To evade this conclusion in favor of infant baptism, the Baptists have strenuously contended, that the proper sense of “holy” is legitimate or lawfully born. Would it not be equally true that it was proper to baptize the children whether the parents were separated or not? in which short passage, the word which is used to "sanctify", or be "sanctified", in the Hebrew language, is used to espouse, or be espoused no less than "ten" times. During the week preceding the birth a table was spread for Juno; and on the last day certain persons were called together to mark the moment on which the Parcae, or Fates, had fixed its destiny. - See Dr. Lightfoot. To report dead links, typos, or html errors or suggestions about making these resources more useful use our convenient, Baker Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, Hastings' Dictionary of the New Testament, Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary, International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, John Etheridge Translation of the Peshitta, James Murdock Translation of the Peshitta, For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, else were your children unclean, but now are they holy, hēgiastaiThere has been a great variety of opinions in regard to the sense of this word. Is sanctified - ἡγίασται hēgiastaiThere has been a great variety of opinions in regard to the sense of this word. This shows clearly what the apostle's meaning is. “For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.” Food is "sanctified by the word of God and prayer" (1Ti 4:4,5). But to finish my thought I do believe that if the other party dies before excepting Jesus in their lives I believe God still receives them unto him self even if he puts them in a lower level of heaven an not the Hollies of Hollies, because that person loved the holy individual just like Christ loved the church so in return they loved on Jesus throughout their marriage! We'll send you an email with steps on how to reset your password. I have been having this sort of argument or discussion i might say with a friend about this. They are indissolubly united by the ordinance of God. That does not mean "sinless," but they are still legally clean in His sight. But now are they holy. Is it not a doctrine among Pedobaptists everywhere, that the children are entitled to baptism upon the faith of either of the parents, and that that doctrine is not affected by the question here agitated by Paul? Here Paul uses the term to denote that one Christian member of a household brings a sanctifying influence to it, so that all the members are to be regarded as separated in part from the great, ungodly, unclean world. This passage has been much debated, and little understood. “Your separation would be a proclamation to all that you regard the marriage as invalid and improper. nor do they allow children begotten of such persons to be legitimate. The usual meaning of the word is, to make holy; to set apart to a sacred use; to consecrate, etc; see the note at. He adds that "no child among the heathens was born in a state of purity; and it is not to be wondered at," says he, "that demons possess them from their youth, seeing they were thus early dedicated to their service." Notify me if someone responds on this discussion/thread. God does not take what is holy and throw it away. 11But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife. The word sanctification here is to be applied much more to the Christian state than to any moral change in the persons; for ἁγιοι, saints, is a common term for Christians - those who were baptized into the faith of Christ; and as its corresponding term קדושים kedoshim signified all the Jews who were in the covenant of God by circumcision, the heathens in question were considered to be in this holy state by means of their connection with those who were by their Christian profession saints. 11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife. 1 Corinthians 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. That is, they are legitimate. 1Co 7:14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, etc. Inform us if our marriages are legal! The unbelieving husband or wife is not made personally holy, not do the children of believers have personal holiness transmitted to them by virtue of birth relation. The usual meaning of the word is, to make holy; to set apart to a sacred use; to consecrate, etc; see the note at John 17:17. As if he had said, Ye see the proof of it before your eyes. It is on the other hand, very frequently used in the sense assigned to it by Doddridge and others. There is not one word about baptism here; not one allusion to it; nor does the argument in the remotest degree hear upon it. Or briefly thus - Do not separate. The unbelieving husband or wife is not made personally holy, not do the children of believers have personal holiness transmitted to them by virtue of birth relation. 13 And the woman which hath an husband that beleeueth not, and if hee be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leaue him. But. But a good cause should not be made to rest on feeble supports, nor upon forced and unnatural interpretations of the Scriptures. Also the bible says how can two walk together except they agree at some point the unsaved one must have a lil belief I think or he or she wouldn 't be married to the holier one so maybe they have as much belief as a mustard seed but are not ready to live the life??? A brother or a sister is not vnder bondage in such cases: but God hath called vs to peace. The learned Dr. Lightfoot says, that the words "unclean" and "holy" denote not children unlawfully begotten, and lawfully begotten; but Heathenism and Christianism; and thinks the apostle alludes to the distinction often made by the Jews, of the children of proselytes being born in "holiness", or out of it, that is, either before they became proselytes or after; but it should be observed, that though the word "holiness" is used for Judaism, yet not for Christianity; and besides, the marriages of Heathens were not looked upon as marriages by the Jews, and particularly such mixed ones as of a Jew and Gentile, they were not to be reckoned marriages; for so they say, "he that espouses a Gentile woman, or a servant, אינן קידושין, "they are not espousals"; but lo, he is after the espousals as he was before the espousals; and so a Gentile, or a servant, that espouses a daughter of Israel, אין קידושיהן קידושין, "those espousals are no espousals";'. 1 Corinthians 7:14. So Calvin, Beza, and Doddridge interpret the expression. They are indissolubly united by the ordinance of God. Bible > 1 Corinthians > Chapter 7 > Verse 14 Library • Free Downloads • eBibles immediately i invoked that we are under grace not the law. The case is the same when the wife is a heathen and the husband a Christian. The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife -, Commentary Critical and Explanatory - Unabridged, Kretzmann's Popular Commentary of the Bible, Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Text and Manuscripts of the New Testament. But it is a good rule of interpretation, that the words which are used in any place are to be limited in their signification by the connection; and all that we are required to understand here is, that the unbelieving husband was sanctified “in regard to the subject under discussion;” that is, in regard to the question whether it was proper for them to live together, or whether they should be separated or not. Sanctification, then, means something besides personal holiness. This passage has been much debated, and little understood. Which best represents the problem with the comment? Otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. I think it means just what it says. The word will appropriately express the sense of illegitimacy; and the argument, I think, evidently requires this. The King James Version is in the public domain. (, California - Do Not Sell My Personal Information. if jesus has already paid the price and he became the curse for me some people still need to know basic biblical truths.