It has been suggested that I Cor 7, while it is indeed a command to the young man or woman struggling with the temptation to fornication (or their fathers) to see to it that they have a spouse, this command does not apply to anyone else in the church: most specifically not to the father of any particular young woman to whom a young man (or his father) might come for a wife. Instead they lay out a series of qualifications that a young man must meet to marry their daughter, or any daughter of the church, and ‘a repentant fornicator’ or even ‘struggling with the temptation to fornication’ is far from that list.
In a purely logical sense this must be seen as folly. If the church is to direct the young man that he must have a wife, they cannot turn around, on the other hand, and forbid the fathers of the young women to give a wife to him! Indeed, they cannot even allow for a system which encourages that.
In a more subtle sense some have suggested that, while it is fine for the young man to marry some woman, they may not have ‘my daughter’. This error takes one of two forms:
Some men merely do not reason this out; and reason out the fact that if their standards, which they in their heart of hearts really believe everyone else should also apply, were actually applied across the board, that this would, in fact, make God’s command impossible to carry out.
Others, and one hopes that they too haven’t reasoned this out, are implying that their daughter may not marry such a man because their daughter (and, by implication, they themselves) is purer, and higher, than the kind of daughter that could, possibly, be given to a fornicator, however repentant and obedient to God’s command of I Cor 7. “Let the daughters who have fornicated be given to the sons who have fornicated,” they say, or imply.
Words fail me at the hubris that this statement implies; as well as the breathtaking Biblical illogic. How many (hundreds of) Bible passages rail against the sin of pride and of forming divisions in the body; where the poor sit at the feet of the rich? Are the ‘rich’ daughters (who have been raised by such wonderful men) to have the ‘poor’ daughters (whose fathers allowed them to fornicate) sit at their feet as well?
Who is better prepared to be a helpmeet of a man who has fornicated (or been torn by that temptation): The woman for whom it is a constant temptation herself, or the woman who has proven herself strong in that area and can, therefore, be a fully equipped helpmeet?
I hope and pray that no one who holds this position has actually thought it out.
Gal 6:1 Brothers, if a man is overtaken in some deviation, you, the spiritual ones, restore such a one in the spirit of meekness, considering yourself, that you not also be tempted. Gal 6:2 Bear one another's burdens, and so you will fulfill the law of Christ. Gal 6:3 For if anyone thinks to be something, he deceives himself, being nothing.
No. I Cor 7 is a command to the whole church, and we each have our role to play. Might I suggest:
Young children: These should be, under their parent’s guidance, getting ready to be married themselves, keeping themselves pure and focused on brother/sister relationships, encouraging and rejoicing with their older siblings as they marry and have children.
Older children: Holding themselves in readiness; eagerly anticipating marriage while insisting on holding each brother and sister in the church as exactly that in all purity; waiting with eager obedience for the day when their father will present them with a spouse.
Childless (or pregnant) Couples: Praying for and otherwise uplifting and encouraging and assisting the others in the church as they are able in this area.
Older Couples : As with childless couples, along with giving Godly counsel to the various groups ala Titus 2 etc.
The Elders: Teaching the Word of God on this issue; particularly in light of the current false teachings of courtship and dating; rebuking and admonishing their congregations when necessary; helping their church to be salt and light on this issue wherever possible to the outside world/church; specifically facilitating marriages, young marriages, fruitful young marriages. Counseling and encouraging the resulting marriages.
Fathers of Sons: Teaching their sons to be prepared for the wife they will bring them; determining their need for marriage; actively seeking a wife for their sons; taking wives for their sons from daughters who have need, where necessary.
Fathers of Sons: Teaching their daughters to be ready for the husband they will bring them; determining their need for marriage; giving their daughters in marriage: either to a son who has need or, if their daughter herself has a need, even to a son who has not need.
Specifically, since that seems to be an issue, on the decision of the fathers of the daughters, as they evaluate a given husband for their daughter, I believe that they should always be asking themselves,
"Do my actions here represent my best obedience to I Cor 7:2? Will my decision be the one that is the most helpful in 'Letting them marry'? Or am I raising objections or obstacles that, without Scriptural warrant, stand in the way of letting them marry? Am I being obedient or disobedient to God's command here?"
3 comments:
How you can say that i cor 7 is a command to anyone, when verse 6 clearly states, "I say this as a concession, not as a command."
Brother, lets not make commands were God makes concessions to our fallen sinful nature. Stop wresting the scriptures.
If your son has fornicated, find him a wife among those who would bind their daughter to a fornicator. There are plenty of females out there who have also fornicated, or let him marry a widow. Do not expect a virgin when your son has been incontinent, I cannot trust my daughter to your son as he has proven himself unable to control himself.
My first duty is to my daughter, not to your son. Your first duty was to teach your son to obey God and not sin against himself, his future wife and God by fornicating. If you have failed in this, if your son has failed in this, then your actions have consequences that you must accept. God forgives but there are always natural consequences ANY TIME we sin. I suppose you can console yourself with the fact that in the present day, at least he will not be stoned to death, as per scriptures. I guess that's something.
Again, my duty is to my daughter and I will not give my daughter to your son as it is not in her best interest. Plenty of young men have been able to control themselves despite the difficulty in doing so. I will choose from those men for my daughter.
>>How you can say that i cor 7 is a command to anyone, when verse 6 clearly states, "I say this as a concession, not as a command."
Well, there are a couple of rather easy answers to this. The first, and most obvious, is that verse six is, well, verse six… and is written in reaction to verses one through five (and not even to all of that) and not to verse nine, which is much of the focus of the above post and your comment. As it is written:
1Co 7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 1Co 7:2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 1Co 7:3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 1Co 7:4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. 1Co 7:5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
1Co 7:6 But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment. 1Co 7:7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.
1Co 7:8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. 1Co 7:9 But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
Verse two might, perhaps, be the subject of the ‘permission not command’ statement. If so, it is because Paul is permitting, but not commanding, every man to marry. Even at that the part about ‘letting’ them marry would still be a command to the parents etc. However the best commentators that I have seen see the ‘permission not command’ as referring to verse five (the verse immediately before the statement); and thus means that Paul is not even commanding couples to have an occasional time of abstinence from sexual intercourse for the purposes of fasting and prayer… that because not all men have his gift, he doesn’t even command that period of short abstinence.
However verse nine, the verse you object to most strenuously, cannot be the subject of the ‘permission not command’ statement. And verse nine states the exact opposite of what you state in your post. Indeed, my post above points out the extreme pride and illogic of your position.
As well, I need to reinforce, none of my post referenced any particular person, including any of my sons, nor was it meant to reference them. Further posts referencing a person will not be published. The point of the post is that God’s word commands us to see that those in the church (ie our Christian youth) who have an issue of being unable to contain should have recourse to the remedy which God’s commands, namely a wife, from the church. It is pride and disobedience which would lead us to refuse.
Yah states:
>>My first duty is to my daughter,
This is not, actually, true. Our first duty is not to our children, but to our God. Thus if I Cor 7 states commands, our first duty is to obey those commands.
A failure to do so is a failure to obey God, and is a failure of our 'first duty'.
Post a Comment