TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers 1 Corinthians 7:10–16. His three-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
In this paragraph the apostle gives them direction in a case which must be very frequent in that age of the world, especially among the Jewish converts; I mean whether they were to live with heathen relatives in a married state. Moses's law permitted divorce; and there was a famous instance in the Jewish state, when the people were obliged to put away their idolatrous wives, Ezr 10:3. This might move a scruple in many minds, whether converts to Christianity were not bound to put away or desert their mates, continuing infidels. Concerning this matter the apostle here gives direction. And,
I.In general, he tells them that marriage, by Christ's command, is for life; and therefore those who are married must not think of separation.
The wife must not depart from the husband (Co1 7:10), nor the husband put away his wife, Co1 7:11. This I command, says the apostle; yet not I, but the Lord. Not that he commanded any thing of his own head, or upon his own authority. Whatever he commanded was the Lord's command, dictated by his Spirit and enjoined by his authority. But his meaning is that the Lord himself, with his own mouth, had forbidden such separations, Mat 5:32; Mat 19:9; Mar 10:11; Luk 16:18. Note, Man and wife cannot separate at pleasure, nor dissolve, when they will, their matrimonial bonds and relation. They must not separate for any other cause than what Christ allows. And therefore the apostle advises that if any woman had been separated, either by a voluntary act of her own or by an act of her husband, she should continue unmarried, and seek reconciliation with her husband, that they might cohabit again. Note, Husbands and wives should not quarrel at all, or should be quickly reconciled. They are bound to each other for life. The divine law allows of no separation. They cannot throw off the burden, and therefore should set their shoulders to it, and endeavour to make it as light to each other as they can.
II.He brings the general advice home to the case of such as had an unbelieving mate (Co1 7:12):
But to the rest speak I, not the Lord; that is, the Lord had not so expressly spoken to this case as to the former divorce. It does not mean that the apostle spoke without authority from the Lord, or decided this case by his own wisdom, without the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. He closes this subject with a declaration to the contrary (Co1 7:40), I think also that I have the Spirit of God. But, having thus prefaced his advice, we may attend,
1.To the advice itself, which is that if an unbelieving husband or wife were pleased to dwell with a Christian relative, the other should not separate. The husband should not put away an unbelieving wife, nor the wife leave an unbelieving husband, Co1 7:12, Co1 7:13. The Christian calling did not dissolve the marriage covenant, but bind it the faster, by bringing it back to the original institution, limiting it to two persons, and binding them together for life. The believer is not by faith in Christ loosed from matrimonial bonds to an unbeliever, but is at once bound and made apt to be a better relative. But, though a believing wife or husband should not separate from an unbelieving mate, yet if the unbelieving relative desert the believer, and no means can reconcile to a cohabitation, in such a case a brother or sister is not in bondage (Co1 7:15), not tied up to the unreasonable humour, and bound servilely to follow or cleave to the malicious deserter, or not bound to live unmarried after all proper means for reconciliation have been tried, at least of the deserter contract another marriage or be guilty of adultery, which was a very easy supposition, because a very common instance among the heathen inhabitants of Corinth. In such a case the deserted person must be free to marry again, and it is granted on all hands. And some think that such a malicious desertion is as much a dissolution of the marriage-covenant as death itself. For how is it possible that the two shall be one flesh when the one is maliciously bent to part from or put away the other? Indeed, the deserter seems still bound by the matrimonial contract; and therefore the apostle says (Co1 7:11), If the woman depart from her husband upon the account of his infidelity, let her remain unmarried. But the deserted party seems to be left more at liberty (I mean supposing all the proper means have been used to reclaim the deserter, and other circumstances make it necessary) to marry another person. It does not seem reasonable that they should be still bound, when it is rendered impossible to perform conjugal duties or enjoy conjugal comforts, through the mere fault of their mate: in such a case marriage would be a state of servitude indeed. But, whatever liberty be indulged Christians in such a case as this, they are not allowed, for the mere infidelity of a husband or wife, to separate; but, if the unbeliever be willing, they should continue in the relation, and cohabit as those who are thus related. This is the apostle's general direction.
2.We have here the reasons of this advice.
(1.)Because the relation or state is sanctified by the holiness of either party: For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife by the husband (Co1 7:14), or hath been sanctified. The relation itself, and the conjugal use of each other, are sanctified to the believer. To the pure all things are pure, Tit 1:15. Marriage is a divine institution; it is a compact for life, by God's appointment. Had converse and congress with unbelievers in that relation defiled the believer, or rendered him or her offensive to God, the ends of marriage would have been defeated, and the comforts of it in a manner destroyed, in the circumstances in which Christians then were. But the apostle tells them that, though they were yoked with unbelievers, yet, if they themselves were holy, marriage was to them a holy state, and marriage comforts, even with an unbelieving relative, were sanctified enjoyments. It was no more displeasing to God for them to continue to live as they did before, with their unbelieving or heathen relation, than if they had become converts together. If one of the relatives had become holy, nothing of the duties or lawful comforts of the married state could defile them, and render them displeasing to God, though the other were a heathen. He is sanctified for the wife's sake. She is sanctified for the husband's sake. Both are one flesh. He is to be reputed clean who is one flesh with her that is holy, and vice vers: Else were your children unclean, but now are they holy (Co1 7:14), that is, they would be heathen, out of the pale of the church and covenant of God. They would not be of the holy seed (as the Jews are called, Isa 6:13), but common and unclean, in the same sense as heathens in general were styled in the apostle's vision, Act 10:28. This way of speaking is according to the dialect of the Jews, among whom a child begotten by parents yet heathens, was said to be begotten out of holiness; and a child begotten by parents made proselytes was said to be begotten intra sanctitatem - within the holy enclosure. Thus Christians are called commonly saints; such they are by profession, separated to be a peculiar people of God, and as such distinguished from the world; and therefore the children born to Christians, though married to unbelievers, are not to be reckoned as part of the world, but of the church, a holy, not a common and unclean seed. "Continue therefore to live even with unbelieving relatives; for, if you are holy, the relation is so, the state is so, you may make a holy use even of an unbelieving relative, in conjugal duties, and your seed will be holy too." What a comfort is this, where both relatives are believers!
(2.)Another reason is that God hath called Christians to peace, Co1 7:15. The Christian religion obliges us to act peaceably in all relations, natural and civil. We are bound, as much as in us lies, to live peaceably with all men (Rom 12:18), and therefore surely to promote the peace and comfort of our nearest relatives, those with whom we are one flesh, nay, though they should be infidels. Note, It should be the labour and study of those who are married to make each other as easy and happy as possible.
(3.)A third reason is that it is possible for the believing relative to be an instrument of the other's salvation (Co1 7:16): What knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? Note, It is the plain duty of those in so near a relation to seek the salvation of those to whom they are related. "Do not separate. There is other duty now called for. The conjugal relation calls for the most close and endeared affection; it is a contract for life. And should a Christian desert a mate, when an opportunity offers to give the most glorious proof of love? Stay, and labour heartily for the conversion of thy relative. Endeavour to save a soul. Who knows but this may be the event? It is not impossible. And, though there be no great probability, saving a soul is so good and glorious a service that the bare possibility should put one on exerting one's self." Note, Mere possibility of success should be a sufficient motive with us to use our diligent endeavours for saving the souls of our relations. "What know I but I may save his soul? should move me to attempt it."
Historical interpretation
Two Centuries of Reception
3 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
If these things may happen to those women also who, having attained the faith while in (the state of) Gentile matrimony, continue in that state, still they are excused, as having been "apprehended by God" in these very circumstances; and they are bidden to persevere in their married state, and are sanctified, and have hope of "making a gain" held out to them.
Paul says this because it is always possible that the unbelieving partner will come to believe if he or she does not detest the name of Christ.
"For how knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thine husband?" This again refers to that expression, "let her not leave him." That is, "if he makes no disturbance, remain," saith he, "for there is even profit in this; remain and advise and give counsel and persuade." For no teacher will have such power to prevail as a wife. And neither, on one hand, doth he lay any necessity upon her and absolutely demand the point of her, that he may not again do what would be too painful; nor, on the other, doth he tell her to despair: but he leaves the matter in suspense through the uncertainty of the future, saying, "For how knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O husband whether thou shalt save thy wife?"
Continue studying 1 Corinthians 7:16 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
In 1 Corinthians 7:16, the Apostle Paul employs a rhetorical question to address believing spouses in mixed-faith marriages, asking, "For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?" This verse serves as both a tempering of expectations and a subtle encouragement, highlighting the ultimate sovereignty of God in salvation while affirming the potential for a believing spouse's faithful witness to be used by God, without placing the burden of conversion squarely on human effort.
Context
Literary Context
This verse is deeply embedded within Paul's extensive discourse on marriage and singleness in 1 Corinthians 7. Specifically, it follows Paul's counsel regarding believers married to unbelievers. In 1 Corinthians 7:12-14, Paul advises that a believing spouse should not initiate divorce if the unbelieving partner is content to remain married, because the believing spouse "sanctifies" the unbeliever and their children. Verse 16 then acts as a crucial clarification and a rhetorical flourish, preventing the believing spouse from assuming their presence guarantees salvation, while simultaneously holding out a glimmer of hope for their partner's conversion. It underscores that while a believer's presence brings a unique blessing and influence, the ultimate act of salvation is God's work.
Historical & Cultural Context
First-century Corinth was a bustling, cosmopolitan city known for its diverse religious practices and moral laxity. Marriage was a fundamental social institution, often arranged, and divorce was common, particularly in the Greco-Roman world. For early Christians, marrying outside the faith or remaining in a pre-conversion mixed marriage presented unique challenges regarding social integration, religious purity, and household spiritual dynamics. Paul's teaching here provided practical guidance for believers navigating these complex relationships, particularly when the Christian faith was a minority religion. The concept of "household" was significant, often encompassing extended family and servants, and the conversion of one member could have profound implications for the entire unit.
Key Themes
1 Corinthians 7 grapples with several profound themes, to which verse 16 contributes significantly. It emphasizes the sanctity and permanence of marriage (unless specific conditions are met, as in 1 Corinthians 7:15). The verse also highlights the individual nature of salvation, underscoring that while God uses human instruments, conversion is ultimately a divine work of grace and a personal response of faith. Furthermore, it subtly introduces the theme of hope and faithful witness within challenging circumstances, suggesting that a believer's consistent, godly life can be a powerful testimony, as echoed in 1 Peter 3:1-2. Finally, it touches on God's sovereignty in matters of eternal destiny, relieving believers of an undue burden for outcomes that are ultimately in God's hands.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This verb, often translated as "to see" or "to perceive," carries the strong implication of "to know" in its perfect tense, as used here. It refers to a deep, certain knowledge or understanding. Paul's rhetorical question, "For what knowest thou," implies a lack of certain human knowledge or guarantee regarding the outcome of another's salvation. It challenges any presumption that a believing spouse could definitively predict or control their partner's spiritual destiny.
Derived from a root meaning "safe," this verb encompasses deliverance, preservation, healing, and making whole. In the context of Paul's epistles, and particularly when discussing spiritual matters, sṓzō unequivocally refers to spiritual salvation—deliverance from sin, its penalty, and its power, leading to eternal life through faith in Jesus Christ. It is not about physical preservation or social betterment, but the ultimate spiritual redemption that only God can accomplish.
These terms refer specifically to a woman, particularly a wife, and a man, particularly a husband. Their pairing in this verse highlights the reciprocal nature of the question, applying equally to both believing wives with unbelieving husbands and believing husbands with unbelieving wives. This emphasizes the universal principle that no human, regardless of their intimate relationship, possesses the power or certainty to effect another's spiritual salvation.
Verse Breakdown
"For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband?"
This initial clause poses a direct rhetorical question to the believing wife. The "For" (G1063, gár) introduces a reason or explanation for Paul's preceding counsel. The question challenges the wife's presumed knowledge or ability to guarantee her husband's salvation. It implies that she does not, in fact, know with certainty, nor does she possess the power to "save" him in the ultimate spiritual sense.
"or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?"
This parallel clause extends the same rhetorical question to the believing husband. The structure mirrors the first, reinforcing the universal principle that applies to both genders. The "how" (G5101, tís) further emphasizes the lack of human means or method by which one could effect the spiritual salvation of another. Both parts of the question underscore that salvation is not a human achievement or guarantee, but a divine work.
Literary Devices
Paul masterfully employs a Rhetorical Question in 1 Corinthians 7:16. This is a question posed for effect rather than to elicit an answer, as the implied answer is "you do not know" or "you cannot." This device powerfully conveys Paul's point that human beings cannot guarantee or solely effect the salvation of another, even an intimate spouse. The verse also exhibits clear Parallelism, repeating the same question structure for both the wife and the husband ("For what knowest thou, O wife... or how knowest thou, O man..."). This structural repetition emphasizes the universal applicability of the principle, ensuring that neither gender feels singled out or uniquely burdened. Furthermore, there is an element of Antithesis implied between human effort/knowledge and divine sovereignty, though not explicitly stated as a literary device, it undergirds the theological message.
Theological and Thematic Connections
1 Corinthians 7:16 stands as a profound theological statement on the nature of salvation and human responsibility. It clarifies that while believers are called to live faithfully and be a witness, the act of conversion is ultimately a sovereign work of God's grace, not a human achievement or guarantee. This truth liberates believers from the crushing burden of feeling solely responsible for the eternal destiny of their loved ones, while simultaneously encouraging them to maintain a hopeful and consistent witness within their marriages. It underscores that God alone draws individuals to Himself, and while He uses means, He is not limited by them, nor is human effort sufficient to bring about spiritual rebirth.
Reflection and Application
For believers in mixed-faith marriages today, 1 Corinthians 7:16 offers a profound mixture of liberation, encouragement, and clear guidance. It frees the believing spouse from the immense pressure of feeling personally responsible for their partner's salvation. While the desire for a spouse's conversion is deeply natural and commendable, this verse reminds us that salvation is ultimately a work of God's Spirit, not a result of human manipulation, persuasion, or even perfect living. This truth allows believers to love their spouses unconditionally, without the added burden of an outcome they cannot control. Instead, it shifts the focus to faithful living, prayer, and trusting God's sovereign timing. The best "witness" often comes not from incessant verbal evangelism, but from a consistent, Christ-like life lived with integrity, patience, and love, demonstrating the transformative power of the Gospel in daily interactions. This verse encourages continued hope and prayer, knowing that God can use even the quiet testimony of a godly life to draw an unbelieving spouse to Himself.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Does 1 Corinthians 7:16 mean I shouldn't try to share my faith with my unbelieving spouse?
Not at all. Paul's rhetorical question is not meant to discourage evangelism or witness, but to temper expectations and highlight the ultimate sovereignty of God in salvation. While you cannot guarantee or force your spouse's salvation, your faithful living and verbal witness can be powerful instruments that God uses. Other passages, like 1 Peter 3:1-2, explicitly encourage wives to win their husbands through godly conduct. The verse simply reminds us that the final act of conversion is God's work, not ours, freeing us from undue pressure while still encouraging us to be faithful ambassadors for Christ in our homes.
What does Paul mean by "save" in this context? Is it only spiritual salvation?
In 1 Corinthians 7:16, the Greek word for "save" (G4982, sṓzō) unequivocally refers to spiritual salvation—deliverance from sin and its eternal consequences through faith in Jesus Christ. While a believing spouse's presence can bring a measure of "sanctification" or blessing to the household (as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 7:14), this does not equate to the unbelieving spouse being spiritually saved. Paul is addressing the ultimate eternal destiny, emphasizing that no human can bring about another's spiritual rebirth; that is solely the work of God.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
1 Corinthians 7:16 powerfully underscores a foundational truth of the Christian faith: no human being can "save" another. This inability of a spouse to guarantee the salvation of their beloved points directly to the exclusive and perfect saving work of Jesus Christ. While we are called to be witnesses and live lives that reflect the transforming power of the Gospel, the ultimate act of drawing, convicting, and regenerating a heart belongs to God alone. This verse implicitly magnifies the unique role of Christ as the only Savior. He is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world, the one who gave His life as a ransom for many. Unlike any human effort, Christ's sacrifice on the cross was fully sufficient to atone for sin, and His resurrection demonstrates His power over death and the grave. Therefore, when Paul states that a spouse cannot know if they will save their partner, he is subtly directing our gaze to the one who can and does save: Jesus Christ, for there is salvation in no other, and He is the way, the truth, and the life, through whom alone one can come to the Father.