UNDERSTANDING THE MENTALITY OF PAUL vis-a-vis MARRIAGE
[theme: immortality]
Paul was CELIBATE – by choice.
He said, in I Corinthians 7:1, “Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.”
From that scripture, it’s OBVIOUS that the Corinthian church had QUESTIONS about marital issues, and about which they had PREVIOUSLY communicated to Paul in writing. That’s why he could say “Concerning the things [there must have been several things] whereof ye WROTE unto me [so they WROTE to him to ask about those things]: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” Of course he wasn’t talking of a physical/social “touch” as in a contact of bodies – such as handshake, etc., in our own modern context, for instance, as that would be improbable, impractical and simply impossible. We “touch” each other all the time. He was talking of a MARITAL “touch,” a SEXUAL “touch.” So he says “it is good for a man not to touch a woman.” In other words, IT IS GOOD (it’s OKAY, there’s nothing bad or out-of-place in it) for a man NOT to be married. In other words, as far as Paul was concerned, CELIBACY was NOT an “abnormal” state of existence.
From that, we see that IF a man CHOOSES to be CELIBATE, there’s absolutely nothing ABNORMAL about it! That’s what Paul said. And I believe he had the Spirit of God – that is, the Spirit of God bears him witness, that, yes, indeed, if you CHOOSE not to marry, there’s nothing, absolutely nothing, wrong about it.
But how many people, today, christian men, in Nigeria, would CHOOSE not to be married? Not very many – if any. That which Paul said is “GOOD” (not to marry) you’re not even contemplating doing it, but you’re ready to split hair over MONOGAMY and POLYGAMY. Some have accused us of “loving” women (as though we’re supposed to “hate” them) when we say that there’s NO SIN, whatsoever, in polygamy, yet NONE of these people, as far as we know, would CHOOSE to be celibate, which was the very FIRST thing that Paul talked about when talking about this issue of MARRIAGE. If you don’t understand Paul from BASICS (the fundamental principles in HIS HEART – which was that of NOT MARRYING AT ALL so that, in his words, you could CARE FOR THE THINGS OF THE LORD – evangelism, etc.) you would NEVER understand the mind-set from which he spoke all those things that he said and which people have built a lot of WRONG and FALSE teachings around today. Simply put, Paul was a CELIBATE man who also wanted, if he could do it, to make every BELIEVER – male or female – CELIBATE also! Left to him, and if it HAD BEEN in his power so to do, he would have actually said “No” to the entire subject of marriage – so that everyone, in his words, could “care for the things of the Lord.” But, knowing that he wouldn’t be speaking from the Lord should he dare say such a thing, HE RELUCTANTLY slanted his preachings, though NOT against polygamy, but in such a way that the understanding you would get, is that of “Please, in order to stay WHOLLY (completely) devoted to caring for the things of the Lord Who is Coming Soon, don’t marry at all; but if you MUST marry (which I Paul doesn’t really want, but which I cannot command) and in order to stay away from sexual misbehaviour (fornication), just have your own “woman” and your own “man” whom you will be having sex with if you cannot stay without sex (which is what I, Paul, would have preferred.)” This is, exactly, brethren, THE MENTALITY OF PAUL! He was a man who DID NOT (repeat: DID NOT) want you to marry! So that, according to him, YOU COULD CARE FOR THE THINGS OF THE LORD “WITHOUT DISTRACTION”! That’s his mentality! There’s NO WAY, therefore, that such a man would ever write anything in his epistles to suggest that you could be polygamous! HE DIDN’T EVEN WANT YOU TO MARRY IN THE FIRST PLACE!
You must understand Paul in this CONTEXT, otherwise you will NEVER understand him concerning the issues of marriage! If Paul were to be alive today and pastoring a church, most of the members of the church WOULD NOT be married! There would be no “MARRIAGE COMMITTEE,” because Paul WON’T ENCOURAGE IT! That man DOESN’T WANT YOU TO MARRY, mehn! That’s the reason for his RELUCTANT stance towards marriage in his writings; and where he permits marriage at all, he would choose his words in such a manner that YOU WOULD NEVER BE THINKING OF POLYGAMY! Even though he won’t be able to CATEGORICALLY SAY SO, because such a statement from him WOULDN’T BE THE WORD OF THE LORD!
Just as, truth be told, the Bible does NOT specify any METHOD of marriage ceremony, so also, TRUTH BE TOLD, the Bible does NOT specify any TYPE of marriage – MONOGAMY or POLYGAMY, for those who CHOOSE to marry.
The gospel was brought to us by the British especially, and other Western (caucasian) people. Although there’s reason to believe that polygamy was NOT strange to them in centuries and millenia past, nevertheless, in modern (or even medieval) caucasian history, monogamy seems to be an accepted CULTURE of the white man. With Paul speaking, without being specific, as though you must NEVER contemplate POLYGAMY, the monogamous “culture” of the WHITE MAN found an “ally” in Paul’s disguised writings (disguised in favour of CELIBACY, or at the most, MONOGAMY) to give to us a so-called “christian” “DOCTRINE” of monogamy!
Now, listen to Paul himself: In I Timothy chapter 3, he says: “If a man desire the office of a bishop (a ruler in the church, not the “BISHOP” you know today), he desireth a good work.” That is, it is GOOD to aspire to function in a LEADERSHIP ROLE in the church of God. Remember that, at that time, the five-fold ministry (apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor and teacher) as we know it today, was YET to be fully FORMED in the Body of Christ – the Church. Most of what was known at the time were the Apostles – like Paul himself; and then, a few people, like Agabus, who were operating in the prophetic office. Whenever Paul would evangelise a city, a church (body of believers) would gather and he would teach them, concerning the things of CHRIST, till he was ready to go to yet another city or region, and he would then need to appoint some people, therefore, to OVERSEE the affairs of that church! They were more of “administrative” elders/leaders than the “men of God” we know today! So, when Paul was giving instruction to Timothy as to what kind of “attributes” that such people should have before administrative LEADERSHIP of God’s People could be put in their hands, he said, as from verse 2, “A bishop (elder, leader) then must be (1) BLAMELESS. That is, not somebody who does NOT have a good testimony of a good “imitable” life. In other words, his character (sense of honesty, promptness, attention to duty, etc) should be such that he can be a ROLE MODEL to the Church and to the brethren. It’s just a COMMON-SENSE approach to choosing a LEADER – nothing seriously “spiritual” about it. It’s about the same thing you would consider in choosing a branch manager for your expanding business! We need to understand that! There was really no big deal about all those “bishops” and “elders” that Paul was talking about in his letters. (2) Secondly, he said that the person to be appointed “bishop” or “elder” must be “the husband of ONE WIFE.” Knowing who Paul is (from our previous ‘analysis’ of his psyche as far as marriage is concerned) and with regards to “caring for the things of the Lord,” such an instruction (“husband of ONE wife”) coming from Paul, is NOT surprising at all! He never wanted you to marry in the first place – so that, according to him, you could “care for the things of the Lord without DISTRACTION” (I Corinthians 7:35); but, knowing that he COULD NOT command celibacy, he had to say, with regards to “bishops,” “the husband of ONE wife” – that is, somebody who wouldn’t have too much “distraction” in taking care of the church! That’s the reason for what Paul said, my dear! Stop allowing yourself to be deluded by some “monogamy” doctrine. And, if you’ve got a good spirit (a spirit that can discern the things of God) and an analytical mind, you should be able to SEE that, even that statement (“husband of one wife”) is NOT really a DOCTRINAL issue! It’s an “administrative” issue from Paul’s paradigm of christian service and church administration! We need to be set free!
He goes ahead, in I Corinthians 7, after first saying that it is GOOD (it is DESIRABLE) for a man not to [marry], he goes ahead to say, in verse 2, “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his [own] wife, and let every woman have her [own] husband.” This is what some people have used to preach monogamy! I LAUGH. Paul who doesn’t even want you to marry (because he believed that the Coming of the Lord was IMMINENT and that you should serve the Lord without distraction) and who had even told you, in the first verse, that it is GOOD (desirable, preferable) that you DON’T marry, only to reluctantly now say that “Nevertheless” (in other words, if you think that you can’t stay without a wife; if you think that you can’t stay without sexual activity, and instead of involving yourself in socially-unacceptable sexual behaviour) to avoid “fornication,” let every man have his (own) wife, and let every woman have her (own) husband.” If you understand that statement in CONTEXT, it is NOT a “doctrinal” statement to determine whether monogamy or polygamy is God’s standard; RATHER, it’s the statement made to people whom Paul would rather have to be CELIBATE, but, knowing that he couldn’t ENFORCE that, permitted them to marry – for ONE purpose – the purpose of AVOIDING FORNICATION. That’s it, my brother. The statement, “Let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband” is NOT a doctrinal statement for monogamy! No! Several times, No! It’s a statement, according to Paul, FOR AVOIDING FORNICATION! Period.
Verse 3 says: “Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.” That’s clear enough – give sex to your partner whenever he/she wants it! So, it’s NOT a matter of “I’m tired;” or “I’m not in the mood;” RUBISH.
verse 4: “The wife hath NOT power (authority) of her own body, but the husband (does have that authority of his wife’s body)” In other words, that’s the reason why he said the wife should render due benevolence (goodwill as far as sex is concerned) to her husband – it’s because, when it comes to SEX, it’s when your husband WANTS it that determines when you (the wife) decides to have sex with him. Similarly, it is whenever your wife wants it, that determines when the man should have sex with his wife. It must not be “rationed.” When John wants it, Mary MUST oblige – that’s what the Bible is saying. And when Mary wants it, John must oblige. SIMPLE Bible instruction!
So, in verse 5, he says: “Defraud ye not one the other (don’t deny each other of sex), except it be with CONSENT (and consent there is, contextually, MUTUAL, otherwise it is NOT consent) for a time (understandably a short period of time), that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again; that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.” What would Satan “tempt” them to do? TO FORNICATE (forget now about distinction between “fornication” and “adultery” – this post is NOT about that.) What this scripture is saying, is that, even the “coming together again” is FOR the purpose of AVOIDING FORNICATION – everything is still tied to what is written in verse 2!
Now, in verse 6, he says something that is REALLY, REALLY SIGNIFICANT to our discussion here – he says: “But I speak THIS by permission, and NOT of commandment”! Can you hear that? That is, all this issue of “marriage” is something I am ONLY PERMITTING YOU TO DO! Left for Paul, they should be celibate! So he says: “But I speak this by permission, and NOT of commandment.” That is, I am NOT saying Go and Get Married! I, Paul, am NOT saying that! I am only PERMITTING you to be married (because I don’t want you to be committing fornication.) “For (left to me) I would (wish) that ALL MEN were even as I myself (celibate.)” Can you see that? Is that the man you want to give you instruction as to whether polygamy is a sin or not? He won’t go there! Paul won’t go there! Because he knows it’s NOT a sin! He doesn’t even want you to get married in the first place; so don’t expect to see anything in his epistles that will give you a leeway for polygamy! Even the very idea of marriage itself (whether monogamy or polygamy) is something he didn’t even want you to get involved in! Brother, if you really want to do what Paul wants, be CELIBATE! Truth is, Paul did NOT preach monogamy – he never did! Paul preached CELIBACY! He only “permitted” marriage! He really didn’t want it! So, somebody who didn’t want marriage in the first place, cannot now be giving you the idea of which is better, or which is “godly” – monogamy or polygamy! Whether monogamy or polygamy, he didn’t even want any! That’s the fact! Get some sense.
“For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift [ability] of (from) God, one after this manner, and another after that (manner.)” In other words, some people have “grace” (like Paul) to be celibate, while some others have “grace” to be married! Do you realise that he said EVERY man [each man] hath his PROPER gift of God – God knows what is PROPER for you – whether celibacy or marriage! This means (if you analyse that statement properly), that CELIBACY (the ability to stay unmarried) is a GIFT (grace) of God! And the ability to be MARRIED (yes!) is also a “GIFT” of God – that’s why he said, “EVERY MAN (every human being) hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner (celibacy), and another after that “manner” (marriage.)” So, even the ability to be in marriage is a “GIFT”! You may not understand that, but that’s NOT the subject of this post. Notice that, in all these things, Paul NEVER (repeat, NEVER) made a case for monogamy as against polygamy; rather he was making a case FOR celibacy, as against marriage! And he was saying that I’m only permitting you to be married (in other words, I don’t really like the idea of you being married); left to me, I would rather have you CELIBATE – just like myself!
He now goes further, in verse 8, to continue making a case FOR celibacy! He says: “I say therefore to the UNMARRIED (bachelors and spinsters) and WIDOWS (all single people), It is GOOD for them if they ABIDE (be CELIBATE) even as I (Paul.)” That’s Paul for you, my brother! The celibate person who wants all others to be CELIBATE too! So, contrary to Paul’s misunderstood writings as being for MONOGAMY, the truth is that Paul’s writings were for CELIBACY! Stop twisting what Paul said! Paul would never smile in a marriage ceremony if he were to attend one! He didn’t like marriage! That’s the truth. He wanted everybody (including YOU) to be celibate. Stop using his writings to push monogamy! You’re mis-representing him! His writings were (in favour of and FOR) CELIBACY! Paul did NOT like marriage – and did NOT think that married people were giving their best to the Lord, even though he admitted that it (marriage) was a “GRACE” too! Look, beloved, it’s a GOOD thing that Paul was NOT married! He would have FAILED WOEFULLY in marriage! He did NOT have the grace for marriage! He had the GRACE for celibacy – and, even though he (reluctantly) conceded that there’s also a ‘grace’ for marriage which some people have, yet Paul WISHED they didn’t put that grace to work! Paul wished they (such people) would be CELIBATE.
When you understand this mind-set of Paul, you will laugh at yourself for even thinking that Paul was pushing FOR monogamy! NO! Paul was pushing for celibacy!
He then says, in verse 9: “But if they cannot contain (their sexual desires), let them marry” (again, a “PERMISSION” rather than an INSTRUCTION to marry! The point is, Paul was AGAINST marriage! But he couldn’t say it because he knew he wouldn’t be talking for God! You must separate Paul’s attitude towards marriage (even when he was writing under inspiration, that attitude against marriage comes out so STRONGLY and it COLOURS his entire writings about marriage, giving the impression that okay, you can marry.. you know that kind of “reluctance” which refuses to go all the way! – and that’s the reason his writings are erroneously thought to be a case for monogamy, when in actual fact it’s a case for CELIBACY) you must distinguish between that attitude of Paul concerning marriage, from the real truth of God concerning marriage – which truth Paul couldn’t repudiate – that’s why he “permitted” marriage, even saying so! The Spirit of God must have had such a tough time trying to make Paul not to say “marriage is sin” in those scriptures!
Now, in verse 25: Paul says “Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress [which distress? We’re not told], I say, that it is GOOD for a man SO TO BE” (that is to REMAIN UNMARRIED! Why is it that Paul is always using the word “GOOD” for celibacy? That’s Paul for you. “Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed” (you see Paul was always careful not to dissolve marriages, knowing that that would displease the Lord; but he was NEVER encouraging marriages, if you were still single! He was always on the side of CELIBACY! “Art thou loosed from a wife? (that is, art thou divorced?) seek not a wife.” You would think that these things are DOCTRINE! They’re NOT. They’re Paul’s celibate streak at work. But you say, was he not writing under inspiration? Sure, he was! But, under that inspiration, he even said, “I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give MY JUDGEMENT” – it was his (Paul’s) judgment; and, I dare say, it was SOUND judgment! Yet, that does NOT change the fact that it is the divinely-inspired SOUND judgment of a man who was disposed to CELIBACY! Do you get my point?
“But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned (he admits that you have NOT sinned, yet he was NOT encouraging that marriage! What would make you think, then, that he will EVER speak in favour of polygamy? Not because polygamy is BAD, No! But because here’s a man who doesn’t even want you to marry in the first place! That the Bible under Paul’s writings, does NOT say, expressly, that polygamy is RIGHT, is NOT because it is WRONG, or SINFUL, but because the man who wrote these things is even AGAINST marriage – whether monogamy or polygamy!); and if a virgin marry, she hath NOT sinned. NEVERTHELESS (what’s the “nevertheless” again, when you have already admitted that they have NOT sinned? – it’s the celibate streak in Paul coming up again!) Nevertheless such shall have TROUBLE in the flesh (which TROUBLE? – Paul is always looking for the least excuse to DISCOURAGE marriage) Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you (that is, I want to spare you that trouble, but he never told us the trouble o!) Then, in verse 29, he really comes out: “But this I say, brethren, the time is SHORT: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none (that CELIBATE streak again!);.. for the fashion of this world passeth away. But I would have you WITHOUT CAREFULNESS (without CARES – that was Paul’s passion – so that you can be WHOLLY devoted to the Lord! As far as he was concerned, marriage – whether polygamy or monogamy – was sharing the attention you could have WHOLLY given to God’s concerns! Can you understand Paul’s heart?) I would have you without carefulness. He that is UNMARRIED careth for THE THINGS THAT BELONG TO THE LORD! – now you understand why he’s NOT even in favour of marriage at all! “how he may PLEASE the Lord: but he that is MARRIED careth for the things that are of THE WORLD! – now you can see WHY Paul didn’t like you married people! But there you are thinking he was preaching monogamy! He was preaching CELIBACY, my friend! So, the fact that Paul was ACTUALLY preaching CELIBACY, while at the same time he couldn’t DENY marriage, therefore makes him look like he was preaching MONOGAMY! Truth is, he didn’t like marriage at all! And for someone like that, IF, indeed, polygamy had been a sin, he would have said it! But he didn’t.
He says: “But he that is married careth for the things of the WORLD, how he may please his WIFE” That’s the way Paul sees you, married people! – YOU’RE living to PLEASE YOUR WIFE, instead of “living to PLEASE THE LORD” You think that such a person would even be thinking of contemplating you being POLYGAMOUS? Never! He doesn’t even want you to marry in the first place! That’s why his epistles seem like they’re being for monogamy! They’re NOT for monogamy! They’re NOT even for marriage! But he couldn’t deny marriage, so his writings look like, okay, you can marry but... (and our brethren have concluded that to mean be MONOGAMOUS.
“There is difference also between a wife (a married woman) and a virgin (a spinster). The unmarried woman (spinster or widow careth for the things of the LORD, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit (the “holy” he’s talking of there means “WHOLLY” devoted to the Lord): but she that is married careth for the things of the WORLD, how she may please her HUSBAND.” Do you see how Paul links “marriage” to “worldliness”? That’s the celebate streak in him!
“And this I speak for your own profit; not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely, and that ye may ATTEND upon the Lord WITHOUT DISTRACTION.” So, that’s all of Paul’s purpose – that you may attend upon the Lord without distraction! That’s why his writings invite you to celibacy but “permits” marriage! If you “permit” your children to play football, rather than “encourage” them to, are you likely to build a stadium for them? Does that make a stadium an aberration? No. Polygamy is NOT an aberration. It’s not a sin; Paul just doesn’t like marriage in the first place, not to talk of polygamy! That’s the reason his writings can EASILY be misconstrued to be a DOCTRINE for MONOGAMY. Truth is, it’s a push for CELIBACY! But because, being a push for celibacy, he only “permits” marriage, so that “permission,” in his writings, have the colouration of “monogamy”! That’s why he would easily say let the elders be husbands of one wife! In fact, that VERY STATEMENT shows that there were people in the Church who were polygamous! And he didn’t say that they had sinned!
“So then he that giveth her (virgin) in marriage doeth WELL (he couldn’t have said he doeth BAD!); but (listen to him -) he that giveth her NOT in marriage doeth BETTER! How can you say that I have a “virgin” (either as my daughter or as my fiancee) and you’re saying that I’m doing BETTER if I give her NOT in marriage? Of what purpose is she my daughter if not that one day I will have the joy of giving her out in marriage? Or, of what purpose is she my fiancee if not that one day I will take her as wife? Can you see, how, at every opportunity, Paul is AGAINST marriage? Only that he couldn’t say that it’s a SIN! Left to him, all of us should be CELIBATE!
“The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at LIBERTY to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord. But she is HAPPIER if she so abide (as a widow), after MY JUDGEMENT (my assessment): and I think also that I have the Spirit of God.” Of course, Paul, you have the Spirit of God – and that Spirit of God is only INSPIRING you to write out things in your CELIBATE mentality!
[theme: immortality]
Paul was CELIBATE – by choice.
He said, in I Corinthians 7:1, “Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.”
From that scripture, it’s OBVIOUS that the Corinthian church had QUESTIONS about marital issues, and about which they had PREVIOUSLY communicated to Paul in writing. That’s why he could say “Concerning the things [there must have been several things] whereof ye WROTE unto me [so they WROTE to him to ask about those things]: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” Of course he wasn’t talking of a physical/social “touch” as in a contact of bodies – such as handshake, etc., in our own modern context, for instance, as that would be improbable, impractical and simply impossible. We “touch” each other all the time. He was talking of a MARITAL “touch,” a SEXUAL “touch.” So he says “it is good for a man not to touch a woman.” In other words, IT IS GOOD (it’s OKAY, there’s nothing bad or out-of-place in it) for a man NOT to be married. In other words, as far as Paul was concerned, CELIBACY was NOT an “abnormal” state of existence.
From that, we see that IF a man CHOOSES to be CELIBATE, there’s absolutely nothing ABNORMAL about it! That’s what Paul said. And I believe he had the Spirit of God – that is, the Spirit of God bears him witness, that, yes, indeed, if you CHOOSE not to marry, there’s nothing, absolutely nothing, wrong about it.
But how many people, today, christian men, in Nigeria, would CHOOSE not to be married? Not very many – if any. That which Paul said is “GOOD” (not to marry) you’re not even contemplating doing it, but you’re ready to split hair over MONOGAMY and POLYGAMY. Some have accused us of “loving” women (as though we’re supposed to “hate” them) when we say that there’s NO SIN, whatsoever, in polygamy, yet NONE of these people, as far as we know, would CHOOSE to be celibate, which was the very FIRST thing that Paul talked about when talking about this issue of MARRIAGE. If you don’t understand Paul from BASICS (the fundamental principles in HIS HEART – which was that of NOT MARRYING AT ALL so that, in his words, you could CARE FOR THE THINGS OF THE LORD – evangelism, etc.) you would NEVER understand the mind-set from which he spoke all those things that he said and which people have built a lot of WRONG and FALSE teachings around today. Simply put, Paul was a CELIBATE man who also wanted, if he could do it, to make every BELIEVER – male or female – CELIBATE also! Left to him, and if it HAD BEEN in his power so to do, he would have actually said “No” to the entire subject of marriage – so that everyone, in his words, could “care for the things of the Lord.” But, knowing that he wouldn’t be speaking from the Lord should he dare say such a thing, HE RELUCTANTLY slanted his preachings, though NOT against polygamy, but in such a way that the understanding you would get, is that of “Please, in order to stay WHOLLY (completely) devoted to caring for the things of the Lord Who is Coming Soon, don’t marry at all; but if you MUST marry (which I Paul doesn’t really want, but which I cannot command) and in order to stay away from sexual misbehaviour (fornication), just have your own “woman” and your own “man” whom you will be having sex with if you cannot stay without sex (which is what I, Paul, would have preferred.)” This is, exactly, brethren, THE MENTALITY OF PAUL! He was a man who DID NOT (repeat: DID NOT) want you to marry! So that, according to him, YOU COULD CARE FOR THE THINGS OF THE LORD “WITHOUT DISTRACTION”! That’s his mentality! There’s NO WAY, therefore, that such a man would ever write anything in his epistles to suggest that you could be polygamous! HE DIDN’T EVEN WANT YOU TO MARRY IN THE FIRST PLACE!
You must understand Paul in this CONTEXT, otherwise you will NEVER understand him concerning the issues of marriage! If Paul were to be alive today and pastoring a church, most of the members of the church WOULD NOT be married! There would be no “MARRIAGE COMMITTEE,” because Paul WON’T ENCOURAGE IT! That man DOESN’T WANT YOU TO MARRY, mehn! That’s the reason for his RELUCTANT stance towards marriage in his writings; and where he permits marriage at all, he would choose his words in such a manner that YOU WOULD NEVER BE THINKING OF POLYGAMY! Even though he won’t be able to CATEGORICALLY SAY SO, because such a statement from him WOULDN’T BE THE WORD OF THE LORD!
Just as, truth be told, the Bible does NOT specify any METHOD of marriage ceremony, so also, TRUTH BE TOLD, the Bible does NOT specify any TYPE of marriage – MONOGAMY or POLYGAMY, for those who CHOOSE to marry.
The gospel was brought to us by the British especially, and other Western (caucasian) people. Although there’s reason to believe that polygamy was NOT strange to them in centuries and millenia past, nevertheless, in modern (or even medieval) caucasian history, monogamy seems to be an accepted CULTURE of the white man. With Paul speaking, without being specific, as though you must NEVER contemplate POLYGAMY, the monogamous “culture” of the WHITE MAN found an “ally” in Paul’s disguised writings (disguised in favour of CELIBACY, or at the most, MONOGAMY) to give to us a so-called “christian” “DOCTRINE” of monogamy!
Now, listen to Paul himself: In I Timothy chapter 3, he says: “If a man desire the office of a bishop (a ruler in the church, not the “BISHOP” you know today), he desireth a good work.” That is, it is GOOD to aspire to function in a LEADERSHIP ROLE in the church of God. Remember that, at that time, the five-fold ministry (apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor and teacher) as we know it today, was YET to be fully FORMED in the Body of Christ – the Church. Most of what was known at the time were the Apostles – like Paul himself; and then, a few people, like Agabus, who were operating in the prophetic office. Whenever Paul would evangelise a city, a church (body of believers) would gather and he would teach them, concerning the things of CHRIST, till he was ready to go to yet another city or region, and he would then need to appoint some people, therefore, to OVERSEE the affairs of that church! They were more of “administrative” elders/leaders than the “men of God” we know today! So, when Paul was giving instruction to Timothy as to what kind of “attributes” that such people should have before administrative LEADERSHIP of God’s People could be put in their hands, he said, as from verse 2, “A bishop (elder, leader) then must be (1) BLAMELESS. That is, not somebody who does NOT have a good testimony of a good “imitable” life. In other words, his character (sense of honesty, promptness, attention to duty, etc) should be such that he can be a ROLE MODEL to the Church and to the brethren. It’s just a COMMON-SENSE approach to choosing a LEADER – nothing seriously “spiritual” about it. It’s about the same thing you would consider in choosing a branch manager for your expanding business! We need to understand that! There was really no big deal about all those “bishops” and “elders” that Paul was talking about in his letters. (2) Secondly, he said that the person to be appointed “bishop” or “elder” must be “the husband of ONE WIFE.” Knowing who Paul is (from our previous ‘analysis’ of his psyche as far as marriage is concerned) and with regards to “caring for the things of the Lord,” such an instruction (“husband of ONE wife”) coming from Paul, is NOT surprising at all! He never wanted you to marry in the first place – so that, according to him, you could “care for the things of the Lord without DISTRACTION” (I Corinthians 7:35); but, knowing that he COULD NOT command celibacy, he had to say, with regards to “bishops,” “the husband of ONE wife” – that is, somebody who wouldn’t have too much “distraction” in taking care of the church! That’s the reason for what Paul said, my dear! Stop allowing yourself to be deluded by some “monogamy” doctrine. And, if you’ve got a good spirit (a spirit that can discern the things of God) and an analytical mind, you should be able to SEE that, even that statement (“husband of one wife”) is NOT really a DOCTRINAL issue! It’s an “administrative” issue from Paul’s paradigm of christian service and church administration! We need to be set free!
He goes ahead, in I Corinthians 7, after first saying that it is GOOD (it is DESIRABLE) for a man not to [marry], he goes ahead to say, in verse 2, “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his [own] wife, and let every woman have her [own] husband.” This is what some people have used to preach monogamy! I LAUGH. Paul who doesn’t even want you to marry (because he believed that the Coming of the Lord was IMMINENT and that you should serve the Lord without distraction) and who had even told you, in the first verse, that it is GOOD (desirable, preferable) that you DON’T marry, only to reluctantly now say that “Nevertheless” (in other words, if you think that you can’t stay without a wife; if you think that you can’t stay without sexual activity, and instead of involving yourself in socially-unacceptable sexual behaviour) to avoid “fornication,” let every man have his (own) wife, and let every woman have her (own) husband.” If you understand that statement in CONTEXT, it is NOT a “doctrinal” statement to determine whether monogamy or polygamy is God’s standard; RATHER, it’s the statement made to people whom Paul would rather have to be CELIBATE, but, knowing that he couldn’t ENFORCE that, permitted them to marry – for ONE purpose – the purpose of AVOIDING FORNICATION. That’s it, my brother. The statement, “Let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband” is NOT a doctrinal statement for monogamy! No! Several times, No! It’s a statement, according to Paul, FOR AVOIDING FORNICATION! Period.
Verse 3 says: “Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.” That’s clear enough – give sex to your partner whenever he/she wants it! So, it’s NOT a matter of “I’m tired;” or “I’m not in the mood;” RUBISH.
verse 4: “The wife hath NOT power (authority) of her own body, but the husband (does have that authority of his wife’s body)” In other words, that’s the reason why he said the wife should render due benevolence (goodwill as far as sex is concerned) to her husband – it’s because, when it comes to SEX, it’s when your husband WANTS it that determines when you (the wife) decides to have sex with him. Similarly, it is whenever your wife wants it, that determines when the man should have sex with his wife. It must not be “rationed.” When John wants it, Mary MUST oblige – that’s what the Bible is saying. And when Mary wants it, John must oblige. SIMPLE Bible instruction!
So, in verse 5, he says: “Defraud ye not one the other (don’t deny each other of sex), except it be with CONSENT (and consent there is, contextually, MUTUAL, otherwise it is NOT consent) for a time (understandably a short period of time), that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again; that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.” What would Satan “tempt” them to do? TO FORNICATE (forget now about distinction between “fornication” and “adultery” – this post is NOT about that.) What this scripture is saying, is that, even the “coming together again” is FOR the purpose of AVOIDING FORNICATION – everything is still tied to what is written in verse 2!
Now, in verse 6, he says something that is REALLY, REALLY SIGNIFICANT to our discussion here – he says: “But I speak THIS by permission, and NOT of commandment”! Can you hear that? That is, all this issue of “marriage” is something I am ONLY PERMITTING YOU TO DO! Left for Paul, they should be celibate! So he says: “But I speak this by permission, and NOT of commandment.” That is, I am NOT saying Go and Get Married! I, Paul, am NOT saying that! I am only PERMITTING you to be married (because I don’t want you to be committing fornication.) “For (left to me) I would (wish) that ALL MEN were even as I myself (celibate.)” Can you see that? Is that the man you want to give you instruction as to whether polygamy is a sin or not? He won’t go there! Paul won’t go there! Because he knows it’s NOT a sin! He doesn’t even want you to get married in the first place; so don’t expect to see anything in his epistles that will give you a leeway for polygamy! Even the very idea of marriage itself (whether monogamy or polygamy) is something he didn’t even want you to get involved in! Brother, if you really want to do what Paul wants, be CELIBATE! Truth is, Paul did NOT preach monogamy – he never did! Paul preached CELIBACY! He only “permitted” marriage! He really didn’t want it! So, somebody who didn’t want marriage in the first place, cannot now be giving you the idea of which is better, or which is “godly” – monogamy or polygamy! Whether monogamy or polygamy, he didn’t even want any! That’s the fact! Get some sense.
“For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift [ability] of (from) God, one after this manner, and another after that (manner.)” In other words, some people have “grace” (like Paul) to be celibate, while some others have “grace” to be married! Do you realise that he said EVERY man [each man] hath his PROPER gift of God – God knows what is PROPER for you – whether celibacy or marriage! This means (if you analyse that statement properly), that CELIBACY (the ability to stay unmarried) is a GIFT (grace) of God! And the ability to be MARRIED (yes!) is also a “GIFT” of God – that’s why he said, “EVERY MAN (every human being) hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner (celibacy), and another after that “manner” (marriage.)” So, even the ability to be in marriage is a “GIFT”! You may not understand that, but that’s NOT the subject of this post. Notice that, in all these things, Paul NEVER (repeat, NEVER) made a case for monogamy as against polygamy; rather he was making a case FOR celibacy, as against marriage! And he was saying that I’m only permitting you to be married (in other words, I don’t really like the idea of you being married); left to me, I would rather have you CELIBATE – just like myself!
He now goes further, in verse 8, to continue making a case FOR celibacy! He says: “I say therefore to the UNMARRIED (bachelors and spinsters) and WIDOWS (all single people), It is GOOD for them if they ABIDE (be CELIBATE) even as I (Paul.)” That’s Paul for you, my brother! The celibate person who wants all others to be CELIBATE too! So, contrary to Paul’s misunderstood writings as being for MONOGAMY, the truth is that Paul’s writings were for CELIBACY! Stop twisting what Paul said! Paul would never smile in a marriage ceremony if he were to attend one! He didn’t like marriage! That’s the truth. He wanted everybody (including YOU) to be celibate. Stop using his writings to push monogamy! You’re mis-representing him! His writings were (in favour of and FOR) CELIBACY! Paul did NOT like marriage – and did NOT think that married people were giving their best to the Lord, even though he admitted that it (marriage) was a “GRACE” too! Look, beloved, it’s a GOOD thing that Paul was NOT married! He would have FAILED WOEFULLY in marriage! He did NOT have the grace for marriage! He had the GRACE for celibacy – and, even though he (reluctantly) conceded that there’s also a ‘grace’ for marriage which some people have, yet Paul WISHED they didn’t put that grace to work! Paul wished they (such people) would be CELIBATE.
When you understand this mind-set of Paul, you will laugh at yourself for even thinking that Paul was pushing FOR monogamy! NO! Paul was pushing for celibacy!
He then says, in verse 9: “But if they cannot contain (their sexual desires), let them marry” (again, a “PERMISSION” rather than an INSTRUCTION to marry! The point is, Paul was AGAINST marriage! But he couldn’t say it because he knew he wouldn’t be talking for God! You must separate Paul’s attitude towards marriage (even when he was writing under inspiration, that attitude against marriage comes out so STRONGLY and it COLOURS his entire writings about marriage, giving the impression that okay, you can marry.. you know that kind of “reluctance” which refuses to go all the way! – and that’s the reason his writings are erroneously thought to be a case for monogamy, when in actual fact it’s a case for CELIBACY) you must distinguish between that attitude of Paul concerning marriage, from the real truth of God concerning marriage – which truth Paul couldn’t repudiate – that’s why he “permitted” marriage, even saying so! The Spirit of God must have had such a tough time trying to make Paul not to say “marriage is sin” in those scriptures!
Now, in verse 25: Paul says “Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress [which distress? We’re not told], I say, that it is GOOD for a man SO TO BE” (that is to REMAIN UNMARRIED! Why is it that Paul is always using the word “GOOD” for celibacy? That’s Paul for you. “Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed” (you see Paul was always careful not to dissolve marriages, knowing that that would displease the Lord; but he was NEVER encouraging marriages, if you were still single! He was always on the side of CELIBACY! “Art thou loosed from a wife? (that is, art thou divorced?) seek not a wife.” You would think that these things are DOCTRINE! They’re NOT. They’re Paul’s celibate streak at work. But you say, was he not writing under inspiration? Sure, he was! But, under that inspiration, he even said, “I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give MY JUDGEMENT” – it was his (Paul’s) judgment; and, I dare say, it was SOUND judgment! Yet, that does NOT change the fact that it is the divinely-inspired SOUND judgment of a man who was disposed to CELIBACY! Do you get my point?
“But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned (he admits that you have NOT sinned, yet he was NOT encouraging that marriage! What would make you think, then, that he will EVER speak in favour of polygamy? Not because polygamy is BAD, No! But because here’s a man who doesn’t even want you to marry in the first place! That the Bible under Paul’s writings, does NOT say, expressly, that polygamy is RIGHT, is NOT because it is WRONG, or SINFUL, but because the man who wrote these things is even AGAINST marriage – whether monogamy or polygamy!); and if a virgin marry, she hath NOT sinned. NEVERTHELESS (what’s the “nevertheless” again, when you have already admitted that they have NOT sinned? – it’s the celibate streak in Paul coming up again!) Nevertheless such shall have TROUBLE in the flesh (which TROUBLE? – Paul is always looking for the least excuse to DISCOURAGE marriage) Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you (that is, I want to spare you that trouble, but he never told us the trouble o!) Then, in verse 29, he really comes out: “But this I say, brethren, the time is SHORT: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none (that CELIBATE streak again!);.. for the fashion of this world passeth away. But I would have you WITHOUT CAREFULNESS (without CARES – that was Paul’s passion – so that you can be WHOLLY devoted to the Lord! As far as he was concerned, marriage – whether polygamy or monogamy – was sharing the attention you could have WHOLLY given to God’s concerns! Can you understand Paul’s heart?) I would have you without carefulness. He that is UNMARRIED careth for THE THINGS THAT BELONG TO THE LORD! – now you understand why he’s NOT even in favour of marriage at all! “how he may PLEASE the Lord: but he that is MARRIED careth for the things that are of THE WORLD! – now you can see WHY Paul didn’t like you married people! But there you are thinking he was preaching monogamy! He was preaching CELIBACY, my friend! So, the fact that Paul was ACTUALLY preaching CELIBACY, while at the same time he couldn’t DENY marriage, therefore makes him look like he was preaching MONOGAMY! Truth is, he didn’t like marriage at all! And for someone like that, IF, indeed, polygamy had been a sin, he would have said it! But he didn’t.
He says: “But he that is married careth for the things of the WORLD, how he may please his WIFE” That’s the way Paul sees you, married people! – YOU’RE living to PLEASE YOUR WIFE, instead of “living to PLEASE THE LORD” You think that such a person would even be thinking of contemplating you being POLYGAMOUS? Never! He doesn’t even want you to marry in the first place! That’s why his epistles seem like they’re being for monogamy! They’re NOT for monogamy! They’re NOT even for marriage! But he couldn’t deny marriage, so his writings look like, okay, you can marry but... (and our brethren have concluded that to mean be MONOGAMOUS.
“There is difference also between a wife (a married woman) and a virgin (a spinster). The unmarried woman (spinster or widow careth for the things of the LORD, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit (the “holy” he’s talking of there means “WHOLLY” devoted to the Lord): but she that is married careth for the things of the WORLD, how she may please her HUSBAND.” Do you see how Paul links “marriage” to “worldliness”? That’s the celebate streak in him!
“And this I speak for your own profit; not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely, and that ye may ATTEND upon the Lord WITHOUT DISTRACTION.” So, that’s all of Paul’s purpose – that you may attend upon the Lord without distraction! That’s why his writings invite you to celibacy but “permits” marriage! If you “permit” your children to play football, rather than “encourage” them to, are you likely to build a stadium for them? Does that make a stadium an aberration? No. Polygamy is NOT an aberration. It’s not a sin; Paul just doesn’t like marriage in the first place, not to talk of polygamy! That’s the reason his writings can EASILY be misconstrued to be a DOCTRINE for MONOGAMY. Truth is, it’s a push for CELIBACY! But because, being a push for celibacy, he only “permits” marriage, so that “permission,” in his writings, have the colouration of “monogamy”! That’s why he would easily say let the elders be husbands of one wife! In fact, that VERY STATEMENT shows that there were people in the Church who were polygamous! And he didn’t say that they had sinned!
“So then he that giveth her (virgin) in marriage doeth WELL (he couldn’t have said he doeth BAD!); but (listen to him -) he that giveth her NOT in marriage doeth BETTER! How can you say that I have a “virgin” (either as my daughter or as my fiancee) and you’re saying that I’m doing BETTER if I give her NOT in marriage? Of what purpose is she my daughter if not that one day I will have the joy of giving her out in marriage? Or, of what purpose is she my fiancee if not that one day I will take her as wife? Can you see, how, at every opportunity, Paul is AGAINST marriage? Only that he couldn’t say that it’s a SIN! Left to him, all of us should be CELIBATE!
“The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at LIBERTY to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord. But she is HAPPIER if she so abide (as a widow), after MY JUDGEMENT (my assessment): and I think also that I have the Spirit of God.” Of course, Paul, you have the Spirit of God – and that Spirit of God is only INSPIRING you to write out things in your CELIBATE mentality!
Comments
Post a Comment