Key Scriptures: 1 Corinthians 7:1–16 (see also Exodus 21:10–11; 1 Cor 7:17–24; Matt 5:32; 19:9)

Go ahead and take your Bibles and turn with me to the book of 1 Corinthians 7. We are addressing the topic of Divorce and Remarriage. We had one lesson last week on that topic. But this topic is so complex, I need two messages to address it. 

And I want to start today where I ended last week. I want to read to you our church’s statement on this issue. This will help frame our discussion tonight. Here is our church’s position on this matter. 

VBVF’s Position on Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage: “Marriage is a wonderful gift given by God to humanity (Gen 2:24; Matt 19:4-6). God designed marriage to be a life-long, exclusive, heterosexual, public, and formal covenantal union between a biological male and a biological female. 

Marriage is the proper means of human procreation in our world, and it is the starting place for the Christian family. It is also a relational commitment to be enjoyed by human beings even in instances where procreation is not possible. Additionally, human marriage is a picture and a type of Christ’s eternal marriage and love for his bride, the church (see Eph 5:22-33). Marriage between a man and a woman in this world is temporary; the marriage between Christ and the church is eternal. 

The Bible speaks clearly of the destructive power of divorce. God hates divorce and the effects that it has upon couples, families, communities, and human flourishing (Mal 2:14-16; Matt 19:7-8). God also speaks clearly about the destructive power of sexual sin and its effects upon society. These are clearly seen in our modern-day, God-defying world.  

Because marriage is a covenant commitment that is meant to be unbreakable, the Bible allows for divorce (and subsequent remarriage) in only two instances: 1) infidelity (Matt 5:32; 19:9), and 2) abandonment by an unbelieving spouse (1 Cor 7:15). Matters are made more complex by the presence of other factors; for example, 1) physical abuse, 2) the timing of a married person’s salvation, 3) desires to reconcile after infidelity, 4) people who are unbiblically married, but join the church after the fact, etc. Because of this, issues of divorce and remarriage need to be adjudicated by the elder board who must decide hard cases with the wisdom God gives. In some cases, a period of separation for the sake of health and safety may be wise.

For more on issues of marriage, remarriage, divorce, and repentance, see the following article from Grace Community Church. The elders of VBVF will use this as a guideline for deciding difficult matters on this issue: https://www.gracechurch.org/about/distinctives/divorce-and-remarriage.” 

And just to show that this is not a novel or progressive view on the issue of Divorce and Remarriage, here is what the Westminster Confession of Faith says, circa 1646: “In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce: and, after the divorce, to marry another, as if the offending party were dead. . . . Nothing but adultery, or such willful desertion as can no way be remedied by the church or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage.”

You heard in that statement the two instances in which the marriage covenant is violated. They don’t necessitate a divorce and remarriage. In other words, an aggrieved spouse isn’t required by Scripture to divorce. But in those two instances, an aggrieved spouse is free to divorce and remarry. 

Last week, we addressed the first of those instances: infidelity (the Greek word was πορνεία [porneia]). Today, we address the second of those instances, namely abandonment by an unbelieving spouse. 

And to flesh that out, let’s look at 1 Corinthians 7. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But first, write this down as #1 in your notes. Here’s the first principle to derive from this text. 

1) God expects marriages to be non-celibate (1 Cor 7:1–7)

“Why, whatever do you mean by that, Pastor Tony?” Well, I promise that this statement will become clear as we look at 1 Corinthians 7.

Just by way of background, though. The Corinthian church, that Paul was writing to, was the epitome of a dysfunctional church in the NT. There were all kinds of problems in that church. There were sexual problems – one guy had his father’s wife! (1 Cor 5:1) – that’s not normal. There were leadership problems in the church. There were worship problems in the church. Some of the church folk were getting drunk during the Lord’s Supper. That’s not your normal problem at church. 

And so Paul, who helped plant this church in Corinth, had to get involved and sort out serious problems. And as part of that, 1 Corinthians 7 is extremely helpful. I’m not glad that the Corinthian church was dysfunctional. But I’m glad that the Apostle Paul wrote this letter about how to deal with dysfunctional problems in the church, so that we might learn from it. 

Because the reality is that we live in a broken world. And broken world problems manifest in the church. What are we going to do about them? What are we going to do about the very real problem of divorce and remarriage in the church? We can’t just ignore it. So what do we do? We address that issue, as we do others, with wisdom and biblical insight. 

So Paul says this in verse 1.  

1 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 

You’ll notice that this statement is in quotes in the ESV. That’s because the ESV interpreters believe that this is what the Corinthian church wrote to Paul. There are no quotation marks in ancient writing, so the fact that the ESV has those marks is interpretive. And I think that interpretation is correct. 

So this is not Paul’s statement to the church. This is what the church said to Paul in previous correspondence as a kind of slogan. And now he’s going to interact with that statement. 

Part of the reason I think this is the right interpretation is because there was an ascetic strain of “sex is evil thinking” in the church at Corinth. And I understand where that came from. Corinth was so bad and so sexually corrupt, the church started to swing the pendulum too far the opposite direction, And they must have been saying, “Let’s just not have sex. It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” In fact, verse 1 literally says, “It is good for a man not to touch a woman!” Now that’s a euphemism for sexual activity. But that’s also evidence for how far ascetism has spread in the church. What’s Paul going to say about that? 

Now watch Paul thread this needle. He basically says, “Yes that’s true, but no that’s not true.” This is brilliant Pauline theologizing. He says in verse 2, 

2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality [πορνεία], each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.

Song of Solomon 6:3 says, “I am my beloved’s and my beloved is mine.” Paul says here, “Yes it is good for a man to not have sexual relations with a woman. But because of temptation, marriage is better.” And the implication here is this—if you can get married, you should get married, in order to reduce the prospect of πορνεία. If I could paraphrase this crudely, I would say the following: Paul is saying the cure for evil sex isn’t sexlessness; it’s good sex. It’s proper sex in the context of marriage. Let me say it less crudely, but even more directly “God expects marriages to be non-celibate.”

Continuing that thought, Paul says in verse 3, 

3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.

Paul is alluding to the one flesh union that takes place at marriage. And a husband and wife should take care of each other sexually so that temptation doesn’t materialize in the marriage and give Satan a foothold.

Ostensibly there were these “holier-than-thou” women in the church (maybe some men too) who were saying, “Sex is dirty. Sex is icky. Sex is unspiritual… Even though we are married, I don’t want to have sex anymore.” Paul says, “Don’t you do that! If you do, you will drive your spouse into πορνεία.”

Coincidently, Paul had just warned in 1 Corinthians 6 about the danger of visiting prostitutes. It’s possible that some of the men in the church were doing this because their wives were unresponsive to them sexually.  

And by the way, pagan men in the ancient Roman world would generally sleep with their wives for procreation. But for fun, they would pursue sex elsewhere. Paul is having none of that. He says, “Husbands you be devoted to your wife and your wife only sexually! Wives, you be devoted to your husbands sexually.”

Look at verse 5,

 5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

Gordon Fee is right to point out that “Paul’s emphasis… is not on ‘You owe me,’ but on ‘I owe you.’” This was true of both wife and husband. Neither of them should deprive (or defraud) his or her spouse. That would be a violation of their vows of one flesh commitment to one another. 

Now Paul does suggest that fasting from sex in the context of marriage is legitimate. But that should only take place if there is mutual agreement and if there is a limited amount of time. Let me spell that out for you—Fasting from sex for two years so that you can focus on prayer is not legitimate. Fasting from sex for two weeks, in my humble opinion, would be unwise!

I heard the NT scholar D.A. Carson talk about this once. And his students would ask him this question about this text, “Why do they need to stop having sex in order to pray? Can’t you pray and have sex at the same time?” And he said to them, “The only reason you ask that question is because you are single.” When you get married, sex can be an exhausting and absorbing task. An important task, yes! Don’t get me wrong. But an exhausting one. And sometimes you need to set that aside to focus on prayer. It’s not because sex is dirty, and you can’t pray and have sex in the same day. 

The point of this really, though, is to say that you shouldn’t be so focused on the Lord in marriage that you neglect your spouse. That creates temptation. Let me say it more precisely than that. Part of focusing on the Lord as a married person is taking care of your spouse sexually. 

Don’t create a false dichotomy between focus on the Lord or focus on sex with the spouse. You can do both of those, and you should do both of those for the glory of God and in obedience to Scripture. 

[At this point, you might say, “I thought this message was about divorce and remarriage, Pastor Tony.” Stay with me. We’re getting there.]

Look at verse 6.  

 6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. 

Paul was single. He was probably a widower. His lifestyle was not conducive towards marriage. He was almost always at death’s door. He was threatened constantly, beaten occasionally, and actually died once, as far as I can tell (see Acts 14:19–20). And he just kept on preaching. 

His “gift” (Greek: χάρισμα [charisma]) was a gift of singleness and apostleship. And he saw the benefit of that for kingdom purposes. Maybe some of you here have that gift too. And you choose singleness for life. You want to be a “bachelor to the rapture.” That’s okay. We’ll talk more about that next week.

But here’s the point—you can’t expect celibacy of a married person! The Corinthian church must have been suggesting that. They must have had these men and women saying to their spouses, “Even though we are married, I’m going to be celibate.” Paul says, “No, you’re not. That’s not your gift. Your gift is marriage.” And God expects marriages to be non-celibate.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Write this down as #2 in your notes. Paul addresses next singles and those who have been widowed. And he tells them, in essence,

2) God expects singles to be chaste (1 Cor 7:8–9)

Look at verse 8.

8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am. 

Interestingly, Paul says in 1 Timothy 5 that widows should marry. That’s not a contradiction. That context has to do with widows who are a financial burden on the church. And also, some of them were busybodies. 

If a widow can stay single, and she isn’t a financial burden on the church (and she isn’t a busybody), then she is better off single. But she can get married if she wants to. And maybe she should, for the same reasons that Paul mentioned already about each man having a wife.  

So verse 9 says, 

9 But if they [unmarrieds and widows] cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion. 

Now that’s justification for unmarrieds and widows to marry, if they want to. But that’s not justification for someone who is divorced unbiblically to remarry. Some have used this passage for a wider application than is warranted. Paul is specifically addressing unmarrieds and widows, not people who are divorced unbiblically.  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thirdly, write this down as #3 in your notes. 

3) God expects pre-conversion marriages to be respected (1 Cor 7:10–16)

So verse 10 transitions. Paul says, 

10 To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): 

Now that doesn’t mean that Paul is creating a conflict between what he says and what the Lord says. He’s just paraphrasing here what Jesus said during his ministry. You’ll hear the echo to Matthew 19 in this statement. 

the wife should not separate from her husband 11 (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife. 

And the reason for this is clear. As we saw in Matthew 19 last week, Jesus calls this an act of adultery. If a man or woman remarries without a biblical exception for divorce, then he or she commits adultery. 

Now that’s pretty simple. It’s not easy, but it’s simple. Now Paul deals with the hard cases. Look at verse 12.

12 To the rest I say (I, not the Lord)

Paul is expanding on what the Lord says here. He’s not saying that he has no authority. He’s saying that as part of his authority as an apostle, he’s clarifying a matter that the Lord Jesus didn’t address explicitly. Jesus spoke to Jews who would only marry Jews. Paul is speaking to Gentiles who sometimes got saved in an existing marital situation. 

And remember now, Paul’s writing is theopneustos (θεόπνευστος – “God-breathed”). Don’t create a false dichotomy between what Jesus says and what Paul says, as if the red letters in your Bible have more authority than black letters. That’s theological compromise if you do that. [By the way, I don’t like red-letter Bibles. That’s a hobby horse of mine. I’ll deal with that at another time.]

Back to verse 12.

12 To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. 

Now let’s be clear about this. Paul never suggests that Christians should pursue being unequally yoked in marriage. Later in verse 39 he says that a widow is free to marry after her husband dies, as long as she marries someone “in the Lord.” What does that mean? It means that she must not marry an unbeliever. 

So the issue in verse 12 doesn’t involve a Christian who married a non-Christian and then all of a sudden wants to back out of it. The issue involves one member of a marriage coming to Christ and the other member doesn’t.

And this happened in Corinth. People got saved. People came to Christ from all kinds of circumstances. Sometimes they came to Christ as a couple—husbands and wives together. Sometimes the husband got saved, but the wife didn’t. Sometimes the wife got saved, but the husband didn’t. Sometimes the parents got saved but not the kids. Sometimes the kids got saved but not the parents. This happens. It still happens. 

What do you do in a situation like that when one member of that “one flesh union” gets saved and the other doesn’t? Now you’ve got one flesh, but half of that one flesh is born again and Spirit-filled, but the other isn’t. Now you’ve got a hard case! 

Paul says clearly in this hard case, “Don’t seek a divorce. If she (your unbelieving wife) consents to live with you, be at peace.”  

And the same is true when the shoe is on the other foot. Look at verse 13.

13 If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. 

Same logic as verse 12, but now we have the woman dealing with an unbelieving husband. And Paul says in verse 14,  

14 For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. 

Now this is a tricky passage. The statement “made holy” in this instance doesn’t mean saved. They are not saved. It means that they are supernaturally sanctified by the faith of the one person. So that one flesh union is sanctified (made holy) by only one of the spouses being saved. A better word here is “consecrated.” They are consecrated as holy under the Lord, even though one of the members of that marriage isn’t born again. 

And Paul adds to this that the impact of this situation on the children is positive. Paul probably had firsthand experience with this with young Timothy. Timothy’s mom, Eunice, was Jewish. And she became a Christian (Acts 16:1–3). She taught him the Scriptures (2 Tim 1:5; 3:14-17). Timothy’s father, on the other hand, was simply called a Greek. He was probably not a Christian. And yet Paul could look at that and say, “Timothy was supernaturally sanctified through the faith of his mother even if his father never became a Christian.”

Alright now we get to the second exception for divorce and remarriage in the Bible in 1 Corinthians 7:15. After Paul deals with all these other scenarios… after he talks at length about how this is better, this is best, this is better, this is best… now he deals with what happens when something that is not “the best scenario” occurs. 

It’d be great if we lived in a world where hard cases don’t exist. But we don’t live in that world yet. So we’ve got to address this matter. 

Look at verse 15. 

15 But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace.

Now let’s deal just with verse 15. Because in verse 16, Paul goes back to his previous statements. But there’s enough here for us to take a close look. 

15 But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved.

If an unbelieving wife leaves her husband, or if an unbelieving husband leaves his wife, the believing spouse is not bound. Actually Paul uses a stronger word here, “enslaved” (Greek: δουλόω - douloō). You don’t have a ball and chain attached to you because of the marriage covenant. If that unbelieving spouse instigates a divorce, then you are free to divorce and remarry. That’s my understanding of this passage. There was really no category for divorce without the prospect of remarrying in the ancient world.

In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. 

The brother or sister is a reference to the believing spouse. You are free. You are not enslaved. God has called you to peace. You don’t have to badger your unbelieving spouse or manipulate him or her to stay with you. You don’t have to force him or her to abide by Scripture. They don’t know Christ; they have no incentive to abide by Scripture. You can be at peace. 

Now admittedly, this situation is exceedingly rare. Here’s what I mean by that. Typically when an unbeliever separates or forsakes the marriage, they do it because they want to marry someone else. Or they get involved in sexual immorality. Very rarely will you have an unbeliever who abandons a believing spouse and then goes on to live a life of sexual abstinence. It happens. But it doesn’t happen very much. In most cases where there is abandonment, there is also πορνεία. 

Nevertheless, this must have been significant enough in the Corinthian context for Paul to comment on it. And where we see cases like this, we need to address them as best we can. 

And just to round this discussion out, look at verse 16,

16 For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife? 

In other words, if your unbelieving spouse wants to stay married, then stay married. What an amazing opportunity for evangelism! You can be an ambassador for Christ in your own marriage! You might be the instrument used by God to convert the other side of your one flesh union. What an opportunity! 

I’ll just tell you church, I’ve seen this. I’ve seen this, and it’s amazing when God does this… when God uses a believing spouse to bring about conversion in an unbelieving spouse. I’ve baptized some of those people. And it’s wonderful. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So let me close with this. I want to revisit some of what I gave you last week in terms of specific situations and marital statuses. 

At the risk of being redundant, let me reiterate those points, but where there is new information according to 1 Corinthians 7, I’ll augment them. And after that, we’ll take questions. 

So, last week I said this. Let me reiterate. 

1) If you are married, don’t seek a divorce. 

And don’t neglect your spouse sexually. Be content where God has you. If you have a biblical exception that allows for divorce and remarriage, you are at liberty to use it. But you don’t have to. And there are good reasons to stay married even if you are the victim of πορνεία.

Paul reinforces that statement here in 1 Corinthians 7 by saying that “If you are married to an unbeliever, stay married. Don’t seek a divorce.” So the situation isn’t changed if you are married to an unbeliever. 

In fact, one of the ways that you can summarize 1 Corinthians 7:1–24 is with the following statement: “Don’t seek to change your situation.” “Live as you are Called.” Paul says in verse 17, “Let each person lead the life that the Lord has assigned to him, and to which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches.” If you are circumcised, don’t hide it with plastic surgery. If you are uncircumcised, don’t get circumcised. If you are a bondservant, don’t be concerned about it (but get your freedom if you can). These are analogies to reinforce the idea that married people shouldn’t seek a divorce. Each person should live as he or she was called.  

2) If you are single, marry wisely or stay single. 

It’s good to be unmarried. It’s good to be married. Each of those is a gift. So be thankful for that gift, and use it for God’s glory. 

I will say this. I didn’t say this last week. But all of us needs to learn how to be happy as a single person. Not all of us marry. But all of us are single at some stage of life. And contentment in singleness is necessary, whether that’s before marriage or after your spouse dies and you are left alone. 

3) If you are widowed, marry wisely or stay single.

4) If you are divorced with a scriptural exception, marry wisely or stay single.

As I’ve tried to argue, there are two scriptural exceptions. We dealt with infidelity last week. Today, we see in 1 Corinthians 7, that abandonment by an unbelieving spouse is another exception. So…

5) If you are divorced without a scriptural exception, stay single.

“Are there more than just two scriptural exceptions, Pastor Tony?” I say no. Some people say yes. I’ll give two possibilities with which I don’t agree. Wayne Grudem has argued that in 1 Corinthians 7:15 there are other possibilities that Paul has in mind. 

Grudem’s argument goes like this. Paul writes, “But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved.” Grudem argues that “in such cases” suggests that there are other cases that might also be possible where divorce is permitted. He has suggested the following: physical abuse, prolonged verbal cruelty, incorrigible drug or alcohol addiction, incorrigible gambling addiction, or incorrigible addition to pornography.

  I love Wayne Grudem, and I’m hesitant to disagree with him. But I don’t think that “in such cases” means in such cases totally different from what Paul is talking about in 1 Corinthians 7. I think Paul means “in such cases” that are similar to what he is describing here with abandonment by an unbelieving spouse. 

Also Grudem argues that the brother or sister is not “enslaved” means that they are free to remarry. I don’t think that’s what Paul is saying in verse 15. I think Paul is saying that they are not enslaved to stay married to an unbeliever who doesn’t want to be married to them. That’s a very limited understanding of enslavement. 

Now, in situations where the spouse (or a child) is in danger, I would counsel separation, even permanent separation if necessary, but not divorce. There may be legal reasons that make divorce necessary, but that becomes, for me, a lesser of evils situation. I don’t put that into the category of scriptural exemption.

Also I’ve just come across recently another exception that people have argued. And it comes from Exodus 21:10–11 where God says, “If [a man] takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights. And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out for nothing, without payment of money.” This has to do with a man’s slave wife in the OT world. If a man marries another woman, he shouldn’t neglect his first wife’s needs. 

One commentator I read this week has said: “I do not think that sexual immorality and physical desertion are the only grounds for divorce. According to Exodus 21:10, a husband is responsible to provide for his wife: ‘He shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights.’ One can argue from the lesser to the greater: if that was the case for a husband’s slave wife, how much more is that the case for his free wife? Exodus 21:10 demonstrates that God deeply cares about a vulnerable wife when her husband is not providing for her, and there is nothing in the NT to suggest that Jesus’ fulfilling the Mosaic law nullifies a wife’s rights and a husband’s responsibilities.” 

The possibility here is intriguing. But I think the context is too far removed from what Paul is saying in 1 Corinthians 7 to establish this as another Biblical exception. So for now, I’m going to stick to the two scriptural exceptions that are well-established in Protestant tradition. But, I also understand, that in a messy world with messy situations sometimes divorce is the least worst option. 

If you are divorced without a scriptural exception and remarried, repent and stay remarried.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Since I spoke against Wayne Grudem just a second ago, let me end by agreeing with him. Grudem writes in his book Divorce and Remarriage the following (And I wholeheartedly agree with his statement): “It is also important for Christians who have experienced divorces not to let the rest of their lives be ruled by this pain from the past. For children who have suffered deeply from divorces, Peter’s words have special relevance, showing that Christ’s sacrifice purchased freedom for us even from any wrongful patterns of life that we experienced from our parents: ‘You were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot’ (1 Pet. 1:18–19). And for adults who have been abandoned by a previous wife or husband, the promise of God’s comfort in 2 Corinthians should also bring great encouragement: ‘Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our affliction, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction, with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God. For as we share abundantly in Christ’s sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too’ (2 Cor. 1:3–5).”