Problems Plaguing a Local Church, Part 14
In our message, FAITHFUL WHERE YOU ARE AT (1 Cor. 7:1-16), after dealing with issues made known to him by Chloe’s household (1 Cor. 1:11f), Paul now begins to answer questions sent to him from the church in Corinth. The Greek phrase ‘peri de’ translated “Now concerning” in the NKJV is used throughout the rest of the book of 1 Corinthians as the Holy Spirit addresses specific challenges facing the local church in Corinth, and also churches in our day (1 Cor. 7:1, 25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1, 12, etc.).
The first issue the church “wrote to” Paul about was on the delicate subject of marriage (1 Cor. 7:1) and it was apparently partly in response to the apostle’s first letter to them (1 Cor. 5:9) as many within the church took exception to God’s teaching with a ‘why can’t we?’ attitude. But first before addressing that, Paul also answers a faction of believers in Corinth (1 Cor. 1:12) who had gone too far in their opposition to false Christian liberty (1 Cor. 6:12-20). Such conservative brothers, like their opponents, also used an expression from their day: “it is good for a man not to touch a woman”- to promote their position as they sought Paul’s endorsement to enact their policies. The idiom “not to touch a woman” means to not have sexual intercourse which they said all Christians should do “to be spiritual” including even married couples! (1 Cor. 2:15; 7:1). The argument may have went like this, “Paul, you are single and have no wife, so we should promote celibacy for all Christians.” Scripture shows us God does gift some to be celibate (some because they were born that way, some because they were made that way by people and some like Paul who are that way of their own volition for the kingdom of God’s sake) but it is a gifting and not something every person possesses (Matt. 19:11-12; 1 Cor. 7:7; 9:5; 12:11, etc.). People should never force celibacy upon others (like the Roman Catholic church did of its priests in the 11th century) because this gifting (as with all good gifts) is from God (1 Cor. 7:7; 9:5; 12:11, etc.).
Marriage is also a good gift from God with multiple purposes (Gen. 1:28; 2:18, etc.), and the type of abstinence these ascetic brothers were arguing for within marriage was totally wrong! (James 1:17; Prov. 18:22, etc.). Sex also is a good gift from God (James 1:16-17) to be used within the covenant of marriage that the Lord designed and made from the beginning of creation, and the Bible says here one of the purposes of marriage is to keep people from trying to satisfy sexual desires inappropriately (i.e. “because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife…” 1 Cor. 7:2a; Rom. 8:3-4; Heb. 13:4, etc.).
When asked about marriage, Paul, like Jesus, goes back to the beginning of creation holding up God’s ideal and design for this blessed union that He established (Matt. 19:4-6; Mark 10:6-9, etc.). That is, “each man [singular] is to have his own wife [singular] and each woman [singular] is to have her own husband [singular]” (1 Cor. 7:2b). The Holy Spirit bypasses the immoral polygamy much of the Old Testament saints committed, showing us clearly marriage is between one man married to one woman for life. Where we fall short of God’s standard, there is GRACE and forgiveness, but we are called to be FAITHFUL WHERE WE ARE AT devoting our lives continuously to Him (Eph. 2:8-9; Rom. 6:1; 1 Cor. 6:19-20; Rom. 8:1; 12:1-2, etc.).
Correcting these misguided brothers, the word “have” means ‘to have sexual relations with’ (1 Cor. 7:2). And we see “…the husband [is also to] render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband” (1 Cor. 7:3). That is, part of the responsibility of the marriage covenant is to meet various needs of the partner including sexual needs (1 Cor. 7:3 NET). Both the wife and husband, though serving in different roles, have equal value and rights in this union but out of love relinquish certain personal rights INCLUDING the exclusive rights to his or her own body! (1 Cor. 7:4). The word “authority” in verse 4 of the NKJV means to ‘fulfill the obligation’ or to ‘pay the debt.’ Love is sacrificial and part of the love of the marriage covenant is to “not deprive” or defraud the other person of emotional, spiritual, and even physical needs as this passage shows us (1 Cor. 7:5). Sexual love is a normal part of marriage which is holy, and husband and wife are not their own but belong exclusively to each other (1 Cor. 7:2-5; Heb. 13:4; Isa. 6:4, etc.). “Satan [the devil and enemy of our souls can] tempt” spouses when the needs of their partner are not met (1 Cor. 7:5), so Paul gives a “concession” here (1 Cor. 6:6) for a married couple to not have sex only if both partners:
- mutually “consent” to abstain for seeking a greater need before the Lord;
- if both partners have established “a time” period for this to occur; and
- if both partners “come together again” at the end of hat period of prayer/fasting seeking the Lord in a concentrated way (1 Cor. 7:5).
The Holy Spirit does “NOT… command” this through Paul as even the apostle realizes many are not gifted as he was with celibacy (1 Cor. 7:6-7, caps my emphasis), and the Lord made the good gift of sex to be used within the marriage covenant (Song of Solomon 2:6; 8:3; 1 Cor. 7:2; James 1:16-17, etc.). Even though Paul “wish[ed] that all men were” like him- and he wrote here to “unmarried” Christian people like himself who had not married and Christian “widows” and widowers who had lost their spouse to stay remain unmarried, he also acknowledges they may not be gifted in that way (1 Cor. 6:7b-9; Matt. 19:12). In such cases “if they cannot exercise self-control” they should then marry someone who is “in Christ” (i.e. a Christian) in God’s timing and way (Rom. 12:1-2; 1 Cor. 7:39; Rom. 7:2-3; 2 Cor. 6:14, etc.).
Paul then writes “to the married” citing Jesus’ standard on marriage quoting our “Lord” (1 Cor. 7:10-11; Mark 10:9-12; Luke 16:18, etc.). He references Jesus’ statements on marriage in the Gospel of Mark and Luke here because these passages, like the book of 1 Corinthians, were written primarily to Roman and Greek audiences where the wife had the authority to divorce also (Mark 10:9-12; Luke 16:18, etc.). In Jewish culture, which Matthew was written to, wives were not allowed to divorce- only husbands could divorce (Matt. 19:9). That is why also only the husband is mentioned in the Gospel of Matthew because it is to a Jewish-Israelite audience and the exception clauses in that gospel also must be understood that way with the audience to whom it was written to. Paul continues saying the “command” from Jesus here on marriage is “a wife is not to depart [divorce] her husband” because that is sin (i.e. Mark 10:5), but if she does do that then she has two options: #1 “remain unmarried” or “be reconciled to her husband” (1 Cor. 7:10-11). Once again, the Holy Spirit first addresses wives here because they could divorce in the Roman/Greek culture of Corinth, but we see the husband is likewise held to the same standard by our “Lord” Jesus’ command: “a husband is not to divorce his wife” (1 Cor. 7:11b). This was also the position of the church Fathers “for the first five centuries… all Greek and all Latin writers except one agree that remarriage following divorce for any reason is adulterous.” -Jesus and Divorce, by Dr. Gordon J. Wenham and Dr. William E. Heth. We see here the principle again that Christians are called to be FAITHFUL WHERE WE ARE AT whether it be married, divorced, or remarried knowing all past sin is under the blood of Christ and “There is… no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus” (Luke 16:18; Eph. 4:32; Rom. 8:1; 1 John 1:9, etc.).
A final question today is then asked by the Corinthian church to Paul about the case of a Christian who is married to a non-believer (1 Cor. 7:12-16). Surely, they can get out of that? Jewish law even required divorcing a person if they did not hold to the Jewish faith, but God tells us here if a Christian is married to a non-Christian, we are to stay FAITHFUL! (1 Cor. 7:12-13). How could this have happened? Maybe a Christian marries an unbeliever against God’s will (2 Cor. 6:14; 1 Cor. 7:39, etc.), or maybe someone hears the gospel and is saved but the husband or wife in that relationship continues to not believe… Either way, we are to be FAITHFUL WHERE WE ARE AT (Eph. 4:32; 1 Cor. 4:1-2, etc.). This is because a godly spouse can play a sanctifying role in their partner’s life and not only the life of their partner but the life of their children too! (1 Cor. 7:14). The statement, “the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband” does not mean the spouse will automatically be saved as verse 16 explains “how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband?…”, etc. (1 Cor. 7:14, 16). It means the deep love of God imaged through the believing spouse (or the Christian walking with God, Eph. 5:18) may bring the lost spouse and/or their children to repentance in Jesus Christ (Rom. 2:4; Eph. 4:32, etc.).
In verse 15 we also see God allows the believing spouse to let the unbelieving spouse depart if that person is unwilling to stay because we as Christians are “called to peace” (1 Cor. 7:15). We cannot make or force anyone else to do anything so if they sin, sometimes we cannot stop the consequences of those sins. We are “not under bondage in such cases” to try to force that person to remain against his or her will (1 Cor. 7:15). Dr. Wenham and Heth note, the only known “church Father” to promote remarriage in the first five hundred years of church history was Ambrosiaster (a Latin writer between 366 and 383AD) and he used not the ‘exception’ clause of Matthew’s gospel but this verse to say it was acceptable to remarry in the case of desertion. But that is not what God says here. As WyCliff correctly explains, “nothing is said about a second marriage for the believer; it is vain to put words into Paul’s mouth.” Paul also explains the use for the same word “departs” in verse 15 from 1 Cor. 7:11 where he clearly states how it is to be applied citing our “Lord” Jesus’ “command” and standard for marriage (1 Cor. 7:10-11). Furthermore, in Paul’s own writings, the ONLY exception the Holy Spirit provides through him for a married person to remarry is if one of the spouses has died (1 Cor. 7:39; Rom. 7:2-3, etc.). The Bible shows us “called to peace” in verse 15 does not mean called to remarriage (1 Cor. 7:10-11, 15; Luke 16:18; Mark 10:9-12; Gal. 5:22-23, etc.). Instead, we are called to be FAITHFUL WHERE WE ARE AT.
Marriage is a lifelong covenant established by God from the beginning of creation. Paul taught a very strict position on divorce and remarriage, but so did Jesus. Both recognized that God’s plan for marriage was a union that was binding and permanent for life (Matt. 19:6; Mark 10:9). “The early church view makes Jesus the great revolutionary who broke with Jewish consensus about marriage and divorce. The [modern] church view makes him merely a disciple of the conservative Pharisaical group Shammai” -The Divorce Myth, Dr. J. Carl Laney. The disciples would not have responded to Jesus’ statement on marriage saying, “If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry!” (Matt. 19:10) if Jesus was simply citing Shammai, nor would the church fathers have taken this position as well (1 Cor. 7:10-11; Luke 16:18; Mark 10:10-12; Rom. 7:2-3, etc.). So, if you are in a struggling marriage, God calls you to be FAITHFUL WHERE YOU ARE AT. If you are married to an unbeliever, God also calls you to be FAITHFUL WHERE YOU ARE AT. If you are divorced, God calls you to be FAITHFUL WHERE YOU ARE AT. And if you are remarried, you too are called to be FAITHFUL WHERE YOU ARE AT staying with your new spouse all the days of your life. Whatever your circumstance “There is… no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus,” and God can “restore… the years the locusts have eaten” (Joel 2:25-27) filling us with His peace now (1 John 1:9; Rom. 8:1; Matt. 19:26; Gal. 5:22-23, etc.).