Last week I posted some new ideas on the passage in 1 Corinthians that seems to say it is better to stay single than to marry. If you missed the post, you can get all caught up here. One question that arose in subsequent discussion (some in the forums and some via email) concerned verses 10 and 12 of that chapter, where it seems that Paul might be providing wisdom that is not inspired by God.
“Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband. 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. But to the rest I, not the Lord, say: If any brother has a wife who does not believe, and she is willing to live with him, let him not divorce her.
I will concede that on the face of it, it seems that Paul may be admitting that he is giving uninspired advice. One of the principles of Biblical interpretation is that the most obvious meaning should be considered first. It would be easy to believe from these verses that Paul at first gives wisdom inspired by God (“not I but the Lord”) and then gives personal, uninspired wisdom (“I, not the Lord”). So can we conclude that Paul gives personal opinion here? Obviously this would bring his words into contradiction with other verses, even some written by Paul himself. For example, in his second epistle to Timothy, Paul says “All Scripture is given by the inspiration of God…” (2 Timothy 3:16). See also 2 Peter 2:20-21. Clearly there would be a conflict with that interpretation. Either all Scripture is inspired or it is not. A second principle of interpretation is that Scripture interprets Scripture. Further to this, it must be impossible for one Scripture to contradict another. So there must be a way of resolving this apparent contradiction!
So let’s step back and discover what Paul meant when he said: “Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord.” To unwrap this we need only look to the words of Jesus, who in Mark 10:1-12 gave His guidelines for marriage and divorce. Though He does not use the exact words “A wife is not to depart from her husband,” that teaching is clear from His words. Notice that Paul does not quote Jesus - he merely summarizes the Lord’s teaching. So when Paul says “not I but the Lord” he is saying that he will repeat what Jesus has already taught - that a woman should not leave her husband and a husband is not to divorce his wife.
Now we turn to verse 12 where Paul says “I, not the Lord say…” We must interpret this in light of what Paul has already said. He has just repeated something that the Lord Himself taught while He was on the earth. Now Paul is going to teach something that Jesus did not speak about. Paul is not saying that he is going to give his opinion or give some uninspired teaching. He merely states that what he is about to say is something on which Jesus was silent.
We see then, that in no way was Paul going outside of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit when he wrote those words. He is merely going beyond the scope of the teaching Jesus provided, discussing a difficult situation that was important to the people of Corinth.
Comments (3) »
1. Jim
November 6, 2006
3:24 PM
Hi,
Thanks for your explanation; I found this site b/c I was looking for a resolution to a question a non-Christian friend asked about this passage.
I do have two questions to ask about the resolution though. First of all, when Paul says “I, not the Lord say…” it seems he is saying that he is saying something the Lord is not saying, as opposed to saying something the Lord never said. So I may be missing something in your reasoning; would you explain please?
But I also wanted to ask about 1 Cor 7:25 (which is the second passage my friend asked about). In the New King James Version (which it seems that you’re using), that passage reads as follows:
“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.”
Here Paul seems to be making a more direct statment to the effect that he is not inspired and is instead offering his own judgment on an issue. Do you agree?
I am a fairly new Christian and am very glad to be corrected. Because of some of the challenges I’ve been exposed to, I’m starting to wonder about Biblical Inerrancy. Do you think that a belief in Inerrancy is necessary to be a Christian?
Thanks for your work on this site, and for taking time to consider my question.
Best Regards,
Jim
2. Max
January 2, 2008
3:47 AM
“Do you think that a belief in Inerrancy is necessary to be a Christian?”
My opinion: In most instances yes, but in a certain way no.
Examples like this show that there are rare verses in the Bible which are clearly commentaries and “NOT” from the Lord. The Lord who Paul is obviously referring to here was the Holy Spirit as that is who is said to inspire the Old Testament, and who is said to have inspired at least most of the New Testament minus a few rare exceptions like this passage.
It is clear from an honest reading of the Bible that some of it is mere historical recording of events (statistics, accounting details of non doctrinal information), some is specific words to only specific people (not for the general reader), some is metaphor, simile, parable, and some is literal commandments and direct words from God to all mankind. We should focus on what is obviously literal, that which is the basis for sound doctrine, that which we base Christianity upon.
Remember the Bible is **all** we have as an authoritative document from God, it is the closest thing we can get to knowing the will of God in this life. Don’t allow yourself to get disheartened by certain translations or certain ways English can be interpreted from a translation. The Bible was written in Greek and Hebrew only, not English.
Stay focussed on the most clear, consistent, literal sound doctrinal passages and you will know what the Lord has revealed to us in this life. Leave the exception verses and odd commentary verses and metaphors for what they are and don’t try to make something out of them if it is not obvious. Don’t think because Jesus said “if your eye offends you pluck it out” that Jesus supports Christians to mutilate their bodies if they ever give into lust of the eye. Beware how you interpret the Bible, stay with the clear parts when basing your doctrine and beliefs, don’t be led into heresy which people always base upon unclear verses, of which there are many. Our salvation is not based in Paul, it is based on the work of Jesus Christ. I may be wrong but I am not afraid anymore to worry if I don’t find certain rare verses by Paul are not directly inspired by God because many are obvious and even in this one he declares it in his own words before he even makes the statements “I, NOT the Lord”. Now of course the statements he made may be perfectly fine doctrinally, so in the end the apparent problem may not really exist in a useful sense as one may at first think it does.
3. Greg
September 29, 2008
12:55 AM
I was baffled at this verse. Good answer. I’m glad that you are following biblical principles..