When Paul Got Real About Marriage and Singleness
What’s 1 Corinthians 7 about?
Paul tackles the messy, complicated questions about marriage, divorce, and singleness that the Corinthians threw at him. It’s raw, practical, and surprisingly progressive for its time – showing us that even in the first century, people were wrestling with the same relationship questions we face today.
The Full Context
Picture this: Paul’s sitting in Ephesus around 55 AD, holding a letter from the Corinthian church that’s basically a theological advice column. “Dear Paul, we’ve got some questions…” And boy, did they ever. The Corinthians were dealing with sexual immorality running rampant in their city (think ancient Vegas meets Silicon Valley), and some believers had swung so far in the opposite direction they were questioning whether married couples should even have sex. Others wondered if new converts should divorce their unbelieving spouses, and still others were debating whether singleness was somehow more spiritual than marriage.
Paul’s response in chapter 7 becomes one of the most comprehensive treatments of marriage and singleness in the New Testament. He’s writing to a church caught between two extremes – the sexually permissive Greco-Roman culture around them and an emerging ascetic movement within their own ranks. What makes this passage particularly fascinating is how Paul balances divine principles with pastoral sensitivity, giving both commands and personal opinions while clearly distinguishing between the two. This isn’t theological theory; it’s pastoral care for real people facing real relational dilemmas.
What the Ancient Words Tell Us
When Paul opens with “Now concerning the matters about which you wrote” (verse 1), he’s literally responding to their letter. The Greek phrase peri de signals he’s moving to a new topic they specifically asked about. But then he drops what sounds like a bombshell: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.”
Grammar Geeks
The phrase Paul uses here – kalon anthropo gynaikos me haptesthai – literally means “good for a man not to touch a woman.” But haptesthai in this context isn’t about casual contact; it’s a euphemism for sexual intimacy, the same word used when Jesus said “don’t cling to me” after the resurrection.
Here’s where it gets interesting: many scholars believe Paul is actually quoting the Corinthians’ letter back to them. It’s like he’s saying, “You wrote that it’s good for a man not to touch a woman, but let me tell you what I think about that…” This reading makes much more sense of what follows, where Paul immediately pivots to affirming the goodness of sexual intimacy within marriage.
The word Paul uses for sexual relations in marriage – opheilete in verse 3 – is fascinating. It means “debt” or “what is owed.” But before we get uncomfortable with that business-like language, understand that in the ancient world, this was actually revolutionary. Paul says both husband and wife owe each other sexual intimacy equally. In a culture where women were often viewed as property, Paul presents mutuality that was centuries ahead of its time.
What Would the Original Audience Have Heard?
To the Corinthians, Paul’s teaching would have sounded absolutely radical. In their world, marriage was primarily about producing legitimate heirs and managing property. The idea that sexual intimacy should be mutual, regular, and oriented toward the other person’s needs? Unheard of.
When Paul talks about not depriving one another except for prayer (1 Corinthians 7:5), he’s using apostereite, which means “to rob” or “defraud.” The same word is used in Mark 10:19 as one of the commandments – “do not defraud.” Paul is saying that withholding intimacy from your spouse is actually a form of theft.
Did You Know?
Roman law gave husbands almost unlimited sexual freedom while expecting absolute fidelity from wives. Paul’s insistence on mutual obligation and equal sexual rights would have been shocking – especially to the men reading his letter.
The section on mixed marriages (1 Corinthians 7:12-16) addresses something Jesus never faced directly: what happens when one spouse becomes a Christian and the other doesn’t? Paul’s answer reveals his pastoral heart. The unbelieving spouse is “sanctified” (hegiastai) through the believing partner – not saved, but set apart, made holy in the sense of being brought within the sphere of God’s special concern.
Wrestling with the Text
But here’s where things get complicated. Paul seems to prefer singleness (1 Corinthians 7:7-8), calling it a “gift” (charisma) – the same word used for spiritual gifts. Yet he also affirms marriage as good and necessary for most people. How do we square this?
The key is in understanding Paul’s eschatological urgency. When he talks about “the present distress” in verse 26, he’s not anti-marriage; he’s pro-mission. Paul sees the time as short (1 Corinthians 7:29) and wants believers free to serve without the divided attention that comes with marriage.
“Paul isn’t creating a hierarchy of holiness – he’s recognizing that different people have different callings, and both marriage and singleness can serve God’s kingdom purposes.”
The most challenging part might be Paul’s instructions to wives not to separate from their husbands (1 Corinthians 7:10-11). But notice the nuance: if separation does occur, Paul gives options – reconciliation or remaining unmarried. He’s dealing with the messy reality that sometimes marriages break down, while still upholding the ideal of permanence.
How This Changes Everything
What Paul does in chapter 7 is revolutionary: he treats marriage and singleness as equally valid callings, both with their own gifts and challenges. In a culture that saw unmarried people as incomplete or suspicious, Paul says singleness can be a divine calling. In a culture that often treated marriage as purely functional, Paul elevates it as a partnership of mutual love and service.
Wait, That’s Strange…
Paul gives more space to discussing singleness than marriage in this chapter – unusual for someone addressing a married community. It suggests the Corinthians were seriously questioning whether Christians should marry at all.
The phrase “each has his own gift from God” (1 Corinthians 7:7) uses charisma, suggesting that both the capacity for celibate service and the capacity for faithful marriage are supernatural enablements. Neither is superior; both require divine grace.
Paul’s repeated phrase “I say this” versus “the Lord says” shows us something beautiful about apostolic authority. Paul distinguishes between direct commands from Jesus and his own Spirit-led pastoral judgment. He’s confident in his guidance but humble about its source – a model for church leadership today.
Key Takeaway
Whether married or single, our relationship status isn’t our identity – our calling to love God and serve others is. Paul shows us that both marriage and singleness can be gifts that free us to live fully for Christ’s kingdom.
Further Reading
Internal Links:
External Scholarly Resources:
- The First Epistle to the Corinthians by Gordon Fee
- Paul and the Single Life by Barry Danylak
- Marriage and Celibacy in 1 Corinthians 7 by Will Deming
Tags
1 Corinthians 7:1, 1 Corinthians 7:7, 1 Corinthians 7:14, 1 Corinthians 7:29, Marriage, Singleness, Sexual ethics, Mixed marriage, Divorce, Celibacy, Spiritual gifts, Pastoral care, Eschatology, Corinthian church, Paul’s ministry
