Parq/e,noi iN CoriNtH: 1 Cor 7,25-40 283 in vv. 1-24 Paul agrees that it is good for a man not to touch a woman (v. 1), but he argues that one should not make a change in one’s marital status except in a couple of specific circumstances; everyone should stay as they were when they became followers of Jesus. in vv. 25-40 Paul applies the same idea to young, unmarried women and ar- gues that they should also stay as they are, i.e., unmarried. He gives reasons why this is beneficial in vv. 26, 28b-31 and 32-34. But he also makes it clear that if they marry, they do not sin (vv. 28a, 36). Marrying is good, but refraining from marriage is better (vv. 38, 40). this discussion is isolated in the New testament because family matters do not otherwise arise with such specificity 65. Fathers’ treat- ment of their children (te,kna) is briefly mentioned in Col 3,21; eph 6,4; 1 tim 3,4.12, but these passages urge them not to provoke their children and to keep them submissive. the topic of arranging mar- riages for them does not arise. the discussion in 1 Cor 7,25-40 displays implications of Paul’s eschatologically-based preference for celibacy that do not otherwise appear. accepting Paul’s argument means that families, particularly fathers, must refrain from arranging marriages for their daughters. More significantly it means they must cancel arrangements they have already made, arrangements that may have been in place since the daughter was born. Such a cancellation might severely disappoint not only the family of the girl, but also the other family with which they were to be allied through the marriage. and even though the decision may have been in the hands of her father, in at least some cases the preferences of the parqe,noj herself would also have been a factor. it is no wonder that Paul makes it clear that even if it is not optimal, it is no sin for the parqe,noj to marry. the athenaeum of ohio terrance CallaN Cincinnati, ohio would then make betrothal a lifelong condition. KüMMel proposes that Paul un- derstands betrothal in Jewish terms as equal to marriage and thus indissoluble. this does not seem very likely to me. 65 For a survey of family matters that do arise, see C. oSieK, rSCJ, “the Family in early Christianity: ‘Family Values’ revisited”, CBQ 58 (1996) 1-24; C. oSieK – d.l. BalCH, Families in the NT World. Households and House Churches (louisville, KY 1997).