Did the apostle Paul enable for divorce and remarriage? On this episode of What within the Phrase?, Kirk E. Miller sits down with famend New Testomony scholar Craig Keener to navigate a difficult and hotly debated passage, 1 Corinthians 7:12–16. Collectively they discover its historic context, dissect key Greek phrases like “go away” and “not certain,” and survey the completely different interpretive viewpoints on what Paul’s phrases imply for believers in religiously combined marriages.
Comply with the present on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and extra.
Join with us
Prepared to extend biblical literacy? Like and share. To go the additional mile, go away us a assessment in your most popular platform.
Subscribe to get future episodes. (Bonus: We’ll ship you a reduction to make use of in your first buy.)
Thanks for subscribing to Phrase by Phrase!
Use code WORDBYWORD to avoid wasting 10% in your first order.
WORDBYWORD
Copy code
Episode visitor: Craig Keener
Craig S. Keener (PhD, Duke) is F. M. and Ada Thompson Professor of biblical research at Asbury Theological Seminary. He’s creator of roughly 40 books, with some 1.4 million copies in circulation. In 2020, Craig was President of the Evangelical Theological Society. He’s married to Dr. Médine Moussounga Keener.
Episode synopsis
Setting the tone: charity and care
Kirk frames the dialog with two cautions to set the tone.
First, this can be a passage the place trustworthy, well-meaning, and severe Christians disagree. So we need to keep away from talking dogmatically on issues the place so many Christians maintain cheap various viewpoints.
Second, the subject of divorce and remarriage isn’t some merely educational exegetical query. It’s immensely pastoral, sensible, and private for a lot of, and infrequently in deeply painful methods. Many individuals’s lives have been deeply affected by marital breakdown. So we need to keep away from discussing it in methods which might be summary, distant, and chilly, as if this topic have been merely an mental curiosity. We should always converse with conviction and interpretive readability whereas refusing to talk carelessly or insensitively.
Why 1 Corinthians 7:15 proves tough
Craig explains that the problem is partly artificial: How will we harmonize the Bible’s collective instructing (e.g., Paul’s statements with Jesus’s instructing within the Gospels)? Some Gospel texts seem to permit no exceptions, whereas Matthew contains the well-known “exception clause” (usually translated as “sexual immorality”; Matt 5:32; 19:9). Then Paul appears so as to add one other situation: What occurs when a believer is married to an unbeliever and the unbeliever walks away?
One other problem is historic. Craig observes that Christian interpretation has different broadly throughout the centuries. Some early church voices advocated no divorce and no remarriage, whereas later traditions, particularly within the Reformation period, emphasised sure New Testomony exceptions.
Lastly, we face sensible and pastoral difficulties. In lots of trendy contexts, divorce is widespread. We all know many who’ve suffered it, which makes these texts deeply private. Discussions aren’t taking place in a vacuum, however amongst individuals who have skilled betrayal, abandonment, abuse, or the lengthy grief of a dying marriage.
Use Factbook to launch your research of subjects like divorce and marriage. Begin your free trial!
The background challenge in 1 Corinthians 7
The Church of Corinth is younger within the religion, and Paul encounters many points that have to be handled.
In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul responds to a letter from the Church in Corinth (7:1). We uncover these on this fledgling meeting apparently believed abstinence, even inside marriage, made for superior holiness. Paul corrects this misunderstanding by affirming marital obligations and warning in opposition to naive “spirituality” that ignores actual temptations and ethical risks (1 Cor 7:1–9; cf. 6:12–20).
In Corinthians 7:12–16 particularly, Paul addresses one other very sensible situation: Many believers in Corinth grew to become Christians after they have been already married. So some have been now in religiously “combined” marriages the place one partner believes and the opposite doesn’t (1 Cor 7:12–16). The query arises: If we’re religiously mismatched, ought to we separate?
“I say (I, not the Lord)”
In 1 Corinthians 7:10–11, Paul introduces his directions to married {couples} with, “I give this command (not I, however the Lord).” He’s relaying what Christ (the “Lord”) instructed on this explicit matter: Don’t go away one’s partner merely as a result of she or he is an unbeliever (1 Cor 7:10–11; cf. Matt 5:31–32; 19:3–9; Mark 10:2–12; Luke 16:18).
Following this, Paul introduces his subsequent set of directions as, “I say (I, not the Lord)” (1 Cor 7:12). Paul isn’t denying that what he says is divinely impressed. That’s not the which means of “not the Lord” right here. Slightly, Paul is clarifying that in earlier instruction, he was citing a saying of Jesus; on this latter instruction, he’s making use of Jesus’s instructing to a state of affairs that Jesus didn’t explicitly tackle in his earthly ministry. Paul is doing pastoral theology: honoring Jesus’s normal whereas reasoning via new circumstances the early church was going through.
The Roman authorized backdrop: “leaving” was divorce
So believers are to not break up such marriages. However what if their unbelieving partner walks out on the wedding (1 Cor 7:12–16)?
As Craig factors out, within the Greco-Roman world, particularly in a Roman colony like Corinth, marriage was sustained by mutual consent. If both occasion walked out, the wedding was thought-about over.
This issues for decoding Paul’s instruction, “If the unbelieving one is leaving, let him go away.” Some readers need to interpret this as solely bodily separation, not authorized divorce. However, as Craig argues, in Corinth’s social–authorized world, the act of leaving was not a short lived association: It functioned as a dissolution of marriage. So Paul isn’t describing a neat trendy class like “separated, however not divorced.” He’s coping with a actuality the place abandonment results marital termination, and the believer can not management that end result. Paul is saying, “If that occurs, that’s not on you. You’ll be able to’t do something about that.”
“Sanctified” spouses and “holy” youngsters?
What does Paul imply in 1 Corinthians 7:14 that the unbelieving partner and their youngsters are made holy due to the believing partner?
Presumably, it doesn’t imply they’re routinely saved, since 1 Peter 3:1–7 speaks of believing wives successful their unbelieving husbands to the gospel. As a substitute, Craig suggests this refers back to the diploma of affect. As an example, in antiquity, the husband would usually get the kids in a divorce, which means the believing spouse would lose her spiritual affect on the kids.
Paul’s assertion, on this studying, highlights why sustaining the wedding, when potential, maintains the Christian partner’s affect on their household.
3 views on divorce and remarriage
Many of the debate over divorce and remarriage in 1 Corinthians concentrates on 1 Corinthians 7:15: “But if the unbelieving one is leaving, let him go away; the brother or the sister is not below bondage in such circumstances” (emphasis added).
All interpreters agree that the believing partner can’t be blamed for the unbelieving partner’s departure. The query, nevertheless, is whether or not Paul is merely saying, You’re not liable for their actions; you possibly can’t cease them, or whether or not he’s additionally saying, You aren’t certain to this marriage anymore; which means,
- one has warrant for divorce, and probably even
- freedom to remarry.
Kirk walks via three major positions that present up in Christian interpretation:
|
View |
(1) By no means divorce, by no means remarry |
(2) Generally divorce, however by no means remarriage |
(3) Generally divorce and with it remarriage |
|
Divorce |
Divorce is at all times forbidden, so a believer ought to by no means provoke it. |
Divorce is permitted below sure situations. |
Divorce is permitted below sure situations. |
|
Remarriage |
Remarriage is likewise at all times forbidden. |
Remarriage is at all times forbidden whereas one’s former partner remains to be alive. |
Reliable divorce brings with it freedom to remarry. |
Moreover, inside positions 2 and three, debate exists over what the warranted grounds are for divorce (and, for view 3, remarriage). All acknowledge sexual immorality (per Matt 5:32; 19:9) and abandonment (per 1 Cor 7:15). Debate, nevertheless, exists over what constitutes “sexual immorality” (simply adultery?) and abandonment (simply bodily desertion?) and whether or not there are extra grounds, like different covenant-shattering actions (e.g., abuse).
Underneath the overwhelming majority of conventional Christian views although, Christians are usually not free to divorce (or remarry) for trivial causes. Amongst these views that enable for divorce (and remarriage), this freedom comes solely when their marriage is damaged in opposition to their will.
The which means of “not below bondage”
Craig contends that the language of being “certain” or “not certain” needs to be learn in gentle of how such phrases functioned in historical divorce and remarriage contexts. In Jewish divorce contexts, this language explicitly meant one was free from marriage in order to marry one other.
Moreover, he factors to 1 Corinthians 7:27–28, the place Paul contrasts being “certain to a spouse” with being “launched from a spouse.” Many English translations blur the pressure of this through the use of common language like “single,” however Craig insists Paul is describing somebody who has been launched (not simply “free” however “freed”) from a wedding (7:27), presumably both via divorce or demise. Notably, Paul feedback that if such an individual marries, they haven’t sinned (7:28). For Craig, this implies Paul can envision a state of affairs the place remarriage after divorce is permissible.
Kirk additionally factors to the top of the chapter, 1 Corinthians 7:39, the place Paul makes use of comparable language (from “certain” to “free”) to talk about the liberty to remarry after one’s partner has died. This means such a language used elsewhere on this chapter (like in 1 Cor 7:15) usually concerned the liberty to remarry.
Uncover Necessary Phrases in your passage with Logos’s Guides.
Begin your free trial!
“Such circumstances” and the query of extra exceptions
Kirk factors out that some interpreter’s keep that Paul’s phrase “in such circumstances” (1 Cor 7:15) signifies that Paul’s particular exception right here isn’t meant to be exhaustive. As a substitute, the logic of Paul and Jesus’s permissions for divorce and remarriage will be utilized to incorporate analogous conditions. Craig agrees, observing that Paul makes use of comparable language (“issues like these”; Gal 5:21) elsewhere.
Nonetheless, we want a cautious controlling precept, lest we undertake overly permissive divorce requirements, like some in Jesus’s day (e.g., burning toast). The moral gravity of marriage should form the moral gravity of any exception.
Craig proposes that the New Testomony exceptions all contain situations the place at the least one occasion is functionally rupturing the wedding. The believer is named to pursue faithfulness and peace, however a wedding will be shattered unilaterally via abandonment, sexual betrayal, or different extreme violations. Craig factors to abuse as one such instance of one thing that quantities to abandoning the marital covenant, even when the abuser by no means bodily leaves the house.
Jesus’s adultery sayings: literal or hyperbole?
As talked about on the outset, one of many major difficulties in the case of the Bible’s instructing on divorce and remarriage is how we synthesize all of it. Thus, Kirk asks Craig how he reconciles Jesus’s varied statements to the impact of, “Whoever divorces and remarries commits adultery” (see Matt 5:32; 19:9; Mark 10:11–12; Luke 16:18) with the obvious existence of exceptions in Matthew 5:32, 19:9, and in 1 Corinthians 7:15.
Craig observes that if Jesus’s phrases are taken in an unqualifiedly literal means, the pastoral penalties can be extreme: It could indicate many second or third marriages are ongoing adultery, requiring we break up these marriages. This misunderstands how Jesus makes use of hyperbole elsewhere in the identical context, e.g., Jesus’s dramatic statements about tearing out a watch or slicing off a hand (Matt 5:27–30), language most Christians acknowledge as forceful rhetoric fairly than literal instructions.
The presence of acknowledged exceptions (e.g., sexual immorality, abandonment) in these “adultery” sayings signifies that Jesus isn’t denying that divorce genuinely dissolves a wedding (cf. John 4:17–18 and Mark 10:9, which assume divorce is an actual risk). Slightly, on this studying, Jesus’s adultery language is a graphic warning: Divorce is a severe violation of God’s creational intention for marriage, and pursuing divorce flippantly locations somebody within the ethical territory of adultery.
The right way to preach or train on divorce and remarriage
Craig’s recommendation for preachers and lecturers goals at a twin duty:
- Uphold constancy to marriage because the Bible’s clear excellent.
- Keep away from condemning folks whose marriage ended in opposition to their will or below coercive, harmful, or betraying circumstances.
Craig warns in opposition to utilizing divorced folks as cautionary tales or treating each divorce as routinely suspect. If Scripture comprises permissions, these permissions exist for actual human evil and actual human vulnerability. You don’t punish a sufferer to exhibit that you just oppose the crime. In the identical means, you don’t heap disgrace on somebody victimized by abandonment or betrayal merely to sign that you just take marriage severely.
On the similar time, emphasize accountability the place it belongs. If somebody is liable for breaking a wedding unjustly, the suitable response isn’t denial or rationalization however repentance, possession, and, the place potential, searching for to make issues proper with God, one’s former partner, and any youngsters concerned.
Logos values considerate and interesting discussions on vital biblical subjects. Nevertheless, the views and interpretations offered on this episode are these of the people talking and don’t essentially replicate the official place of Logos. We acknowledge that Christians might maintain completely different views on this passage, and we welcome various engagement and respectful dialogue.
Tell us what you assume
How do you interpret 1 Corinthians 7:15? Be part of us within the Phrase by Phrase group to share your ideas.
Craig Keener’s advisable assets on divorce and remarriage
Different assets for additional research
Associated content material
