1 Corinthians 7:34

1Co 7:34. Μεμέρισται καὶ ἡ γυνὴ καὶ ἡ παρθένος) That is, there is a difference alse between a wife and a virgin. Not only the unmarried and the married man have duties differing from each other; but also the duties of the wife, and virgin (of the female sex) differ as far as possible from each other. Some connect the word μεμέρισται, having the particle καὶ also before it,[60] by a different pointing, with the foregoing words, but Paul refers it to those which follow. The difference, namely between marriage and celibacy, each of which claims for itself a different class of duties, rather refers to women than to men; for the woman is the helper of the man;—the woman undergoes a greater change of her condition, than the man, in contracting marriage; comp. 1Co 7:39-40. Further, he is speaking here chiefly of virgins, 1Co 7:25: therefore the word μεμέρισται is particularly well adapted to this place; and the singular number does not prevent it from being construed with wife and virgin. So 2Ki 10:5, in the Hebrew, He that was over the house, and he that was over the city, the elders also and the bringers tip of the children SENT” [singular verb] (Heb. ישלח), so below, 1Co 9:6, Ἢ ΜΟΝΟΣ ἘΓῺ ΚΑῚ ΒΑΡΝΆΒΑς, Κ.Τ.Λ., “or I ONLY [instead of ΜΟΝΟΊ] and Barnabas.”—ἽΝΑ Ἡ ἈΓΊΑ, that she may be holy) She thus pleases the Lord, if she be holy, being wholly devoted to him. Holiness here implies something more than at 1Co 7:14.

[60] Lachm. reads καὶ μεμέρισται καὶ with AB Vulg., and punctuates thus, γυναικί, καὶ μεμέρισται. καὶ ἡ γυνὴ, etc., G fg read μεμέρισται καὶ. Tischend. reads as Lachm., but puts the full stop at γυναικί.—ED.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_7:34. Taking the reading μεμέρ. κ. ἡ γυνὴ κ. ἡ παρθένος (see the critical remarks), we have: The wife, too, and the maiden are divided,[1240] i.e. they are severed from each other as regards their interests, are separate in what they care for, personae, quae diversae trahuntur. The way in which μερίζεσθαι is used (see Reiche, Comment. crit. I. p. 195) to denote division into different tendencies, views, party-positions, is well known (Mat_12:25-26; Mar_3:24-26; Polybius, viii. 23. 9; Herodian, iii. 10. 6, iv. 3. 3); but the expression is selected here in reference to the different kinds of μεριμνᾶν. Theophylact says well: Οὐ ΤῊΝ ΑὐΤῊΝ ἜΧΟΥΣΙ ΦΡΟΝΤΊΔΑ, ἌΛΛΑ ΜΕΜΕΡΙΣΜΈΝΑΙ ΕἸΣῚ ΤΑῖς ΣΠΟΥΔΑῖς, ΚΑῚ Ἡ ΜῈΝ ΠΕΡῚ ἌΛΛΑ ΣΠΟΥΔΆΖΕΙ, Ἡ ΔῈ ΠΕΡῚ ἌΛΛΑ. Comp Theodoret. The simple rendering: There is a difference (Chrysostom, Luther, Grotius, Mosheim, Zachariae, Heydenreich, and others), would still conduct one back to the sense divisa est, but would give too general and meaningless an idea.

Μεμέρ. is in the singular, because it stands at the head of the sentence, and ἡ γυνὴ κ. ἡ παρθένος embraces the female sex as a whole made up of two halves. Comp Kühner, II. p. 58 f.; Bernhardy, p. 416; Buttmann, neut. Gr. p. 110 f. [E. T. 126].

ἵνα ᾖ ἁγία Κ.Τ.Λ[1243]] Comp 2Co_7:1. This moral consecration to God of her whole personality, which she strives after, is the πῶς ἀρέσει τῷ Κυρίῳ explicated. One can hardly conceive that Paul avoided the latter phrase on the ground of possible misconstruction (Hofmann). This, considering the sacredness of the idea of ἀρέσκειν τῷ Κυρίῳ, would be a piece of prudery, which is unlike him.

[1240] If we adopt Lachmanns reading (defended especially by Hammond among the older expositors), which Ewald also follows (leaving out, however, the second ἡ ἄγαμος), the meaning will be: The married man cares … how he may please his wife, and is divided (in his interest). And the unmarried wife (widowed or divorced) and the unmarried maiden cares, etc. Hofmann, too, prefers this reading, taking the καί, which it has before ἡ γυνή, in the sense of also. The betrothed maiden, in his opinion, is no longer ἄγαμος. But in the whole context there is only the simple distinction made between married and unmarried persons. Betrothed maidens, too, belong to the latter class; comp. ver. 36: γαμείτωσαν.

[1243] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

NOTE.

There is no ground for inferring from 1Co_7:32-34 that Paul, himself unwedded, looked somewhat askance upon marriage (Rückert). To assume any such onesidedness of view on his part would be a very hasty proceeding (see on 1Co_7:2). On the contrary, what we have here is not his view of how, from the nature of the case, things must necessarily subsist,[1245] but only his experience of how in point of fact they usually did subsist. This experience he (ὁ ἄγαμος) had arrived at, on the one hand, by consideration of his own case and that of many other unmarried persons; and, on the other, by observing the change of interests which was wont to set in with those who married. We have here, therefore, a purely empirical support for the preference of celibacy,a preference, however, which with Paul is simply relative, depending upon the nearness of the Parousia and the end of the world, and also upon the subjective gift of being holy in body and spirit (comp Act_14:4). The expectation of these events being so near has remained unfulfilled, and thereby is invalidated the Pauline support which has been often found in our text for celibacy, which, as a legal requirement, is in principle thoroughly un-Pauline (comp 1Co_7:35). The apostle, moreover, is speaking generally, and not to one special class among his readers.

[1245] Paul himself, it is plain, had intercourse with numbers of eminent servants and handmaids of the Lord (Priscilla, etc.) who were married. This in opposition to Cropp in the Jahrb. f. Deutsche, Theol. 1866, p. 102.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vv. 34. “The married woman also is divided. The unmarried virgin careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit; but she that is married careth for the things of the world, [seeking] how she may please her husband.”

The text, at the beginning of 1Co 7:34, has been extraordinarily handled and re-handled. This arises, no doubt, from the uncertainty which copyists felt in regard to the verb μεμέρισται, is divided. Should it be made the end of 1Co 7:33, or the beginning of 1Co 7:34? On this there depended also in part the question of the καί (and) before the verb. The verb may certainly be connected with the preceding sentence; in this case it ought to be preceded by καί: “He who is married cares for the things of the world, how he may please his wife; and he is divided (in himself).” It will be objected that such an addition destroys the parallelism with 1Co 7:32; but there was no observation to be made on the result of the harmony between the will of the celibate and that of the Lord, whereas it is otherwise in the case of 1Co 7:33. This meaning is that adopted by Neander, Hofmann, Edwards, Lachmann, Westcott, and Hort. Only one cannot help asking why the apostle did not likewise add an analogous reflection when concluding the case of the married woman in 1Co 7:34. The parallelism between the two members of the sentence is rigorous, and seemed to demand it. It is better, therefore, to join the verb μεμέρισται (with or without the καί) to 1Co 7:34. But in this case, what is the subject of the verb is divided? And how are we to read and punctuate the following words? One reading gives the epithet ἡ ἄγαμος, unmarried, twice, first after the word ἡ γυνή, the woman, and then after the word ἡ παρθένος, the virgin; another, only after the first of these words; a third, only after the second. Not only does the majority of the documents support this third reading; but its representatives are found in the three families of Mjj., and the two oldest versions testify in its favour, so that we ought to receive it as the most probable. The true text seems to us to be: Μεμέρισται καὶ ἡ γυνὴ [καὶb ἡ παρθένος ἡ ἄγαμος μεριμνᾷ...But the question is, how far we are to extend the subject of μεμέρισται, is divided. Many think that the subject is double: Both the wife and the virgin are divided. Then the new sentence would begin with ἡ ἄγαμος, the unmarried. We should require to take the verb is divided in the sense of is different (so Chrysostom, Luther, Mosheim, etc.), or, what comes to nearly the same thing, in the sense of going in opposite directions (Theodoret, Meyer, Beet): “There is a difference between the wife and the unmarried woman.” But after the idea of a division of the same person by opposite cares had been so forcibly advanced in 1Co 7:33, it is unnatural to give to the verb μερίζεσθαι, to be divided, the sense of to differ, all the more that the verb is in the singular, and that, notwithstanding all Meyer’s subtle explanations, one would expect the plural (μερίζονται), as is shown by the paraphrase of Theodoret, who instinctively falls into the plural (μεμερισμέναι εἰσὶ ταῖς σπουδαῖς). This verb in the singular can only apply to one whole divided into several parts (comp. 1Co 1:13; Mar 3:25-26, etc.). Although, then, the Latin and Syriac versions, and almost all the Latin Fathers give this meaning, it appears to me difficult to accept it.

There remains, as it seems to me, only one possible explanation: that which assigns to μεμέρισται as its subject the following term only: the woman, ἡ γυνή, reading the καί: The woman also is divided (evidently the married woman). 1Co 7:33 had just shown the married man divided within himself by different anxieties. It is absolutely the same with the married woman, adds the apostle; and he establishes it in the sequel of the verse, presenting first by way of contrast the description of the virgin who consents to remain so. The beginning of the following proposition is therefore ἡ παρθένος, the virgin. The καί before this word ought either to be understood in the sense of also (like the bachelor, 1Co 7:17), or rejected. It may easily have been added under the influence of the widespread interpretation which made the following substantive a second subject of μεμέρισται.

The apostle forcibly brings out the contrast between the married woman who is inwardly divided, and the virgin whose happy inward harmony the apostle proceeds to point out. The apposition ἡ ἄγαμος, the unmarried, is not a pleonasm; it signifies: “the virgin who remains unmarried.” She takes counsel only of the will of the Lord, without being obliged to put herself at one with the will of a human master; she has consequently only one perfectly simple aim to pursue, that which is indicated by the ἵνα, in order that, which follows. The word ἁγία, holy, is equivalent here to the term consecrated, that is to say, entirely devoted in her body and spirit to the service of the Lord. As to the words: in her body, we must compare 1Co 7:4, where it is said of the married woman that she has not power over her own body. As to the spirit, compare what follows, where it is said of the married woman that she is under obligation to take account of her husband’s will, as well as of earthly necessities. It is an ideal full of nobleness and purity which floats before the eyes of the apostle, when he thus describes the life of the Christian virgin being able to give herself up, without the least distraction, to the task which the Lord assigns her. He will give scope to this impression still more fully in 1Co 7:35. In the last proposition of the verse, the apostle returns to the other alternative, that of marriage, and develops the first words of the verse: The woman is divided. The aor. γαμήσασα signifies: from the moment when she did the act of marrying. In English we should rather join these two propositions by a conjunction: “While the virgin cares for...the married woman cares for...”

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1Co_7:34

There is difference (also) between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please (her) husband.

What is true of men is true also of women. There is a difference between a wife and a virgin. The difference is, that the virgin may devote her whole time to the Lord; the wife must be involved in worldly cares for the sake of her husband. The Greek literally rendered is, Divided is a wife and a virgin. Their interests are diverse. The one has a husband to divide her attention; the other is free from such distraction. The reading adopted by Lachmann and Ruckert modifies the sense of this passage, and relieves some of its difficulties. They connect μεμέρισται with the preceding sentence, He that is married careth for the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and is divided, i.e. distracted between the service of the Lord and his social duties. In the following clause they read ἡ γυνὴ ἡ ἄγαμοϚ καὶ ἡ παρθένοϚ ἡ ἄγαμος, the unmarried woman and the virgin care for the things of the Lord. Jerome pronounces in favor of this reading, which he says he found in his Greek MSS., and it is also adopted by Calvin. The common text, however, is generally preferred. The virgin cares for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit. That is, that she be consecrated as to body and Spirit. The word holy has the sense here that it has in 1Co_7:14, and so often elsewhere. It is not in purity and spirituality that the virgin is said to have the advantage of the wife; but in freedom from distracting cares. In 1Co_7:14, even the unbelieving husband or wife is said to be sanctified or made holy. And it is in the same general sense of consecration, that holiness is here predicated of virgins as distinguished from wives. It would be to impugn a divine ordinance, and to contradict all experience, to say that married women, because married, are less holy than the unmarried. Paul advances no such idea.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mind.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

difference also--Not merely the unmarried and the married man differ in their respective duties, but also the wife and the virgin. Indeed a woman undergoes a greater change of condition than a man in contracting marriage.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 34. There is a difference also between a wife and a virgin.] That is: There is this difference between a married and an unmarried woman. The unmarried careth (only) for the things of the Lord, having no domestic duties to perform. That she may be holy-separated to Divine employments, both in body and spirit. Whereas she that is married careth (also) for the things of the world, how she may please her husband, having many domestic duties to fulfil, her husband being obliged to leave to her the care of the family, and all other domestic concerns.

On this verse there is a profusion of various readings in MSS., versions, and fathers, for which I must refer to Griesbach, as it would be impossible to introduce them here so as to make them look like sense.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

34. The unmarried woman and the virgin. What he had laid down as to men he now declares in like manner as to women — that virgins and widows are not prevented by earthly things from devoting their whole cares and their whole affections to God. Not that all act this part, but that there is opportunity for it, if the mind is so disposed. When he says, that she may be holy in body and in spirit, he shows what kind of chastity is true and acceptable to God — when the mind is kept unpolluted in the sight of God. Would to God that this were more carefully attended to! As to the body, we see what kind of devotement to the Lord there commonly is on the part of monks, nuns, and the whole scum of the Papistical clergy, than whose celibacy nothing can be imagined that is more obscene. But not to speak at present of chastity of body, where is there one to be found among those that are held in admiration in consequence of their reputation for continency, that does not burn with base lusts? We may, however, infer from this statement of Paul, that no chastity is well pleasing to God that does not extend to the soul as well as to the body Would to God that those who prate in such haughty terms as to continency, did but understand that they have to do with God! They would not be so confident in their contendings with us. At the same time, there are none in the present day who dispute on the subject of continency in more magnificent style than those who are openly and in the most shameless manner guilty of fornication. But though they should conduct themselves ever so honorably in the sight of men, that is nothing, if they do not keep their minds pure and exempt from all uncleanness.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

34. There is difference also] The text is here in great confusion, and there is great variety of punctuation among the editors. The Vulgate and Calvin, who are followed by many modern editors, translate thus: He that is married careth for the things of this life, how he may please his wife, and is distracted. And the unmarried woman and the virgin (some read unmarried virgin) careth for the things of the Lord. There are two objections to this rendering: (1) The term unmarried woman is a singular one to apply either to a widow, or to a married woman living apart from her husband; and (2) it is difficult to see how the Apostle could commend the latter in the face of his express prohibition of separation save in the particular case mentioned in 1Co_7:15-16. Wordsworth translates, “The wife and the virgin, each has her appointed lot,” thus keeping the original meaning of the word here used. See also 1Co_7:17, where it is translated distributed, and also 2Co_10:13 and ch. 1Co_1:13.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

There is difference also between a wife and a virgin,.... The word translated "there is difference", stands in some copies at the end of the last verse, and in the Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions, by which it is rendered, "and is divided"; referring to the married man, whose thoughts are distracted with the cares of the world, and his mind divided between the Lord and his wife, between the things that please the one, and those that please the other; so that he cannot attend upon the Lord without distraction, as the unmarried person may; see Co1 7:35. But the more generally received reading is what we follow; in which words the apostle shows, that there is just the same difference between a married and an unmarried woman, as there is between a married and an unmarried man. There is no difference in their nature, nor sex, but in their state and condition, and in the cares which involve the one and the other.

The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord; not everyone that is unmarried, but one that has the grace of God, being in a single state; as such an one is more at leisure, and can more conveniently attend on the service of the Lord, so she ought, and generally speaking does: and her end in so doing is,

that she may be holy both in body and in spirit; not in body only, but in spirit also; for outward chastity, without internal holiness, will be of little avail: but as a close adherence to the Lord, and to his worship and service, may be a means of preserving from external pollutions of the body, so likewise of carrying on the internal work of grace upon the soul; not that it is to be thought that unmarried persons are the only ones that are holy in body and spirit; there are some that are so in neither; and there are many married persons that are chaste in their bodies, and possess their vessels in sanctification and honour, and are blessed with inward spiritual purity.

But she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband; not by beautifying and adorning herself with broidered hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; though this is all that some care for; but with good works, taking care of her household and family affairs, bringing up her children in an orderly manner, honouring and obeying her husband, doing everything to oblige him, and to engage his love and affection to her, as becomes her; nor is this said of her by way of criticism, only that such is her state and situation in life, that she has not the opportunities and advantages the unmarried person has of serving the Lord; on which account the single life is represented as most advisable to abide in.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

34 There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.

Ver. 34. Careth for the things] Expeditius vacat.

Holy both in body and spirit] For contemplative wickedness and mental uncleanness also greatly displeaseth God. Incesta est, et sine stupro, quae stuprum cupit, saith Seneca (In Declam.); and, Quae quia non licuit non facit, illa facit, saith Ovid. The very desire to do evil is to do evil. The Romans punished one of their Vestal Virgins for uttering this verse only:

" Faelices nuptae! moriar ni nubere dulce est.

Oh! ‘tis a brave thing to be married."

How she may please her husband] As Sarah did Abraham, calling him lord; as Rebecca did Isaac, by providing him the meat that he loved; as Livia did Augustus, by observing his disposition, and drawing evenly with him, being a piece so just cut for him, as answered him rightly in every joint.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Between a wife and a virgin, - Between a woman that is married and one that is unmarried. The apostle says that a similar difference between the condition of her that is married and her that is unmarried takes place, which had been observed between the married and the unmarried man. The Greek word here (μεμέρισται memeristai) may mean, “is divided,” and be rendered, “the wife and the virgin are divided in the same manner;” that is, there is the same difference in their case as exists between the married and the unmarried man.

The unmarried women ... - Has more advantages for attending to the things of religion; has fewer temptations to neglect her proper duty to God.

Both in body and in spirit - Entirely holy; that she may be entirely devoted to God. Perhaps in her case the apostle mentions the “body,” which he had not done in the case of the man, because her temptation would be principally in regard to that - the danger of endeavoring to decorate and adorn her person to please her husband,

How she may please her husband - The apostle here intends, undoubtedly, to intimate that there were dangers to personal piety in the married life, which would not occur in a state of celibacy; and that the unmarried female would have greater opportunities for devotion and usefulness than if married. And he intimates that the married female would be in danger of losing her zeal and marring her piety, by attention to her husband, and by a constant effort to please him. Some of the ways in which this might be done are the following:

(1) As in the former case 1Co 7:33, her affections might be transferred from God to the partner of her life.

(2) Her time will be occupied by an attention to him and to his will; and there would be danger that that attention would be allowed to interfere with her hours of secret retirement and communion with God.

(3) Her time will be necessarily broken in upon by the cares of a family, and she should therefore guard with special vigilance, that she may redeem time for secret communion with God.

(4) The time which she before gave to benevolent objects, may now be given to please her husband. Before her marriage she may have been distinguished for zeal, and for active efforts in every plan of doing good; subsequently, she may lay aside this zeal, and withdraw from these plans, and be as little distinguished as others.

(5) Her piety may be greatly injured by false notions of what should be done to please her husband. If he is a worldly and fashionable man, she may seek to please him by “gold, and pearls, and costly array.” Instead of cultivating the ornament of “a meek and quiet spirit,” her main wish may be to decorate her person, and render herself attractive by the adorning of her person rather than of her MinD.

(6) If he is opposed to religion, or if he has lax opinions on the subject, or if he is sceptical and worldly, she will be in danger of relaxing in her views in regard to the strictness of Christianity, and of becoming conformed to his. She will insensibly become less strict in regard to Sunday, the Bible, the prayer meeting, the Sunday School, the plans of Christian benevolence, the doctrines of the gospel.

(7) To please him, she will be found in the frivilous circle, perhaps in the assembly room, or even the theater, or amidst companies of gaiety and amusement, and will forget that she is professedly devoted only to God. And,

(8) She is in danger, as the result of all this, of forsaking her old religious friends, the companions of purer, brighter days, the humble and devoted friends of Jesus; and of seeking society among the frivilous, the rich, the proud, the worldly. Her piety thus is injured; she becomes worldly and vain, and less and less like Christ; until heaven, perhaps, in mercy smites her idol, and he dies and leaves her again to the blessedness of single-hearted devotion to God. O! how many a Christian female has thus been injured by an unhappy marriage with a frivilous and worldly man! How often has the church occasion to mourn over piety that is dimmed, benevolence that is quenched, zeal that is extinguished by devotion to a frivilous and worldly husband! How often does humble piety weep over such a scene! How often does the cause of sacred charity sigh! How often is the Redeemer wounded in the house of his friends! And O how often does it become necessary for God to interpose, and to remove by death the object of the affection of his wandering child, and to clothe her in the habiliments of mourning, and to bathe her cheeks in tears, that “by the sadness of the countenance her heart may be made better.” Who can tell how many a widow is made such from this cause; who can tell how much religion is injured by thus stealing away the affections from God?

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

There is the same difference between a married woman and a single woman, as there is between a married man and a single man. If a woman be unmarried, and be piously disposed, she hath leisure and opportunity enough to mind the things of God; but if she be married, she will then be obliged to attend secular affairs, to take care for her family, and to please her husband. It is the same thing that was before said of the man. The sense is, that a conjugal relation draws along with it many diversions, from which a single life is free.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

34. Is difference—The difference stated by Paul between a wife and a virgin is not that virginity is intrinsically holier than marriage, as Romanism teaches, but that it affords advantages for a more exclusively religious life.

Married careth… world—In the practical duties of married life her style of Christian character may nevertheless be perfected; yet if all are married, the style of usefulness which celibacy affords is lost.

Please her husband—Dr. Poor, on the passage, (in Schaff’s Lange,) well says: “This is not charged upon her as a sin, but it is a part of her obligation of marriage, and is, therefore, expected of her. And if she has married in the Lord, then even this very effort to please her husband may be a part of the service she renders unto the Lord. Yet, while this is so, the obligation of the husband, it must be confessed, not unfrequently presents a temptation to a divided service; and in her endeavours to gratify his wishes, especially if he is of a worldly, or even partially sanctified spirit, is often betrayed into acts which militate against her piety, and interfere with her higher obligations. This is how it happens that many a Christian woman comes to be found absenting herself from the place of prayer, frequenting the ball-room, giving parties on the Sabbath, and in other ways compromising her conscience, to her own spiritual injury and the discredit of her profession. And it is to the danger of such evils, incurred by marriage, that the apostle points.”

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

There is difference also, etc. The reading, punctuation, and exact sense are surrounded with uncertainty, which does not, however, affect the general meaning. This is probably given correctly in our English Version. He implies that the married woman must of necessity be more of a Martha than a Mary. Nevertheless, two things are certain:

(1) that God intended marriage to be the normal lot; and

(2) that marriage is by no means incompatible with the most absolute saintliness.

It is probable that most, if not all, of the apostles were married men. (1Co_9:5) The spirit of St. Paul"s advice the avoidance of distraction, and the determination that our duty to God shall not be impaired by earthly relationships remains eternally significant. Another common way of punctuating the words is, "The married man cares.., how he may please his wife, and is divided in interests."

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

There is a difference also between a wife and a virgin - Whether the church be under persecution or not. The unmarried woman - If she know and use her privilege. Careth only for the things of the Lord - All her time, care, and thoughts center in this, how she may be holy both in body and spirit. This is the standing advantage of a single life, in all ages and nations. But who makes a suitable use of it?

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

world

kosmos = mankind. (See Scofield "Mat 4:8").

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

34. “The wife and the virgin differ widely: the unmarried woman cares for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy, both in body and spirit: but the married woman cares for the things of this world, that she may please her husband.” In these verses you can see that Paul leans to the celibacy for Christ’s sake, which he himself practiced, here setting forth the plausible argument that unwedded saints, utterly disencumbered to devote all their time to the service of the Lord, enjoy a decidedly more capacious opportunity to glorify God and lay up a rich treasure in Heaven than wedded people, thus encumbered with families.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

and is divided. So also the woman that is unmarried and the virgin is careful for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married is careful for the things of the world, how she may please her husband .

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

34. There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The sole thought of the unmarried person who is consecrated to Christ is to please Christ.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

34. καὶ μεμέρισται καὶ ἡ γυνὴ καὶ ἡ παρθένος κ.τ.λ. The text here is in the greatest possible confusion, nor is it easy to give a clear idea of the various texts, punctuations and translations. First of all Tischendorf adds καί before and after μεμέρισται to the rec. text. He further accepts the rec. text as far as μεριμνᾷ on the authority of DEFG, Vetus Lat. Peshito, and some MS. of Vulg. After ἡ γυνή, Lachmann, Tregelles, Westcott and Hort add ἡ ἄγαμος, with B and Vulg. They leave these words out after ἡ παρθένος. אA have them in both places. There are thus the following main texts, καὶ μεμέρισται καὶ ἡ γυνὴ καὶ ἡ παρθένος ἡ ἄγαμος μεριμνᾷ κ.τ.λ. (Tischendorf). καὶ μεμέρισται καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἡ ἄγαμος καὶ ἡ παρθένος μεριμνᾷ κ.τ.λ. (Tregelles, and Westcott and Hort), and καὶ μεμέρισται καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἡ ἄγαμος καὶ ἡ παρθένος ἡ ἄγαμος. So Lachmann. The punctuation also differs. The other editors mentioned place a period after μεμέρισται, connecting it with what goes before. Tischendorf and rec. have no stop there, and connect it with what follows. The Latin Fathers, apparently without exception, connect μεμέρισται with what follows. Tischendorf also places a colon after παρθένος. The uncials throw little light on the question of punctuation. It seems best on the whole to accept the rec. punctuation ‘quum pro testimoniorum gravitate, tum pro sensu atque sententiarum loci cohaerentia’ (Tischendorf). See more below.

ἀρέσῃ אABDEFG.

34. καὶ μεμέρισται. See Critical Note. The Vulgate, Calvin, Lachmann, Tregelles, Westcott and Hort and others place a period after μεμέρισται. Tischendorf decidedly rejects this (‘nihil nobis placet’), and Jerome himself (the translator of the Vulgate) admits that it is not the translation he has found in his Latin copies. But that translation he rejects as incompatible with ‘Apostolic truth.’ The objection to placing a period after μεμέρισται is twofold. (1) γυνή is used throughout this chapter in the sense of wife, as distinct from virgin. (2) μερίζω is not used in N.T. and seldom, if ever, elsewhere, in the sense of distract, which is (in N.T.) expressed by μεριμνάω or περισπάω (see below). On these grounds Tischendorf’s punctuation seems preferable. The literal rendering then is And both the wife and the virgin have been divided off from each other, and the sense is that a distinct path in life has been marked out for the wife and the virgin, or as Bp Wordsworth translates ‘the wife and the virgin, each has her appointed lot.’ So Chrysostom. For μερίζω see 1Co 7:17. Also 1Co 1:31 (where we could hardly translate ‘Is Christ distracted?’); Mar 3:26; Mar 6:41; Rom 12:3; 2Co 10:13. We may also compare the use of μεμερισμένον in Lucian, Deorum Dial. XXIV. 1 ἀλλ’ ἔτι καὶ νεκρικὰ συνδιαπράττειν μεμερισμένον.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

34.] See var. readd.: I treat here only of the text.

Divided also is the (married) woman and the virgin (i.e.divided in interest (i.e. in cares and pursuits) from one another: οὐ τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχουσι φροντίδα, ἀλλὰ μεμερισμέναι εἰσὶ ταῖς σπουδαῖς, Theophyl.: not merely, different from one another, as E. V., Chrys., Luth., Grot., al. Divisa est mulier et virgo D-lat G-lat Tert). It may be well to remark as to the reading, on which see Digest,—that Jerome testifies to this having been the reading of the old Latin copies, and himself sometimes quotes the passage in this form; but, when speaking of it critically, he states that it is not in the “apostohca veritas,” i.e., it would seem, the Greek as understood by him. “Nunc illud breviter admoneo in Latinis codicibus hunc locum ita legi: ‘Divisa est virgo et mulier;’ quod quamquam habent suum sensum, et a me quoque pro qualitate loci sic edissertum sit, tamen, non est apostolicæ veritatis. Siquidem Apostolus ita scripsit, ut supra transtulimus: ‘Sollicitns est quæ sunt mundi, quomodo placeat uxori, et divisus est.’ Et hac sententia definita transgreditur ad virgines et continentes et ait: ‘Mulier innupta et virgo cogitat quæ sunt Domini ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu.’ Non omnis innupta, et virgo est. Quæ autem virgo utique et innupta est. Quamquam ob elegantiam dictionis potuerit id ipsum altera verbo repetere, ‘mulier innupta et virgo:’ vel certe definire voluisse quid esset innupta, id est virgo: ne meretrices putemus innuptas, nulli certo matrimonio copulatas” (Jer. contra Jovin. i. 13, vol. ii. p. 260). The sing. verb seems to be used, as standing first in this sentence, and because ἡ γυνὴ κ. ἡ παρθ. embraces the female sex as one idea: so e.g. Plato, Lys. p. 207, φιλεῖ σε ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ἡ μήτηρ: Herod. v. 21, εἵπετο γὰρ δή σφι κ. ὀχήματα κ. θεράποντες καὶ ἡ πᾶσα πολλὴ παρασκευή: q. d. ‘There loves thee father and mother,’—‘there followed them,’ &c. See more examples in Kühner, ii. p. 58 (§ 433, exception 1):—Reiche thinks that one and the same woman is intended at different periods: but ἡ δὲ γαμήσασα is against this: it would be γαμήσασα δέ (Meyer).

The judgment of marriage here pronounced by the Apostle must be taken, as the rest of the chapter, with its accompanying conditions. He is speaking of a pressing and quickly shortening period which he regards as yet remaining before that day and hour of which neither he, nor any man, knew. He wishes his Corinthians, during that short time, to be as far as possible totally undistracted. He mentions as an objection to marriage, that which is an undoubted fact of human experience:—which is necessarily bound up with that relation: and without which the duties of the relation could not be fulfilled. Since he wrote, the unfolding of God’s providence has taught us more of the interval before the coming of the Lord than it was given even to an inspired Apostle to see. And as it would be perfectly reasonable and proper to urge on an apparently dying man the duty of abstaining from contracting new worldly obligations,—but both unreasonable and improper, should the same person recover his health, to insist on this abstinence any longer: so now, when God has manifested His will that nations should rise up and live and decay, and long centuries elapse before the day of the coming of Christ, it would be manifestly unreasonable to urge,—except in so far as every man’s καιρός is συνεσταλμένος, and similar arguments are applicable,—the considerations here enforced. Meanwhile they stand here on the sacred page as a lesson to us how to regard, though in circumstances somewhat changed, our worldly relations; and to teach us, as the coming of the Lord may be as near now, as the Apostle then believed it to be, to act at least in the spirit of his advice, and be, as far as God’s manifest will that we should enter into the relations and affairs of life allows, ἀμέριμνοι. The duty of ver. 35 fin. is incumbent on all Christians, at all periods.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

34. ἵνα ᾖ ἁγία. Bengel remarks that ἁγία here means more than it does in v. 14: what is set apart from the world for God ought to conform to the purity of God and not to the defilements of the world: Trench, Syn. § lxxxviii.; Cremer, pp. 598 f. See 1Ti 5:5, and the art. Heiligung in Herzog (Hauck). Stanley quotes Queen Elizabeth, who said that England was her husband.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

There is a difference. The textual question here is very perplexing, and it is well - nigh impossible to explain the differences to the English reader. He must observe, 1st. That gunh wife is also the general term for woman, whether virgin, married, or widow. 2nd. That memeristai A. V., there is a difference, literally means, is divided, so that the literal rendering of the A. V., would be, the wife and the virgin are divided. Some of the best texts insert kai and both before and after is divided, and join that verb with the close of ver. 33, so that it reads : careth for the things of the world how he may please his wife, and he is distracted. This makes gunh and parqenov (A. V., wife and virgin) begin a new sentence connected with the preceding by kai and Gunh is rendered woman, and the words h agamov the unmarried, instead of beginning a sentence as A. V., are placed directly after woman as a qualifying phrase, so that the reading is hJ gunh hJ agamov the unmarried woman, and both this and hJ parqenov the virgin are nominative to merimna careth. The whole, then, from the beginning of ver 33, will read : But he who is married careth for the things of the world how he may please his wife, and he is distracted; and the unmarried woman and the virgin care for the things of the Lord. 98

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.