Take the 2-minute tour ×
Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Paul makes clear in 1 Corinthians 7:25 that the following section is not a word from God but his (Paul's) opinion:

Now concerning the betrothed, I have no command from the Lord, but I give my judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy.—1st Corinthians 7:25 (ESV)

Does this mean that 1 Corinthians 7:26-40 is not the 'Word of God'? If it is, how can this be explained? If it isn't, doesn't this call some other verses, particularly from the epistles, into question, i.e. that they might be just the writer's opinion?

share|improve this question
1  
IMHO, it depends on how you read the bible. As a literalist, you would find this troublesome. For me, I read the bible as the inspired word of God - therefore it's the bigger picture of the story / book / bible that is important to me. It's difficult for me to explain here. Basically, it may be the writer's opinion but the spirit of the text and the moral lessons are from God. –  user1054 Oct 9 '12 at 14:10
    
I see what you're saying but how can you say the moral lessons are from God if the idea is not God's but Paul's by his own admission. It might be God's opinion but there's also the possibility that Paul could be literally totally wrong, or am I not right? –  byronyasgur Oct 9 '12 at 14:56
    
I'm sorry, I really can't respond to your question here as it would be my opinion which may not be consistent with orthodox Christianity. However, I will say that Paul was very much a man who learned from his life experiences. He wasn't all knowing, ever. –  user1054 Oct 9 '12 at 16:42
2  
I know. Christians, including me, believe that the new and old testaments are the word of God ( and many of us believe that the writers themselves contributed little to the sovereign inspiration of the holy spirit. Chuck missler has some material on this ) ... yet there are passages which clearly are not God's word ... plenty of stuff from the book of Job for example God himself refutes as NOT being His ( later in the book ) ... anyway I don't think we examine this stuff deeply enough when you consider that doctrines preached every sunday are built on scriptures as the "Word of God". –  byronyasgur Oct 9 '12 at 17:13
    
@byronyasgur wrt to the references in Job, God refutes the claims of Job's "friends" as not being correct. They were still recorded accurately. Likewise, when Herod is killed in the Book of Acts for not giving credit to God and instead taking the adulation of man personally, as if he were God, it doesn't say the people who said those things were right - it records they were said, and then what God did in response. –  warren Oct 9 '12 at 17:16
show 4 more comments

3 Answers 3

up vote 6 down vote accepted

One of the things it is important to realize about the Bible is that the authors did not sit down to 'write the Bible'. Books of the Bible have to be taken first as what they were intended by their authors to be - a biography of Jesus, a history of the early church, or a letter to one of the churches. Yes, God did inspire those authors to write something that would be infallible and of eternal value, but he did not simply dictate a message for all people for all time which Paul or whoever then wrote down. It's highly likely that Paul did not realize that he was writing Infallible Scripture when he did it. He certainly wrote other letters that are not included in Scripture.

Because of this we find things in the Epistles which are of unclear value to those of us who read them 2000 years later. Paul asks the church to greet specific people that he knows. That isn't God instructing us to greet those people, it's Paul sending a greeting to people he knows. It's part of God's awesome power that he can use those writings to instruct us, without making everything a direct commend from him.

In other words, God inspired Paul to write those words in his letter. The fact that they are Paul's opinion (but a divinely inspired opinion) are unimportant. They are meant to be there, and they are just as inspired as every other part of the Epistle. The Bible also contains many other things that are not the direct command of God - stories of people who did less-than-righteous things; opinions offered by characters that do not necessarily reflect God's opinions

Why did God cause Paul to write his own opinion as part of Scripture? A good questions, which I don't have a definitive answer for. Maybe it was to draw attention to the fact that Christianity is not just a set of written rules, but sometimes calls for us to use the Holy Spirit that he gave us to work out what the right thing to do is. But I speculate. The answer here is that there is no conflict between Paul writing something that is his opinion, and the fact that God inspired him to write exactly that.

share|improve this answer
    
Let's be nice guys. –  wax eagle Oct 10 '12 at 14:03
    
+1 for "In other words, God inspired Paul to write those words in his letter. The fact that they are Paul's opinion (but a divinely inspired opinion) are unimportant." I tend to agree with that statement myself. –  David Stratton Oct 10 '12 at 14:04
1  
To be honest I think you've done a particularly amazing job explaining this ( to my own personal satisfaction anyway that is ). In my case I would tend to agree with everything you wrote here but I don't know that I would have been capable of formulating it. I think the question you brought up Why did God cause Paul to write his own opinion as part of Scripture? was probably the essence of my issue and I think your answer is as good as I'm likely to get this side of glory. It serves as a reminder of the hugeness of God. Thanks. And thanks to all the other answers and comments too. –  byronyasgur Oct 10 '12 at 18:56
add comment

Using the basic rules that Biblical Literalists use when determining what is to be taken as "literally the Word of God", we find the basic principle:

When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense,seek no other sense;

Therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths indicate clearly otherwise.

That makes things pretty simple. In context, this was an Epistle, which is to day, a letter of instruction to the Church at Corinth. Literally, Paul is saying that this is something he is speaking "with permission" - that is, the author himself is stating that this is his personal position, not something that the Holy Spirit guided him to write.

Therefore, it is reasonable to believe and understand that these words were not laid upon Paul by the Holy Spirit, but "by permission" indicates that he had the Holy Spirit's permission to write these things. That implies he sought out the will of God in these things and found no opposition or reason not to write these things.

This means, logically, that these verses are not the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit, but are not in contradiction to the will of God.

This is all in line with the Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

  1. no commandment of the Lord: yet . my judgment-I have no express revelation from the Lord commanding it, but I give my judgment (opinion); namely, under the ordinary inspiration which accompanied the apostles in all their canonical writings (compare 1Co 7:40; 1Co 14:37; 1Th 4:15). The Lord inspires me in this case to give you only a recommendation, which you are free to adopt or reject-not a positive command. In the second case (1Co 7:10, 11) it was a positive command; for the Lord had already made known His will (Mal 2:14, 15; Mt 5:31, 32). In the third case (1Co 7:12), the Old Testament commandment of God to put away strange wives (Ezr 10:3), Paul by the Spirit revokes.

Then again, Clarke's commentary states:

I have no commandment of the Lord - There is nothing in the sacred writings that directly touches this point.

Yet I give my judgment - As every way equal to such commandments had there been any, seeing I have received the teaching of his own Spirit, and have obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful to this heavenly gift, so that it abides with me to lead me into all truth. In this way I think the apostle's words may be safely understood.

Which, of course, would indicate that this is the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit, which leaves the concept of a fully inspired Scripture intact.

So apparently the answer to the question is, not surprisingly, "There seems to be more than one point of view on the subject, neither authoritative."

As a sige point, this isn't the only place in 1 Corinthians where such a statement is made. Verse 6 has a similar statement (KJV):

But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.

which most commentaries interpret to be referring to the preceding verse, but again, interpret differently.

share|improve this answer
    
I think this seems well thought out. Basically the infallible scriptures includes Paul's sanctified opinions showing us that we should learn to also form goo opinions yet be flexible knowing others may have equally sanctified opinions. I am glad the scriptures an Paul made this distinction. –  Mike Oct 11 '12 at 10:36
add comment

Paul is not trying to make the point that 1 Corinthians 7:12ff is his opinion where the rest is God's inspired Word. Rather, Paul knows the oral tradition of Jesus’ sayings on divorce that were later written down in the Gospels, but he is not aware of a time when Jesus ever spoke specifically to a situation in which one spouse becomes a Christian and the other remains unconverted. Therefore, he carefully distinguishes between the written words of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels and his own understanding of how Jesus’ teaching would apply to this new situation. Paul makes the notations (“Not I, but the Lord” and “I, not the Lord”) in order to delineate between directly quoting Jesus and not quoting Jesus.

So, Paul is not saying that 1 Corinthians 7:12ff is simply his wisdom or opinion. Paul is saying that 1 Corinthians 7:12 and following is newly revealed Scripture, led by the Spirit, through his pen. When Paul says, “Not I, but the Lord”, he is saying this is a quote directly from the Lord, recorded in Matthew 5:32. When Paul says, “I, not the Lord”, he is saying this is a new word revealed through him from God in the Holy Spirit.

Simply put, Paul is delineating between quoting Jesus and not quoting Jesus.

Paul views his admonition here as authoritative and inspired, not merely as human wisdom (v. 40; cf. 14:37–38).

share|improve this answer
    
Welcome to the site! This doesn't really have much to do with your answer, but I find that sharing the following tends to help new visitors avoid mistaking the purpose of this site. I do hope to see more from you! When you get a chance, please see How we are different than other sites? and What makes a good supported answer? –  David Stratton Feb 23 at 2:36
    
Interesting, you might be right. Just to be clear you're saying that "from the Lord" is not referring to some word spoken directly to Paul by the Lord through the spirit. ie divine wisdom or revealed knowledge etc. I always assumed that's what it would have meant; but rather when he says "but [I give my judgment] as one who by the Lord's mercy ... " he is referring to being inspired by the spirit. If correct then I think this brings heavenly inspiration much closer to us; and I do tend (myself) to think that our wisdom is inspired by God, even if we don't know for certain that that is the case –  byronyasgur Feb 24 at 19:26
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.