1 Corinthians 7:1-9

 In the previous passage, Paul laid down the firm rule: “flee fornication.” But that leads to the question of the alternatives--and for the Christian, there are only two alternatives: marriage and celibacy. And so, throughout chapter 7, Paul will directly address the issue of marriage, specifically looking at it as it relates to the problem of fornication.

Before we get into the passage itself, we need to mention something very briefly regarding the structure of 1 Corinthians. You may remember when we started this study, I said that this letter was written in response to problems within the Corinthian church. But it had two specific triggers. First, some members of the Corinthian church had visited Paul and given him an account of problems within the church, specifically the problem of sectarianism. But the church had also sent him a letter asking him some questions. We know that from verse 1 of this passage: “Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me.” Here, Paul is specifically answering a question that the church had asked him. Many people divide 1 Corinthians in half around this, with chapters 1-6 being Paul's response to the second-hand reports about the church and chapter 7 and following being his response to the questions in the church's letter. Of course, we don't have access to this letter and don't know exactly what the church had asked Paul. However, we can say definitively that one of the things they asked had to do with marriage, and chapter 7 is Paul's attempt to answer that question.

We can understand this passage best if we look at it like this. There are three states that a human can be in. First, there is the SINGLE state, a state in which a person is involved in no sort of sexual relations. This would include both those who have never entered into such relations and as well those who were once but are no longer, such as widows.

Second, we have the MARRIED state, where a man and woman live together. Though this isn't the main point of the passage, Paul's language here definitely implies that marriage must both be monogamous and heterosexual. 

Finally, there is the state of FORNICATION, a state in which people engage (or seek to engage) in any sort of sexual relations outside of marriage.

These are the three states possible; all people have to fit in. Now, as regards FORNICATION, Paul has already made his stance on it clear in the last chapter. It is something which must be fled, which must be avoided at any cost. It is not acceptable, not a real option for the Christian.

What about the SINGLE state? What can we say about it? Paul says it is a good state. This is verse 1. “It is good for a man not to touch a woman”--that is, to remain single. Paul repeats this point in verse 8, where he speaks directly to those who are single and tells them that abiding in their current state is good. The word translated 'good' in these two verses is kalos: Strong defines it: “beautiful, but chiefly (figuratively) good (literally or morally), i.e. valuable or virtuous (for appearance or use...):--... fair, good(-ly), honest, meet, well, worthy.” The point is that this single state is one that has a value, that is fitting or proper. 

This may seem obvious, something not worth the trouble to say. But in ancient days, there was some prejudice against being single. In Sparta, men who were unmarried were subject to legal penalties. The Jews said a man who did not marry had murdered his own descendants. The Talmud says: “It is forbidden a man to be without a wife,” (quoted in Clarke) and as evidence quotes: “And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” (Genesis 2:18)

In light of this context, it is important for Paul to make this clear. While it is generally true that it is not good for man to be alone, yet for certain men and in certain situations, it may be the best path. 

Paul himself is an excellent example of this. Paul counts himself fell within this SINGLE group. (There is a theory that Paul had at once time been married and that his wife had died or even had left him when he became a Christian. However, there is no hard evidence, and it doesn't make any real difference to the point.)

And Paul's life and ministry worked best because of the fact that he was single. As Barclay observes, “A married man could never have lived the life of journeying which Paul lived.” For the particular kind of ministry Paul had, the attachments and responsibilities of a family would have been a hindrance. There's an old saying: “He travels fastest who travels alone.” And the obvious rejoinder for most men is: who cares about traveling fast? But Paul did need to travel fast—Paul's journeyings not infrequently involved running for his life. For a man with Paul's mission, in a certain, limited sense, it was good for man to be alone.

What about the MARRIED state? We have already touched on this in passing, but the married state is also good. It was something God created and intended for man. “And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” (Genesis 2:22-24)

A few phrases from 1 Corinthians 7, taken on their own, might lead one to believe that Paul was opposed to marriage. But this is far from the truth. In 1 Timothy, Paul warns Timothy about false teachers that will rise and describes their heretical teaching as follows: “Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.” (1 Timothy 4:3) Marriage, like food, is something God created and we shouldn't treat God's gifts as something unholy. As Coventry Patmore pointed out, it is foolish to try to be more pure than God.

I mentioned that Paul was single. But it wasn't that there was some sort of moral barrier in the way of it. “Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?” (1 Corinthians 9:5) From this, we can gather that most of the other apostles were married; Paul (and perhaps Barnabas) were the exceptions in being single. And Paul seems to be saying that he could have gotten married; it wasn't that it was forbidden. He simply had chosen not to.

The married state was, in its way, a good one. Paul is saying it is wrong or something that the Christian must avoid. The main thing he has to say about marriage here is that if you are going to be married, then commit to it. The foundation of marriage is the idea of mutual commitment; Beacon titles these verses “The obligation of reciprocity.” Paul uses the idea that each partner in marriage belongs to the other and not to themselves. Solomon, writing in language that is literally more flowery, has the same idea: “My beloved is mine, and I am his: he feedeth among the lilies.” (Song of Solomon 2:16)

In marriage, there is a responsibility to your husband and wife—and becoming a Christian does not deny that responsibility. So far from trying to diminish or undercut marriage, Paul clearly supports the sanctity of marriage, even of the physical side of the married relationship.

So, we have these three states—the single state, the married state, and the state of fornication. One of these is absolutely wrong. But of the other two, both are good, both have their value, both are acceptable for the Christian, and either are preferable to living in fornication. That is the point Paul is making.

In verse 6, Paul says he speaks a permission, not a commandment. On this, Matthew Henry comments: “[Paul] did not lay it as an injunction upon every man to marry without exception. Any man might marry. No law of God prohibited the thing. But, on the other hand, no law bound a man to marry so that he sinned if he did not... It was a thing in which men, by the laws of God, were in a great measure left at liberty.”

And all of this may sound very obvious and self-evident, but I actually think this is very important.

In our society, the value of marriage has been somewhat eroded, but there is still a general emphasis on romantic or sexual relations of some kind. A good percentage of entertainment focuses on the idea of such relationships. There is an underlying assumption (sometimes explicit) that if a person is single, it must be because they can't attract a partner. 

And because of all of this, it is good to remember Paul's words here. The single life can be good; there is nothing wrong with it, and it can be used for God.

In verse 8, Paul speaks to people who are unmarried and says that it is good to remain in that state and seems to suggest that marriage should only be considered if they feel unable to live a single life morally. We will come back to this question when we get to the end of chapter 7, but at the very least, we can interpret it like this: you shouldn't get married just to get married. You shouldn't enter this state just because it's what other people do, or what people expect you to do, or because you're afraid of what people will think about you if you don't. As Paul says several times in 1 Corinthians, just because a thing is lawful doesn't mean it's a good idea.

But, conversely, in our society there is a growing reaction against marriage and even romance. 

Probably all of you know the story of Snow White; in the story, at the end, after Snow White has been poisoned and put into a coma, her prince comes along and saves her with the kiss of true love. There was a famous animated version of this story released in the 1930s by Walt Disney. There is now a new version of this film being made; in a press conference, the actress playing Snow White explained that this new version would be updated from the 1930s version; among other 'modern' changes, Snow White will no longer be dreaming of true love.

There is an attitude in the world today that looks down on the idea of romantic love and marriage as something outdated or demeaning—this is especially true in the extremes of feminism and whatever you call the equivalent of feminism for men.

And to all of this, we return to the Bible. Paul may not have a very flowery or romantic view of marriage here, but he saw it as a sacred obligation and something that was, for many people, the gift of God and the proper course of life.

In Roald Dahl's novel, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, there is a scene where the characters see a group of trained squirrels who work in the factory, cracking nuts. And whenever the squirrels get a nut, before they crack it open, they'll tap it first to determine whether the nut is good or rotten. If it's rotten, they throw it away, but if it's good, they crack it open to use the nuts in the candy.

And I know this is a strange comparison, but that's something like 1 Corinthians 6-7. We are examining these various states, and both marriage and singleness are good; both are sound. For particular people, one may be better than the other; under individual circumstances and special time periods, one may be advisable over the other—but in the end, both are good, and one can serve God in either. Only fornication is rotten and must be discarded as unworthy of the Christian.