew 12:44, the word is translated “empty.” Other,
extra-biblical, usages indicate the word denotes “absence and/or leisure.”
[9] Male commentators have consistently
assigned a meaning of “conjugal co-habitation” to the Greek word, sunerchomai, which is translated in this
verse as “come” (as in come together/gather together). But there is no
definitive biblical evidence that the coming together Paul refers to, in verse
five, is conjugal—for married people it could certainly include it. The word is
used in such a context in only two places in the New Testament, 1 Corinthians
7:5 and in Matthew 1:18 where we read that Mary is found with child of the Holy
Ghost before she and Joseph “came together” (i.e., before they began living
together as husband and wife; there is no definitive hermeneutical proof that sunerchomai is referring to Mary and
Joseph’s future conjugal relationship (Roman Catholics certainly deny that is
the case). In all other places, sunerchomai,
refers to non-conjugal groups of
people coming (or gathering) together.
[10] In other words, Paul felt liberty from
God to share his opinion on the
subject. So virtually everything written in 1 Corinthians chapter seven [aside
from verses 10-11 which he clarified in verses 12-16] Paul states is his opinion, and not to be taken as “Thus
saith the Lord.”
[11] Paul is not referring to a supernatural
gift of self-control, as all Christians are commanded
to exercise self-control. The fact that it is a command, means that, with the
help of God, all are capable of it. Therefore, the ability for a single person
to abstain from porneia is not a
gift. It is simply the exercise of self-control which we are all commanded to
do. The gift Paul writes of, is the ability to be content without being married.
[12] The apostle is issuing a general
advisory for Christians not to marry during the “present distress.” This is not
a slur against the marriage relationship or a defense for celibacy. It was
simply common sense considering the horrific persecution taking place at the
time.
[13] Will
not contain is more accurate according to context and comparison with other
passages. . .There are no Christians who cannot
restrain themselves from sinning. If that were the case then lack of self-control
would not be sin. But that is not the case, self-control is something
Christians are commanded to add to their faith, and is also a fruit of the Holy
Spirit (fruit results from growth and maturity). Using the words “cannot”
instead of “will not”, as many versions do, soft-soaps the issue of self-control
or the lack thereof.
[14] Rather than be consumed with burning,
sinful lusts, get married (and remain faithful to your spouse!)
[15] This goes back to verse one, and one of
the questions Paul obviously wrote this letter in response to: It is good that a man not touch a woman? What
a ridiculous rendering! Put the shoe on the other foot: It is good that a woman not touch a man! No, it is not “good” either way if it is unmarried men and
women we are speaking of “touching” one another here; it is sin, pure and
simple, if they do! Could Paul have been answering a question concerning
bringing children into Nero’s Christian burning world? In that case it would be
better that a husband not touch his wife (as that was the only form of birth
control available at the time), but because of porneia, doing away with marriage or spouses altogether would not
have been a good idea. And Paul also made
it clear that the tribulation they were suffering was not going to be a good
excuse for divorce.
[16] Unqualified statement of absolute
equality of the sexes
[17] Divorce is permitted in these cases. If
a sister or a brother is not under bondage, then there is no hindrance to
marrying again if they so choose.
[18] The Corinthian Church met in the local Synagogue, which was likely filled with believing Jews
married to un-believing Jews. This was likely a widespread dilemma within the
early church.
[19] As it is impossible for a circumcised man
to become uncircumcised, we know that Paul is speaking generically to both
women and men. The reference, here, is to Judaism. He was telling Jews that
they did not have to become Gentiles to be saved.
[20] Paul was telling Gentiles that they did
not have to become Jews to be saved. In the Body of Christ there is no Jew or Gentile,
hence, one is not superior/inferior to the other, hence, the apostle told the
non-Jewish believers, “If you are not Jewish, do not attempt to become Jewish.”
He repeated this a few verses down.
[21] Paul has not changed the subject. He
has only made a slight detour. He is still dealing with marriage and he gets
back to it shortly. But he takes the opportunity to extrapolate the marriage
question—which must have been one of changing marital status, due to the
present distress attached to becoming a Christian in those perilous times—into
other areas of life. Is Paul saying no changes can be made in a person’s life
once they come to Christ? No, but he is warning against unnecessary, major life
changes simply because one has become a Christian. He is not condoning slavery, as some accuse him of. The penalty could be death
by crucifixion for runaway slaves—criminals of all sorts were crucified. Their
masters could kill them, or they could face the coliseum to be torn apart by
beasts. The Romans had a variety of cruel deaths to choose from. In light of
the brutal consequences, it is unlikely that Paul would encourage born-again
slaves to run away.
[22] Again, the apostle stresses that the
following advice, is his opinion.
[23] The entire chapter of 1 Corinthians
seven, must be interpreted within the context of the “present distress,” which
was the driving force that brought questions about marriage, reproduction, and
divorce to the forefront.
[24] Paul advises against marriage only, at this particular time.
[25] Brethren is a gender-neutral word
including both sisters and brothers in the Lord.
[26] Marital celibacy? Do not seek to bring
children into the world, at this time?
[27] Here, Paul makes a clear statement
about his belief in the imminent appearance of Christ, based on his revelation
of the resurrection and catching up (commonly known as the rapture) 1
Thessalonians 4:15-18 15: For this we say unto
you by the word of the Lord that we which are alive and remain unto the coming
of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep 16: For the Lord
himself shall descend from heaven with a shout with the voice of the archangel
and with the trump of God and the dead in Christ shall rise first 17:
Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the
clouds to meet the Lord in the air and so shall we ever be with the Lord 18:
Wherefore comfort one another with these words). His comments underscore his belief
that not only was life not going on as usual, but that it never would again, so
he advises Christians on attitudes and behavior appropriate for the last days. This
is reminiscent of the Lord God’s word to Baruch Jeremiah 45: 2:
Thus saith the LORD the God of Israel unto thee O Baruch 3: Thou didst
say Woe is me now for the LORD hath added grief to my sorrow I fainted in my
sighing and I find no rest 4: Thus shalt thou say unto him The LORD
saith thus Behold that which I have built will I break down and that which I
have planted I will pluck up even this whole land 5: And seekest thou
great things for thyself seek them not for behold I will bring evil upon all
flesh saith the LORD but thy life will I give unto thee for a prey in all
places whither thou goest
[28] Verses :32-34 are a clear statement of
equality of the sexes in both essence and function. If this was the only
passage in scripture that underscores the essential and functional equality of
the sexes, it would be enough, but it isn’t. There are many more. Yet, if it
was, it would not change the fact that this one passage, alone, refutes the
misogynistic, uniquely complementarian, claim that women and men are equal in
essence only, but not in function.
