Transcription
Foreign. Now, I concluded last time in something of a hurry, in order to make sure that we got to that into that hour tape. And I said something that I think I need to clarify. Since two people asked me afterwards, when I said that God has made human sexuality both unitive and reproductive, as well as pleasurable, I do not mean by that that it must always be reproductive, it must always be unitive. God has also made that which is unitive, reproductive, and that's a part of the gift of sex. But I'm not at all convinced that sexual relationships must be engaged in only for reproduction. Paul, all I mean, the New Testament, the Bible, obviously says that they shall become one flesh, not in order that they might have children, but one flesh means that they might become one flesh. The first reason is unitive, and I really would make a point of that. It, it, it, it's the great and it's symbolic. It's, it's not only symbolic, obviously, but it is symbolic of the relationship that a husband and wife are to have with one another. Many, many times my wife and I have concluded our sexual experience, and I have just burst into praise to God for the joy of this relationship that he has given us together. I love her, and she's crazy, she loves me. Good. And we're grateful for this symbolic, beautiful, pleasurable, unitive experience that God has given us, that is in fact biblical and biblically expressed.
Now, what about verse 7? However, Paul says, "I wish there all were as I myself am." Well, this is the other text that has made some of us think. Some think that Paul was dealing with not getting married. If we're right in our interpretation up to this point, and it's one of those spaces where it makes so much sense that almost nothing else, you know, can be right, then put verse 7 means is that Paul is really a gifted celibate. And by gifted celibate, I mean celibacy as a gift that does not need marriage. He simply is free from sexual, the need of sexual fulfillment. And that's what celibacy really is. The person can be celibate without and still have sexual drive, but a genuinely celibate person is a person who's simply been freed. And I know people like that. They simply don't have any sense of need for sexual fulfillment.
Now, this is one of those texts, by the way, where I always sort of put tongue-in-cheek and say, now, in one of those places where you really have to take Paul for what he means and not for what he says, because he can't really mean, "I wish that all were as I myself am." It's like saying, "I speak in tongues more than you all." Well, how does he know? Uh, you know, it's Paul's way of saying that I would that all were. In other words, he appreciates his gift, and it's obvious that he prefers that gift when we come down to to the next section we're going to look at in a moment. But it's also obvious that, and gift, by the way, the interesting thing is that the word gift here is charisma for Paul. Charisma does not mean "charismatic utterance." It means a gracious gift from God. Celibacy and marriage are both charisma given by God to us because we are the people of his pleasure. We're his creation, and he loves his creation, and that's why it is.
Now, I think we just should say a quick passing word about 8, 10, and 12 before we do move on to 25. To the unmarried and the widows, or to the widowers and the widows, I say it's well for them to remain single as I do. That's what makes me really tempted. That widower is really what's in view. To remain single as I do. See that? You know, that makes so much sense out of the text. That means Paul was in fact a widowed man, and he is renowned remaining single. And you know, not, not never getting married. But obviously, widows, if he's going to, if they're going to remain single as he does, it means that they were in his classification, is what would be the obvious sense of that text. But he also recognizes that people who have over many years enjoyed or had, you know, had the privilege or the of sexual, of a sexual partner, that abstinence is really more difficult than those who have never engaged in sexual relations. And therefore, it's better for such people to marry. However, it's clear that Paul really would prefer that those who have once been married and are now no longer married should stay that way. He says the same thing about widows at the end of the chapter. You'll notice when he finally brings the whole chapter to an end, he finally says about the widows one more time, you know, but if they marry, it's okay. But if they marry, marry him the Lord. But he would prefer that they didn't, in terms of his own opinion.
Now, in verses 10 and 11. Now, Paul says some very strong things about divorce. No divorce. And here he says, "Not I, but the Lord." Now, this text has been bothersome, not so much verse 10, but verse 12. "To the rest I say, not the Lord." Well, now, very quickly, just say what Paul is doing here. In verse 10, Paul has from the Jesus Tradition. Now, you understand the gospel. I mean, Paul wrote before the Gospels were written. You know, Paul antidates this passage here, was written at least 10 years before the first gospel was written. But the, the stuff that's in the Gospels, the Jesus tradition, was certainly alive and well in the church. And in the Jesus tradition, they had Jesus' word about divorce. And all Paul does is cite the Jesus tradition, you see, in verses 10 to 12. He's not saying, "I got a direct contact, you know, a direct pipeline with Jesus on this one, and here's what he says." But I can't get one on verse 12. So here's what I say. What he's saying is, "Not I, but the Lord," meaning we've got something from Jesus on this one. So he gives what Jesus said on this one. But when it comes to number, to verse 12, Jesus didn't speak to this question. So he says, you know, Jesus didn't say anything, but I will. And he's speaking now with the same authority that he's always spoken as an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ. It's not his opinion. It's just that he doesn't have a Jesus word on this matter. But he didn't have a Jesus word and a lot of other things either, you know. So it fits into the same category. He's just clarifying that Jesus spoke to that issue. So listen to him.
Now, back to something that Jesus didn't speak to. Now, we've already talked about divorce in a brief note here, so we'll not say anything about that. You know, Jesus said, "No divorce," because he said, "Love your enemies." Um, and, uh, you know, that's really to be said. Divorce is predicated on selfishness. And if you were listening to the lectures this morning, divorce is not an option simply because that's not where the Christian, the Christian isn't thinking in those categories any longer. He's no longer thinking *kata sarka*, according to the old worldly way of looking at things. And therefore, divorce is out.
Well, what about a pagan partner? And here he has to wrestle with the thing a bit. But what he does is he says, "No divorce." But if the pagan partner tries to get out of the relationship, don't fight it, keep the peace. But he clearly wants them to stay married. And the reason for it, he says, is the pagan husband or wife is sanctified. Now, he does not mean that they're converted or that they're Christian. You remember this little thing I put on the board here yesterday about the two spheres? You know, the sphere of the spirit and the sphere of Satan? Okay, here's a Christian who's living in the sphere of the spirit. Okay, and married to somebody who really belongs here. But because of the unitive aspect of marriage, they're kind of in between. Now, they're not in the community of faith, I don't mean to suggest that by my diagram, but by the very fact that they're married to somebody who is, there is a very good chance, there's a very good possibility that they too will become a member of the community of faith. Who knows? But maybe, he says, you will be able to win that partner. So divorce is out, mostly because it's such a great opportunity for the Christian member who is truly Christian to finally bring that, that other member to Christ. And I don't have time to tell another of the great stories from Augustine's Confessions, but his mother, who all those years was a Christian, a beautiful one. Augustine finally says, before her death, and he goes on to tell the situation in the home, how the father was unfaithful to her and many times got drunk and beat her. And in all of this, he said, she lived as your child in his presence. And before he died, she won him to be, not by a word, but by her life. And boy, that is one of the beautiful moments. First Peter 3 really comes singing home at that point. But that's the point of it. You know, she's going to win him to him because she was truly Christian, and it finally did him in. So it's not, "Don't separate," but "Keep together," precisely because of that great opportunity. And of course, for the sake of the children too, you see. Not that they're sanctified or in the sense that they're Christians, but precisely because they have the opportunity of becoming members of the community of faith. Better in that situation, otherwise they'll probably go with a pagan partner because he thinks you're crazy. And, you know, it's not a good scene.
Okay, now we've got to skip over to get to verse 25. And I'm going to put a whole packet of notes aside now concerning the *parthenos*. Now, we've already suggested that we're moving to a new section, and obviously it is also another situation where Paul has no Jesus word. Now, concerning the unmarried, "I have no command of the Lord." Now, what he means from this again, as we've got to take this in the context of chapter 7, this does not mean that Paul doesn't have any pipeline, you know, that God isn't speaking to him anymore, and he doesn't know what to say. What he is saying is that Jesus never spoke to this question, but I'm going to give my opinion as one who is trustworthy. That is, he is not suggesting that his opinion is in fact just, you know, out of the air, but it's opinion. It's his opinion as one who is trustworthy. But I think you should note, it is still nonetheless an opinion, even for the Apostle Paul, as a trustworthy and not a commandment. He has no command from the Lord, and he is not giving any commandments himself. But what he is doing is in fact, all the way through, hey, there's not a single commandment. Verse 26, "I think in the verse 28, I would spare you." Verse 32, "I wish for you." You know, that kind of thing goes on all the way along, and that's not Paul's ordinary way of speaking, we must admit.
Now, we have two great problems in this section. One, of course, is the meaning of *parthenos*. What is this word going to mean in this text? And the second is that we really lack knowledge here about the present circumstances in Corinth. And furthermore, we really lack knowledge about marriage and singleness in that particular culture. That is, we really don't know. And here's one of the difficulties that you can't even find it in the, in, in the commentaries, because the commentaries are destitute here, as I am for you. We really don't know how marriages were arranged in a culture like Corinth. It was pretty good ideas in some other places like in Palestine, but not in Corinth. We simply don't really know. And secondly, we don't know what it entailed in every way in terms of setting up a household in antiquity. But given the fact that there's some things we don't know, the overall thrust of the passage, it seems to me, comes through pretty clearly, and we can see what's going on.
Now, notice that just as he has cited, "It is well for a man not to touch a woman," we have a repeat of that kind of thing. Now, I think in view of the impending distress that it is good for a man to remain as he is. And my guess is he's citing them again, but now favorably. "In view of the impending distress, it is good for a man to remain as he is." If not, he simply has picked up the phraseology and has used it. Now, the basic reason for Paul's advice is a word that I can translate, but I can't tell you what it means. I can give you some guesses, and that's what we'll try. Paul says in verse 26, and this is the absolute crucial passage in the text, he says, "on account of the *enestos* and *non-kein*." Now, that doesn't mean anything to you at all, but neither does it if I translate it for you. "In view of the present." Well, what does "present" mean? The present distress? Well, the RSV thinks it means impending distress, something that is not already present, although the verb usually ordinarily means something that's standing right there, and you know, present among us, but something that is sort of hanging already to come. And what they mean by that is the *eschaton*, therefore, the fight, you know, the summation of the age, which seems to be, uh, uh, supported by the further texts that suggest, I've lost my place for a minute here, down in verses 30, 31, 32, somewhere there about the present, 26 is the one we just looked at. "The time has grown short." Verse 29, "The appointed time has grown very sharp." Now, that sounds eschatological to me also. The appointed time, the time that God has appointed for himself, you know, to wrap things up. But on the other hand, that, that can mean some kind of appointed time that they and Paul knew about that he, you know, he didn't, he didn't clue us in. That is one of those places where they're on the way of length, and we're out of it. Now, my guess is that in fact, it is eschatological. The other possibility, of course, is it means some kind of present distress that they were experiencing. That it is just, it, let me put it this way, if it means present distress that they're experiencing, it would have been like writing to a group of of people in Vietnam, Christians during the Vietnamese debacle, and saying, "In view of the present distress, it's better for one to remain as he is." And that's perfectly good sense, because in view of the present distress, who knows, you know, what's going to happen to you next? You might be married and become a, she becomes a widow in, in two days. So, in view of the impending distress, whatever it was. Now, that's a possibility. What I'm saying, I don't know. I personally think that it's eschatological. I think that Paul really, in his earlier days, was living in a much greater expectancy of the return of Christ in terms of its bringing, you know, God's bringing the consummation. Now, obviously, toward the end of his life, he, he had, you know, that was no longer so urgent. Since the time of my departure is at hand, and he begins to think about the church going on after Paul leaves, First Timothy, Second Timothy, particularly where he gives one that point of view. It's very difficult for some to handle that that Paul could actually have changed his mind or couldn't have known about the eschaton or something like that. But I, of the opinion that God doesn't have to reveal everything to his Apostle in the process of his writing letters about, you know, other things. In any case, the one thing I can be sure of is if you'd have told the Apostle Paul 1977, he would have absolutely left you off the face of the earth. 1977. Can you imagine? 3177. 3177. Try it. Try it on for size. 3177. No possible way. Not there's not even a possibility of 1979, let alone 31. You know.
Now, that leads me to say something about how you and I as Christians have got to come to grips with this already, not yet business about the fact that God started the eschaton and it hasn't brought it to an end. We'd like to think that maybe God doesn't know what he's doing and he doesn't have his business very well at hand. I really can't answer all of that, except that there is that thing that goes on in the scriptures that tell us that "a day with the Lord is a thousand years, a thousand years a day," precisely because he doesn't look at time the way you and I do. That's a happy measurement for you and I because we're time-bound, and he's not. Now, in God's view, uh, if you will, God's perception of things, it's different from ours. And I think that probably the best view that one can take with regard to the eschaton is the one that D.L. Moody suggested many years ago, and that is that you should live every day of your life as though Jesus Christ were coming back that day, and yet as though they were not coming back for a thousand years. Every day of your life, you live it out. You live it out that way.
Now, if you thought that he was coming, only thought he was coming back today, if you would do anything differently, you ought to do it differently anyway. You follow me? If you knew Jesus was coming back tomorrow, would you do anything differently? Would you play tennis this afternoon? Well, I would like to think yes. Now, I, I probably wouldn't because I've got this, I'm this kind of person. There's so many things I want to get done first, type of thing. You know, but if the Lord would just free me up from that, you know, that kind of, "I got to get so many things done first" mentality, as if somehow that's going to make any difference with Jesus coming back, you know, the whole thing's kind of stupid. But if he had freed me up from that, I would like to think that I wouldn't do anything differently. That I would live out in my life, I hopefully wouldn't sin, but hopefully that's true anyway, you know, you understand what I'm saying? That is that God's going to help us in those places, but at the same time, we've got to think a thousand years. I know that's kind of particularly difficult for us because we're eschatological people too. We can't imagine, you know, beyond 1980. But even Wham-mers had better learn that it might be another thousand years. I can't imagine it, but neither could Paul imagine us, and here we are. Now, that's the place where Paul is. That's the, the, the context. But the real issue is to be found, it seems to me, in verse 28. "If you marry, you do not sin." And if a girl marries, she does not sin.
Now, I have a very strong view about what's really going on in this passage. This one I'm not going to give my life for. That I'll tell you what I think is going on here. Is one of those places where Paul is caught because he really essentially agrees with their position, but he doesn't want to appear to agree over much. You see, those that have already argued for no sex within marriage really have Paul pinned down when it comes to no marriage at all. You know, he can handle the no sex within marriage, but when it comes to no marriage at all, it's clear that Paul himself prefers singleness, and that's their position. And he wants to agree with their position, but he doesn't want to agree over much. Now, why does he not want to agree over much with their position? Precisely because they are arguing for singleness for the wrong reasons. So he is in favor of singleness, but he's not in favor of singleness from their point of view. It's from a biblical, divine, inspired point of view. And the real reason for singleness that makes singleness a live option, Paul says, has to do with service to the Lord. That's simply the place where it is. That's, that's what, that's the, and I say this to people, marriage is an option, and singleness is an option. And it's clear from what Paul says that marriage is an option. "If you marry, you do not sin." Now, he doesn't mean that that's not to damning marriage with faint praise, you know, or in a backhanded salute or something. That is simply Paul's way of of agreeing with their position, but at the same time recognizing that marriage is fully within the plan and will of God. But, but singleness is the option that he's talking about here, and that's obviously the point of the whole text. Remain single. Single. This is a real option. I agree with your position. Be single. But now, why is hesitance to agree with them? Precisely because they're wanting singleness because of no sex. And Paul says, singleness not because no sex, but singleness because one is freed from the cares that marriage sometimes brings, brings into a person's life.
Now, I have had a remarkable experience this week here in a way that I haven't had for many, many months, that suddenly makes this text makes some sense to me. You people have taken such marvelous care of me, and you have left me to be by myself in a way that I have not been by myself for years. I have got so much work done that my wife is going to flip out when I get home when I tell her how much work I have been able to get done while I've been here. And it has suddenly occurred to me that Paul is really correct. Now, I'm not anxious about that, you understand. I'm only giving this as a very valid personal illustration that this is true. I am a seminary professor who on his knees today had to ask the Lord to remind me again, please, that I am, I am a seminary professor, not because it's my job where I get money, but because here are young people who are going into the ministry of the church, and I want everything I do to be for the sake of the church and the sake of the kingdom. So when I grade those papers, it isn't just slapping a grade on it, but it's trying to do something that will help them to understand the mistakes they made so that they won't go out into the church and make those mistakes. And I take time with those papers. And every once in a while, I get, I get anxious, you know, 134 of them. After a while, you read the same thing so many times, there's a moment, so, you know, so in any case, there, there comes into that, that kind of anxiety and that whipping them off kind of thing. But I have been freed this week to simply sit there and be what I'm supposed to be, a seminary professor, and here teaching, Wham, and getting the job done as God has given me grace and strength to do that job. And if I were home this week, I would not have got that work done. I guess as sure as I'm here, I wouldn't have got that work done. And the reason is, I've got three high schoolers, and these kids are precious to me, and they're so precious to me that when they run track meets, I go to track meets. When they have things going on, I go to what they've got going on. My wife and I would have things going on in an evening, and we spend some time in an evening. I would be spending so much time, legitimate time, and necessary time to my existence. Now, not anxiety and care in the sense that I'm overburdened by that, not me, not for one minute. I love every minute of my life with my family. But the fact is, my singleness this week has freed me from those things, and I have been able to concentrate precisely on what God has called me to do.
Now, I would never make it as a single, personally. The Lord knows that. He has gifted me with a, with an absolutely precious wife, and I am so grateful that I can't express my gratitude for that. I, you know, if she were to die, I don't know what I would do. The Lord would really have to reconstitute me. And I don't mean because of sexual drive. I mean because I am so, I'm so completely a half person without her. But he's even freed me from that this week, just freed me to be what I'm supposed to be doing in terms of the calling of God. And suddenly, this text has made some sense to me in a new way. I used to hear that anxiety and care in terms of really getting under the burden, boy, I got a wife, this, you know, no, that's not what Paul's talking about. He's just talking about care, meaning legitimate care. Legitimate care. Singleness is a real option because it frees one up to devote himself or herself fully to the Lord.
Now, I don't have any word to say to those who are single and don't want to be single. I don't have any word here except that God in his grace has gifts in the church, and that's a matter of prayer. I don't really have any more word here, and I'm sorry. I wish I did. I wish I could go and say, "Hey, you and you." But that's not, that's not my prophetic call.
Now, what about this final thing down in verses 36 to 38 in the final two minutes that we've got? Well, what is going on in verses 36 to 38 is a special kind of *parthenos*. Here are people who are already engaged to be married, you see. And surely, it's engagement. Celibate marriage doesn't make sense. Father-daughter makes no sense at all. And out of the Greek, I mean, it could have made some sense if the Greek text would have allowed it, but the Greek text itself just won't allow it. You have to do so many things with a Greek, add some words and all kinds of stuff. The Greek really won't allow it. Now, I know it's translated that way in the NASB, but the Greek won't allow that. It's because that the tradition of the church, tradition has made it that for so many years, they were afraid to, you know, get away from the church tradition. Almost certainly, it means engaged couples. Now, we're talking about a special kind of *parthenos*, you see. Singleness, okay. If you want to be single, stay that way. If you marry, okay, too. But when you're just, when it's just talking about singleness, plain singleness, you know, stay single. Well, now, the final question is, well, what about those who are already engaged to be married? Surely they should, you know, stay single. And Paul says, well, if they can find, but, and it's clear from this passage that he's advocating marriage for them after all, because they're engaged and go on with it. And, uh, and in terms, and some of the language that he uses is kind of hard to handle, but in overall, that's what in fact the passage is saying.
So, what the whole chapter says is marriage is a gift, singleness is a gift. Marriage is an option that people ought to think about, and singleness is an option that people ought to think about. And both ought to affirm one another in the church of Jesus Christ. The kind of concern I have is that we've lived for a long time in a church where only we only have married people, and we think married people, and we talk married people, and the poor single person feels like he's left out and left, you know, out in the street somewhere. And we should take hints from the Apostle Paul. He was after all one of those singles, and he should give us some of the clues as to so the rest of us ought to learn to affirm singleness. And I mean, really affirm it, and not simply affirm it with a kind of a backhanded affirmation. Paul affirms it, and you've told me to hush up. So we're through.