Essentially, 1 Corinthians 7:12 says: If a man has a wife who is not a follower of Jesus, and she consents to remain married to him, he must not divorce her.

What stands out to me is the emphasis on the choice and consent of the non-Christian spouse. That emphasis feels both intentional and important. Following Jesus of Nazareth — and/or being closely united to someone who follows Jesus of Nazareth — is not presented in Scripture as a comfortable or rational lifestyle. In fact, the Gospels, Acts, and the New Testament missives make it clear that following Jesus of Nazareth is inescapably risky and dangerous. And whenever something is risky or dangerous, consent matters.

For instance, before people are allowed to engage in hazardous activities, such as whitewater rafting, surgery, extreme sports, etc. – they must first give informed consent. That is what I think God is doing in 1 Corinthians 7:12. God is being honest about the cost of His joyful but hazardous agenda for human life.

If a non-Christian chooses to remain married to a genuine follower of Jesus of Nazareth, they are essentially consenting to be in the raft – careening down a hazardous raging river – with their spouse – and their spouse’s ULTIMATE SPOUSE – Jesus of Nazareth. Which means that they will inevitably experience the realities of holiness as Jesus of Nazareth defines holiness. Holiness is NOT comfort, popularity, success, luxury, ease, self-sufficiency and/or prosperity; BUT rather risk, danger, and disruption (read through Hebrews chapter 11, and you’ll get a vivid smattering of specifics!).

SIMPLY PUT, holiness means proximity to Jesus. And if Jesus insists on whitewater rafting, then holiness means getting splashed by freezing water, occasionally flipped upside down, and navigating violent currents, sharp turns, and jagged rocks. Holiness is being with Jesus in the uncomfortable places He chooses to be—not the safe places we would choose for ourselves.

And now, what about the ‘spouse being made holy‘ bit that Paul talks about?

I think it is similar to the story of Moses’ radiant and radically threatening face in the book of Exodus. In the deepest sense, Moses was made holy eternally—his soul belonged to God. But in another sense, Moses’ face was made holy: it reflected God’s glory after being in His presence. That holiness had real effects, but it was not salvific in itself. His face reflected holiness and it unsettled and disturbed people SO MUCH, that they told him he had to cover his face! In other words, holiness is hazardous! …so Moses must cover his face. …so non-Christian spouses have to consent to stay married to people who are authentic followers of Jesus of Nazareth.

In this way, if a non-Christian remains married to a sincere follower of Jesus of Nazareth, they will then – in a manner of speaking – be like Moses’ face. The non-Christian spouse risks reflecting the reality of Jesus by choosing to stay married to a follower of Jesus — and Jesus is not a tame lion. If a non-Christian desires a comfortable, prosperous life, God wants that person to know that remaining married to a follower of Jesus may jeopardize that comfort. Jesus threatens the world, and anyone closely united to Jesus will be perceived as a threat as well.

BECAUSE…

The world says, “Everyone can be God.”
Holiness says, “Only God is God.”
The world says, “Comfort and safety.”
Holiness says, “Adventure and audacity.”
The world says, “Asherah.”
Holiness says, “Aslan.” [i.e. not a tame lion]

This raises the question: Will someone be in heaven because of who they were married to?

The answer is: only if their consent becomes radicalized.

Consenting to remain married to a follower of Jesus is like Moses consenting to glimpse the back of God on Mount Sinai. That consent had a visible effect on Moses’ face—but if it had stopped there, Moses’ soul would still have been lost. Heaven is populated by people who have been impacted by holiness at the soul level, not merely the surface level.

If a non-Christian allows holiness to affect them only at a “married-to-a-follower-of-Jesus” level, that is like plastic surgery. However, if they allow holiness to penetrate their soul, that is like heart surgery. Both surgeries require consent — but one is far deeper and far more invasive.

:::

BONUS MATERIAL: this connects to baptism as well. Baptism sets someone apart as holy — and it is therefore a hazardous act. We often overlook the danger of baptism, especially with infants, because we do not ask for their consent. But the danger still exists. Baptism is good and life-giving, but it is not tame. There is nothing safe about being marked by holiness.

*Balaam the socerer is another example of someone impacted by holiness without being saved. Balaam consented to speak with God and consult with God, and God’s holiness significantly affected his life and reputation—so much so that it disrupted and dramatically threatened his work as a sorcerer-for-hire with the Moabites. Long-story-short with Balaam …holiness impacted him without redeeming him.

In summary, if a non-Christian consents to remain married to a follower of Jesus they must understand the risk. The holiness of God may very well ruin the non-Christian’s earthly success and reputation. Holiness is hazardous.