Commentary - 1 Corinthians 7:10-11

Bird's-eye view

In this brief but weighty passage, the Apostle Paul lays down the foundational rule for Christian marriage, drawing a sharp distinction between his own apostolic counsel and a direct command from the Lord Jesus Himself. The subject is the permanence of the marriage covenant between two believers. Paul is addressing a church rife with confusion, where some were tempted to think that a "spiritual" life might require abandoning ordinary marital duties, or even the marriage itself. Paul cuts through all such sanctimonious nonsense with a clear prohibition: the wife is not to leave her husband, and the husband is not to divorce his wife. This is not a suggestion; it is a command rooted in the teaching of Christ. However, Paul, with pastoral realism, immediately provides a crucial parenthesis for a situation where the command is broken. If a wife does leave, her options are starkly limited to two: remain unmarried or be reconciled. This passage establishes the baseline for Christian marriage as a lifelong, binding covenant that cannot be dissolved at will, while also acknowledging the reality of sinful separation and fencing it with strict limitations.

The core principle is covenantal faithfulness. Marriage is not a consumer contract based on satisfaction, but a sacred bond reflecting Christ and the Church. Paul's instruction here is the bedrock upon which the rest of his teaching on marriage in this chapter is built. He will go on to address mixed marriages and other scenarios, but he starts here, with two believers, and with the unvarnished command of the Lord. The permanence of marriage is the norm, and any deviation from it is a serious breach that brings with it severe and restrictive consequences.

Outline

Context In 1 Corinthians

Chapter 7 of 1 Corinthians is Paul's response to specific questions the Corinthian church had asked him about marriage, sex, and singleness, likely in a letter they had sent. The chapter begins by correcting a wrongheaded asceticism that was creeping into the church, where some were advocating for celibacy even within marriage. Paul corrects this by affirming the goodness of marital relations. He then moves from the general to the specific, addressing different groups: the married, the unmarried and widows, and those in mixed marriages. Our passage, verses 10-11, is the first of these specific instructions and deals with the foundational case: a marriage between two believers. Paul distinguishes his instruction here from what follows by grounding it directly in the Lord's teaching (cf. Matt 5:32; 19:9; Mark 10:11-12). This gives it the highest possible authority. This section sets the stage for his subsequent discussion of mixed marriages (vv. 12-16), where he will say, "I, not the Lord," indicating that he is applying the Lord's principles to a new situation not directly addressed by Jesus during His earthly ministry.

Key Issues

A Commandment, Not a Suggestion

We live in a therapeutic age where much of what the Bible presents as a command, we receive as a helpful hint or a lifestyle suggestion. But Paul is not offering tips for a more fulfilling relationship. He is laying down the law. And he is careful to tell us where he got this law. When he says, "not I, but the Lord," he is referring back to the explicit teaching of Jesus Christ during His earthly ministry. Jesus was unequivocal about the sanctity of the one-flesh union and God's hatred of divorce. He taught that Moses permitted divorce only because of the hardness of human hearts, but from the beginning, it was not so. Paul is simply taking the Lord's teaching and applying it as the baseline for the Christian church.

This is a covenantal matter. Marriage is not a partnership that can be dissolved when one party feels their needs are not being met. It is a solemn bond, a vow made before God and men, that pictures the unbreakable relationship between Christ and His Church. Therefore, to break this bond is not just a personal failure; it is a theological lie. It misrepresents the gospel. This is why the command is so stark and absolute. The integrity of our witness is at stake. Paul is not being harsh; he is being faithful to the one who is the ultimate Husband of us all.

Verse by Verse Commentary

10 But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband

Paul now turns his attention from general principles to a specific group: the married. And for this group, he has a charge, an instruction. He immediately clarifies the source of this instruction, giving it maximum weight. This is not his personal opinion or pastoral advice; this is a direct command from the Lord Jesus. The distinction is crucial. Later, when dealing with mixed marriages, he will say "I, not the Lord," not because that part is uninspired, but because he is applying Christ's principles to a situation Christ did not directly address. Here, he is on ground the Lord Himself covered. The command is given to the wife first, perhaps because women in that culture might have been more susceptible to a false piety that sought "spiritual" freedom from marital obligations. The word for "leave" here is chorizo, which means to separate. It is a general term. The command is clear: a Christian wife is not to initiate a separation from her husband.

11 (but if she does leave, she must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband),

Here we have a divine parenthesis. Paul is a pastor, and he knows that despite the clarity of God's commands, people are sinners and will sometimes break them. What happens then? He anticipates the question: "What if she leaves anyway?" The command is not to leave, but sin happens. In such a case, where a wife unlawfully separates from her husband (meaning, for reasons other than those permitted by Christ, such as sexual immorality), her options are severely restricted. She has only two. The first is to remain unmarried. This is not a state of singleness to be celebrated; it is a consequence of her sinful action. She has broken the covenant fellowship, but the covenant bond remains. She is not free to pursue another relationship. Her second option, and the clear goal, is to be reconciled to her husband. The breach is to be healed. The separation is to be ended. This pastoral provision does not soften the initial command; rather, it reinforces the permanence of the marriage bond by showing that even a sinful separation does not dissolve it.

and that the husband should not divorce his wife.

Paul now mirrors the command, applying it to the husband. He uses a different word here, aphienai, which more specifically means to "send away" or "divorce," reflecting the husband's legal prerogative in that culture. While the wife might "leave," the husband would formally "divorce." The point is that the prohibition is symmetrical. What is forbidden to the wife is forbidden to the husband. He is not to put away his wife. The covenant has two sides, and the obligations of permanence are binding on both. The husband, as the head of the wife, has a particular responsibility to maintain the stability and integrity of the marriage. For him to initiate a divorce is to abdicate his foundational duty as a husband.

Application

The teaching here is as counter-cultural today as it was in Corinth, if not more so. We are marinated in a culture of expressive individualism that views marriage as a vehicle for self-fulfillment. When it ceases to make us happy, we are told we have every right to end it and start over. The Bible says otherwise. For the Christian, marriage is not primarily about our happiness, but about God's glory. It is a covenant, not a contract.

This means, first, that believers must enter into marriage with a sober understanding of its permanence. We are vowing to be faithful "until death do us part." This is not a poetic flourish; it is the literal terms of the covenant. Second, for those who are married, this passage is a call to perseverance. Difficulties, trials, and frustrations are not grounds for bailing out. They are opportunities to learn forgiveness, exercise grace, and depend on Christ, whose love for His own bride never fails. Third, for those in the tragic situation of an unlawful separation, the path forward is not to justify the sin but to heed the apostolic restriction. The only godly options are celibacy in that separated state or the hard, humbling work of reconciliation. The world offers a thousand other options, all of them leading to further sin and misery. The gospel calls us to the narrow way of repentance and faithfulness, which is the only path to true restoration and life.