There are 3 occurrences of πάντας in 1 Corinthians [see Table below], the Greek word translated all people in: And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people (πάντας, a form of πᾶς) to myself.¹ The first occurrence will take some time (1 Corinthians 7:7 ESV):

I wish² that all (πάντας ἀνθρώπους) were as I myself am. But³ each has his own gift from God, one⁴ of one kind and one⁵ of another.

Here πάντας was clearly limited by ἀνθρώπους (KJV: all men). Paul did not wish that all porcupines were as I myself am. I admit when I first read it I considered even all men limited to “very few men” because I heard the second clause as “But most of you aren’t as spiritual as I am.” Yet here πάντας ἀνθρώπους was translated all, everyone in the NET, which has the advantage of eliminating porcupines and other non-humans. And now I no longer think that everyone is wrong, misleading or a poor translation.

Now concerning the matters about which you wrote,⁶ Paul began this particular explanation, but what was written wasn’t recorded. Perhaps that’s because it seems fairly obvious that the question involved whether certain people at a certain place and time should or could marry, depending on whether the writers were doing the forbidding, being forbidden or both. Or perhaps it was because the Holy Spirit regarded Paul’s answer as more universally applicable than the questions as written. Paul continued (1 Corinthians 7:1b ESV)

“It is good for a man not to have sexual relations (ἅπτεσθαι) with a woman” [Table].

The Greek word translated good here was καλὸν (a form of καλός), the “beautiful good,” rather than ἀγαθόν (a form of ἀγαθός). I wrote about the “beautiful good” in another essay. So, why did Paul write, It is good (a beautiful good) for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman?

According to Britannica online, “The philosophical and religious ideals of celibacy in the Classical world strongly influenced subsequent practices of celibacy and monasticism in Christianity.”⁷ Was Paul persuaded that pagan celibacy was the highest form of self-righteousness? Probably not.

As I studied, I wondered why Paul chose ἅπτεσθαι, “to touch,” rather than λαμβάνεσθαι, a present middle/passive infinitive form of λαμβάνω, “to take.” And I also wondered why γυναικὸς (ESV: woman), a form of γυνή in the genitive case, was chosen rather than γυνήν in the accusative case or even γυνῇ in the dative. I typed the latter question into a search engine and Barnes’ Notes on the Bible directed me to the story of Abraham, Sarah and Abimelech.

Abimelech took (וַיִּקַּ֖ח) Sarah. In the Septuagint the Greek word translated took was ἔλαβε(ν) (a form of λαμβάνω). Abimelech had every intention of making Sarah one of his wives but he had not come near (קָרַ֖ב) her,⁸ he had not touched (ἥψατο, a form of ἅπτω in the middle voice) her.⁹ The Greek word translated sexual relations (ἅπτεσθαι) in 1 Corinthians 7:1b (ESV) was an infinitive form of ἅπτω also in the middle voice. I did not allow you to touch her,¹⁰ God told Abimelech in a dream. The Greek word translated to touch here was ἅψασθαι, another infinitive form of ἅπτω in the middle voice.

The Greek word γυναικὸς (a form of γυνή) was in the genitive case because whether translated wife¹¹ or woman,¹² she is married (συνῳκηκυῗα) to a man (ἀνδρί),¹³ or she has lived (συνῳκηυῖα) with a husband (ἀνδρί).¹⁴ A note (5) in the NET explained that the Hebrew was literally: “and she is owned by an owner.” Though this concept has been misunderstood as abusive authority, I think the Holy Spirit understands it as a man’s responsibility for his wife.

Consider an owner’s responsibility, written in the law, for an ox or bull:

Husbands, love your¹⁵ wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, Paul wrote, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself [Table].¹⁶ The Greek words translated should here are ὀφείλουσιν [καὶ], and love is ἀγαπᾶν, an infinitive form of ἀγαπάω in the present tense: In the same way husbands owe also to love their wives as their own bodies.

Yes, I am asking myself at this very moment if I took ownership of, if I accepted the responsibility for, my wife’s spiritual well-being while we were married. No, I’m not at all happy with the answer. “Find’em, feel’em, fuck’em and forget’em,” was the guiding maxim of the 4F club. It was something I learned in elementary school, not part of the official curriculum but handed down from a classmate’s older brother. And though I scoffed at it in my youth as morally beneath me, in my old age I reckon I’ve lived more nearly in compliance to that odious maxim than to any semblance of Christ-likeness. A feminist is not a godly husband: See to that¹⁷ yourself,¹⁸ was too often my attitude as I was preoccupied with more worldly concerns.

It seems like I understand Paul’s insight in 1 Corinthians 7:1b better, at least grasp its generality better, if I don’t even try to translate his word string into a fluent English sentence: καλὸν ἀνθρώπῳ γυναικὸς μὴ ἅπτεσθαι, “beautiful man wife not to touch.” That beauty is obvious in the story of Abraham, Sarah and Abimelech, when a man does not touch another man’s wife. The beauty of God’s intervention to spare both Sarah and Abimelech is beyond compare. I’ll return to that later. Paul described the beauty of a man not touching his own wife for an agreed upon period of time a few verses after this, and the beauty of not taking a wife at all in some verses after that (1 Corinthians 7:28-35 ESV):

But if you do marry,¹⁹ you have not sinned, and if a betrothed woman marries, she has not sinned. Yet those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. This is what I mean, brothers: the appointed time has grown very short. From now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none, and those who mourn as though they were not mourning, and those who rejoice as though they were not rejoicing, and those who buy as though they had no goods, and those who deal with the world²⁰ as though they had no dealings with it. For the present form of this world is passing away.

I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to please²¹ the Lord. But the married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please²² his wife, and his interests are divided.²³ And the unmarried or betrothed woman²⁴ is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to be holy in body²⁵ and spirit.²⁶ But the married woman is anxious about worldly things, how to please²⁷ her husband. I say this for your own benefit,²⁸ not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion²⁹ to the Lord.

I’ve discounted this entire chapter way too much: the appointed time has grown very short spoke to me of the return of Christ. I couldn’t calculate how Paul might have amended his words if he had known that I would still be waiting in the fall of 2023, and so I failed to pay enough attention to what is actually written here. Now, as I approach my seventieth birthday my appointed time has grown very short and my attention is more focused, perhaps, than in the past. There are things to consider about συνεσταλμένος, the Greek word translated very short, a participle of the verb συστέλλω in the perfect tense. But for the moment I’d rather consider and address something else.

Paul’s assumptions about the beautiful preoccupations of an unmarried man and an unmarried or betrothed woman were not made regarding those who are born of the flesh of Adam only. His words are folly to those who are perishing.³⁰ That which is born of the flesh is flesh,³¹ Jesus explained to Nicodemus. “None is righteous,” Paul wrote of those born only of the flesh of Adam, “no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one [Table]. Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive. The venom of asps is under their lips. Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes.”³²

In this letter Paul addressed those who were born, not only of the flesh of Adam but, from above as well, by the Spirit (1 Corinthians 1:4-9 ESV):

I give thanks to my God always for you because of the grace of God that was given you in Christ Jesus, that in every way you were enriched in him in all speech and all knowledge—even as the testimony about Christ was confirmed among you—so that you are not lacking in any gift, as you wait for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will sustain you to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

I say: “I’ve lived more nearly in compliance to that odious [4F club] maxim than to any semblance of Christ-likeness.” But Paul wrote that, our Lord Jesus Christ…will sustain you to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.³³ The Greek word translated will sustain was βεβαιώσει, a 3^rd person singular form of βεβαιόω in the future tense, active voice and indicative mood: “to establish, strengthen, stabilize, make firm, confirm, secure, warrant, make good.” The word translated you was the plural ὑμᾶς, so I assume Paul meant individuals rather than the Corinthian church as a singular collective.

Everything I’m complaining about in my self-assessment happened after I said a sinner’s prayer to Jesus. Some of it after I returned from atheism. What hurts the most is the more recent events in my forties and fifties when I thought I was doing better. At the very time when 1 Corinthians 7 and Ephesians 5 should have been my daily meditation, I ignored them and became anxious about worldly things, how to please [my] wife,³⁴ and I should’ve known better—but, clearly, I didn’t. During this study, as my failure to understand the love owed to my wife was brought to my attention (how many years after the fact?), I moaned, “Why don’t You just kill me, and be done with it?”

That wouldn’t really accomplish anything from God’s perspective: for all live to him.³⁵ So I suck it up and appropriate Paul’s words as my own, finding hope and comfort (even fellowship) in them (1 Timothy 1:15, 16 ESV):

The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the foremost. But I received mercy for this reason, that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display his perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe in him for eternal life [Table].

I left a sermon on the first chapter of 1 Peter recently, disgruntled. Peter is not my favorite writer, though my Pastor is beginning to help overcome that antipathy in me. The text was: Therefore, preparing your minds for action, and being sober-minded, set your hope fully on the grace that will be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ.³⁶ I left the worship service that afternoon mumbling something about, “pie in the sky bye and bye.” It took me a day or so to put my disgruntled feelings into words.

But when I finally expressed myself honestly…

No, thank you. I’ll put my hope fully on the grace that is brought to me new every morning, the fruit of Your Spirit: Your love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

…the Lord’s answer was immediate:

Why do you hope for what you already see?

There wasn’t much left for me to say:

Duh, because I’m an idiot?

And so He corrected my misunderstanding.

Any time I compare myself to Jesus, I come up short. And the appointed time has grown very short³⁷ for that gap to be closed before I see Him face to face. Here is real hope: to set [my] hope fully on the grace that will be brought to [me] at the revelation of Jesus Christ. For now, I keep following Him through the Scripture, all too aware that those who have suffered the most from this gap are those whom I have loved and continue to love (e.g., because I do it so poorly).

I’ll pick this up in another essay. The table mentioned above follows.

Tables comparing Genesis 20:2; 20:4; 20:5; 20:6; Exodus 21:28 and 21:29 in the Tanakh, KJV and NET, and tables comparing the Greek of Genesis 20:2; 20:4; 20:5; 20:6; Exodus 21:28 and 21:29 in the Septuagint (BLB and Elpenor), and tables comparing 1 Corinthians 7:7; Ephesians 5:25; Matthew 27:4; 1 Corinthians 7:28 and 7:31-35 in the NET and KJV follow.