We should understand Paul’s instruction—as Calvin did—as a prohibition to partake in idolatrous and ungodly living and worship that is contrary to the gospel of Jesus Christ and forsaking any partnerships that would encourage such evil.

The Question

In the thirteen chapters of Second Corinthians, Paul exhorts the Church in Corinth with an epistle laced with beauty and glory. In these chapters, the apostle articulates the “God of all comfort” who turns the world upside-down by demonstrating that true power is found in weakness as He reconciles a sinful people to Himself and commissions them with a message of reconciliation.

While the letter is riddled with beauty, it is not without its perplexing passages. One of the chief culprits is 2 Corinthians 6:14, where Paul states, “Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers.” He followed this imperative with a series of five questions used to draw a contrast, saying,

“For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness?
Or what fellowship has light with darkness?
What accord has Christ with Belial?
Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever?
What agreement has the temple of God with idols?”

Opinions proliferate about what it means to be unequally yoked. Does it pertain to marrying or dating non-believers? Is Paul thinking of business partnerships? Is it in reference to spiritual matters only, or does he also have social factors in mind? What does Paul have in mind when he exhorts believers to not be unequally yoked?

Paul’s Imagery

Paul builds his command on a stark piece of imagery. The image of a yoke draws to the mind an agricultural and farming metaphor. Those hearers with an agrarian background, or those familiar with the Pentateuch, would not have found this language surprising, as Deuteronomy 22:10 states, “You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together.”

What Paul and Deuteronomy 22 are concerned with here is an imbalance in power and purpose. One can easily imagine the futility of pairing an ox and a donkey under the same yoke which would inseparably link their movements and efforts. The ox, due to sheer strength and size would overpower the weaker animal, leaving the field unevenly plowed, or worse.

Paul picks up on this language and goes beyond agricultural realities to say that when two parties with different passions and purposes try to operate while being yoked together—it’s a recipe for disaster.

Read More