What does Paul mean by "the present distress"?

Explanation:

Paul says that because of the present distress [ἀνάγκην], it is good for a person to remain as they are. Paul uses the word ἀνάγκη (distress) elsewhere to refer to the ongoing stress that a Christian endures in this world.³ For example, in Romans 13:5 he explains that it is necessary [ἀνάγκη] for Christians to obey the government. In other words, it is the Christian’s burden to obey the government, just as the Christian has burdens and distress while living in the world.

A clearer example, though, comes from 2 Corinthians 6:4 where Paul says that as servants of God, they have endured afflictions, hardships [ἀνάγκαις], calamities. In this case, the term clearly has to do with the distress Christians endure in the world. Similarly, in 1 Thessalonians 3:7 Paul says that in all their distress and affliction, they have been comforted by the Thessalonians’ faith.

Thus, we have three examples where Paul uses the noun ἀνάγκη (distress) to indicate the hardships that Christians endure in the world.

Counterargument:

While it might be that ἀνάγκη can refer to distress in general, the context suggests that Paul has in mind the distress that immediately precedes Christ’s second coming. For if Paul has general distress in mind, then why should he advise the Corinthians that it is good not to marry? We know from Scripture that God instituted marriage (Genesis 2:24). We also know that marriage produces children, and children are included in God’s kingdom. It is hard to see why Paul would advise the Corinthians to avoid marriage, if possible, when this would result in less children and less inhabitants in the kingdom. The fact that Paul uses the noun ἀνάγκη (distress) in the context of advising the Corinthians not to marry, suggests that Paul has Christ’s second coming in mind. Christ explained that there would be distress of epic proportions immediately preceding his second coming (Matthew 24:19–28). It is likely this distress that Paul has in mind.

Response to counterargument:

Paul does not suggest that people should not get married. Rather, he explains that each should remain as he is. He also points out that each has his own gift from God, and for some this includes singleness. That Paul suggests people remain as they are and that those who are called to singleness do well to remain so, does not undermine the institution of marriage. Finally, we must keep in mind that Paul is responding to a letter from the Corinthians. The Corinthians have likely suggested that it is good for a man not to touch a woman (1 Corinthians 7:1). Paul does not completely disagree, but given the present distress, that is, the hardships of being a Christian in the world, singleness is a good option.

Explanation:

For Paul, the period of the end times stretches from the end of Christ’s ministry to his second coming. This means that when Paul says that it is good to remain as one is because of the present distress, his point is that because Christians must endure life in the world from the time of Christ’s ministry to his second coming, one should remain as he is. We can deduce that in Paul’s view, the end times stretch from the time of Christ’s ministry to his second coming, based on his comments in 1 Corinthians 7:31. There Paul says that the form of the world is passing away. Still, Christians do not abandon the world, but they do not let the world dictate their present existence.⁴

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that it is just as likely that Paul says in 1 Corinthians 7:31 that the form of the world is passing away because he believes Christ’s second return is imminent. Maybe Paul believes that the distress has started, and Jesus will return at any moment. That the form of the world is passing away is an indication of such distress. One could make a case that in fact, Paul does not have in mind the distress before Christ’s return when he says that the form of the world is passing away. But such a case would be built on an argument, and the above is not an argument, but an assertion.

Explanation:

We get the sense from Paul’s pastoral advice in 1 Corinthians 7:1–40 that sin is a constant distress that Christians have to deal with. For example, he suggests that people marry because of sexual immorality (1 Corinthians 7:2), that special gifts of the Spirit are needed for some to remain unmarried (1 Corinthians 7:7), and that abstinence is possible but people still burn with sexual passion (1 Corinthians 7:9).⁵ All of this alludes to the fact that Christians experience distress in the flesh because of sin. Thus, when Paul says that the Corinthians ought to remain as they are because of the present distress, he has in mind the distress of resisting sin.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that Paul specifically says that marriage is no sin (1 Corinthians 7:28). Paul does not say that people ought to get married to avoid sexual immorality (1 Corinthians 7:2), but that married people ought not to abstain from sexual relations. Further, Paul does not say that sexual desire is a sin, but that those who have strong sexual desires should feel free to marry. Those who have the gift of self-control do well to stay single. Thus, it might be that the present distress refers to sin, but we cannot deduce this from Paul’s pastoral advice about marriage.

Response to counterargument:

While it is certainly true that Paul points out that marriage itself is not sin, sin still lurks in the background of his thinking. It is because of sexual temptation that married people ought not to abstain from sexual relations (1 Corinthians 7:2). Further, Paul knows that married people tend to divide their attention between their spouses and the Lord, instead of dedicating their attention solely to the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:33–34). Thus, Paul does not say that either marrying or remaining single is a sin. Still, sin, which Paul characterized as the present distress, lurks in the background of his pastoral instruction.

Possible weaknesses:

The weakness of this view is that it overlooks the effect of the participle form of ἐνίστημι (be present). ἐνίστημι is used adjectivally to modify the noun ἀνάγκη (distress), which emphasizes the fact that Paul has a particular distress in mind. This interpretation does not adequately deal with this emphasis. In other words, the participle suggests that Paul does not have in mind general ongoing distress, but some particular distress that is currently present for the Corinthians.

Explanation:

Paul explains that because of the present distress it is good for a person to remain as he is (1 Corinthians 7:26). We want to understand what present distress motivates him to advise single people to remain single and married people to remain married. We can deduce what he means by reading 1 Corinthians 7:26 in the context of 1 Corinthians 7:26–31. He explains that while it is not a sin to marry, single people should remain single. He then explains that the time is short so that even married people should live as though they had no spouse (1 Corinthians 7:29). In other words, the time of Christ’s second coming is soon, and the Corinthians should be prepared for his coming. He follows this up with another clue from 1 Corinthians 7:31 where he says that the form of this world is passing away. Such a phrase can only mean that Paul thought Christ’s second coming was imminent.⁸

Counterargument:

While we want to interpret Paul in context, the context does not force us to think that Paul has Christ’s second coming in mind. Rather, when Paul says that because of the present distress, the Corinthians should remain as they are, he likely has a circumstantial affliction in mind such as famine. We know from records that there was a severe famine in Corinth in AD 51.⁹ In all likelihood, Paul has such hardship in mind when he speaks to the present distress of the Corinthians. Thus, when we reach 1 Corinthians 7:29 we want to understand what Paul means when he says that the time is short with the present distress of famine in mind. In other words, Paul is not saying that the time is short, as in Christ’s return is imminent. Rather, he is saying that time is limited, as in critical.¹⁰ Because of the famine, it is a critical time in Corinth, so people should remain as they are and avoid the burdens of marriage.

Response to counterargument:

There are two problems with this view. First, it is hard to see how one could take ὁ καιρὸς συνεσταλμένος ἐστίν in the sense of the time is critical. The verb συστέλλω (to wrap up) is in the perfect passive tense, which denotes an action in the past with ongoing effects. The normal meaning of this verb in the context of time is shorten.¹¹ This could mean that the time was long but has now been shortened, or that the time is coming to a close.¹² In other words, the verb συστέλλω (to wrap up) has to do with time ending, not a critical time.

Second, this counterargument does not account for 1 Corinthians 7:31 where Paul says that the form of the world is passing away. This phrase is critical because it makes sense of 1 Corinthians 7:26 and 1 Corinthians 7:29. If the form of the world is passing away, it is no wonder Paul says the time is short. And of course, if the time is short because the form of the world is passing away, then Jesus’ second coming is imminent. The fact that Paul believes the world is passing away and that Jesus’ second coming is imminent does not rule out that there is a famine in Corinth. Indeed, it may be that Paul interprets the famine in Corinth as a sign of Jesus’ imminent return.¹³

Explanation:

Paul says that because of the present [ἐνεστῶσαν] distress it is good for a person to remain as they are. We want to know what Paul means by present distress and we get a strong clue by looking at the tense of the verb ἐνίστημι (be present). The verb is in the form of a perfect active participle, and it is used adjectivally to modify distress. The perfect tense indicates that the distress began in the past, and the effects are ongoing.¹⁴ That Paul has a present distress in mind, combined with the fact the time is short and the world is passing away, indicates that Paul believes the second coming of Christ is imminent.

Counterargument:

While it might be that ἐνίστημι (be present) is in the perfect tense, this does not mean that Paul has Christ’s second coming in mind. That is because Paul uses the verb ἐνίστημι (be present) to modify the noun ἀνάγκη (distress/necessity). To understand what he means by the present distress, we need to understand his use of ἀνάγκη, and we can get at the meaning when we reach 1 Corinthians 7:28. There Paul writes that those who marry will have affliction in the flesh.¹⁵ Most likely, Paul uses the terms for distress and affliction synonymously. That is to say, the present distress is the affliction in the flesh that married people have to endure. So what affliction in the flesh is associated with marriage? The only plausible answer is sexual passion.¹⁶ Thus, the present distress is sexual passion. Because Paul would spare the Corinthians such distress, he advises singleness. In other words, the present distress has nothing to do with Christ’s second coming.

Response to counterargument:

This counterargument is confused for a number of reasons. First, our interpretation must make sense in the immediate and broader context. This means that we have to consider Paul’s meaning, in light of not only 1 Corinthians 7:28 but also 1 Corinthians 7:26. If we take the suggestion that when Paul says present distress he means sexual passion, then why does he follow this up with the advice that the Corinthians remain as they are? In other words, how does remaining as one is help with sexual passion? Second, this counterargument overlooks the fact that the participle form of ἐνίστημι (be present) is in the perfect tense. This means Paul has in mind an action in the past that has continued results. What action in the past would cause the distress of sexual passion? Third, Paul’s solution for sexual passion is not that people remain as they are. Rather, when we reach 1 Corinthians 7:36 we learn that his solution for sexual passion is marriage. In other words, sexual passion is not an affliction in the flesh that only married people endure. Rather, according to Paul, single people endure it, and the solution is marriage.

Possible weaknesses:

There are a few weaknesses with this view. For one, we expect that if Paul had the tribulation before the second coming of Christ in mind, he would be much more explicit. Further, if Paul knows that there will be a distress before the second coming of Christ, we should assume he also knows that according to Christ, the first signs of the end are only birth pains (Matthew 24:8). Finally, since Paul is not explicit about what particular distress is supposed to cause him to think that tribulation has begun, we need a historical record to support the notion that there was great distress in Corinth in the first century. Unfortunately, this view offers no such record.