It was proposed to me that the stipulations for marriage in 1 Corinthians 7 repeal the "fornication clause" for divorce in Matthew 19. I would really appreciate any added input on this issue.
Katie
Katie
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
1 Corinthians 7 Question
- Thread starter sola scriptura
- Start date
There are several issues in the 1 Cor 7 passage, it would be helpful to know exactly which verses are being referenced.
First of all, if someone is making a claim about a law being of no effect, or being repealed, the burden of proof is on the individual making the claim. If you can post a summary of the person's claim, we can better understand their thoughts.
Secondly, God's Laws cannot be repealed, they can only be fulfilled, and only by God Himself.
Thirdly, those two passages do not conflict, so by default are not in opposition to each other, or capable of repealing each other, or over-ruling each other.
The Corinthian passage talks about avoiding fornication by being committed INTO marriage, and that if a believing woman leaves, she is still bound to her husband, and the husband must take her back if she returns.
The Matthew 19 passage in similar fashion says that unless a woman commits fornication, the husband is not allowed to put her away.
In both passages, the two are still married and are not allowed to separate, and there is nothing to repeal because the two passages are in agreement. In the Corinthian passage, it is clearly stated that she is to NOT marry, but must return to her husband. She cannot because she would have to commit fornication/adultery in order to marry again, because no matter where she is geographically, she is still a married woman.
This verse is referencing a believer that is married to a spouse that is NOT a believer and leaves. A woman that believes is left by a man that is not only gone, but not willing to be a husband or a covering for her. She is not bound to him any longer, she is free to marry again.
The Matthew 19 passage has nothing to do with believers married to unbelievers, and therefore cannot be applied directly against 1 Cor 7:15. The passage in Matthew is about "divorce for any cause", which was the practice of the jews of that time.
First of all, if someone is making a claim about a law being of no effect, or being repealed, the burden of proof is on the individual making the claim. If you can post a summary of the person's claim, we can better understand their thoughts.
Secondly, God's Laws cannot be repealed, they can only be fulfilled, and only by God Himself.
Thirdly, those two passages do not conflict, so by default are not in opposition to each other, or capable of repealing each other, or over-ruling each other.
The Corinthian passage talks about avoiding fornication by being committed INTO marriage, and that if a believing woman leaves, she is still bound to her husband, and the husband must take her back if she returns.
The Matthew 19 passage in similar fashion says that unless a woman commits fornication, the husband is not allowed to put her away.
In both passages, the two are still married and are not allowed to separate, and there is nothing to repeal because the two passages are in agreement. In the Corinthian passage, it is clearly stated that she is to NOT marry, but must return to her husband. She cannot because she would have to commit fornication/adultery in order to marry again, because no matter where she is geographically, she is still a married woman.
This verse is referencing a believer that is married to a spouse that is NOT a believer and leaves. A woman that believes is left by a man that is not only gone, but not willing to be a husband or a covering for her. She is not bound to him any longer, she is free to marry again.
The Matthew 19 passage has nothing to do with believers married to unbelievers, and therefore cannot be applied directly against 1 Cor 7:15. The passage in Matthew is about "divorce for any cause", which was the practice of the jews of that time.
:lol:
Memphis Dwight
Member
1 Corinthians 7 does not contradict Matt chapters 19 or 5:32. Nor do these Matthean sayings contradicts the rules and dynamics of marriage that preceded Christ's sermons. Everything is harmonious. Sometimes we silly humans can come up with false ideas and then they reverberate for a few hundred years and so that the lies are nearly indistinguishable from the truth.
1 Cor 7 was written to a congregation that was expecting the day of the Lord to be very near. Christ had said: And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! That is matt 24:19. The expression those days refers to the time period leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem that happened in AD 70 also known as the day of the Lord.
1 Corinthians was written much closer to the coming of the Lord than was say 1 Timothy. In 1 Tim we have Paul exhorting the younger widows to remarry. He says I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully. 1 Tim 5:14.
Yet in 1 Corinthians 7 he advises against marriage though he doesn't command anyone not to get married. The Corinthians were probably worried about the ramifications of starting a family and having that added burden of young children or even infants when they knew that a great calamity was coming upon the rogue jewish nation involving a massacre by the Roman army.
Paul's advice about birth control for those already married: 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.
They didn't use any birth control except abstinence. And abstinence can sometimes fail. So we have to keep all of this in mind when reading 1 Cor 7.
Furthermore, the stipulation,the exception clause for fornication, is not just confined to a woman sleeping with another man. There is such a thing as nonsexual fornication. See Judges 19:2 for this. Any time a woman is going against her husband's authority and will not repent, she is in fornication. Because fornication is nothing more than prostitution and prostitution of the mind involves alienation of affection and disobedience towards husband. 1 Peter 3:1-3 indicates that obedience behavior is chaste, or pure as some bible say. So then disobedience would be impure, or unchaste. Fornication.
1 Cor 7 was written to a congregation that was expecting the day of the Lord to be very near. Christ had said: And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! That is matt 24:19. The expression those days refers to the time period leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem that happened in AD 70 also known as the day of the Lord.
1 Corinthians was written much closer to the coming of the Lord than was say 1 Timothy. In 1 Tim we have Paul exhorting the younger widows to remarry. He says I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully. 1 Tim 5:14.
Yet in 1 Corinthians 7 he advises against marriage though he doesn't command anyone not to get married. The Corinthians were probably worried about the ramifications of starting a family and having that added burden of young children or even infants when they knew that a great calamity was coming upon the rogue jewish nation involving a massacre by the Roman army.
Paul's advice about birth control for those already married: 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.
They didn't use any birth control except abstinence. And abstinence can sometimes fail. So we have to keep all of this in mind when reading 1 Cor 7.
Furthermore, the stipulation,the exception clause for fornication, is not just confined to a woman sleeping with another man. There is such a thing as nonsexual fornication. See Judges 19:2 for this. Any time a woman is going against her husband's authority and will not repent, she is in fornication. Because fornication is nothing more than prostitution and prostitution of the mind involves alienation of affection and disobedience towards husband. 1 Peter 3:1-3 indicates that obedience behavior is chaste, or pure as some bible say. So then disobedience would be impure, or unchaste. Fornication.