Why does Paul say each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband?

Explanation:

In 1 Corinthians 7:1, Paul writes that he will now respond to a letter from the Corinthians. He then writes, It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Now he explains that because of sexual temptation, a man ought to have his own wife, and a woman her own husband. When Paul says that a man ought to have his own wife, and a woman her own husband, he must be addressing people who are already married. And if he is addressing people who are already married, he cannot mean that each single person ought to get himself a wife or husband. Rather, he must mean that each person who is already married must have their own wife or husband. If this is right, then the term to have must be a euphemism for sexual relations (see argument b). So how do we know that Paul addresses already married people and not people who are single but should get married?

If Paul is saying that single people should get themselves a wife or husband, then he contradicts himself several times. That is because in 1 Corinthians 7:7, Paul says that he wishes all were like him, that is, unmarried. And in 1 Corinthians 7:8 he says that unmarried people do well if they remain single. Then in 1 Corinthians 7:26 he repeats that it is good to remain unmarried.⁵ It does not make sense for Paul to say that because of sexual temptation each man should get a wife, when he clearly says that unmarried people should remain unmarried. Thus, Paul must be addressing married people. And if he is addressing married people, he cannot mean to have in the sense that married people should get a wife or husband because they already have one. Thus, he must mean that a married man or woman should have sexual relations with their own wife or husband.

And from the fact that Paul addresses already married people we can conclude that when he writes, It is good for a man not to touch a woman, he is quoting and responding to an idea that originates with the Corinthians, and not Paul himself.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that Paul himself admits that his instructions are a concession. In 1 Corinthians 7:6 he says that what he writes is a concession and not a command. This qualification allows him to go on and explain that the ideal case is to remain single. Thus, the notion that a man or woman should find a husband or wife because of sexual temptation is advisable, but not mandatory.

Response to counterargument:

There is a problem with this counterargument. When Paul says that a man should have his own wife, he uses the term ἕκαστος which means each. And when he says that each woman should have her own husband, he uses the term ἴδιος which means one’s own/private.⁶ Paul’s language is highly individual. Thus, we should infer that he means either that each and every person should have his own private spouse, or that each person who is married should only have sexual relations with his own spouse. Given that Paul says that remaining single is an honourable and valuable position, it seems that he must be referring to specific married people and not every individual person.

Explanation:

When Paul writes that each man should have his own wife, and each wife her own husband, he most likely has in mind that married people should only have sexual relations with their spouses. We can deduce this because of his use of the verb ἔχω (to have). First, we know from Scripture that the term ἔχω is used as a euphemism for sexual relations in several instances (see the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, Exodus 2:1; Deuteronomy 28:30; Isaiah 13:16; see also Matthew 14:4; Mark 6:18).⁷ Further, we have no record of an ancient author using the verb ἔχω to refer to taking a wife.⁸ On the other hand, when ancient authors do advise men to take a wife, they use the verb to take.⁹

It is most likely that when Paul says a man should have his wife and a wife her own husband, he likely means that a man should only have sexual relations with his wife, and a wife her husband.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that the reason Paul says a man and woman should have their own husband or wife is because of sexual temptation. People who are already married do not have sexual temptation because they are already married, and thus, free to have sexual relations with their spouse. Thus, Paul has single people in mind. The fact that the verb to have is not used elsewhere to suggest that a person ought to take a spouse does not mean that it can never be used to say that a person ought to take a spouse.

Response to counterargument:

The problem with this counterargument is that it assumes that Paul has single people in mind, but this is not necessarily so. In other words, this argument assumes that in 1 Corinthians 7:1 he says that it is good for a man not to touch a woman, and then explains that because of sexual temptation, single people ought to marry. Instead, it is entirely plausible that when Paul says it is good for a man not to touch a woman, he is quoting from the letter from the Corinthians. If this is so, then Paul is likely responding to the notion that married people ought to abstain from sexual relations. Paul says that because of the temptation for married people to commit adultery, they should not abstain from sexual relations in marriage except when in agreement and for a time (1 Corinthians 7:5). Unless the counterargument can show that Paul is not responding to the Corinthians’ own idea that it is good for a man not to touch a woman, this argument stands.

Explanation:

When we look at the structure of Paul’s writing, we see that he follows one train of thought in 1 Corinthians 7:2–4. After writing because of sexual immorality, Paul presents three balanced pairs of one unified thought.¹⁰ We can see this by reconstructing 1 Corinthians 7:2–4 as follows:

2) Each man should have his own wife,
And,
     Each woman her own husband.

3) The husband should give to his wife her due,
Likewise,
     The wife to her husband.

4 The wife does not have authority over her own body, but her husband    does,
Likewise,
     The husband does not have authority over his own body, but his wife does.¹¹

The careful structure clearly demonstrates that Paul has one thought in mind, which is that married people should not abstain from sexual intercourse. And why should married people not abstain from sexual intercourse? Because of sexual temptation (1 Corinthians 7:2).

Counterargument:

While it is possible that Paul has one unified thought throughout 1 Corinthians 7:2–4, it is also possible that 1 Corinthians 7:3–4 qualify his statements from 1 Corinthians 7:2. Paul says that it is good for a man not to touch a woman, but because of sexual temptation, one ought to marry. Now Paul qualifies this by explaining that the reason marriage is the solution to sexual immortality is because married people are not supposed to withhold sexual relations from each other unless they agree and only for a time (1 Corinthians 7:5).

Response to counterargument:

The problem with this counterargument is that if Paul means to use 1 Corinthians 7:3–4 to qualify 1 Corinthians 7:2 we expect him to use a conjunction to make this clear.¹² For example, he might have written, “Because of sexual temptation a man should have a wife, and a wife a husband. Now…” Instead, the conjunction is absent, and Paul lays out three carefully structured sentences which all seem to qualify 1 Corinthians 7:1b, and the idea that it is not good for a man to touch a woman.¹³ Thus, given the careful literary structure, it is most likely that Paul qualifies 1 Corinthians 7:1b through 1 Corinthians 7:2–4.

Possible weaknesses:

The weakness of this view is that it seems to overlook the plain sense of the text. Paul clearly says that because of sexual sin, each man ought to have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. It seems obvious that Paul means to say that because of the temptation to sin, men and women ought to marry. Still, by understanding that Paul here responds to the Corinthians and that to have is often used as a euphemism for sexual relations, this interpretation is highly plausible.

Explanation:

In 1 Corinthians 7:1, Paul says that it is good for a man not to touch a woman. When we reach 1 Corinthians 7:2 we find our reason why this ideal is not possible.^16,17 There Paul states, But because of sexual temptations, a man ought to have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. Thus, Paul is saying that the reason each man and woman should marry is to avoid sexual temptation.

Counterargument:

The problem with this view is that it undervalues marriage as an institution that was designed by God from the beginning. We learn from Genesis 1:28 that God created men and women and commanded them to be fruitful and multiply. The only way to be fruitful and multiply is through sexual relations, so marriage, and sexual relations in marriage, seem to be woven into the fabric of creation. Further, in Genesis 2:18 we read that it is not good for a man to be alone, so God created woman to be his companion. The author concludes by saying that the two will become one flesh. That the two will become one flesh implies that the married couple will support one another and express their love through sexual relations. Further, in Ephesians 5:25–32, Paul uses marriage to illustrate the unique relationship between Christ and the church, which implies that Paul had a high view of marriage. Given the theological arguments for the richness of marriage, it is hard to see how Paul could reduce marriage to an outlet for sexual temptation.

Possible weaknesses:

The problem with this view is that it does not understand Paul in light of the whole canon of Scripture. It is hard to see how he could reduce marriage to a solution to sexual temptation. Unfortunately, this view cannot explain why Paul would suggest that marriage is a solution to sexual sin without devaluing the whole institution.