Sullivan church of Christ – Sullivan, MO
Date: October 2, 2005
MARRY – ONLY IN THE LORD (Part 3)
Ben Justice
[CONTINUATION OF LAST WEEK’S ARTICLE.]
===========================================
Again, I Cor. 7:39 states, “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.” The first part of the passage reflects God’s plan for marriage. It
is God’s will that marriage last a lifetime and that only death can dissolve the
marriage bond. Of course, the one exception is “fornication,” wherein only the
innocent party has the right to “put away” (divorce) the guilty party and marry
again (Matt. 19:9). But, God’s plan is “one man for one woman for life.” Paul
penned in Rom. 7:2-3, “For the woman which hath a husband is bound by the law to
her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the
law of her husband. (3) So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to
another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free
from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.”
It is our aim to concentrate upon the last part of I Cor. 7:39 — “she is at liberty to
be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.” There are two views as to the
meaning of the phrase “only in the Lord.”
1.) Marry a Christian
2.) Marry in harmony with the Lord's will. In other words, she must marry an
eligible man, that is, one who has the right to marry, but he doesn’t have to be a
Christian.
Therefore, either “only in the Lord” means a Christian or it does not. Gary
Workman writes, “From the earliest centuries the statement was understood to
mean that a widow may remarry ‘only a Christian.’ In more recent times, though,
a case has been made that the words mean she may remarry ‘only in harmony
with the Lord’s will.’ This is usually explained to mean that she must not marry
an unscriptural divorced man” (As quoted by Bruce R. Curd, Marry Only In
The Lord, Pg. 118-119).
It is this writer’s studied conviction that the phrase “only in the Lord” means a
“Christian.” Of course, there must be evidence for this view. The question is,
“How is this phrase ‘in the Lord’ used throughout the NT? Let’s see.
The expression “in the Lord” is equivalent with “in Christ” or “in Christ Jesus.”
To be “in the Lord,” “in Christ,” or “in Christ Jesus” is to be a Christian. The NT
makes this abundantly clear. Rev. 14:13 states, “. . . Blessed are the dead which
die in the Lord from henceforth: . . .” Those who die “in the Lord” are obviously
Christians. Rom. 16:11 says, “Salute Herodian my kinsmen. Greet them that be of
the household of Narcisus, which are in the Lord.” In other words, “which are
Christians.” 2 Cor. 12:2 says, “I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, . .
.” “In Christ” obviously means a “Christian.”
If we simply take the usage of the phrase “in the Lord” (or its equivalent), as is
used throughout the NT and apply proper hermeneutics (sound rules for
interpretation) to I Cor. 7:39, then logic demands that “in the Lord” means a
“Christian.”
The second view on I Cor. 7:39, which says “in the Lord” means “marry in
harmony with the Lord’s will,” is allegedly based upon the usage of the phrase
“in the Lord” in Eph. 6:1 and Col. 3:18, 20. Many believe that the phrase “in the
Lord,” as used in these passages does not refer to a Christian. So, their
argument is why should it mean a Christian in I Cor. 7:39, if it doesn’t in Eph. 6:
1 and Col. 3:18, 20. Guy N. Woods writes,
It is not likely that any other view of this phrase would have been advanced but
for an alleged difficulty involving it in Ephesians 6:1, where children are
instructed to “obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right.” Those who do not
believe Paul enjoins a Christian widow to marry only a Christian in I Corinthians
7:39 feel that in Ephesians 6:1, the phrase “in the Lord,” does not designate a
Christian, but means only that the actions of the verb “obey,” is in the sphere of
the Lord’s teaching. That is, children are to be obedient to their parents as
Jesus taught” (Guy N. Woods, Questions & Answers — Open Forum, Freed-
Hardeman College Lectures — Vol. 1, Pg. 93).
Eph. 6:1 states, “Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.”
Col. 3:18 states, “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in
the Lord.”
Col. 3:20 states, “Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well-pleasing
unto the Lord.”
While many take the phrase “in the Lord” in the above passages to mean that
whatever can be done without violating the law of God, that do, I ask, “Why
construe the phrase ‘in the Lord’ in the above passages in any other sense other
than its obvious sense?” It is my studied conviction that the phrase “in the
Lord” in the above passages means a “Christian.” The word “in,” which forms the
first word in this phrase is a preposition. It is from the Greek preposition en.
Thayer gives an excellent discussion on this preposition in his lexicon:
. . . of that in which any person or thing is inherently fixed, implanted, or with
which it is intimately connected . . . of a person to whom another is wholly
joined and to whose power and influence he is subject, so that the former may
be likened to the place in which the latter lives and moves. So used in the
writings of Paul and of John particularly of intimate relationship with God or
with Christ, and for the most part involving contextually the idea of power and
blessing resulting from that union; . . . Since such union with Christ is the basis
on which actions and virtues rest, the expression is equivalent in meaning to by
virtue or spiritual fellowship or union with Christ; . . .
Thayer then lists Eph. 6:1 and Col. 3:18 (J.H. Thayer, The New Thayer’s Greek-
English Lexicon, # 1722, Pg. 211, definition # 6).
Very simply, this preposition refers to “location or place.”
In Eph. 6:1, Paul was speaking to children. These children were old enough to
have obeyed the gospel. Also, the parents were Christians. We know this
because Paul wrote “to the faithful in Christ Jesus” (Eph. 1:1). However, these
children were still to be obedient to their parents. Why? Because they are “in
the Lord.” Paul then adds, “for this right.” In other words, “this is right,”
because you are a Christian. In Wuest’s Commentary, he says, “It defines the
quality of the obedience by defining the sphere within which it is to move — a
Christian obedience fulfilled in communion with Christ” (Kenneth S. Wuest,
Wuest’s Word Studies — Ephesians, Pg. 136). Lenski says, “This evidently
implies that those who are thus to obey ‘in the Lord’ have been placed in
communion with him as his very own; and this means baptism” (R.C.H. Lenski,
Commentary on the New Testament — Ephesians, Pg. 646). G.C. Brewer
wrote, “For children to obey their parents ‘in the Lord’ does mean, I think, that it
is a part of their Christian duty to obey your parents. Because you are ‘in the
Lord’ obey your parents” (As quoted by Guy N. Woods, Ibid.).
In Col. 3:18, wives are to submit themselves to their own husbands, and Paul
adds, “as it is fit in the Lord.” In other words, it was fit because they were
“Christians.”
Col. 3:20 again says, “Children, obey your parents in all things: for this well pleasing
unto the Lord.” Notice the KJV wording — “unto the Lord.” The American
Standard Version of 1901 says, “in the Lord,” which, I believe, is the better
rendition. Children were to obey their parents. Paul then gives the reason: for
this is well pleasing unto (in) the Lord.” The New English Bible translates it like
this: “Children, obey your parents in everything, for that is pleasing to God and is the
Christian way.”
Bruce Curd makes this excellent statement:
. . . it should be noted that there are 27 occurrences of the term “in the Lord” in
the New Testament all of which indicate our relationship to Christ . . . there are
dozens of other passages which use the expressions “in Christ,” “In the Lord
Jesus Christ,” and “in Christ Jesus,” which obviously means that those under
consideration were Christians (Bruce Curd, Ibid., Pg. 17).
[MORE NEXT WEEK]