Sullivan church of Christ – Sullivan, MO 63080
Date: September 25, 2005
MARRY – ONLY IN THE LORD -- # 2
(An Examination of I Cor. 7:39)
Ben Justice
[CONTINUATION OF LAST WEEK’S ARTICLE. It is our intention to
examine I Cor. 7:39. In order to appreciate this passage, context must be
given consideration. We shall continue to examine the context that leads
up to I Cor. 7:39.]
======================================================================
As Paul begins v. 12-16, he deals with specific cases within God’s General Law of
Marriage. He begins v. 12 by saying, “But to the rest speak I, not the Lord.” “To the
rest” refers to the rest of the questions that the Corinthians had asked Paul. In
v. 10-11, the Lord did indeed speak about the General Law of Marriage (Matt. 19:
6). However, in v. 12-16, the Lord did not specifically address the specific cases
that the Corinthians had inquired about. Again, let us emphasize that v. 10-11
discuss God’s General Law on Marriage, but v. 12-16 addresses specific
situations relating to the General Law. The Specific Cases would be:
1.) What if a Christian man is married to a non-Christian wife — v. 12?
2.) What if a Christian woman is married to a non-Christian husband — v. 13?
Roy Deaver summed it up as follows:
Paul states that in giving the answer to these specific questions he (as an
inspired apostle) is speaking — not the Lord. This simply means that though the
Lord — in His personal ministry — DID set forth the marriage law referred to in
verses 10-11, He (the Lord) did not deal with the application of that law to the
specific cases which the Corinthian brethren had asked about (Roy Deaver, “A
Correct View of I Corinthians 7,” The Home As God Would Have It —
Thomas B. Warren & Garland Elkins, Editors, Pg. 207).
Paul wrote in v. 12, “If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased
to dwell with him, let him not put her away.” “Brother” obviously means
“Christian.” Here is a Christian man (or husband). “Believeth not” means “not a
Christian.” Here is a non-Christian woman (or wife). This is a specific case of a
married man married to a non-Christian woman. Paul commanded that if the
non-Christian wife “be pleased to dwell with him (the Christian man), let him
not put her away” (not divorce, but “leave” — ASV). Again, this echoes the Lord’s
statement in Matt. 19:6.
In v. 13, Paul gave the same instructions, but this time the situation is
reversed. You now have a Christian woman who is married to a non-Christian
man. Connect the word “leave” in v. 13 to the phrase “put away” in v. 11, 12.
These words are from the same Greek word.
The reason for the instructions given in v. 12-13 is found in v. 14. The word “for”
that begins v. 14 introduces an explanation or reason why neither is to leave.
Paul said, “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife.” This corresponds
to v. 13 — “And the woman which hath a husband that believeth not.” If the
Christian woman does not leave her non-Christian husband, as per Paul’s
command, then the non-Christian husband is “sanctified.” The word “sanctified”
means, “to make, render, or declare sacred or holy, consecrate” (J.H. Thayer,
The New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon, # 37, Pg. 6). This does not mean
that the non-Christian man is or will be saved just because he is married to a
Christian woman. In the context, Paul is speaking of the marriage relationship.
When both parties remain committed to each other, although one may be a non-
Christian, it is still a holy and pure union in the eyes of God, provided, of
course, both are eligible to be married. In other words, God recognizes the
marriage as legitimate. It should not be broken up in any way. Some of these
Christian women who were indeed married to non-Christian men might have
gotten the idea that they would be polluted or contaminated or defiled by being
married to a non-Christian. However, the marriage is good and is not to be
broken up.
Paul says next, “and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband.” This
corresponds with v. 13 — “If any brother hath a wife that believeth not.” Again,
the same things would apply in this situation.
Paul then notes, “else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.” If it is
the case that there needs to be a separation, then your children are “unclean,”
that is “impure” or “unholy.” They would be regarded as “illegitimate.” However,
Paul says, “but now are they holy.” This is further proof why there is to be no
separation.
We must address this question at this point. Why would the Corinthians' ask
these questions to begin with? It is clear that the Corinthians had asked about
their religiously mixed marriages, that is, where one was a Christian and the
other was not. It is obviously implied that they wanted to know whether or not
the marriage is to be dissolved when one party is a Christian and the other is
not. Paul commanded the Christian not to leave. Evidently, they thought it best
to leave, hence this question posed to Paul. If these questions were asked,
then it is only logical to conclude that these marriages had been formed before
they were converted to Christ. Hence, when the gospel of Christ was preached
in Corinth, either the husband or the wife became a Christian, while the other
spouse remained a non-Christian. The sense of their question was, “Paul, what
should we do about this situation? Shall we leave?” Again, Paul’s answer was,
“No.” These were not marriages formed while one spouse was a Christian.
Practically all Bible scholars are in agreement that both parties were heathen
when the gospel was first preached to them. In fact, this is the only thing that
makes sense, if language means anything at all. Nichols and Whiteside make
these excellent remarks:
Paul’s injunction in I Corinthians 7:12-15 that a believer should not forsake an
unbelieving companion is thought by some to justify mixed marriage; but the
exact reverse is true, else why should the believer think that he should leave
the unbeliever? Two unbelievers marry, and later one becomes a Christian. The
thought would naturally come to the Christian under such circumstances, “if it
is wrong for the Christian to marry an unbeliever, is it right to live with an
unbeliever?” With any other view, how could such a question arise?” (As quoted
by Bruce R. Curd, Marry Only In The Lord, Pg. 65-66).
Wayne Jackson wrote,
I Corinthians 7:12, 13 (obviously written to regulate a situation where one party
of a marriage has obeyed the gospel) raises an interesting question. Since
chapter 7:1ff answers questions submitted to Paul, it seems obvious that those
Christians married to unbelievers had somehow gotten the mistaken notion that
they would need to separate from their mates and thus inquired of the apostle
regarding the matter. Does it not seem reasonable that they had heard teaching
against marrying non-Christians and hence wondered if their own unions were in
jeopardy and thus were prompted to write Paul about it? If it was a settled fact
in the early church that there was nothing wrong with marrying a non-Christian,
one wonders why this obvious concern ever developed (As quoted by Bruce R.
Curd, Ibid., Pg. 66).
Bruce Curd stated,
The second question asked by the Corinthians would never have been asked if
strong warnings against the contracting of mixed marriages had not been issued
by inspired men to the churches (Ibid.).
Without going into explanation, it is my firm conviction that the inspired
command given in 2 Cor. 6:14, “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers:
. . .” applies to marriage.
Doesn’t it make complete sense that a non-Christian who becomes a Christian,
and their spouse does not, would wonder what effect their marriage (the closest
of all human ties) would have upon their Christian walk? Surely, this has come
to come to the mind of the spiritually minded person. Indeed, it did to some of
the Corinthians. Hence, they asked Paul about this situation. But why ask
such a question if they were already Christians when they married a child of the
devil. Such a question would make absolutely no sense at all.
It is at this point that we wish to skip ahead to v. 39. Again, Paul wrote, “The
wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be
dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.” Only
death can dissolve the marriage bond. Paul certainly contemplated a time when
non-Christian husbands married to Christian wives would die. This would make
the Christian wives widows. Paul instructs them that if they desire to marry
again that they marry whomever they will. However, this qualifying statement is
given — “only in the Lord.” It is my firm studied conviction that this phrase
means “a Christian.” [MORE NEXT WEEK]