To Have AND to Hold

Well, for all of you who are
wondering, this is the kind of Sunday where I answer the question. Do you really think he’ll preach
that passage, too? Yes, I will. We come to First
Corinthians chapter seven, the chapter on all things pertaining
to marriage. And the apostle has many, many
things left to say to the Corinthian church. In chapter seven, we
come really to the third major section of this epistle. Following
his formal greeting in the first nine verses of chapter one, Paul’s
lengthy address about division in the church followed in chapters
one through four. Last week we wrapped up the second
major section, chapters five and six, which dealt with moral
failure in the church. Not only the moral failure of
an individual, but the moral failure of the church to deal
with his sin. But Paul’s purposes in this letter
are many. His address to this church is
dynamic. tackling not only things about
which he is greatly concerned, but also as a good shepherd,
responding to many of their questions and concerns as well. This is
what we have come to as we turn to chapter seven, a shepherd’s
caring reply to genuine questions by his flock. In order to navigate
through their many questions, Paul uses a simple literary device,
now concerning. The section dealing with problems
in the church is not so much vile sin like he discussed in
chapters 5 and 6, but really misunderstandings,
uncertainties about Christianity and how they should carry themselves
as Christians, having found themselves converted by God’s grace. We’ve
already learned back in chapter five, verses nine through 11,
that Paul had previously written to the Corinthians in a letter
that no longer exists, But we also have a strong indication
here that the Corinthians had also written to Paul. Perhaps
delivered to him by the same delegation that brought him news
of the division in the church in Corinth. And we can almost
picture the apostle, can’t we? With pen in hand and their letter
on the desk with its list of questions laid out in front of
him. as he writes. And in order to transition from
subject to subject, he uses, as I said, this literary device,
now concerning. He not only uses that phrase
here, but again and again throughout the letter. First Corinthians
7.1, he just says, now concerning the things about which you wrote.
And he acknowledges that he has those things in mind, if not
right directly in front of him. It’s a general allusion to the
questions that they asked. In 1 Corinthians 7.25, he uses
this device again, now concerning virgins. A question posed to
him about unmarried daughters. In 1 Corinthians 8.1, now concerning
things sacrificed to idols. There was meat sold in the marketplace
after being offered to a false god, and there was quite a conundrum. Can we eat the meat or not? In
1 Corinthians 12, 1, now concerning spiritual gifts, questions about
the use and the abuse, misuse, of their God-given spiritual
gifts. And then once again in 16, 1,
now concerning the collection for the saints. There was a love
offering being taken for the church in Jerusalem by the Gentile
churches. And they were going to bring
this gift to Jerusalem, as you probably already know. And so
it’s a recurring feature in this epistle. And here in chapter
seven, its first use, it serves to open up a lengthy discussion
from chapter one chapter 7 verse 1 all the way down through chapter
14 verse 40, a section which Paul addresses the problems in
the Corinthian church. Here in these eight chapters,
Paul will not only address marriage here in chapter 7, but other
bewildering topics such as food offered to idols, principles
of stewardship, chapter 9, idolatry in chapter 10, Even head coverings in Chapter
11, spiritual gifts in Chapter 12 through 14. There were problems
troubling this undeveloped church. But at the top of Paul’s list
were the numerous uncertainties about the institution of marriage.
We don’t possess the letter that they wrote to Paul. But we can
conjecture that some of their questions, some of the questions
that they may have been mulling over may have been along these
lines. Is it a sin to marry? Is singleness better in God’s
eyes? Now that I’m a Christian, should
I refrain from intimacy even with my spouse? Now that I’ve
come to Christ, must I remain married to my unbelieving wife? Or, related to that, may I marry
my unbelieving boyfriend? Is divorce wrong? What happens
if my spouse abandons me? Am I wrong to desire a wife? Or for women, am I wrong to desire
a husband? How eager may I be as a father
to marry off my daughter? Those are just some of the possible
questions that seem to have been posed to Paul. To which he’s
responding in chapter seven. Well, these are the kinds of
questions that clearly form the basis for Paul’s address to them.
If you would. I’m not going to read the entirety
of the chapter, we’ll save that lengthy latter portion for another
day, but I do want to read the good portion of it through verse
24. Chapter 7, verse 1, now concerning the things about which you wrote,
it is good for a man not to touch a woman, but because of immoralities,
each man is to have his own wife and each woman is to have her
own husband. The husband must fulfill his
duty to his wife and likewise also the wife to her husband.
The wife does not have authority over her own body but the husband
does. And likewise also the husband does not have authority over
his own body but the wife does. And likewise, pardon me, stop
depriving one another except by agreement for a time so that
you may devote yourselves to prayer. and come together again
so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. But this I say by way of concession,
not of a command, yet I wish that all men were even as I myself
am. However, each man has his own
gift from God, one in this manner and another in that. But I say
to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them to remain
even as I. But if they do not have self-control,
let them marry. For it is better to marry than
to burn with passion. But to the unmarried I give instructions,
not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband,
but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled
to her husband, and that the husband should not divorce his
wife. But to the rest, I say, not the
Lord, I say, not the Lord, that if any brother has a wife who
is an unbeliever and she consents to live with him, he must not
divorce her. And a woman who has an unbelieving
husband and he consents to live with her, she must not send her
husband away. For the unbelieving husband is
sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified
through her unbelieving husband. For otherwise your children are
unclean, but now they are holy. Yet if the unbelieving one leaves,
let him leave. The brother or sister is not
under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace.
For how do you know, oh wife, whether you will save your husband?
Or how do you know a husband where you will save your wife?
Only as the Lord has assigned to each one as God has called
each in this manner, let him walk. And so I direct in all
the churches. Was any man called while he was
already circumcised? He is not to become uncircumcised. Has anyone been called in uncircumcision? He is not to be circumcised.
Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. But what matters
is the keeping of the commandments of God. Each man must remain
in that condition in which he was called. Were you called while
a slave? Do not worry about it. But if
you’re able also to become free, rather do that. For he who was
called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freed man. Likewise,
he who was called while free is Christ’s slave. You were bought
with a price. Do not become slaves of men.
Brethren, each one is to remain with God in that condition in
which he was called. Like all new believers, you me,
we certainly had our own plaguing questions following our respective
conversions. And you know that in order to
work through these questions, it takes time and instruction
and discipleship. That’s what leads to maturity,
knowing and applying God’s word by his spirit and grace in order
to grow and glorify God. And Paul knows exactly where
this flock in Corinth is, both mentally and spiritually. And they’ve come to exactly the
right place, the right person, their spiritual mentor, their
father in the faith, the beloved Apostle Paul. And he eagerly
takes up their genuine questions. For Paul, there are no dumb questions. The world as it is, from which
we’ve been rescued by God’s grace, constantly presses in, and to
use Paul’s imagery in Romans 12, seeks to press us into its
mold. Paul knows this, and he knows
the extreme difficulties presented by being steeped in a sinful
culture, He knows. And so he takes up their many
questions with all seriousness. And he moves to provide them
with sound biblical counsel, exactly what a true shepherd
should do. I’ve entitled the message, I
think appropriately, to have and to hold. Because that is
the core message here in 1 Corinthians 7 verses 1 through 5. And what Paul gives us here are
four features of moral purity. Four very sensible features of
moral purity. First of all, let’s look at the
underlying principle that we discover in verse one of chapter
seven. Now concerning the things about
which you wrote, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. And
you say, well, if this is a marriage conference, you’re off to a very
difficult start, Paul. Now concerning, again, Paul’s
literary device for introducing his new subject, even the word
translated as now serves as a contrast, really, with this chapter and
the last. Paul had wrapped up his sobering
address about immorality in chapter 5 and 6. And he is formally turned
to address a new matter, but the transition could not be smoother. His last line of chapter six,
remember, glorify God in your body. And it applies not only
to the previous discussion about immorality, but it serves as
a perfect introduction to his questions about marriage. And
this phrase, now concerning, also marks, as we mentioned,
the beginning of Paul’s consideration of issues that the Corinthians
raised. He says here, by a letter which
they wrote. We don’t have this letter. It
would be remarkable to have that piece of literature. But we do
know the nature of the letter. It was inquisitive. And we know
not only the nature of the letter, that it was an appeal for counsel.
They wanted his advice. They wanted to understand things
better about Christianity. And we can piece together some
of the content just based on what Paul speaks to. Perhaps
they ask direct questions, or perhaps they provided enough
anecdotes of what was going on in Corinth that Paul was able
to discern the questions that they might have posed and now
respond to their particular concerns. And the first one of these challenging
issues that he opts to deal with is that regarding marriage. We know that the Jewish people
had plenty of divine instruction about marriage in the Old Testament,
and generally they highly esteemed the state of marriage. They tended
to look on singleness as a disregard of the orders that God gave to
Adam and Eve, be fruitful and multiply. And so, like so many
good Jewish mothers, they exerted much pressure on their sons and
daughters to marry and start a family. But that didn’t stop
this nation, however, from lowering their standards for divorce and
undermining God’s institution of marriage by that means. But the Gentile world, which
largely comprised the Corinthian church, was entirely at the mercy
and the whims and the influence of the fallen society in which
they lived. And those saved out of that culture
sought to get as far away from physical intimacy as they could.
They contemplated a return to a purified singleness, thinking
that that’s what God would have of them. To make matters worse,
there were many false teachers who denigrated marriage and who
even formulated a religious prohibition against it. Paul warns young
Timothy of false teachers, 1 Timothy 4, of men who would forbid marriage. And so it’s understandable that
this immature church was confused and uncertain about God’s standards
in marriage. But as Paul begins his address,
it’s important to keep in mind that Paul is not setting forth
here to provide a marriage treatise. everything that he could possibly
say about the subject. That’s not what he’s doing. Instead,
he’s one by one answering his church’s questions. It’s a loose
and seemingly disordered discussion about a variety of topics related
to marriage. This is important because the
first thing that he says regarding marriage is that it’s good for
a man not to touch a woman. Wow. This is stunning advice
to almost anyone who hears it. But it’s not a divine mandate.
If so, it would contradict other biblical passages on the subject. It’s Paul’s wisdom to his church. And he may even be quoting from
the very question that they posed. Is it good for a man not to touch
a woman? Well, it would be advisable not
even to touch a woman given the wretchedly low morals of the
culture. He will go on to say that he
even wishes that all men were like himself, that is, single,
celibate. And it is at least possible,
since we know that there were parties formed around the various
personalities, Paul and Apollos, that such followers also wanted
to say that Paul’s lifestyle was mandatory for all. It wasn’t. We’ll talk more about singleness
in the weeks ahead, but as a general principle, Paul could not help
but put forth that it It was good for a man not to touch a
woman. It’s a good thing. It’s morally good, but it’s entirely
dependent upon God’s call and grace. If a man were able to
abstain even from intimate physical contact with the opposite sex,
that is a calling. Singleness, he says, is not a
bad state. It’s morally good for those who
are gifted to it. It’s not better or worse than
marriage. It’s good in a city and culture
that was so disgustingly immoral. Perhaps the best thing would
be to abstain from such activities altogether. If that was your
calling, that would be better, Paul says. Even Jesus, Matthew
19, says that under certain circumstances it is better not to marry. And
yet, as morally pure as it would be not to touch a woman, the
writer of Hebrews also says that marriage is to be held in honor
among all. Marriage is good. And even Paul
himself will go on to write the Ephesian church utilizing the
God given institution of marriage as a living illustration of Christ
and the church. Paul’s not against marriage.
He simply reminds them that not only is the state of marriage
a good thing, but the state of singleness is a good thing if
you are called and graced to it. Well, no wonder the Corinthians
were bewildered. But Paul will make it clear in
time. Nevertheless, his underlying
principle is that it is good for a man not to touch a woman,
is a morally pure thing if one is able to remain single. That’s
the underlying principle. After all, their questions do
involve the subject of marriage. And so unless you are truly called
to singleness, a life that is by God’s grace relatively free
from temptation in this realm, get married. Find someone. And if you are married, settle
into that state and do not seek singleness. That’s essentially
what Paul says in the opening verse. But I said that there
were four sensible features of moral purity here, and we come
to the second one in verse two. Not only the underlying principles
stated in verse one, but the overarching concession in verse
two. But because of immoralities,
each man is to have his own wife and each woman is to have her
own husband. This is Paul’s concession. to
the goodness of singleness. And it’s introduced here by the
adversative, but. It serves as an about face and
it is necessary because most people are not called to singleness. Paul immediately provides the
reason for such an allowance. Immorality. Again, this time
stated in the plural, pardon me, in the plural, immoralities.
And he declares that there are several sins, numerous sins,
associated with the attempt to live a pure and single life that
have been accommodated by the institution of marriage. You
don’t fall into that trap. Not only in this society of first
century Corinth, but in every age and culture, The sins of
the flesh war against an individual’s attempt to live both single and
pure. The temptations were great. Many
times too great for individuals to remain unstained by the world.
And there were many different ways that a single person might
fall in to sin in this regard. There was adultery. Whether with
a single woman or a married woman or even a homosexual relationship,
there was prostitution. As we’ve already addressed, there
was rape and all the rest. And so thankfully, Paul acknowledges
that provision has been made to avoid such transgressions. Marriage. God has made provision
because of immoralities, he says, that each man, that is, each
man who lacks the grace and calling of singleness is to have his
own wife. And likewise, each woman who
lacks the grace and calling of singleness is to have her own
husband. It’s good and right and pure. It’s God-given. It’s God-ordained.
It’s God’s institution. that a person, a man or a woman,
should marry. And there, even in profligate
Corinth, God’s provision stood as a safeguard against capitulating
into the sins of the culture. It’s likely that some people
had taken the position that singleness was a mandate, which would be
a recipe for disaster for those who were not called and gifted
for such. Please remember Paul is not again
writing a treatise on marriage. He’s only answering the simple
question or questions posed to him. He’s not reducing marriage
to merely a safeguard against vice. He’s strictly keeping his
focus on the questions that are presented to him. Marriage is
God’s institution for the foundational relationship of the family. And
it serves to provide not only to make babies, but for the helpful
companionship that God promised Adam in the garden, as well as
the protective aspect of marital intimacy. And plainly, marriage
is far better than singleness. He does not speak of marriage
as a necessary evil, But if you’re not called to singleness, marriage
is infinitely better. The manner of life for those
not gifted to a life of celibacy would be a life of almost certain
immorality. In a world so full of vice and
temptation, few can avoid that trap. Marriage, after all, was
God’s answer to his own creation assessment that it was not good
for the man to be alone. And as an additional note, John
Calvin was not alone to see here that in these words there was
an inbuilt safeguard against polygamy. Multiple wives or multiple
husbands Each man that is singular is to have his own wife singular,
and each woman singular is to have her own husband again also
singular. If you’re married, Paul says,
it’s a good thing. It’s a good state. The Lord has
provided for your protection. Only do not seek a second spouse,
whether illicitly or legally. There’s a third sensible feature
of moral purity laid down here for us, not only the underlying
principle that it’s good not to touch a woman, but the overarching
concession in verse 2 that each man is to have his own wife.
And the third sensible feature is the intimate significance.
of the overarching concession, the intimate significance. Look
at verses three and four. If you would, the husband must
fulfill his duty to his wife and likewise the wife to her
husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body,
but the husband does. And likewise, also, the husband
does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
Yes, I’m going to preach this set of verses to marriage. for those who are not graced
and gifted for singleness, has a tremendously sensible feature
in husband-wife relations. Paul wastes no time in pointing
out the intimate significance of God’s provision, but the language
may shock you. Paul says the husband must fulfill
his duty to his wife. That’s somewhat surprising to
us, isn’t it? And I have to tell you that I don’t know of a man,
at least I haven’t met him yet, who considers intimacy as a duty. The word duty is the language
of debt, obligation, what is due. In fact, it is the exact
words that Jesus used in the parable of the unmerciful slave
who went before the king and pleaded for the king to forgive
him his debt. Same word. It’s also the same
word that Paul uses in Romans 13, that we are to render to
all what is due, whether it’s tax or custom or fear or honor. And so Paul says here, it is
your marital duty, which includes even the frequency of that duty. In all of my dozens and dozens
of counseling couples on this matter, I’ve never counseled
a man who considers it a duty. Some wives, yes, but not the
man. Paul does, however, put the language
to husbands and wives that they are to fulfill their duty to
one another and to their marriage. Paul is speaking to the likely
tendency among the Corinthians to try to do away with every
kind of sexual impulse, including those that God himself had ordained.
This would lead to disaster, and so Paul says, fulfill your
duty. Okay, now this one, verse four,
if this recording leaks out to the general public, to the people
of the world, it will cause an instant uproar. Because the entire
abortion industry is built on this one argument that Paul dismantles
in one sentence. In this verse, verse 4, Paul
provides support for his language of verse 3. Get this. The wife does not have authority
over her own body, but the husband does. You know, the husbands don’t
have to even be told that their wife is pursuing an abortion. Well, they’re likely gathering
their pitchforks and torches already, but the same is true
also here for the men. The husband does not have authority
over his own body, but the wife does. In marriage, we willingly
sacrifice our selfish independence, even in this realm. Now, that
said, I don’t know of a single Christian marriage, and I’ve
known a great many, who would ever take this attitude with
their spouse. Spouse, you know, I command thee. Every Christian couple I know
puts their spouse first. They love them, they care for
them. But the foundation for that authority
is present here. The knowledge of this principle
is present. Husbands and wives belong to
each other. They are married for one another’s
mutual good. They are not independent agents. They are married for one another’s
care. They do not have authority over their own bodies. They belong
to one another. And so, practically speaking,
if you are married, enjoy one another. Even outside the efforts
of procreation, you belong to one another. And there’s a fourth
and final principle, a sensible feature of moral purity, not
only the underlying principle and the overarching concession,
and the intimate significance, but fourthly, the balanced admonition. Verse five, stop depriving one
another except by agreement for a time so that you may devote
yourselves to prayer and come together again so that Satan
will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. So
Paul takes it to its logical extreme here, deprivation. That’s what’s going on when the
husband-wife attempts to eliminate or minimize God-ordained intimacy,
they end up depriving their spouse of a good gift of God. Some of
the older translations translate this word as defraud. We defraud
someone when we wrongly take what is rightfully theirs. Such
is marital intimacy. This issue, of course, is one
of the big three in marriage counseling. You probably already
know that. Almost all such counseling, marriage
counseling, centers around at least one of three issues. Sometimes they’re blended, sometimes
they get multiplied, but it centers around one of three issues. Money, or the use or management
of money, parenting, that’s a doozy, and intimacy. And of course,
alcohol fits in there as well. But intimacy or lack thereof
is a big issue, a recurring issue. And this must have been quite
an ongoing struggle, even in the Church of Corinth, because
Paul says here, stop depriving one another. In other words,
it’s been going on far too long. Stop it. This would certainly apply to
spouses who withhold intimacy as some kind of a punishment,
as a weapon. But even in the midst of noble circumstances,
that someone thinks they’re more holy if they abstain. Well, not if you’re married. To withhold is to defraud. It’s
to take what is not yours. That doesn’t mean that there
aren’t times where abstinence isn’t permissible. Even the Old
Testament seems to recognize this. Solomon hints at it in
Ecclesiastes when he says in chapter three, there’s a time
to embrace and a time to shun embracing. It’s at least the
beginning of intimacy. Other chapters are even clearer
in his recorded call to repentance, Joel chapter two. Joel says,
gather the people, let the bridegroom come out of his room and the
bride out of her bridal chamber. The wedding is canceled. We need
to repent. There are times, spiritual occasions,
where intimacy would be ill-timed and inappropriate. But Paul outlines
the necessary conditions here for abstaining from intimacy.
First of all, that it is by mutual consent. We agree to take a break. Paul says it’s by agreement.
The Greek word there translated as agreement is symphonous. You heard it there, didn’t you?
It’s the word from where we get our word symphony. There ought
to be beautiful music, a symphony of purpose, an agreement in order
to abstain. Secondly, Paul says that it’s
temporary. Look there in verse five, he
says, for a time. It’s not a permanent break. It’s
not for a long time. It’s just for a season, a night,
a week, a period of recovery, some involved undertaking by mutual consent, temporarily. Thirdly, he says, in order to
facilitate a spiritual focus that you may devote yourselves
to prayer. In other words, he says that
there should be a spiritual purpose to this break. Worship, prayer,
a deep study of God’s Word, a retreat, an intense seeking of God’s face.
There’s a spiritual purpose to this break. Those are the three conditions
and to that Paul circles back to God’s provision for marriage
to begin with, again with a fourth consideration, and that is to
prevent temptation, or as Paul puts it, so that Satan will not
tempt you. There’s a definite intention
to come back together in time. We remember God’s provision.
We remember why we’re married in the first place. This last
consideration was so important to John Calvin because of the
abuses that he witnessed in monasticism. The ascetic lifestyle of the
monks led to all manner of abuses, not unlike what has transpired
again among Roman Catholic priests in our own day. If you’re not
called to singleness and graced, it’s a recipe for disaster. For a person is not called and
graced for singleness, an attempt to maintain such a difficult
lifestyle of self-denial is dangerous because it throws the door open
to the devil, or as Paul calls him here, ha-satanos, the Satan,
the adversary, who you remember only seeks to steal, kill, and
destroy. Well, this is the paradigm that
must be met for a couple to take a break, a conjugal break, by
mutual consent, temporary, with a spiritual focus in order to
avoid temptation. And so Paul’s advice to us in
closing is if you’re married, except for these agreed upon
short breaks, exercise God’s provision for your protection
for temptation. Now Paul has much more to say
about marriage. He’s only broached the subject
of singleness and he’ll have much more to say in the verses
that follow. He’ll also address the subject
of divorce and even the subject of remarriage. And I would encourage you to
pre-read those sections. that the Lord might grant us
grace to be educated ourselves and informed and even corrected.