James Bales and “I, not the Lord” in I Cor 7:12

Mr. Bales’ Argument On I Corinthians 7:12

James Bales’ position was I Cor 7:15 ("but if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace") allows another cause for divorce, scriptural remarriage following, other than divorce for fornication, this second cause being desertion. The first reply to this assertion is usually that Matt 19:9, because it uses the word "except," shows that fornication is the only scripturally cause, thereby ruling out any other cause, including desertion. Parallels are usually made to John 3:5 and similar passages. Our brother Bales’ response to this reply is that Matt 19:9 is not addressing marriages involving one or more non-Christians, that it is only addressing marriages where both of the partners are "under covenant" to God. Mr. Bales’ proof for this assertion is given as I Cor 7:10-12. He understands (I think correctly) the phrase in I Cor 7:10, "I command, yet not I, but the Lord" is referring to the fact the Lord gave the command "Let not the wife depart from her husband" directly while on earth (presumably recorded in Matt 19:6-9), while the phrase in I Cor 7:12, "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord" is introducing an answer to a Corinthian question that was not directly addressed by the Lord while on the earth. Mr. Bales then reasons that since verse 12 begins a discussion of mixed marriages, therefore Matt 19:6-9 must not address mixed marriages, and cannot be used to refute his doctrine that I Cor 7:15 allows another scriptural cause for divorce and remarriage.

The Correct Understanding Of I Corinthians 7:12-16

The truth is I Cor 7:10-11 does not specify marriages involving two Christians only, it speaks to all marriages. Verses 12-15 do not show Matt 19:9 does not teach concerning mixed marriages, but shows Jesus in Matt 19:9 (or at any other time) did not specifically state what the Christian is to do if his spouse (an unbeliever would be assumed) leaves him. Paul answers that question in verse 15, "let him depart." In other words, "Don’t go to the point of casting your pearls before swine in trying to convince him otherwise; even if the marriage is restored, who knows if you would be able to convert him to Christ anyway (verse 16)? If you (the believer) couldn’t do anything to help it, you have not sinned; it is not your problem" Verses 12-14, which precede Paul’s answer in verse 15, are Paul’s way of keeping the Corinthians from getting the wrong idea from his answer given in verse 15. Before giving his answer to the question, Paul first wants to make sure the Corinthians did not get the impression from his answer that a Christian could initiate the departing himself.

I might do something similar if my little daughter were to ask me if she could play outside. Before answering her question directly, I would probably precede the answer with, "now let me make this clear; do not go near the road. If your ball goes near the road, don’t go get it; come get Daddy and he will get it. Don’t go near the road!" Then I would finally answer, "Yes, you may go play outside."

The question raised by the Corinthians would have been something like, "What if I’m married to an unbeliever, and he leaves me, would my desire/obligation to try to convert him demand that I make never ending efforts to convince him to come back to me? Just how far must I go?" That is the question that Jesus does not directly address in the Matt 19:9 type passages. Before Paul gives his answer to that question (such answer found in verse 15), he first wants to make sure the readers don’t get the wrong idea and think he is giving them permission to depart. So he precedes his answer with the warning that they may not leave their partner. The question and answer might have gone something like the following: "Paul, what do we do if our spouse leaves us? How far must we go in pursuing the continuation of the relationship in hopes of converting them? Corinthians, let me first make it clear that you must not ever leave your spouse, even if that spouse is not a Christian. But if they insist upon leaving you, that is not your fault/problem. Who knows if you would have been able to convert them anyway?”

So the thing I Cor 7:12 indicates Matt 19:6-9 does not address is not mixed marriages per se, but what must be done if my spouse leaves me against my will? Matt 19:6-9 does not explain the answer to that question in detail, but I Cor 7:12-16 does.

Conclusion

The bottom line is that both Matt 19:9 and I Cor 7:10 address all, not just two Christians, paired in marriage. They therefore demand, contrary to “Bales’ Doctrine” (same with Homer Hailey), that partners break up unscriptural (adulterous) marriages when becoming a Christian (anytime when repenting).

hear Bible Crossfire Sunday nights at 8:04 central on SiriusXM radio Family Talk 131 or at BibleCrossfire.com