what did the apostle paul mean by this?

1 corinthians 7:29 What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not;

i'm guessing he's talking about abstaining from sex within a marriage "from now on".

had his followers listened to him, there wouldn't be any followers after a certain amount of years...right?

so why then did he ask married couples to not have sex at this certain time...starting then "from now on"?

waitasec said:

1 corinthians 7:29 What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not;

i'm guessing he's talking about abstaining from sex within a marriage "from now on".

had his followers listened to him, there wouldn't be any followers after a certain amount of years...right?

so why then did he ask married couples to not have sex at this certain time...starting then "from now on"?

Click to expand...

Paul thought that the world was about to come to a close and that The Kingdom of God would appear. He also believed that the general resurrection had begun, and thus hey we're living in the end times. Obviously, like so many others, he was wrong.

However, equipped with this belief, it was thought that one had to begin living as if the Kingdom of God was here. It also meant that one had to focus on other areas of life, and the idea was that sex distracted people.

waitasec said:

1 corinthians 7:29 What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not;

i'm guessing he's talking about abstaining from sex within a marriage "from now on".

had his followers listened to him, there wouldn't be any followers after a certain amount of years...right?

so why then did he ask married couples to not have sex at this certain time...starting then "from now on"?

Click to expand...

Here's a complete education on the verse in question. I find the above post not to be accurate at all. Only if one takes a literal reading without study can we reach such a poor conclusion.


This is real scholarly work on the subject, not a guess based on little research.



Its best to read all of the link to put it into poper context


http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/NTeSources/NTArticles/GTJ-NT/Glenny-1Cor7-GTJ-91.pdf

These five exhortations are illustrations of the new perspective​

that the Christian is to have concerning the world. That they are not meant to be taken literally but as "dialectial rhetoric"59 is clear from
the context. First, if they were taken literally they would be absurd.



This is the key phrase, but I will post the whole article

The overall structure of verses 29-31 is fairly straightforward.
Paul develops the Christian's relationship with the world in five con-
structions and these five constructions "are bracketed by two assertions
which are intended to ground the understanding of existence expressed
here."48 Fee suggests that the basic premise in verse 29a is followed by
its purpose or result (the five​

[FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]w[j mn< [/FONT][/FONT]constructions in vv. 29b-31a); then
the section concludes with the reason ([FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]ga<r[/FONT][/FONT]) in verse 31b.49
Paul's opening words, "But this I say," certainly point forward to
the following phrase,50 "The time is short.51 The time [FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth](kairo<j[/FONT][/FONT]), in ​

which Paul's recipients live, has been determined by God's eschato-

logical intervention in Christ (Rom 3:25, 26). The coming of Christ has
initiated the "last days" (8eb 1:2; I Pet 1:20; Rom 16:25, 26), and
therefore Christians have a different perspective than Old Testament
believers. Paul is not emphasizing that the end is imminent as much as
he is emphasizing that it is now clear or plain. This truth should
radically alter the values and decisions of Christians.52
The meaning of Paul's introduction to the five​

[FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]w[j mh< [/FONT][/FONT]construc-
tions in verse 29b is debatable. It is generally understood that [FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]to>
loipo<n [/FONT][/FONT]has a temporal significance and should be translated, "from
now on" or "henceforth.’"53 The context strongly supports such an
understanding. More difficult is the [FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]i!na [/FONT][/FONT]which follows it. It could be
imperatival54 or it could indicate purpose.55 The two ideas are close,
but purpose is the more standard use of [FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]i!na [/FONT][/FONT]with [FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]to> loipo<n[/FONT][/FONT].56 The [FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]kai< ​

[/FONT][/FONT]

merely begins the series of​

[FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]w[j mh< [/FONT][/FONT]exhortations, each of which is intro-
duced by [FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]kai<[/FONT][/FONT]; the first use of it (v. 29b) does not need to be translated.57
Thus, in verse 29a Paul is affirming that one reason God has com-
pressed (drawn together) the time of salvation is so that for the remain-
ing time believers would have a new perspective concerning their
relationship with this present world.58 This new perspective is described
in the five exhortations in verses 29b-31a.
These five exhortations are illustrations of the new perspective ​

that the Christian is to have concerning the world. That they are not

meant to be taken literally but as "dialectial rhetoric"59 is clear from
the context. First, if they were taken literally they would be absurd.
Second, a literal interpretation of the first illustration contradicts
verses 2-5, and third, they contrast what Paul says in Rom 12: 15 about
sorrowing and rejoicing.60
It has been argued that Paul's concern in the first statement is to
urge celibacy and abstention from sex within marriage.61 However, to
take the exhortation that literally causes contradiction (cf. vv. 1-5) and
would unnecessarily limit Paul's teaching in this clause. Paul is teaching
that for the present age, whether one is married or not, he is to live ''as
if not" because the various relationships of this life are passing away.
The obvious reason why he does not have a clause starting "and let
those who do not have wives be ..." is because there is no negative
counterpart to complete it, not because he is only addressing married
couples.
The tension in the​

[FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]w[j mh< [/FONT][/FONT]expressions is not a temporal one
between the present and the future. It instead emphasizes the dialectal
relationship between a person and this world. The two present tense
verbs in each exhortation emphasize this dialectic.62 In light of the
eschatological nature of the times in which Christians live (v. 3lb), in
every situation of life they are to live without their relationship to the
world being the determining factor, but instead with their relationship
to Christ determining their attitudes and decisions. They are to be in
the world, but the world is not to dictate their present existence.
Therefore, if they are married they are to maintain their marriage
relationship, but at the same time to carefully control the passions or
desires that might shape their married relationship (I Thess 4:4ff).
Furthermore, the marriage relationship is not what determines or
controls their lives; instead their lives are dominated by Christ and a
desire to obey Him (7:19b).
For the Christian, rejoicing and mourning take on new meaning
(v. 30). The Christian rejoices and mourns in this world concerning
things of this world, but not as this world rejoices and mourns. Fur-
thermore, this world does not determine or dictate the Christian's
ultimate responses and relationships with other men. The laughter and
tears of this world are not the last word.63
Christians buy and sell (v. 30), but they do not buy to possess. ​

That is, the world does not determine their reasons for buying and sell-

ing. Fee notes that "those who buy are to do so 'as if not' in terms of
possessing anything. The eschatological person 'has nothing, yet pos-
sess all things' (2 Cor 6:10; cf. I Cor 3:22).,,64 This is why the Chris-
tian can "use the present world" (v. 31a). The world is not good or evil;
it simply is.65 But the present form of this world is passing away
(v. 31b); thus one is not to be "exploiting" it,66 engrossed in it, or
absorbed in it.67
The reason for the Christian's new relationship with the world is
given in verse 31b; in what is the most important sentence in the
section, Paul argues, "The essence68 of this world is in the process of
passing away.’"69 The fact that this world is passing away is the basis of
the five​

[FONT=Greekth,Greekth][FONT=Greekth,Greekth]w[j mh< [/FONT][/FONT]statements which precede it; furthermore, the meaning
of all of these statements is determined by "Paul's understanding of the
salvation deed of God in Christ."70 Fee suggests that the progressive ​

present tense verb form in verse 31b

it can be argued that paul was indeed absurd...
:yes:

waitasec said:

1 corinthians 7:29 What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not;

i'm guessing he's talking about abstaining from sex within a marriage "from now on".

had his followers listened to him, there wouldn't be any followers after a certain amount of years...right?

so why then did he ask married couples to not have sex at this certain time...starting then "from now on"?

Click to expand...

It could mean to live like you were single - shaggin' everyone you can; disregarding your significant other and their feelings; ignoring them; doing things without having to answer to them...

connermt said:

It could mean to live like you were single - shaggin' everyone you can; disregarding your significant other and their feelings; ignoring them; doing things without having to answer to them...

Click to expand...

ha ha ....
i thought the same thing.


frubals to you for thinking like me

waitasec said:

it can be argued that paul was indeed absurd...
:yes:

Click to expand...

In a historical context though, he wasn't really absurd though. He taught many things that others did as well.

Paul was an apocalyptic preacher. He spends a great amount of time talking about the end time, and the general resurrection. Because of that, he taught as if the end was approaching (as well as did many of his followers. In fact, Paul actually has to clarify to some of his followers that the end hadn't quite come yet, as they were living as if it had).

Since he believed that he was living in the end times (as in, the time is short), he urges an adjustment in social, emotional, and economic relations. And that is all because the present form of the world is passing away (verse 31). If we continue reading, he also states that this is to help with anxiety. He states that a single man is anxious about the affairs of God, while a married man is anxious about the affairs of the world, as he wants to please his wife.

Jesus taught that the end was near as well, and Paul just continued with this. So in context, Paul was not being absurd, he was just trying to prepare others for what he believed was to come, the end of this present world. And in Jewish thought, it wasn't unique. We can find similarities I believe in 2 Esdras.

fallingblood said:

In a historical context though, he wasn't really absurd though. He taught many things that others did as well.

Click to expand...

i don't think that matters though...
people sacrificed their young to appease their gods...still absurd.

Paul was an apocalyptic preacher. He spends a great amount of time talking about the end time, and the general resurrection. Because of that, he taught as if the end was approaching (as well as did many of his followers. In fact, Paul actually has to clarify to some of his followers that the end hadn't quite come yet, as they were living as if it had).

Click to expand...

all of which are absurd notions...the earth was just a speck in the universe as it is now.

Jesus taught that the end was near as well, and Paul just continued with this.

Click to expand...

so then they were both absurdly wrong

So in context, Paul was not being absurd, he was just trying to prepare others for what he believed was to come, the end of this present world. And in Jewish thought, it wasn't unique. We can find similarities I believe in 2 Esdras.

Click to expand...

the entire apocalyptic context is absurd...because the earth hasn't changed, it's still a little blue speck...

thinking that earthquakes occur because it is gods punishment is absurd
thinking that diseases are gods punishment for the fall is absurd (not that i think you believe that) it is absurd to pretend to know something someone can't know....that is what is absurd.

waitasec said:

i don't think that matters though...
people sacrificed their young to appease their gods...still absurd.


all of which are absurd notions...the earth was just a speck in the universe as it is now.


so then they were both absurdly wrong



the entire apocalyptic context is absurd...because the earth hasn't changed, it's still a little blue speck...

thinking that earthquakes occur because it is gods punishment is absurd
thinking that diseases are gods punishment for the fall is absurd (not that i think you believe that) it is absurd to pretend to know something someone can't know....that is what is absurd.

Click to expand...

It is absurd in our modern understanding. However, in his historical context, it was not absurd. And in this case, I believe we have to judge him according to the historical context.

So I agree that in a modern context, and looking back at Paul, it is absurd. However, in his historical context, it was not absurd.


Just to make clear though, if Paul lived today, I would definitely think what he saying was absurd.

waitasec said:

1 corinthians 7:29 What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not;

i'm guessing he's talking about abstaining from sex within a marriage "from now on".

Click to expand...

You guessed wrong. Paul was talking about the quitters; the adulterers; the Bill Clintons of New Testament times:

29 But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none...

Paul is admonishing the people to wise up and fly straight.


I hope this helps.

Furthermore, the marriage relationship is not what determines or
controls their lives; instead their lives are dominated by Christ and a
desire to obey Him (7:19b).

Click to expand...

There you go.

Shades-o-Blue said:

You guessed wrong. Paul was talking about the quitters; the adulterers; the Bill Clintons of New Testament times:

29 But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none...

Paul is admonishing the people to wise up and fly straight.


I hope this helps.

Click to expand...

No interpretation needed, it means the exact opposite of what it says. Now I understand.
:help:

fallingblood said:

It is absurd in our modern understanding. However, in his historical context, it was not absurd. And in this case, I believe we have to judge him according to the historical context.

So I agree that in a modern context, and looking back at Paul, it is absurd. However, in his historical context, it was not absurd.

Click to expand...

i get what you mean....
but nevertheless, what do you think was considered to be absurd in this particular context?

Just to make clear though, if Paul lived today, I would definitely think what he saying was absurd.

Click to expand...

you don't need to clarify that with me...i get it...

Shades-o-Blue said:

You guessed wrong. Paul was talking about the quitters; the adulterers; the Bill Clintons of New Testament times:

29 But this I say, brethren, the time is short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none...

Paul is admonishing the people to wise up and fly straight.

Click to expand...

so why live as though one was not married?

Sleeppy said:

There you go.

Click to expand...

there goes what?

fishy said:

No interpretation needed, it means the exact opposite of what it says. Now I understand.
:help:

Click to expand...

Then you're one up on the rest of the unbelievers. Good for you

waitasec said:

so why live as though one was not married?

Click to expand...

You don't. That's not what Paul was saying. The Apostle was telling the people how so many were giving up on their marriages, when that was exactly what they were not supposed to do. Read the whole chapter, but read the KJV; it's the most correct in the spiritual sense.

waitasec said:

so why live as though one was not married?

Click to expand...

its not ment to be read literal.

thats the problem with breaking script into blocks of text.

waitasec said:

1 corinthians 7:29 What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not;

Click to expand...

The NT gives the idea that your supposed to leave your life behind and follow.

waitasec said:

1 corinthians 7:29 What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not;

i'm guessing he's talking about abstaining from sex within a marriage "from now on".

had his followers listened to him, there wouldn't be any followers after a certain amount of years...right?

so why then did he ask married couples to not have sex at this certain time...starting then "from now on"?

Click to expand...

Maybe since he was not getting any, he didn't want others to do the same just kidding.

For some esoteric reason/Or maybe spiritual.