It is not Good for Man to be Alone

It is good for a man not to touch a woman.

from JoeUser Forums
Gen. 2:18 - "It is not good for man to be alone"

1 Cor 7:1 - "It is good for a man not to touch a woman"

So, a bit back, I was challenged by Little-whip to find a scripture to back the principle I was talking about, that God intended people to be married and enjoy sex within the marriage. And, I found this little tidbit here that pretty much derailed my research, leaving me with only the Song of Solomon as backup for my claim, which really isn't enough but it's what I had. Of course, someone had already mentioned it in a sarcastic way when I got back to the thread, but I digress -

The tidbit I found was 1 Cor 7.

1Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry.[a] 2But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.

8Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.

So basically, what he appears to be saying here, is the only good reason to get married is to avoid being fornicators. Meanwhile, at the very beginning of the world, Adam was given a wife. This was when there was NO POSSIBILITY of fornication, because there were no other humans around. I mean, there were animals, but that's not what this thread is about. :D

Regardless, how does one reconcile the two statements? It is not good to be alone, but it is good to be alone?

This thread is not a "Friday Five" where we list 5 Bible contradictions, either. If you want to do that, you have your own blog. It's probably a great topic. I really don't want to see that here - as I find things that confuse me, I'll give them their own thread.

I really hope someone has a good explanation for it, too. Because I don't.
religion
3,157 views 10 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Jythier both are true statements, in the context of God's word.

Gen. 2:18 - "It is not good for man to be alone"

Was given at the inception of creation, as we know it today. The purpose and plan of God was for humanity to replenish the earth. That is why He gave Adam a help meet for this purpose. Adam and Steve would not have worked, plus homosexuality is an abomination to God. He gave Adam a woman with soft skin, and enticing attributes, so that they may procreate.

1 Cor 7:1 - "It is good for a man not to touch a woman"

The Apostle Paul in his first epistle to the believers in Corinth addressed a number of issues concerning sex and marriage. Corinth was a large city with many immoral and wicked practices of the day. It could be likened to America. Appears that homosexuality, prostitution and even sex outside of marriage was not uncommon place. Sound familiar?

What the Spirit of God was addressing to the believers at the church in Corinth is that there is nothing wrong with being married (hence it is not good for man to be alone) and there is nothing wrong with not being married. I can remember that my youngest sister did not marry until late in life- after she was twenty-five and I can remember my grandmother thinking that something was wrong 'homosexuality' because she was not married earlier. It is still a stigma that exist today. Paul was saying if God has given you the gift of celibacy and you have no desire for marriage, it is 'good for a man not to touch a woman' but if you do not have this call of God, you are better to marry than burning (with sensual desires) .

There is another advantage that this epistle address in term of remaining single. It is true that and individual that has the gift and desire to remain single can holy set their heart and body on serving the Lord. If one is married, then ones considerations must include ones spouse.

Happy Thanksgiving Jythier
Hamartano
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
I was glad you inspired me, too. The one time I actually go and do some reading you call me on not researching. But I didn't want to get into this question at the time.

A couple days ago, my wife, out of the blue, asks me, "How do we know the Bible is the inspired word of God?" I'm pretty sure the answer is, "Only by faith."

When I see people living lives devoted to Jesus and you can see Him touching their life and meeting those needs He said not to worry about, I can't help but believe.

I hope your grotesque, twisted hand heals quickly. How's the nibbling going on Emp's resumes? I've often thought it is best to keep him gainfully employed, so that he is complacent enough that he doesn't try to conquer the world.
Ashes of the Singularity II
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Gen. 2:18 - "It is not good for man to be alone"

1 Cor 7:1 - "It is good for a man not to touch a woman"


Regardless, how does one reconcile the two statements? It is not good to be alone, but it is good to be alone?


The answer can be found by taking both statements according to the context of who said them and the teaching behind them.

In Gen. 2:18, Creator God is speaking. As Creator, God has a plan in mind. This is the only time that God said of His work, "It is not good", because His work was still incomplete. God had created Adam as the first man as well as first father of the human race. The human race therefore required not only a father but also a mother. The two form the head and center of the family. So, it was not good for Adam to be alone. God created the woman. God instituted marriage at the start of creation. 1:27-28. Without underestimating it’s other purposes, marriage is ordained by its very nature for the begetting and rearing of children. According to the plan of God, marriage is the foundation of the wider community of the family.


In 1Cor. 7, "It is good for a man not to touch a woman"....

Although at that time, there was no name for the single state in life, St. Paul is teaching about the two vocations we have in life...namely, that of marriage or that of being single or unmarried. Those who are unmarried, must be chaste, virginal or celibate. St. Paul lived a celibate life and gives reasons for highly esteeming this life. In v. 25-35, he says that celibacy is a higher state than marriage and shows that, as Christ taught, celibacy is a special gift from God. St.Matt. 19:11-12.


From what the Apostles says, ‘each has his own special gift from God”. It’s clear from this that the vocation of marriage is also a gift of God and therefore, family life, conjugal duties, education of children, the effort to improve the family’s standard of living, are things a husband and wife together should work to supernaturalize meaning things which should help them live a life dedicated to God. Marriage is a divine path on earth. Those who are called to the married state will , with the grace of God, find within their state everything they need to identify themselves each day more and more with Christ and by their life in marriage lead those whom they love closer to God.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Regardless, how does one reconcile the two statements? It is not good to be alone, but it is good to be alone?


I really hope someone has a good explanation for it, too. Because I don't.


Well Jay I'll try.....

If you notice by looking at 7:1 you'd see that Paul is not writing a treatise on marriage but is answering questions sent to him...."now concerning the things you wrote to me...."

We have only one side of the conversation here. It is clear that Paul favored celibacy....v1,7,8,9,27,38 although he approved marriage v2,27,28.

Probably celibacy is a position taken by some at Corinth. Paul grants its validity but does seem clear aout the fact that marriage is better for those who might be overcome by temptation.

Right from the getgo God said it was NOT good that man should be alone Gen 2:18. Now that doesn't necessarily mean in a marriage sort of way but it can also mean Christians shouldn't isolate themselves.

I think of Ecc 4:9 which says:

"Two are better than one because they have a good reward their labor. For if they fall, the one will lift up his fellow but woe to him that is alone when he falls, for he has not another to help him up."

So for safety, comfort and strength he has given us each other. This can be either in a marriage relationship or in a Christian one. But it is NOT GOOD that man be alone.

Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
The Bible says a lot of things, doesn't it?

I'll tell you one thing-if I'm a with a woman and she allows me to touch her I am totally going to do it.   

~Zoo
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'll tell you one thing-if I'm a with a woman and she allows me to touch her I am totally going to do it.


I use to think like that. I use to do that. Didn't seem like mistakes at the time. I wasn't a Christian yet, but now... man, I don't have my whole self to give to my wife. And that, my Zooish friend, is a terrible thing to give up.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
I use to think like that. I use to do that. Didn't seem like mistakes at the time. I wasn't a Christian yet, but now... man, I don't have my whole self to give to my wife. And that, my Zooish friend, is a terrible thing to give up.


Not to mention if you every have a daughter.... will that change a man's thought process?

My brother told me one day, long before he got married that if he had a daughter he would allow her to pose for Playboy. Guess what, yep, he got it a daughter. She is 18 years old now fresh out of high school.... my how his opinions have changed. For the better, in my opinion.

hamartano
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
If I had a daughter, and she was 18, I would have no choice whether she posed for Playboy or not. But I'd like to hope I'd raised her so that she wouldn't even think of it.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
I don't have my whole self to give to my wife


Hmm...unless you've been with a girl that has very sharp "features" then I don't really get this...unless you're talking about some metaphysical committment thing.

~Zoo
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
You'll figure it out someday. It isn't metaphysical, it's memories.