LET THE UNMARRIED MARRY
Cecil Hook

"Dear Paul: In the new relationship into which you have led us women, we readily repudiate the local religion served by prostitute priestesses in the temple of Venus. We recognize the degrading nature of such sexual experiences for both women and men, but how are we to look upon marriage and conjugality now? May we continue in these relationships while belonging to Christ?"

Some such questions were asked the apostle by the Corinthians. If we had the exact questions, we might better understand his answers. I propose the above questions in view of Paul's preface to his answers, that preface being in 1 Corinthians 6. Commonly, a gap is left between the sixth and seventh chapters, but let us consider the possibility that Paul is laying some groundwork in the sixth chapter for his answers in the seventh.

In verse 9, Paul lists sexual sins with idolatry, no doubt, because they were very much a part of the religion in their community with their temple supported by a thousand prostitute priestesses. Although some Corinthians might have argued that God made both our passionate sexual nature and also the means of satisfying it, hence "all things are lawful," Paul countered that "The body is not meant for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body." They were now members of Christ who must not make themselves members of a prostitute, lest they become one with her and the temple that sponsored her. They had become one with Christ. Never could the Christian female be a priestess of their temple nor could the male become joined with the prostitute and what her temple represented for they themselves had become temples - temples in which the Spirit of God lives. To become one with a prostitute would be a sin against one's own body which had become a temple of God.

Could sexual expression have any place in these new temples? Yes, for God intended that each should have a conjugal partner. One partner was not to refuse the other on the grounds that he or she was now joined to Christ and could not rightly become joined to another person.

The unmarried, having no rightful sexual fulfillment, tend to be aflame with passion. God recognizes this, and he does not deny any person the right of a companion. So, Paul says that the unmarried may marry. But who are these unmarried ones? There are three kinds: (1) those who have never been married, (2) widows, and (3) divorced persons (Compare the use of agamos, unmarried/single, in 7:8-11). Now, wait a minute, Paul! You don't mean that divorced people may remarry; you must mean "let them marry, except for the divorced!" Paul makes no exceptions. Let the unmarried marry.

Do not verses 10-11 deny what I have just written about verses 8-9? No. We must go back to the context and the questions that were asked. This convert to Christ feels that, since she is joined to Christ as one with him, even as a sexual partner in a symbolic sense, she cannot be joined conjugally with her husband also. She feels strongly that she should refuse him sexually or even separate from him. Paul discourages that but, if she should separate on that grounds, she must not use it as a pious excuse to rid herself of her husband in order to take another. To prove her sincerity of purpose she must remain single or be reconciled to her husband.

Paul's instructions here are not concerning failed marriages, abused partners, desertions, or the tragic mistakes of young people in which cases the unity of marriage is already destroyed except for the legal divorcement. The destroying of the union of two whom God joined together is the sin, not the remarriage.

Paul assured them of the sanctity of their marriages even though they might be joined to unbelievers. Sexual relations with a spouse were not immoral or idolatrous even though the spouse might be a pagan. If the unbelieving partner, in retaliation to the companion's acceptance of Christ, chose to separate from the Christian, the brother or sister was not bound. That would put such a disciple back into the unmarried state covered in verses 8-9 where he or she would be free to marry again.

In this teaching, Paul does not call upon anyone to divorce a mate. They were to remain in the state in which they were called. They did not have to try to change their circumcised/uncircumcised, slave/free, or married/ unmarried state in order to be joined with Christ as a temple of the Spirit. "So, brethren, in whatever state each was called, there let him remain with God." None were living in adultery." To our surprise, Paul does not even mention adultery in his teaching about marriage and divorce in this context.

Jesus' teachings about marriage, divorce, and remarriage were explanations of the regulations of the Law of Moses. Although the apostolic teachings on the subject might seem to be at odds with those of Jesus, that is not really true. A discussion of this would take much more time and space. I purloined some of my thoughts from tapes of classes taught by Oliver Howard in the Pepperdine Lectures in 1986. For a fuller discussion of Jesus' teachings I would have to plagiarize too evidently; so, I refer you to that source for many challenging and exciting concepts on the subject. — 1350 Huisache, New Braunfels, TX 78130