This is one of the most thorough teachings on Christian marriage and singleness in the Bible. And it seems to be a response to something the Corinthians had said.

“Now concerning the things about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.””
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭7‬:‭1‬ ‭LEB‬‬

The line “It is good for a man not to touch a woman” seems to be a quotation from the letter written to Paul by the Corinthian Church. And chapter 7 is a response to that statement.

Ancient Koine Greek did not have any punctuation or even upper and lower case letters. There were no quotation marks.

😯 Whoa. And I thought it was hard to find a text with a chapter and verse address!

🤓 How do you tell where a sentence ends?

Translators can generally tell by the context and they put in punctuation to help us out. It’s not always easy to determine if there is a quotation happening. There are other passages in the Pauline Epistles that may or may not be quotations rather than directions from Paul. How one breaks up a sentence and where you put punctuation can dramatically affect the meaning.

For example:

The word for “touch” in verse one is a neutral word. It’s the word for when Jesus touched a blind man or the woman touched the hem of Jesus’ robe. It’s not a sexual term.

The Corinthians show their immaturity or perhaps even a snarky pettiness. Paul has already taught them about chastity (good old word, that) and the need to keep their bodies holy by practicing sexual abstinence until marriage and faithfulness within marriage. You could almost read their comment as something like “Well fine. If sex is going to send us to Hell then we’ll just treat women like they have kooties.”

🧔🏽‍♂️ Paul: That’s NOT what I said.

This is possibly the 3rd time Paul has quoted some statement from the Corinthians and then responded with a correction. I have highlighted the quotations and responses below:

““All things are lawful for me,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful for me,” but I will not be dominated by anything. “Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”—and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭6‬:‭12‬-‭13‬ ‭ESV‬‬

“Now concerning the things about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” But because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife and let each woman have her own husband.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭7‬:‭1‬-‭2‬ ‭LEB‬‬

Each of these instances has this pattern:

Quote – Conjunction – Rebuttal

In 6:12 the conjunction is alla.

The conjunction in 6:13 and in 7:2 is de.

Taken together, one way to understand 7:1-2 is that Paul is pushing back on their idealistic and generally unsustainable suggestion that they basically all become celibate. That’s not feasible for most people.

And here’s another problem. Some of these people were thinking that sexual intimacy was bad even within marriage.

👱🏼‍♀️ Hi Honey. Guess what. I think God is calling me to be more holy.

🧔🏻 Oh? Well, that’s great, Sweetheart.

👱🏼‍♀️ So I’m going to become a nun and starting tonight I’ll be sleeping in my own room.

🧔🏻 Uh… wait a minute! I didn’t sign up to marry a nun!

Hence Paul’s instruction in verses 3-4 that married couples are not to deprive one another of sexual intimacy. The one circumstance for abstinence within marriage is for a limited time of prayer and fasting. Otherwise, it creates an opening for Satan to bring temptation.

Paul is very balanced in his instruction. He doesn’t tell everyone to take a vow of celibacy. Nor does he insist that the only way to fulfill God’s highest calling is to be married.

From a perspective of ministry, singleness is much easier. As a single person in ministry I can attest to this. There have been many times on a Sunday that I have stayed late after church to listen to and pray with someone who needed it. I did not have to give a moment’s thought to a burning pot roast, hungry children, or a husband wondering what had become of me.

Paul is also writing in an atmosphere of persecution. And being married when there is persecution is not ideal. Read the memoirs of persecuted Christians. You’ll find that often the spouse of a missionary or underground church leader is a target. It’s risky to raise children when you are being run out of town by an angry mob and your business is burned to the ground. This is why Paul advises singleness to those who can manage it.

But he is very quick to point out that neither marriage nor singleness makes a person spiritually superior or inferior.

• Singleness – more difficult morally to remain sanctified, must abstain from sexual sin, easier to be completely focussed on Christ and ministry
• Marriage – easier to handle sexual desire and avoid sexual sin, cannot be completely focussed on Christ and ministry because of family responsibilities

While not directly stated, I’ve heard plenty of Christians infer that sanctification and real character growth are only possible through marriage. That’s nonsense. The Lord is the One Who sanctifies and causes us to grow, not marriage or singleness.

It’s unfair to compare marriage and singleness. That’s comparing apples to oranges. One is not easy and the other hard. That’s an overly simplistic, “grass-is-greener” view. Life is hard, no matter your marital status. In some situations, married people have an advantage. In other situations, singles have the advantage. We shouldn’t waste our time and emotions envying what we don’t have and thinking that “the other side” has all the fun while inflating our hardships and minimizing the blessings we have.

• Enjoy the perks of singleness when you’re single.
• Enjoy the perks of marriage when you’re married.

Sometimes easier said than done, but possible by the grace of God.

I’m no expert on the verses (10-15) concerning the grounds for separation, but the text seems to be saying that if you have a marriage where one person becomes a Christian and the other bails out and abandons the marriage, then the abandoned partner is well and truly free or “not bound.” Meaning, they divorce and are free to remarry. There is a spectrum of views within the Church on biblical grounds for divorce and additional views on whether or not remarriage is permissible. I’m not going to unpack all of them. I’d be here for a month.

You probably noticed that some of the advice in this chapter is not a command from God but counsel from a caring Apostle, (verses 6, 12, 25, 40). There is a tremendous freedom in Christ, and Paul – shockingly for a former Pharisee – is not getting nitpicky with a bunch of rules. He is giving wise and helpful counsel.

The command “a wife must not separate from her husband” he says is “from the Lord.” And it is a repetition of statements both in the Mosaic Law and the teaching of Jesus.

Here’s how I land:

I can’t find anywhere in the Bible that “We just couldn’t make it work” is sufficient grounds for breaking the vows made before God and men. Vows are serious business. If it’s not “working” get counseling, fast and pray, and put your all on the altar. Two people each trying to get their way won’t “make it work,” but two people wholly surrendered to Christ can.

Infidelity and abandonment (and I would also say abuse, which is a form of abandonment) seem to be biblical grounds for the dissolving of a marriage. I mean, God Himself is a divorcee. He divorced Israel because she was unfaithful to Him, (Isa. 50:1).

God hates divorce (Mal. 2:16). His plan is permanence in marriage. Remarriage after divorce has been long-debated and depends a lot on the circumstances. Divorce and remarriage are not God’s will, but they are also not unpardonable sins.

Whether married or single, widowed, or divorced, the best state to be in is a life of honoring God.