Chapter 7
V1-2 It is quite clear that although on one hand it is admirable for a man not to marry and focus his life on serving Messiah, without the somewhat distractive burden of matrimony, such a state could prove detrimental for those who cannot contain their sexual desires. This is not to say that sexual desires are sinful, as these are a gift from Elohim unto mankind, provided these desires are expressed solely through the union of divine holy matrimony between one woman and one man. It is against Bible principles for some denominations to outlaw marriage altogether, and the dangers of this have manifested themselves in homosexuality, lesbianism and paedophilia as witnessed over the ages in the Roman Catholic church, amongst its priests and nuns and choirboys.
V3-4 Eunoia translated benevolence should in this instance be correctly translated conjugal duty. Once married, it must be understood between the husband and wife that they now belong to each other, and it is sinful to deny one another sexual gratification. It is no secret that some married people deny each other conjugal duties as a means of punishing each other, which unbeknown to them is scripturally impermissible. The word exousiazo translated power also means authority. A man has authority over his wife’s body as does she over his. Many cultures and pagan religions are male dominant in this regard, and give the woman no sexual rights, to the point of female circumcision which is a euphemism for genital mutilation, which is an insult and abomination to Elohim.
V5 Only agreement with each other to serve Elohim in fasting and prayer should be considered a reasonable excuse to deprive each other of conjugal rights, which not only is great evidence of saintly behaviour in the marriage and total subjection to Elohim, but also fosters self-discipline. However, because of our carnal nature, we must return back to our conjugal responsibilities, to prevent Satan and his demonic host working on our limited self-control to tempt us into adultery.
V6-9 Although these previous verses may not be necessarily found in the Tanakh/Old Testament, which was the only scriptural text available in the first century, Paul does give a disclaimer that these views given are by suggnome/concession and not by commandment. He was giving sound advice as moved by the Holy Spirit. He was not advocating asceticism. Being unmarried himself (possibly being a widower v8), he was able to dedicate his complete life to Messiah, without distraction, as this was his calling.
However not all are given that vocation, as gifts and responsibilities vary in the body of Messiah. Hence if one could not contain their sexual desires, it would be preferable for them to marry. In essence celibacy is the optimum state in which to serve YHVH Elohim, provided one is disciplined enough to overcome the desires of the flesh cf Matt 19:12. Celibacy is a gift from Elohim, giving the recipient an ability to resist sexual desires, which the majority of mankind cannot contain. Celibacy must never be imposed on the saints.
V10-11 Paul then addresses the married, reminding them of Yeshua’s commandment cf Matt 5:31-32
V12-13 Since the Corinthian ecclesia comprised of new converts, their spouses may have refused to accept Yeshua as their Messiah and remained in their pagan beliefs. Being polarised morally and ethically, this undoubtedly would have created strain within the marriage, prompting some to seek divorce. Paul by Holy Spirit word of knowledge and wisdom, did not condone such an eventuality. Besides, Yeshua clearly only gave fornication as a scripturally sound reason to divorce one another.
V14 cf Lev 19:19; Deut 22:9-11. The Hebrew word ‘qadash’ is horribly translated as defiled in Deut 22:9, when it actually means sanctified. The word used in the Septuagint LXX Bible is hagiasthe which also means sanctified. It is difficult to understand why mixing leads to sanctification, but ultimately Paul drew upon these laws of Torah to associate them with the sanctified child born of mixing a believer and non-believer. He did so to discourage divorce between these couples. In v14 the word unclean is the Greek akathartos which is better translated impure, and hagios translated holy is the same word for sanctified. Also, cf Mal 2:15-16. Paul was in no wise implying that the offspring of mixed marriages are more sanctified than that of two believers, but was simply pointing out that the best thing coming out of such an initially prohibited union was the offspring accepted by Elohim.
V15 If married to a non-believer who decides to chorizo/divorce, the believer is no longer in bondage, and is hence free without guilt on their hands cf Rom 7:1-3. It is important to note that if the believer were to leave the non-believer, this would be contrary to Torah. However, if the non-believer, who is already destined for damnation, were to refuse conversion and opted to leave, then the believer would be freed from this appendage of bondage. Additionally, by not forcing the non-believer to stay, the chances of contention would be eliminated and hence maintain peace in the believer’s life.
V16 cf 1 Pet 3:1. The reason Paul insisted on them remaining married, was in order for the believer to hopefully influence the non-believer to turn to Messiah, leading to their deliverance and getting them onto the path that leads to salvation. Paul truly personified being as cunning as serpents, in order to win souls for Messiah by any means possible cf Jm 5:19-20; Matt 10:16; 1 Cor 9:19-22.
V17 This verse begins a section that ends in verse 24, which must be read as a whole in order not to twist the context, as Torah detractors have greedily rushed to do. This section does not in any way relate to abolition of Torah, but as is stated in this verse is relating to a convert being admonished not to feel obliged to change their social or ethnic status.
V18 For anybody to believe that this verse relates to physical circumcision would reveal their foolishness, as it is impossible to stick back the foreskin of one who is circumcised as the first part of this verse would be erroneously interpreted as. Rather, the Jews were referred to as the circumcised, and the Gentiles as the uncircumcised cf Rom 2:26-3:1. Paul was basically saying that a Jewish convert to Christianity should not endeavour to become non-Jewish in ethnicity, as much as a Gentile convert should not feel obliged to become a proselyte Jew. We are new creations in Messiah not in ethnicity cf 2 Cor 5:17.
V19 is wrongly used as the coup de gras scripture for opponents of Torah, who claim that physical circumcision was abolished, and concomitantly all other commandments of Torah. This is a twisted form of interpretation which is neither in line with the preceding nor succeeding verses in the section of this epistle. Paul is actually DEFENDING Torah. The word BUT must not be missed, which in this context means ‘rather what matters is this’. When read correctly he clearly states that being a Jew/circumcision is nothing in the grand scheme of things, nor being a Gentile/uncircumcision BUT what matters is keeping the commandments of Elohim.
If one were to interpret this as meaning physically getting circumcised is nothing, then Paul would then have had to say that keeping the commandments of Elohim is also nothing. But he doesn’t say that, lest he be deemed a complete lunatic. He definitely would not have been able to state his case during his public trial in Acts 25:8. Context is key. It is true the Gentiles were uncircumcised physically. They were not however obliged to become physically circumcised as a means of being accepted into the body of Messiah. Abraham was justified by faith, just as we are initiated into Christendom by justification through faith in Messiah. Abraham was only circumcised 24 years later. Gentile Christians are given the liberty of learning and accepting the need for circumcision as they grow spiritually with time in their walk cf Gen 15:6; 17:24; Acts 15:1;5,19-21
V20 Paul, as is characteristic of his epistles, always ensures that no ambiguity is drawn upon his writings by reiterating his points. Again, he says remain in the ethnic group you are in and do not change it based on your conversion to Christianity, from either Judaism/the circumcision on the one hand, or paganism/the uncircumcision on the other. Once grafted into the congregation of Israel, the physically uncircumcised Gentile converts were admonished to attend the synagogue every Sabbath to learn the Torah given by Moses in order to grow in knowledge and with time discover that circumcision is indeed a commandment for one to be able to partake in the Passover feast, and was a covenant sign made with Abraham forever (Abraham was not an Israelite mind you.) cf Acts 15:19-21; Ex 12:48-49; Gen 17:9-14.
V21-22 Doulos translated servant is actually properly translated slave/bondservant. These verses are further proof that this section is dealing with one’s ethnic and social status not abolition of circumcision or Torah for that matter. There undoubtedly were divisions in the Corinthian church based on class. Paul took great pains to express that all are viewed as being on a level playing field in Yeshua’s economy, and all would be rewarded equitably at the bema seat judgement based on our performance on earth, which would be mutually exclusive with one’s social status. Unfortunately, this doctrine of the Nicolaitans still beleaguers churches of today cf Rev 2:6.
V23-24 cf Ex 12:44. Gentiles are indeed bought with the price of Yeshua’s blood unto the congregation of Israel to become slaves/bondservants of a new and better Master. If a slave on conversion to Christianity, Paul assured such to not care for it, as in Messiah they were His spiritual slaves as much as their converted earthly masters were.
V25 cf Psa 25:9 Paul was meek and shown the ways of Messiah in his judgement. Pathernos/virgins refers to maidens who have never had sexual intercourse, of marriageable age.
V26 Anthropos translated man is better translated person as it refers to either male or female. In this case it is in reference to female virgins. Paul was suggesting virgins remain that way because of the distress they were going through, of which we do not have further information, and will not bother speculating.
V27-28 Whatever state married or not, Paul advised remaining in that state despite the turbulent climate that they were living in at the time. The social upheaval must have caused much consternation for marriage to have been an issue concerning future events following the crisis. Those deciding to marry were warned of the struggles the crisis would bring. In parts of the world where Christianity is outlawed, the persecution perpetrated against a single saint, though terrible, is more bearable than that of one who is married.
If one were forced to renounce Yeshua as Messiah and Lord or face death and they were single, they probably would be readily available to die for Yeshua. However, if the torturer were to force a man to renounce Messiah or face execution of his wife or vice versa, the stakes would be much higher. The probability of one denying Messiah to save the life of their spouse would be much greater than a singleton who has nothing to lose. This would easily explain Paul’s exhortation.
V29-31 It is unclear if Paul was referring to the distressing times they were going through at the time, or whether he was referring to life in general. Regardless the message is not missed that our days on earth are but a vapour cf Ps 39:5-6, Jm 4:14. We are to focus on pleasing Yeshua to our greatest potential on our days on earth, if we are to prove to be good and faithful bondservants. If married, serve Yeshua as if unmarried i.e. as if you have no spousal distraction. If in mourning, serve as one not lamenting and rejoice in Messiah. If rejoicing in earthly things, serve Messiah as one not doing so. If heaping up earthly possessions, cease such focus of your attention, and rather heap up heavenly riches serving Messiah to the maximum cf Lk 6:21,25; 1 Jn 2:17; 1 Pet 1:24.
V32-34 Paul reinforces his point through repetition cf 1 Tim 5:5.
V35 Paul rapidly clarifies himself that he is not intending to promote asceticism, which would ensnare the congregation into false doctrine. Rather his intention is to give wise counsel regarding the benefits of a celibate life over a married life in relation to one’s potential devotion to Messiah. It is unfortunate that many single people of our age, instead of using their freedom to serve Yeshua to their greatest potential, actually spend more time in self-worship, a seemingly benign, yet malignant form of idolatry. In summary, it is not commanded of us to be celibate, but for those who are able to contain their sexual desires, it is euschemon/honourable, comely.
V36 On the other hand if a man and his virgin mate could not contain their sexual desires for one another, during that particular time of distress, then Paul advised that they marry one another to not allow Satan to tempt them into fornication. Marriage is a divinely beautiful union, through which we may legitimately be fruitful and multiply Gen 1:28. It is simply the distraction attached to it that Paul was referring to when full devotion to Messiah was to be brought to attention. However, it should not necessarily hamper one’s eternal rewards, as those who are married, and are able to overcome the challenges that come with matrimony, especially the increased attacks from the kingdom of Satan on all fronts i.e. husband, wife and children, are more than likely to prove to be more excellent Christians.
Hence why Paul in his epistles to Timothy recommended the ecclesia to be headed by men with one wife and well-disciplined children 1 Tim 3:1-7. For one to have established and conquered all manner of trial in tribulations that without fail bedevil a Christian marriage, proves their capability to understand all manner of trials that their congregants may face and be good fathers of the ecclesia, full of wisdom and good counsel 1 Cor 4:15. These are qualities that those never married lack, but which celibate widows or widowers (as Paul most likely was), certainly are not want of.
V37 Conversely a man who in that present distress could contain his sexual desires towards his virgin mate, was commended by Paul.
V38 Note that the word ‘her’ is in italics in the KJV, meaning it is not in the original manuscripts, but rather was inferred by the translators as to have clarified the text. However, they horribly got this wrong as it confuses and corrupts Paul’s train of thought commenced in v35 and decontextualizes this section of scripture. Paul never at any point in time mentioned fathers giving away their daughters, as inferred by the translators, which prompted them to add the word ‘her’. Rather Paul was strictly speaking of a man and his virgin lover throughout, who were to decide whether or not to get married. Paul reiterates his point that a man who decided to give in to his sexual desires and marry v36 was considered as having done well, but due to the gravity of that particular distress they were in, he that managed to exercise discipline and overcome these sexual urges and did not marry did better.
The quality of good versus better here was solely as a differentiation between one who could resist carnal lusts for the service of Messiah in those tough times, over the other who fell to these desires (though not considered sinful) and hence could not serve Messiah with as much liberty and alacrity. This is a lesson for us to consider when we face periods of persecution against Christians, which throughout the ages reared its ugly head, and shall undoubtedly reach its pinnacle in the great tribulation to come. In that dark period a scenario may arise whereby a married man may be given an almost impossible choice of either accepting the mark of the beast to save his wife’s life, or rejecting it leading to death of his loved one, or vice versa This would not be as traumatic a decision for an unmarried Christian who would have nothing to lose.
v39 -40 Having addressed the decisions men were to be faced with in v36 and 37, Paul closes by also sharing his sound, Holy Spirit guided judgement with widows faced with the option of being celibate and living out their days completely free to wholly serve Yeshua, or remarrying back into a life of less potential of maximum devotion to Messiah.