Verse by Verse

⁴ Therefore concerning the eating of things offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one.

⁵ For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords),

⁶ yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.

⁷ However, there is not in everyone that knowledge; for some, with consciousness of the idol, until now eat it as a thing offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled.

The point of verse 4 is that since there is only one God, things sacrificed to other non-existent gods mean nothing.

However (verse 5), although there are no other gods, there are those who worship what the think are gods represented by the idols (demons — 1 Corinthians 10:20). The idol is nothing, but the worship is evil because it is of demons and not of God.

Those who don’t fully understand about idols (v.7) or who, perhaps, used to worship idols, can be defiled by eating meat sacrificed to them — not because the meat is tainted, but because they eat against their own consciences.

defiled (v.7) = covered with mud

1 Now concerning things offered to idols: We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies.

2 And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know.

3 But if anyone loves God, this one is known by Him.

Probably the fact that the church contained both converted Jews and Gentiles was the source of controversy. The distinction between the clean and the unclean animals had been for centuries an insuperable barrier to fellowship between Jew and Gentile. Wherever the devout Jew lived he required a special butcher to prepare his meat, one who was trained to decide whether the meat was killed according to the law or not. The Jew would under no circumstances eat meat which had not been certified as free from legal blemish and officially prepared according to the law. The custom today still prevails in the eating of specially prepared “kosher” meat. But the Gentiles had been accustomed to obtain their meat anywhere, as long as it was good to eat, and they made no distinction between clean and unclean animals. Much of this meat which was sold in these pagan temples consisted of remnants of sacrifices brought to the heathen altars and placed on sale after the priests had used their own portion for ceremonial purposes and their own private use. It was meat of the very highest quality, for nothing but the best was accepted by the priests in sacrifices to their heathen gods. Moreover, it was usually cheap, for it was donated for sacrifice, and therefore it was a boon to poor Christians who might not otherwise enjoy this highest quality meat.

The legalists said, however, that it was wrong to eat such meat because it had been offered unto idols and served in an ungodly heathen temple; while those who took a more liberal view contended that there was nothing wrong with it because they were under grace. — DeHaan, pages 93-94.

knowledge (v.1) — In this case, knowledge that idols are not deities and, therefore, that there is no intrinsic harm in eating meat offered to them.

puffs up (v.1) = lit. “blows up, inflates” — self-conceit, pride

edifies (v.1) = builds up — Knowledge puffs up, love builds up.

If anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know (v.2) — In the original the tenses vary, in the first place the perfect tense, rendered “knows,” signifies knowledge acquired; in the next two the past definite or aorist tense signifies the beginning of the process of acquiring knowledge. We may therefore suggest the following rendering: “if a man imagines he has fully acquired true knowledge, he has not even begun to know how it ought to be gained.” — Vine, page 57.

The point of verse 3 is that love, not knowledge is the key to doing God’s will.

³⁵ And this I say for your own profit, not that I may put a leash on you, but for what is proper, and that you may serve the Lord without distraction.

³⁶ But if any man thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin, if she is past the flower of youth, and thus it must be, let him do what he wishes. He does not sin; let them marry.

³⁷ Nevertheless he who stands steadfast in his heart, having no necessity, but has power over his own will, and has so determined in his heart that he will keep his virgin, does well.

³⁸ So then he who gives her in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better.

³⁹ A wife is bound by law as long as her husband lives; but if her husband dies, she is at liberty to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.

⁴⁰ But she is happier if she remains as she is, according to my judgment—and I think I also have the Spirit of God.

put a leash (v.35) = throw a noose — deprive of liberty — Paul was saying that they were still free to make their own choices in the matter of marriage.

behaving improperly (v.36) — referring to fathers, if they prevent their daughters from marrying without a strong reason to oppose it, which might cause them to sin as a result.

flower of youth (v.36) — of marriageable age

well/better (v.38) — not right and wrong, but a matter of expediency

whom she wishes (v.39) — Widows can make their own choices regarding whom they marry, while virgins can only marry with their fathers’ consent. — Romans 7:1-6.

in the Lord (v.39) — according to His will and, of course, only to another believer

my (v.40) — stressed — in Paul’s opinion; it’s not a command

The dispensational aspect of this can be seen by comparing this passage with 1 Timothy 5:14: Therefore I desire that the younger widows marry, bear children, manage the house, give no opportunity to the adversary to speak reproachfully.

 So, what to make of all this. I have a bit of a struggle with those places in this chapter where Paul says that it’s his opinion and not the Lord’s command. The commentaries all stress that these parts are as inspired as the rest, but it must mean something when Paul says that. 1 Corinthians was written early, before Acts 28, when the Jews had not yet been completely set aside. Indeed, there were still kingdom believers around, including in the church in Corinth (vs. 17-20). The Christians in Corinth were apparently being persecuted, which added an immediate, practical aspect to Paul’s letter, but apart from that there appears to be the over-riding thought that the Lord could return at any moment and usher in the kingdom, which means that the persecution they were facing might be the persecution prophesied for the Tribulation. It wasn’t that Paul was giving bad advice which he later rescinded (1 Timothy 5:14), but that he hadn’t been given full revelation yet. His advice was sound in light of the circumstances and in light of what he knew at that point.

I think Paul was allowed to say what he said because it was the right thing for the moment, but the Holy Spirit also had him say that it was not a command from the Lord because the Holy Spirit knew the future and wanted future generations of believers (us) to understand this wasn’t the final word on the subject, even though it was from Paul.

²⁹ But this I say, brethren, the time is short, so that from now on even those who have wives should be as though they had none,

³⁰ those who weep as though they did not weep, those who rejoice as though they did not rejoice, those who buy as though they did not possess,

³¹ and those who use this world as not misusing it. For the form of this world is passing away.

³² But I want you to be without care. He who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord—how he may please the Lord.

³³ But he who is married cares about the things of the world—how he may please his wife.

³⁴ There is a difference between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman cares about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. But she who is married cares about the things of the world—how she may please her husband.

say (v.29) = declare

time is short (v.29) — The Greek verb used here signifies “has been drawn so as to be little in amount,” or “has been contracted.” The word denotes a season or a period providing an opportunity; it does not refer to length of time as such. Paul is here speaking of the time in which our life and circumstances are to be viewed and planned in the light of the imminent return of the Lord Jesus Christ. We know He is coming, but we do not know the day or the hour — He may come this moment. Therefore, we should occupy until He DOES come; and for you and for me as individuals, the time IS short. — Greene, page 261.

from now on (v.29) — that which remains of our lives on earth

as though they had none (v.29) — not letting the marriage become more important than one’s relationship with Christ

The point of verse 30 is that we should live with the understanding that the joys, sorrows and things of this world are temporary.

not misusing it (v.31) — should be “not using it to the full”

form (v.31) = external appearance

without cares (v.33) — without preoccupations, without a split mentality

The word [cares] in all its forms always denotes a painful division and distraction of thought, but it does not always denote a sinful distraction, Since Paul also had the cares of the churches (2 Corinthians 11:28). And since Paul wants the believers to attend upon the Lord without distraction, without the spasms of cares and fretting, he urged the young people not to get married in those distressing days of persecution, unless there was a positive physical necessity. What he says about the unmarried as caring for the things of the Lord represents a high spiritual ideal life. Old bachelors and single women actually do not always put the Lord first, and do not always please the Lord, as Paul says they do, and married people do not always please their partner of life. He gives here only general and lofty ideals without stopping to make excuses for the many exceptions in the cold realities of life. One thing is sure, that Paul seeks to make the Lord preeminent above all the fleeting things of time. — Bultema, pages 64-65.

__________

Paul is speaking here [verses 33 and 34] of matters in general. Naturally, a man who is married knows that it is his duty to supply the physical and material needs of his wife and family, and it is only reasonable that he would have less time for the things of the Lord. It is the duty of the head of a family to provide for those who depend on him. In 1 Timothy 5:8 Paul said, “If any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel!” A man who is married is duty-bound to care for his family; and in so doing, his service to God is automatically limited. But if he is unmarried he is free to go to the ends of the earth if the Holy Spirit do leads … — Greene, page 265.

²⁵ Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy.

²⁶ I suppose therefore that this is good because of the present distress—that it is good for a man to remain as he is:

²⁷ Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed. Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife.

²⁸ But even if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Nevertheless such will have trouble in the flesh, but I would spare you.

Paul had “no commandment from the Lord” relating to virgins under the then-present circumstances. Indeed, probably no fixed rule could be laid down which might not lead to license on the one hand, or undue restraint on the other. Thus the apostle gives only his judgment (v.25), based on the conditions at Corinth at that time. And he adds that those who do not follow his advice are not necessarily guilty of any wrongdoing. As to the question of the inspiration of his advice in the matter, see notes on v. 12. — Stam, page 140.

judgment (v.25) — advice, counsel

mercy (v.25) — assumes need and the means of meeting it

They were days of great stress and persecution and opposition from the enemy. The Christians were despised and suspected on every hand. They were subjected to the greatest acts of violence and even to death. In view of all this Paul says to the unmarried: Remain as you are because of the uncertainty of these terrible days of persecution. And then too, they were evidently looking for the imminent return of the Lord Jesus Christ. The persecutions they endured were regarded by them as the persecutions predicted as coming just before the return of the Savior, and in view of His early return (which they evidently expected), Paul gives this advice. — DeHaan, page 86.

__________

The above words from the apostle Paul [present distress] agree with the many evidences that he never expected that the “dispensation of the grace of God” might last for more than 1900 years. He expected to be alive at the Lord’s coming for His own after a brief and wonderful opportunity for a sin-cursed world (1 Corinthians 15:52; 1 Thessalonians 4:17). Thus here he describes conditions which will prevail during the Tribulation period and “will” begin to prevail even before that time. — Stam, page 143.

good (v.26) = intrinsically good — well-adapted to circumstances

remain as he is (v.26) — whether single or married, a man should remain in his present situation.

Note carefully the words “loosed from,” not “have you loosed yourself from a wife.” This clearly refers to the person whom his mate has divorced. He did not wish a divorce. He wanted the marriage to continue, but she insisted otherwise and obtained (directly or indirectly) a divorce, and so the man has now been “loosed from ” a wife. This cannot refer to an unmarried man, for an unmarried man has never been “loosed from a wife.” He simply does not have one. But the person described in v.27 has been “loosed from a wife” and this is the party whose plight has so often been overlooked in discussions on the divorce and remarriage question.

A careful study of vs.12-15 will give us some insight into the plight of the one who has thus been “loosed from” a mate. And such, says the apostle in both v.15 (where the unbeliever has departed) and vs.27-28 (where the believer is involved), may marry again without any stigma of wrongdoing; see v.15, “not under bondage in such cases” and vs.27-28, “thou hast not sinned.” — Stam, pages 141-142.

in the flesh (v.28) — in the circumstances of life

²¹ Were you called while a slave? Do not be concerned about it; but if you can be made free, rather use it.

²² For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman. Likewise he who is called while free is Christ’s slave.

²³ You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men.

²⁴ Brethren, let each one remain with God in that state in which he was called.

slave (v.21) — Paul — Romans 1:1; Philippians 1:1; Titus 1:1

if you can be made free (v.21) — don’t worry about being a slave, but if you have a chance to be free, do so

Does the apostle cry, “Rise and rebel! Assert your rights?” This is the cry on every hand today, even in much less aggravated cases of injustice, but as a result great bitterness and deep hatreds are being engendered. Certainly this approach to the problem of injustice is not based on the Word of God. There we read: “Bondmen, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh.” And this obedience, we read further, should be sincere and from the heart: “Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart … heartily, as to the Lord …” (Colossians 3:22-23). Four times in Colossians 3:22-24, the apostle makes it clear that in faithfully serving one’s master he is serving the Lord.

Before God the believing bondslave occupies a position not one whit lower than that of his master. Thus, here in 1 Corinthians 7:21-23, Paul suggests that should a slave be presented with an opportunity to be free he should take advantage of it. But if in bondage, he says, “Care not for it.” Today we might say, “Think nothing of it.” — Stam, page 138.

called (v.22) — saved

Lord (v.22) — speaks of authority and ownership

Christ (v.22) — speaks of love and grace

You were bought at a price (v.23) — this was said in 6:20, but the connection is different; there the fact of the purchase (the blood of Christ) was the ground of an exhortation to remember that our body is a temple of the Holy Spirit and is to be used for the glory of God. Here it is the ground upon which, social distinctions apart, we are to remember that we are bondservants of Christ, having been freed from slavery to sin.

Among the Greeks, manumission from slavery was effected by a legal fiction, according to which the slave set free was purchased by a god. The slave could not provide the money, so the master paid it into the temple treasury in his presence, a document being drawn up with the words “for freedom.” Nobody could enslave him again, as he was the property of the god. For the believer there is an analogy in certain details, but how different the circumstances! — Vine, page.52.

slaves of men (v.23) — regarding men as having control over us

Verse 23 repeats the idea of verse 20 but adds “with God”

¹⁷ Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches.

¹⁸ Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised.

¹⁹ Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God’s commands is what counts.

²⁰ Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them.

in all the churches (v.17) — A general statement that what Paul has just said and is about to say isn’t only for the Corinthians.

A fine statement of this verse is found in Arthur S. Way’s translation. It reads, “Let each member go on living in the same conditions which the Lord originally allotted to him, and in which he was when he heard God’s call.” The meaning is self-evident. Conversion is not outwardly revolutionary. It is, instead, inwardly regenerative. It does not storm into our national and social life and proceed to create violent changes and adjustments. It is true that changes will occur. It leaves us totally different than what it finds us. It does not require us, however, to make an occidental of the oriental. So the principle is “as the Lord hath called everyone, so let him walk.” In other words, be what you were when Christ found you. Not, of course, in the manner of your life, but in its sphere. — Laurin, page 129.

__________

Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing (v.19) — This statement required a unique amount of boldness and bravery when we remember that many thousands of Jewish believers were still great zealots for the law in every detail (Acts 21:20). Circumcision in particular was considered the most basic and obligatory of all the Mosaic ordinances. Paul had formerly undoubtedly believed this also, but in the face of James and all the brethren of the law he calmly stated this incomparable statement three times, although he knew full well what God of old had already said about this matter (1 Samuel 15:22; Ecclesiastes 12:13; Isaiah 1:11, 13, 16-17; Jeremiah 7:22; Micah 6:6-8; Hosea 6:6). It seems that even the legalistic brethren like James did not understand that the crucifixion of Christ was the real antitypical circumcision without hands, which made superfluous once and for all every rite enacted with hands (Colossians 2:10-12). — Bultema, page 59.

 I think there might be reason to take a slightly different view of these verses than any of my commentaries did. Back at the beginning of my study of 1 Corinthians, I said I wanted to look for evidence that there was a mix of Jewish kingdom believers and Gentile grace believers in this church. Is it possible that these verses are confirmation of that? Later, in other letters, Paul makes it clear that there is no circumcision or uncircumcision. But here he says that they are to “abide in the same calling in which he was called.” In other words, there were those called to be of the circumcision and those called to be of the uncircumsion. In Galatians 2, Peter, James, and John agree to limit their ministry to the circumcision when Paul agrees to limit his to the uncircumcision. But in the Corinthians church, there were both — as is confirmed in later passages regarding tongues. This was one of Paul’s very early letters, probably written before either Romans or Galatians, and so the mix of Judaism and grace was still evident and the book needs to be interpreted in light of that fact.

¹² To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her.

¹³ And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him.

¹⁴ For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

¹⁵ But if the unbeliever leaves, let it be so. The brother or the sister is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace.

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

In these verses, Paul addresses marriages in which one of the pair is saved after marriage. He is not sanctioning marriage between a believer and a non-believer.

I say this (I, not the Lord) (v.12) — There are no commands of God to quote on this subject (as there was on divorce among believers), so Paul addresses it on the basis of his apostolic authority.

In 1 Corinthians 7:12 [and also referring to vs. 25 and 40] he says, “But to the rest speak I, not the Lord.” This does not deny the divine inspiration of his words. He simply means: “This is not part of the revelation I have received from the Lord.” Indeed, in v. 25 he confirms this interpretation by his statement: “Now concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord …” Here the thought of inspiration does not even enter in, but rather that of “the revelation of Jesus Christ” to him.

That everything in Paul’s epistles was divinely inspired is emphasized not only in 2 Timothy 3:16, but also in 2 Peter 3:16 where “all his [Paul’s] epistles” are called “the Scriptures,” which unbelievers “wrest … to their own destruction.”

But as we have seen, it is also evident, especially from 1 Corinthians 7, that all Paul wrote is not to be included in the special revelation he received from the Lord in glory. — Stam, pg. 134.

willing (vs. 12-23) — indicated mutual consent

sanctified (v.14) = set apart — not a change of spiritual state, but that the marriage is legitimate in God’s view even though one partner is not saved

children (v.14) — again, they are seen by God as the result of a legitimate marriage

holy (v.14) = sanctified, set apart

In this verse we have a great contrast of the grace of Christianity and the rigor of Judaism. One of the ways Israel remained a holy people was in refusing to mix with the heather in marriage. Those who took heathen wives were polluted, and their children unclean. When they judged the sin they proved it by not only offering a blood sacrifice, but by putting away both children and wife (Ezra 10:3).

In the case of the Christian who was married to an unbeliever, Paul says that he does not have to put away his children — they were not unclean, but holy. — Greene, pg. 247.

In light of Greene’s quote above, it was probably because of the mix of Jewish kingdom believers and Gentile grace believers in this particular church which required this teaching from Paul.

Verse 15 covers the situation in which one partner believers after marriage and the other, non-believing partner does not want to remain married.

not bound (v.15) — to the marriage vow

called us to live in peace (v.15) — If the two can remain married without strife and hatred, they should.

 ⁷ For I wish that all men were even as I myself. But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that.

⁸ But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am;

⁹ but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

¹⁰ Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband.

¹¹ But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife.

as I myself (v.7) — able to exercise self-control. Some think Paul was once married because normally only married men were in the Sanhedrin, but there is no Biblical support for it.

gift (v.7) = gift of grace

remain even as I am (v.8) — Paul isn’t saying that the unmarried state is superior, but that it does have advantages in certain circumstances.

self-control (v.9) — power or, in this case, lack of it

It should be carefully noted, however, that here again the apostle does not promote celibacy for all, but only for those who, like himself, had no need to be married. And no doubt he makes this statement as he does other statements in this chapter, with “the present distress” and persecution in view (v.26) and, under these circumstances, to encourage a life wholly devoted to Christ, unencumbered with family cares (vs. 32-35). — Stam, page 128.

What Stam points out in the quote above about “the present distress” gives me a different opinion on the passage than what I’d come to after last study. I now think these is some ground for interpreting 1 Corinthians in light of the situation in the city at the time of the writing.

burn with passion (v.9) — emotionally (1 Timothy 5:14)

Verse 10 indicates that Paul was not advocating divorce in any circumstance.

yet not I but the Lord (v.10) — Mark 10:9; Luke 16:18

if she does depart (v.11) — if there is a separation (although there shouldn’t be), neither partner is free to marry another person

1 Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

² Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.

³ Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband.

⁴ The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.

⁵ Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

⁶ But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment.

This letter was not written with normal conditions of life in view. Two things contributed to the abnormal state of affairs in Corinth. One was their recent conversion from paganism; the other was their imminent persecution by pagans. These two things created abnormal conditions. As a result, a letter had been written to Paul asking his advice on specific questions. Therefore, when Paul writes the advice found in this chapter, he is not treating the general subject of marriage. He is giving advice concerning marriage under certain emergencies which had arisen in Corinth. He is not saying here is what is right or wrong, but what is wise under prevailing conditions. — Laurin, page 120

I include Laurin’s quote (above) because it’s a common view I’ve heard before. It makes sense, but I’m not sure I agree with it (or that I disagree with it). All Scripture was written “under prevailing conditions,” and to discount it on that basis leaves us with very little to guide us.

render (v.3) = the discharge of an obligation

does not have authority (v.4) — In this case, over one’s own body, either to withhold sex or to have sex outside of marriage.

for a time (v.5) — abstention must be 1) by mutual consent; 2) temporary; and 3) to devote energy to prayer

fasting (v.5) — not in the original manuscripts

permission (v.6) = lit. “joint opinion,” “concession” — referring to what he just said in verse 5.

Paul is not less inspired here (v.6) than he is elsewhere. He is not stepping out of character as an inspired writer. He is as much inspired at this point as at others. What he is saying is that his advice to marry or to stay unmarried is not to be considered as a divine command. Everyone is to act according to his own conscience. — Laurin, page 124.

__________

This was not by commandment but by permission, and just because you are able to be happy in the single state, do not make your personal experience a rule for others, do not make your own ideas the measuring stick and the only rule and guide for everyone else who may be differently constituted in temperament than you are. — DeHaan, page 73