Can You Marry the Wrong Person?
EDIT: PLEASE NOTE ADDITION AT THE BOTTOM
Considering the activity on my recent blog posts and Theology Unplugged podcasts on the will of God and Barack Obama, I though I would squeeze this lemon one last time (and pour some salt). No, that does not mean take a shot of tequila before reading this!
My basic argument was that whatever faults one may be inclined to find in Barack Obama, he was elected president. In this, it was, in some very real sense, the will of God.
While I was a singles’ pastor for six years, I often dealt with issues from those whom I had married. I had these issue in both premarital counseling and post-marital counseling. In post-marital counseling things got interesting. I would often sit in the presence of a discouraged wife or husband whose marriage was less than happy. For some, things just weren’t clicking. For others, the problems were more serious. Much of the time people would suggest that they had made a mistake. In their mind, they simply married the wrong person and their “soul-mate” was still out there waiting.
These type of things quickly become a matter of theology—very practical theology. The question is this: Is it possible to have married the “wrong” person?
No matter how difficult things were I would always discourage such a direction in thinking. I don’t think that it is ever possible to have married the “wrong” person. I know that this sounds strange to some, but it is simply a natural outcome of my belief in God’s sovereignty. Just as the presidency is ultimately in God’s hands, even if and when people make evil choices, God’s will is ultimately being accomplished.
Getting personal: My wife and I met in a bar. Yes, that is right. Fifteen years ago, I was out, drunk and picking up on women. In a drunken stupor, I stopped my wife (my waitress at the time) and said “Before I get drunk, I want to say ‘I love you’” (sweet pick-up line, huh?) We hit it off, and to make a long story short, we got hitched. As I grew in the Lord, I questioned my motivations for marrying her. If you have seen her, you know she is very beautiful. This is not to brag, but to give you a sense of conflict that I have had (and, I am sure, Kristie has had as well). We have had our share of difficulties. I would like to say that things have been great with me and Kristie, but we have some very serious personality conflicts. Sometimes these are so severe, so discouraging, so long-lasting, so unforgiving, that the terrible question pop’s in my head, “Did I marry the wrong person?” It is in these times that my theology begins to lock certain doors.
Are you supposed to meet your wife in a bar? No, not ideal. Are you supposed to love her primarily because of looks? No, not ideal. Can you make wrong decisions that lead to an important decision such as marriage? Absolutely. So, was it God’s will that I marry Kristie. You bet.
You see, I believe that God works with us in our sin. Does he have any other choice? If he did not work through our sin, what does the world “grace” mean and, frankly, when would he work? God brought Kristie and I together and our togetherness has been hard. Yes, it could have been easier had we married someone else. We could have smiled more. We could have been more relaxed. Things could have more “click” to them. We could be setting an example of a “Christian marriage” for all to see. Although I hate to say this, the grass sometimes really is greener on the other side.
But my shade of green is not necessarily God’s.
Is it God’s will for Kristie and I to be together? You bet. Could there have been better choices made? “Better” is rather relative and can get you into trouble. From a human perspective which does not see all ends and is foolishly self-serving, yes. From a divine perspective, no.
God has a purpose for Kristie and I to be together. We did not marry the wrong person. Sometimes we cannot see what is really going on and our passions are clouded by the pain, but we must keep our eyes on the sovereignty of God and find a much deeper level of satisfaction in each other knowing that God—the all-knowing God—has put us together for a reason. In this we swallow our thoughts of mistake and we let go of the humanistic “soul-mate” theory. Once this is done, we find a new fairy-tale marraige that is better than any we could have chosen. Why? Because God knows best. Because God works through sin. Settled, satisfied, and in constant delight describes my marraige when I take this perspective. Don’t catch me on one of those other days.
EDIT: Before you react to this post in a very critical matter, believing I have lost my bearing, heading toward some sort of radical Calvinism, please answer this. If you were talking to someone who was the result of a rape/incest union and they asked you, “Was it God’s will for me to be conceived?” What would you say?
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!- Where Should You Search for a Spouse? or “I Am Ashamed About Where Kristie and I Met”
- Michael Patton will not be blogging for a few days because…
- "God Comes Before My Wife" . . . And Other Stupid Statements
- Calvinism and the Divine Decrees – Correcting a Misunderstanding
- “It is not good for man to be alone”: A Theological look at Singleness
Print This Post

Sue on 14 Nov 2008 at 3:23 am #
I do agree with you. But we can vow the wrong vows. If the wife vows to obey she is in conflict since the Bible says not to vow to do something that one cannot do.
Often the husband asks the wife to do something because he is sinful or has made a very human mistake. For example, once my husband asked me to pass another car. He was unable to see what I could see. We would not be alive today if I had obeyed him. I never drove again when he was in the car out of the desire to live. But this meant that on long drives he had to do all the driving whereas before that incident, we shared the driving.
Since humans are subject to human error, I believe the vow to obey is forbidden by the Bible. A marriage that has a healthy foundation has much greater chance of survival.
Phil Craig on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:47 am #
I am not married. But a friend of mine said, a couple of weeks after his wedding, that it was like being on a constant spiritual growth course. Having to always think for another person really forced selflessness upon him.
I found that helpful – it gave me a new perspective on what God uses marriage for.
Phil McCheddar on 14 Nov 2008 at 6:15 am #
Dear Michael
I agree with your premise that everything that happens is, in some very real sense, the will of God. But I don’t feel the same optimism and rejoicing that you draw from that premise.
Was it God’s will to give the Israelites meat to eat in the wilderness when they asked for it? Yes, I believe it was God’s will … but He didn’t give them meat as a blessing but rather as a judgement & curse in reaction to their sinful craving. “And they ate and were well filled, for he gave them what they craved. But before they had satisfied their craving, while the food was still between their teeth, God’s anger rose against them, and he killed the strongest of them and destroyed the young men of Israel” (Ps.78:29-31). “They lusted exceedingly in the wilderness, and tempted God in the desert, and he gave them their request, but sent leanness into their souls” (Ps.106:14-15).
Was it God’s will to give the Israelites a king when they hankered to be like the surrounding nations? Yes, I believe it was God’s will … but He didn’t give them a king as a blessing but rather as a curse. God said “I gave you a king in my anger” (Hosea 13:11). Samuel said to them: “In that day you will cry out because of the heavy burden your king will lay on you, but the LORD will not answer you in that day” (1 Sam.8:18)
To quote Richard Baxter: “Remember that it is one of the greatest plagues this side of hell, to be given up to your own desires. And by your eagerness and discontents you provoke God thus to give you up. “So I gave them over to their stubborn hearts to follow their own devices. But oh, if only my people would listen to me, they would be fed with the finest of wheat” (Ps.81:12-16). God may say, Follow your own lust, and if you are so eager, take that which you desire; take that person, that thing, that dignity which you are so earnest for; but take my curse and vengeance with it: never let it do you good, but be a snare and torment to you.”
NB. I am not refering specifically to your marriage but to the general principle of being comfortable and content with whatever happens on account of it being the will of God.
Scott Ferguson on 14 Nov 2008 at 6:56 am #
I guess I get to be the first to say it!
Can Free Will have any meaning if everything we do is God’s Will?
If we are not free to make mistakes – such as marrying the wrong person – than our freedom is a mirage. We may believe we are acting freely but we are wrong. Now, I personally believe that this is a possibility – we are ruled by a deterministic universe but we have the illusion of free will – but arguments like the Free Will Defense to the Problem of Evil goes out the window.
Calvinists like to claim that we have Free Will and yet Salvation is predetermined. This has always been a tough position to reconcile and now I am coming to the conclusion that it is actually impossible to reconcile given how, in practice, Calvinists view the world. It is one thing to make up theological sounding arguments about how God knows the end result without forcing it but when the Calvinist cannot think of one real world example of an instance that is not God’s Will than there is absolutely no room left for Free Will.
There, it had to be said
Matt Turner on 14 Nov 2008 at 8:56 am #
I want to say that this is my first time posting but I really do appreciate what you do. I’ve been looking for a blog to really get my gears going on my faith in Christ and so far I’ve been blessed, especially considering this past Presidential election.
After reading this, almost get the impression that we’re trying our best to get away from God (sin and disobedience) but it seems that God won’t go away from us (grace and redemption). That’s pretty much the story behind the Bible, God finding ways to restore man back to a relationship with Him. I won’t lie when I say that I’ve felt that I married the wrong person when Ash (my wife) and I fight. But your post gives me new insight into my perception of our relationship. My question is this: you briefly mentioned the “humanistic ’soul-mate’ theory” and I was wondering why you think this is so humanistic? I can’t help but think of eHarmony when you mention ‘’soul-mate” but is this something that western Christians have thought up or is there some merit in the Bible?
Cliff Martin on 14 Nov 2008 at 9:13 am #
So, Calvinists are immune to ever making any really bad choices. Hmmm. Sign me up!
Cliff Martin on 14 Nov 2008 at 9:58 am #
Michael,
As a former Calvinist, I have never been able to reconcile the prayer Jesus taught us about God’s will being done on earth as it is in heaven with a deterministic Calvinistic view. What possible sense can the Lord’s prayer have if God’s will is always being done on earth?
Crazyupstart on 14 Nov 2008 at 10:05 am #
Scott,
It depends a lot on your definition of “free will.” Is everyone born with a free will? Rom. 6 specifically teaches that we are born as slaves. How can we the slaves be made free? By our own free will desire? Nay, only by God’s grace.
Phil McC, you have a good point that though we sin, and it is not God’s *intent* that we sin, it is in God’s will to use bad situations to teach/punish us for our downfalls.
When speaking of marriage, I think that the union of a man and a woman is not something that God takes lightly. Can you marry the wrong person in your sin? God won’t be surprised by your marriage. God won’t have to reconstruct His plans because of it. He teaches us that we are to be selfless in marriage. Work at it. He who is selfless covers a multitude of disagreements.
J's comment on 14 Nov 2008 at 10:33 am #
Ah yes, of course it then follows that every divorce is God’s will as well. And dying in a gas chamber. and murdering someone. Yes, it was God’s will to work through that sin. Hmm, and abortion providerse as well. That’s God’s will. Speaking of marriage, having an affair and breaking up a marriage would also be God’s will for dealing with that marriage. Babies from incest, also God’s will.
In addition to Cliff’s comment on the Lord’s Prayer, I would add that Paul must have been mistaken when he wrote that we shouldn’t sin that grace may abound. We should all intentionally choose the “wrong” wife so that grace may abound. And murder the best man and bridesmaid while we’re at it.
CMP has written many good things; his blogs on God’s will are not among them. There are actually some reasonable arguments for a Calvinist view of God’s will out there–the above is not among them. The view expressed above is way too easy to skewer (and deserves to be) and it doesn’t address the biblical text adequately address the Biblical texts (Lord’s Prayer, etc.).
It also provides remarkably little guidance for the Christian, because whatever “is”, is God’s will.
One of the bigger problems with the above view of God’s will, is that the God that has it is way too small and weak. It conceives of God as a god that cannot create true free will. It does not adequately address the Bible’s presentation of what free will is, and substitutes its own definition of free will, so that it can make its “system” work. It limits God to working with only what can be “known”.
Scott Ferguson on 14 Nov 2008 at 10:34 am #
Crazy, whatever the source of Free Will, it still must allow the freedom to make mistakes. Can we be 73.5% free?
If someone wants to argue that God can work with, adjust for or plan for our mistakes, that would be a different argument. Like you said, for God to be surprised by our decisions would be peculiar.
C Michael Patton on 14 Nov 2008 at 10:40 am #
J, and others who object.
Rather than try to respond to what I believe to be a misunderstanding of what I mean by God’s will, let me ask you a question:
If you are talking to a person who is the result of a rape/incest happening, and they ask you “Was it God’s will that I was conceived” what do you say?
Phil McCheddar on 14 Nov 2008 at 11:00 am #
I believe Barack Obama is God’s choice as the new president of the USA (because he actually got elected) but I’m not sure whether it’s a case of God giving the USA the best possible president in order to promote the USA’s welfare, or the worst possible president as a judgement on the USA for its collective sin. So whilst I may rejoice that God’s will has been done, God’s will in this instance may mean trouble and woe for the USA in the next 4 years.
To try to apply this to marriage, was it God’s will that David should commit adultery with Bathsheba and kill Uriah her husband? I think the fact that it happened shows that it was part of God’s eternal, perfect plan (God determined that David and Bathsheba would procreate Solomon, who was an ancestor of Jesus of Nazareth), yet at the same time David was guilty of a wicked decision that both angered and grieved God. It was not something David could therefore look back on and rejoice in the belief that God’s will had been done. Although God brought good out of this tragic mess, it resulted in much trouble and woe for David and his posterity – God killed David & Bathsheba’s 1st baby son, David’s wives were violated by Absalom, and the sword never departed from David’s house (2 Sam.12:10-14).
I think the truth that God determines everything that happens should never encourage us to make reckless decisions. Especially in the case of choosing a marriage partner we should be very wise and discerning. But if we find ourselves in a ‘difficult’ marriage, we should not regard it as a hopeless catastrophe but rather as an opportunity to glorify God. The world may measure a successful marriage by the conviviality or tenderness of the relationship, but I think God is more glorified by us if we exert ourselves to do the right thing for his sake even when we feel naturally inclined to do the opposite. If our marriage does not just float along smoothly but we have to exert ourselves to make it work, and if we push ourselves to be kind and patient and loyal to our spouse out of fear & love of God, then what great glory our actions will bring to God both now and on the last day!
Wm Tanksley on 14 Nov 2008 at 11:39 am #
Romans 8:28 seems to argue pretty strongly in favor of contentment even in the face of our past sins. So does Phil 4:11.
I don’t know if it argues for comfort; I don’t see that anywhere. It certainly doesn’t argue for fatalistic resignation. But nobody’s arguing for that.
(On to a different post:)
An ancient debate!
We are able to make mistakes, and sin, and commit evil. But God is able to create a universe even knowing that it will contain evil; furthermore, God intends those evil acts for good (as Joseph explained to his brothers). God intended the evil acts for good before they were performed — at the very latest, He intended them for good at the same time the brothers were intending them for evil.
I don’t think the results were second-best, either. Consider another example; in Acts 2 Peter explains that Christ was crucified according to the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God. And yet the plan of redemption appears to be designed from before the foundation of the earth…
Our mistakes are meant for good.
It’s a silly defense, though. Evil is far more than a personal problem; it’s universal and natural as well.
The problem isn’t that we’re wrong to think we can be free; the problem is that we don’t understand what freedom is. When we assert a false definition of freedom, the response must be “we are not free IN THAT WAY”.
The typical definition is that free will requires the ability to choose anything, without constraint. The problem with this is obvious — constraints are everywhere and unremovable; I can’t “choose” to fly right now, or to be married to a different woman. Another attempt at a definition is that free will requires a choice that is completely impartial; that the same person in the same circumstances could make a completely different choice. But this is counterfactual, not real; it’s impossible to test or even imagine. It’s also a bit silly, since it implies that the only possibly free choice is one where the person choosing has no desire whatsoever before the choice is made; but that means the choice would be entirely random. If you’re choosing between two things and you truly don’t care which one, you can make a coin flip decide. The result is that although it’s a free choice by the definition, it’s arguably not YOUR choice.
The definition of free will that I’m comfortable with is that a free person chooses according to his desires. He chooses that which he desires most. But this is compatible with constraints on the ability to will. And in fact, Paul says that before we are saved we are enslaved to sin.
Again, this doesn’t argue for resignation or not making choices. On the contrary; it says that we have to live with our choices, and not reject the consequences simply because our first choice was sinful. Even though one can marry unwisely, that marriage is part of God’s plan, and both spouses must live within that plan. If one were to believe that God’s will was for a different marriage, one would also have to believe that leaving this one would be less sinful!
Cliff Martin on 14 Nov 2008 at 12:32 pm #
Michael,
Excellent question! And this gets the very heart of God as REDEEMER! It was not God’s will that the rape or incest occur. Never! But God’s specialty (and he is so adept at this) is redemption. He can take our mistakes, our bad choices, our sins, and redeem them … even redeem the consequences of them … and turn them into things of marvelous beauty. So it was God’s will that the baby be carried to term, and given life.
Your theology makes strange business of redemption. Yes, you would agree I’m sure, God redeems. But in your theology, he himself creates the very scenarios from which he redeems. Where is the glory in that?
David on 14 Nov 2008 at 1:03 pm #
Cliff,
Read Jonathan Edwards and you will find the answer to your question “where is the glory in that.” God is glorified completely in all his attributes, including mercy AND justice.
Heath on 14 Nov 2008 at 1:46 pm #
Disclaimer #1: I have not read the comment thread, so sorry if I am repeating.
Disclaimer #2: I am commenting here as a favor to a friend.
With those said, I can’t even begin to say how completely I disagree with the post on so many levels.
First, God does not exercise exhastive soverignty, thus not all choices are a part of God’s will. If God’s soverignty is exhastive, then the very words I am writing to you now are God’s words, and you should take heed.
Second, not everthing that happens is God’s will. Who is elected president is only God’s will if the electorate is submitted to God’s will. Who you chose to marry is only a part of God’s will if you are submitted to God’s will.
Third, if one is to argue that every marriage is God’s will simply because it happened, then the opposite must also be true, namely that every divorce is God’s will simply because it happened. Since scripture opposes this view, and we probably both agree that divorce is not God’s will, than your line of reasoning is a logical falicy.
Fire away…
Blepo on 14 Nov 2008 at 1:47 pm #
Since I intend to criticize your idea, I will first respond to your question. I think it is the wrong question to ask. The circumstances under which the person was conceived were not in God’s moral will, but they were in His passive will, meaning He allowed them to happen. While God did not desire for his/her parents to copulate, they did, and the biological processes God put in place did the rest. One of his/her parents made an immoral choice, and that choice led to the existence of a new human being. Now that person exists, and God loves them and has a purpose for their life, because God’s love and purpose are not dependent on the circumstances surrounding our origin.
I agree with some of the previous comments. Your post seems to make it out to be that whatever is, is God’s will. I agree with this only if “God’s will” means what God allows to happen. But most people, when they read “X is God’s will,” think this means “this is what God wants.” If that is not true of abortion and the Holocaust, why think it is any less true of marriage?
I am a strong believer in the sovereignty of God, and a strong disbeliever in the doctrine of soulmates. But I do think it’s possible to marry the wrong person, and I don’t see how that detracts from God’s sovereignty. God’s sovereignty does not entail the proposition that He wants everything to happen that does happen. In His sovereignty, sometimes He lets us make bad choices for ourselves—choices He does not want us to make but we insist on. I think it is irresponsible to think that since God allowed something to happen, that it was His will. Can God use our bad choices? Sure, just like he will use the American people’s bad presidential choice. But we need to be careful in how we convey this as being “God’s will.” It’s God’s will in the sense that He let it happen, will work His purposes through it all, and remains in control of the universe.
When it comes to relationships, there are personality-type combinations that make marriage a very difficult affair. I’m not saying that there is necessarily a marriage out there that cannot work, but clearly there are some people that should not be married to one another. My wife and I are a good example of this. We dated for almost five years. The relationship was horrible, but we got married anyway (for all the wrong reasons, and against the advice of people I think God placed in our lives to warn us). Every day is a day of misery now. We are polar opposites, and that doesn’t make for a good relationship. The things I value in a woman, she lacks. The things she values in a man, I lack. When one does not like the type of person they married, it is difficult to be a happy and productive couple.
I have no question that I married the wrong (kind of) woman. Together, we become worse human beings, not better. If I had married a woman who was more like me, and displayed the characteristics I value most, I know my life would be different (and the same for her). But I didn’t. Now we’re married, and we can’t do anything about it. Yes, God permitted us to marry, but no, I don’t think for a second that God wanted us to be together. Can I learn something from my marriage? Can God use it? Sure, but that doesn’t mean God wanted us to be together in the first place.
Heath on 14 Nov 2008 at 1:47 pm #
And why do reformed blogs always employ moderation? Just curious if it is a class taught in Seminary or something… (That is a joke… Trying to lighten the mood after my last comment!)
Vance on 14 Nov 2008 at 1:54 pm #
My short answer to your last, edit, question is that it is God’s will that the process of reproduction occurs and that people ARE born, and God has full and complete foreknowledge, from the beginning of time, of every single instance and event of his Creation, including that birth. And, since God created the way He did KNOWING all of that, then in that sense, everything that happens is God’s will. But, I think most things, like each individual’s birth, death, etc, are not some deterministic will of God in the sense that God did anything to make it happen other than create the way He did in the first place. God does not direct the way the leaf floats down the stream and does not dictate which sperm hits the bullseye or whether any sperm do so, in a given instance. And God does not have a specific person out there who is God’s gift to us as a spouse, in my opinion. God gives us the free will to choose, and then aids us along the way to do the best with our choices.
And, no, this is not Deism, since I think that what I described is just the general rule, the parameters of God’s created universe in all its glorious randomness, *within which* God can and does choose to specifically act in those areas where He chooses.
David on 14 Nov 2008 at 2:05 pm #
God does not direct the way the leaf floats down the stream and does not dictate which sperm hits the bullseye or whether any sperm do so, in a given instance.
But didn’t God create the universe so the leaf would float the exact way it does? Does it suprise him how the leaf floats? Just one very small change in the initial conditions of the universe could make the leaf float slightly to the left (all it takes is something to change the wind direction at that EXACT time – wow God is awesome to even consider when it comes to His knowledge!). God set up the universe with full knowledge of EVERY single outcome that would follow.
I’m not saying a domino game, but for an infinite being we must concede that full knowledge should mean full certainty. If truth is “that which corresponds to reality” and God knows something truly (in advance – foreknowledge), then how do you get around the fact that what He knows MUST correspond with reality?
So if God foreknows I’ll marry someone, it MUST correspond with reality. How could it have been any different?
So regardless of how God determines in some active sense, I think its unavoidable that His knowledge somewhat predetermines what must happen (though as secondary agents we bring about our own fate).
Anyways those were all rhetorical questions, just sharing my thoughts.
Ruben on 14 Nov 2008 at 2:13 pm #
Michael, I’m in a similar situation as you – my wife and I married haphazardly
and I always wonder if I made the right choice, I hardly knew her at that
time and I constantly have personality conflicts. I had an ex girlfriend who is
much closer to my personality and spiritually more compatible, we got along
extremely well and for some stupid reason we parted ways. I now look at this
as one of the biggest mistakes in my life. Not that I regret marrying my wife,
as we grow older together I realize more how great she is and how good
our marriage can be. I look at it more as tragic in that I disobeyed God and
just did what I wanted to do and I had to suffer for it (my wife probably
sufferred more). Yet it is all good, not sure if God willed it this way or if He redeeemed
my bad choice. I just read an article about Rich Mullin’s parents, his dad told him
that he only knew he really loved his mother after 20 years of marriage, that
rings true with me, it grows with time and maybe the relationships I had when I
was younger were really more shallow ..
Heath on 14 Nov 2008 at 2:24 pm #
“If you were talking to someone who was the result of a rape/incest union and they asked you, “Was it God’s will for me to be conceived?” What would you say?”
No.
Elizabeth Esther on 14 Nov 2008 at 2:24 pm #
Linking over from Molly’s. You are the first person I’ve read who disavows the whole “soul-mate” idea. Maybe I’m not reading the right people!
The whole “soul-mate” thing is just plain ridiculous–a postmodern construct stemming from Romanticism when a huge emphasis was placed on personal fulfillment, personal happiness, emotional feelings of love + euphoria. During the Victorian era, it was considered revolutionary for a young person to marry for love. Most marriages were arranged by parents or made for political associations, monetary considerations, upward family mobility or just simple survival. We have such a small view of marriage in modern American culture. We think personal happiness is The Ultimate Virtue. When really, according to God, holiness is.
Vance on 14 Nov 2008 at 2:41 pm #
David, I think we are thinking the same way, just looking at it from opposite ends of the lens. Yes, God entirely foresaw what we would, and CHOSE to create in the exact way that all this would happen. But, I think what He foresaw is what would happen in an entirely random and freely acting universe. God KNEW I would choose to have a burrito for lunch, and if you were extremely technical about it, you could say that since he chose to create in such a way that I would be created, have a given mind, with given tastes, in a place that had certain food, etc, etc, etc, ad infinitum, so that his choosing to create THAT universe was determining my choice, you could get to predestination in a very tortured way.
Sonny Cable on 14 Nov 2008 at 3:07 pm #
How many wills does God have? I read about passive will and moral will and perfect will and permissive will and…
Just wondering.
Love you all
ADawson on 14 Nov 2008 at 3:17 pm #
I usually don’t throw my hat into this ring but I just had to sound off on this one! =)
Can you marry the wrong person where ‘wrong’ is synonymous with ‘against the revealed will of God’ – yes.
I think everyone can agree this this sense of the word ‘wrong’. It’s the one I’m going to use for the rest of my post.
If you do marry the wrong person is it, in “some sense” (in accord with your preferred definition of God’s sovereignty which can be argued about forever), God’s will that you do so – yes.
Will your marrying the “wrong person” “ultimately” be to your benefit as you struggle through a bad situation while trying to be faithful to the revealed will of God as best you can? – yes.
Was it “ultimately” (<– this word provides a lot of wiggle room) God’s Will for a person conceived as a result of rape to be here – yes.
Did the rapist do something horribly wrong and is he deserving of God’s punishment – YES.
Can both the Calvinist and Arminian agree with all of these statements by inserting their own understanding of the words “ultimately” and “in some sense”? – I believe so.
Thanks,
Archie
David on 14 Nov 2008 at 3:22 pm #
Vance,
Yup sounds like we’re pretty close but I don’t understand how God can have meticulous sovereignty over creation yet somehow produce an “entirely random and freely acting universe.” You must be defining random a different way?
Relative to man, there are choices and options and even the appearance of randomness.
Relative to God, time doesn’t exist and knowledge is infinite so therefore man’s choices are not contingent to Him.
Wm Tanksley on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:12 pm #
I don’t think the words “entirely random” belong in there… Unless you’ve got a special definition for them. True randomness can’t be foreseen, by definition.
Otherwise I agree with the words. The problem is that now that you’ve admitted that our actions are both completely governed by God and completely free, you have to come up with definitions for those words that are consistent.
This will come down to admitting that freedom lies in choosing what we most desire, NOT in choosing randomly. And God ultimately is the creator of our desires — even the ones that stem from the curse rather than the creation, since He decreed the curse.
Not at all tortured! God actively created that specific universe, and He could have done otherwise. His creative power is what caused this specific universe, and not some other universe, to exist. His creative power extends to an ability to create some other universe in which you did not eat that burrito, which He decided not to create for reasons of His own.
But this is not how we “get to predestination”. Predestination is right there in the text of your Bible; it’s a premise, not a conclusion. This is merely how we get to free will, which is NOT in your Bible (but IS in our everyday experience).
-Wm
Vance on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:21 pm #
Right, David, that omniscience and omnipotence do make this a matter of humans trying to discuss the “things of God”, much like a 3 year old might try to discuss the plot of Lost. :0)
But what I mean by “random” is that God created a natural universe with natural laws and allows those natural laws to operate in a non-deterministic, non-meticulously managed way. The blowing of a mote of dust is controlled by forces God created, not by God in a meticulous way. God KNOWS meticulously the entire history, past and future, of that mote, but does not force it’s by direct intervention, but simply allows it to run its *natural* course. Again, you can go full circle and say that God’s foreknowledge is a form of determinism, but I would say this created a tortured use of that concept.
In the same way, I think it is a very important distinction between God’s knowledge of what choices we will make, and God’s directing those choices in some meticulous way. And I don’t think the lack of meticulous determinism dilutes God’s sovereignty in the least, unless you insist on defining sovereignty as such meticulous determinism (which would be circular).
Kind of like that question “is God powerful enough to create something He could not move?”: is God not sovereign enough to create something which He allows to operate entirely naturally, without meticulous and direct intervention being necessary, but still possible?
Let’s go back to the beginning, at the “void”. Let’s say God has an infinite (truly infinite) series of universe choices before him, all of which involve him allowing the universe to develop entirely naturally and randomly, including two with exact histories except that in one the dust mote, entirely by natural forces, floats a little to the left. God creates THAT universe. You could then argue, I suppose, that God by His choice meticulously determined that entire history, including that “alternate mote path”, but the fact remains that God chose among entirely natural, randomly acting universe options. In other words, God chose WHICH set of naturally occurring events would be His Creation.
Ultimately, I believe God DID choose to create a universe in which I would choose my wife and Michael would choose his, and not vice versa. But that does not negate the fact that we made those choices entirely freely for all intents and purposes.
TGIF - Links to the weekend… : Think Theology on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:29 pm #
[...] Can you marry the wrong person? Whoa. Have fun! [...]
C Michael Patton on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:37 pm #
Here is what some of you are going to have to wrestle with:
“Acts 17:26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place.”
If it is as simple as saying that God, in no sense, willed the marriage or the conception of the child spoken of above, but simply allowed it and worked through it, how it is that he “determined” the time and place that they were to be born?
Did God not determine the time or place where the child conceived out of rape and incest are to be born? If he did, then isn’t there a real sense in which he willed it.
Remember the important distinction between the two wills of God. 1) Will of decree. 2) Will of desire. I think most of you are speaking about the second, not realizing the necessity of the first. Tension? Yes, but both are true.
Did God will for Pilate to sin and have Christ crucified? Yes and no. No (2). Yes (1).
And you are right that this is not an Arminian/Calvinism distinction necessarily. An Arminian can most certainly agree with what I have said in this blog. And, of course, so can a Calvinist.
Wm Tanksley on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:39 pm #
Great point; I agree.
I just wanted to talk about “God’s will”.
God has a moral law, which He orders all men to obey. Which spouse you choose is NOT part of that law.
God has given commands. Which spouse you choose is not one of those commands.
God has a plan for the universe. Which spouse you choose IS part of that plan.
All three of those could be called the Will of God. But the only one which includes all the details is something that’s not a moral obligation. We are NOT expected to try to determine God’s plan for the universe; we’re expected to obey His commands and law.
Thus, God doesn’t have a “soulmate” for us. Nor does He decree a lack of suffering. He does promise that “all things work together for good” to those called according to His purpose.
Cliff Martin on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:51 pm #
David,
Read Jonathan Edwards and you will find the answer to your question “where is the glory in that.” God is glorified completely in all his attributes, including mercy AND justice.
Yes, I know the Edwards arguments. They just don’t make sense. Do they to you, honestly? How is God wonderful and glorious when he inflicts the pain, and then comes along later to rescue the sufferer? It is like a fireman who surreptitiously sets an apartment on fire and then returns later to heroically rescue the trapped children. It is like the man who is honored for releasing an animal from a cruel trap, but who is undeserving because we learn later the he himself set the trap!
This debate has gone on for hundreds of years, and it will continue. As you well know, a reasonable case can be made from Scriptures for both sides. I abandoned strict Calvinism long ago because it just does not make any sense, but instead makes an ogre of God.
Scott Ferguson on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:51 pm #
“If you were talking to someone who was the result of a rape/incest union and they asked you, “Was it God’s will for me to be conceived?” What would you say?”
As the father of two adopted children these kind of thorny issues lurk in the back of my mind at all times. “What if my birth-mother had kept me?” “Was it wrong for my birth-mother to get pregnant at 14?”
My answer (so far) to questions like this is basically, “The circumstances of your birth do not reflect on you in any way. You are responsible for making something valuable of your life. Grow. Learn. Love. Give.”
Worrying about the meaning of our birth or marriage or parking space in front of the mall is slipping down the slope toward navel-gazing. Even for adults, we are chiefly responsible with what we do next. Go and sin no more. I know most Christians will have a hard time seeing it this way (no slight intended) but life can retain its “meaning” without it fitting God’s purpose. Really. It’s not cut and dried but it can be done.
Oh yeah. My answer to the Micheal’s question is “No… Grow. Learn. Love. Give.”
kwk on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:53 pm #
One of my favorite resources on this sort of question is “Decision Making and the Will of God” by Friesen & Maxson. It distinguishes between the “sovereign” will of God (which no one can thwart), the “moral” will of God (what he wants, but which we can choose to oppose), and the “individual” will of God, which is usually only a superstitious fallacy. The latter term is often what is meant when people wonder who God wants them to marry. Within God’s moral will, there are certainly wiser or less wise options, but the vast majority of decisions ultimately rest with us as we take advantage of our God-given gifts of reasoning, discernment, feeling, and community.
So I agree with the idea expressed by others that one does not have a single “soul mate” out there waiting for him or her; we are not called to love people because they are “right” for us, we are simply called to love them.
Scott Ferguson on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:54 pm #
Interesting point, William. It occurred to me not long ago that just maybe Jesus was so vague about the specifics of our behavior because they are not important. Get the big stuff right and handle the little stuff as best you can.
Scott Ferguson on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:57 pm #
kwk: I knew a couple who mailed James Dobson to find out if it were God’s will that the husband take a job in another state. That’s one debilitating need to “know” God’s Will!
Vance on 14 Nov 2008 at 5:00 pm #
Tanksley, that is a good way to approach it. But the question really is whether “which spouse we choose” is part of God’s “Plan” for the universe, or whether it is simply what God knew would happen and God’s Plan still works with that event. A subtle difference, I suppose. I think I could have chosen a different spouse than I did (which, yes, would have made it a different universe than the one God chose), and God’s Plan still could have been fulfilled.
It becomes very circular and does, indeed, stretch the meaning of many concepts out of all recognizable form, to argue that our free will and God’s naturally occurring universe is suddenly NOT either free or random because God happened to have foreknown it, and chose accordingly. Yes, God chose the “flavor” of universe in which these exact events happened, and thus what actually happens IS God’s will, but the MECHANICS of the my free will and the natural randomness are still there.
And I think this works still with the verse Michael points out. God chose the flavor of universe in which those boundaries would end up being where they were. Thus God “determined” them in His choosing among the infinite varieties in the first place.
And, then there is the complete “X factor” of God still choosing to directly intervene in certain times and places in a VERY meticulous and deterministic way, as we see in the miracles, God’s interventions, etc, including actually coming and interacting with humans in human form.
Another Scriptural support for this view comes from the mere fact that the Bible describes where God *intervenes*, he has mercy, he responds to prayers, he does miracles. If EVERY event on this planet throughout history was meticulously determined by God, it would be entirely redundant for Scripture to indicate that God stepped in to make something happen or prevent something from happening. This describes a sovereign God stepping in to a naturally occurring world and CHANGING what was going to happen, absent that intervention. I am talking specifically here about the mechanics of how the universe works naturally, including our own choices, in the absence of God’s intervention. If God controlled our every desire, there would be no need for Scripture to describe God stepping in to “harden” someone’s heart, for example.
BTW, much of this is said better than I ever could in the book “Why I am not a Calvinist”. And, yes, a strict Arminian may be able to agree with Michael’s post, but I find my self becoming almost Pelagian (or semi) in my old age! :0)
Wm Tanksley on 14 Nov 2008 at 5:05 pm #
No, the words you speak are your own words, your own as a gracious part of God’s plan for the salvation of the world.
This the fallacy of equivocation. We speak of God’s will in two different ways; God’s plan (which He wills), and God’s moral law (which He wills). All of God’s plans will come to pass; but God’s moral law is not fulfilled in His creation.
God’s plan does not depend on you being submitted to God’s will. Neither does His moral law. This is why the Bible does not talk about submitting yourself to God’s will. Attempting to do so is a misleading waste of time, and goes against the council of God; you should be seeking after wisdom, not after hidden knowledge that God reveals only to you.
Not everything that happens is according to God’s moral law. Everything that happens is part of God’s plan.
But once you’re married, God’s moral law is usually very clear. Whether you got into the marriage by following the moral law or not, you’re in it now.
-Wm
David on 14 Nov 2008 at 5:12 pm #
Cliff,
This debate has gone on for hundreds of years, and it will continue. As you well know, a reasonable case can be made from Scriptures for both sides. I abandoned strict Calvinism long ago because it just does not make any sense, but instead makes an ogre of God.
I agree that a strong case can be made either way.
If God didn’t set the trap, then why did He allow it? Still sounds like He’s every bit as liable for anyone who dare point the finger. Either he set the trap or sat around and watched the trap.
If God doesn’t cause things and then comes to the rescue later, why is he sitting around until later? Why even create at all if you know you’ll have to step in later and save the day. The argument doesn’t just stop at Calvin, it goes all the way to the problem of evil.
I became a Calvinist because I didn’t like the idea that God could be disappointed in the work of Christ, or that He tries to accomplish something but cannot. Perhaps you are not a Calvinist and can somehow affirm this as well, but for me God must be more free than man.
Cheers.
Wm Tanksley on 14 Nov 2008 at 5:23 pm #
It’s purely semantic — sorry. We use the word “will” to mean many different thing; we mean the things that a person wants, the things that a person chooses, the things that a person told you they wanted, the things that a person commanded… All those very different things could be called that person’s will.
Theologians speak of the “decretive” and “express” will of God, or the “hidden” and “spoken” will. One is God’s plan; the other is God’s commands. God’s commands are finite; his choices are infinite.
Lisa R on 14 Nov 2008 at 6:55 pm #
Michael, this post so resonates with me personally. I met my now late husband during a 13 year period of extreme rebellion where I basically turned my back on God. My motivations were driven by very unhealthy attitudes about myself and relationships and I found myself in a very difficult marriage to a man that so often was unkind to me. What’s worse, is that 2 years into the marriage, he became chronically ill with a diagnosis of kidney disease and lupus. But the Holy Spirit was at work in my heart, and by the time he first collapsed in 1999, I was ready to commit by life to Christ. The next 5 years were rough in general. But clearly it was my choice to marry him.
He past away in 2004 and the path since then has led me to seminary. Now what’s interesting is that his death in a sense paved the way for me sit in one of the finest theological training institutions and provided additional income so that I can do it full-time. Much of what I experienced has also proven to be motivation for ministry, especially as it relates to how I got myself in the pickle in the first place. My choice based on unhealthy attitudes but similar to so many others I see that are in need of the comfort that 2 Cor 1:4 talk about. How positioned I am to eventually serve the same type of people with the same type of issues.
Were my decisions made during a period of sin and rebellion? You bet. Did God approve of what I was doing? Nope. Has He used it for a greater good? Absolutely.
yipeng on 14 Nov 2008 at 9:46 pm #
Thanks for sharing your story! Interesting…
M.Y. on 14 Nov 2008 at 11:48 pm #
This has been a very good debate for me on a very personal level. I’ve been wrestling with these same thoughts for several weeks. What has exacerbated the problem of a difficult and apathetic marriage is having met someone whom, spiritually and personally, is more compatible. However, I have chosen the high road … for the glory of Christ, you see, not for my own selfish (or otherwise) desires.
This quote resonates with me, and bears repeating:
“Remember that it is one of the greatest plagues this side of hell, to be given up to your own desires. And by your eagerness and discontents you provoke God thus to give you up.” — Richard Baxter (Ps. 81:12-16)
God never lets go when we remain committed and obedient to Him, whether we have regrets in our choices or not. It is the choice of obedience He commands and commands it for HIS glory … which is effectually more important for the Kingdom that any paltry discontents of my unhappy circumstance.
Sonny Cable on 15 Nov 2008 at 12:02 am #
Which will of God did Jesus mean we were to pray for?
The “decretive” or the “express”?
Love you all
C Michael Patton on 15 Nov 2008 at 12:06 am #
Good question. I would ask, which one did Christ pray for in the Garden? “Not my will be done (to live and not go to the Cross), but your will (to die at the hands of sinners and misunderstanding).
Dr Mike on 15 Nov 2008 at 9:28 am #
Re your addendum:
“Yes, it was God’s will for you to be conceived but the manner in which it happened was not his will.”
God’s decretive will causes historical things to happen but the means by which some things occur are not within his moral will. That Christ would die for our sins was a decision made before the foundation of the world; that he would be crucified in the manner he was was not God’s moral will.
For that matter, it was certainly God’s will for you to marry Kristie; it was not (perhaps) his moral will for the two of you to meet in a bar or to behave in certain ways.
There may be some middle knowledge stuff here that might come into play, but it is critical to keep God’s moral and decretive wills distinct.
I run into this all the time with clients, especially those who want a divorce because s/he “married the wrong person” or “wasn’t a believer when s/he got married.” Again, it’s a matter of God’s declarative will – they were to be married – versus his moral will – they shouldn’t have been drunk and just met in Las Vegas the day before. But either way they are married and, lacking biblical grounds for a divorce, are to stay married.
Jn 19.22b
CHRIS S on 15 Nov 2008 at 1:10 pm #
Please excuse my oversight if someone has already mentioned this(I did not read every comment)but in regards to the purpose of marriage i.e. happiness or holiness, has anyone read Gary Thomas’ book SACRED MARRIAGE. This is a wonderful book. It encourages us to stay in our marriage to the glory of God. It talks about the fact that maybe God gave us marriage to make us holy more so than to make us happy. The fact that our marriage may be difficult(and how many are not?)does not mean that God wants us to bail or that we somehow missed out on our “soulmate”. Check it out. Very encouraging book.
Susan on 15 Nov 2008 at 1:57 pm #
Michael (and all), I think you know, at least sort-of, that I can fully relate to you on this one. Try 21 years of an incredibly painful marriage. Immediately after marrying my husband, who I loved very much (but will admit to having some doubts about before…. i.e. there was an uneasiness in my soul about marrying him…. didn’t know why) I found myself thinking about annulment. It took only days into our marriage to realize that I had dated Dr. Jeckle, but married Mr. Hyde. I will cry if I expound. I thought he was a believer. I was deceived. So was he. I remember telling him after coming home from our honeymoon, that I must have married the evil twin of the guy I had dated. I was in shock….. extremely painful. He pushed me away. I was rejected, and continued to feel and experience this rejection in the form of despising anger and insults, for 21 years. I told my husband a few days ago that I can count on one hand the number of sincere compliments he has paid me in 21 years (as apposed to the thousands of demeaning comments).
We have three children, who have had to grow up experiencing this extreme discord between mom and dad. Painful…. to see how it affects them.
I certainly grappled with the question of whether I had made a mistake early on. I knew another girl who was in my situation who definitely decided that she had made a mistake. She found her new “soul-mate”, left her husband, remarried.
“Soul-mate” Don’t get me started! “I found my true soul-mate” = #1 excuse; reason given; to leave spouse. I hate to see Christians buy into this deception. Amy Grant said this about the man she left her husband for, in a TV interview.
I decided that it was a big mistake to buy into the “I made a mistake” philosophy. I would have divorced a long time ago if I had. My entire marriage has been a test of faith, but I told myself repeatedly that I married him believing that I was responding to God in submission, and much prayer….that our marriage was God’s will. God never promises to lead us down an easy road. Hosea can relate.
The good new is that my husband entered God’s family this past summer (!). This past week, for the FIRST time, my husband said to me that he knows that he has treated me very badly over the years of our marriage. He said that he wishes he could make it up to me. I thought he would NEVER come to that place of recognition. I thought that he would NEVER say those words. He has spent 21 years blaming and shaming me. The scales are beginning to fall from his eyes. He is very convicted. I know that this is a day that ONLY God’s Spirit could bring about.
Michael. Personal question (which maybe I should ask via personal email… (?), Do you think that Christy is in Christ? I suspected from a past post of yours that she might not be. Was that a photo of her on the ‘milk’ blog you did?…. holding the baby)?
Lisa, thanks for your story.
Wm Tanksley on 15 Nov 2008 at 2:37 pm #
Neither and both — we’re to pray that God’s will is done on Earth in the same manner as it’s done in Heaven. Which meaning of “will” that has isn’t really important; what’s important is that we’re asking for that kingdom regime to come during which people on Earth obey God’s will with the same obedience that God’s will is adhered to in Heaven.
Yes, God’s decretive will is irresistible; but in heaven, it’s fulfilled with joy. Yes, God’s express will is sometimes disobeyed; but in heaven, it’s obeyed.
Wm Tanksley on 15 Nov 2008 at 2:47 pm #
That would be a result of the error of “seeking God’s will for my life” instead of seeking to obey God’s explicit law and wisdom. It doesn’t follow directly from realizing that God’s plan will come to pass.
That, of course, doesn’t follow at ALL, much less directly. As far as I can see, it’s simply a total contradiction. Can you explain how you could draw that conclusion?
That’s what the Bible says. The Bible does NOT say that finding God’s will is how the Christian gets guidance.
Please cite this “biblical presentation of free will”. I’m missing it. As far as I can see, the Augustinian/Calvinistic system adequately accounts for the Bible’s presentation of the power of God and the freedom of man (not freedom of will); while the Arminian system has to import the idea of libertarian freedom of the will.
-Wm
C Michael Patton on 15 Nov 2008 at 2:51 pm #
Praying for God’s will is an expression of submission (not our will be done) and hope (hope that it will eventually bring forth a complete restoration). I would not say that it is “neither” however. Not sure what you mean by that.
Christ, in the garden, prayed for God’s will as an example to us that his will is sometimes accomplished through the evil of this world (e.g. the “cup” of crucifixion).
C Michael Patton on 15 Nov 2008 at 2:59 pm #
Susan, your story touches me greatly every time I hear it. It is an increabible encouragement to many, including myself. I relate it mostly to my father, to whom my mother was (is?) in a simular situation. It has been a long time without seeing any change. My mother has stayed with him all this time (even though she now cannot make any decisions about it since the stroke).
Kristie and I do well so long as we don’t dwell on the “soul-mate” theory—at least the one that the world implicitly affirms. Kristie struggles in her faith a great deal. I continue to pray that she will find complete rest in Him.
Wm Tanksley on 15 Nov 2008 at 2:59 pm #
Analogical reasoning is always questionable. There are so many things about our relationship that aren’t covered by that… For example, I assert that our sin, suffering, and redemption places us in a better situation than we would have been without the original sin. (Why do I assert this? Because God put us in this situation, and planned our redemption since before the foundation of the world.)
I have lit a fireplace, then watched as my son disobeyed my command and touched it. Am I a bad father? Should I be condemned? Or did I just do the best thing to prevent a much worse disaster later?
Wm Tanksley on 15 Nov 2008 at 4:27 pm #
Here, look at the Lord’s Prayer as it’s usually presented:
Our Father, which art in Heaven
Hallowed be thy name.
Thy Kingdom come,
Thy will be done,
On Earth, as it is in Heaven.
This leads to an error: thinking that Jesus is simply praying that God’s will be done and His kingdom come. But that’s not the case. The last two lines must be read as one thought; Christ isn’t mourning that God’s will isn’t being done; He’s asking that God’s will be done in the right manner.
In other words, God’s will is being done on Earth; but it’s being done in the wrong way, for the wrong reasons, with the wrong attitudes.
Thus, I say that Christ isn’t merely asking God to accomplish His will. He’s asking God to bring His kingdom in which His will shall be accomplished with the joy and obedience He designed.
-Wm
minnow on 16 Nov 2008 at 1:38 am #
CMP– Do you grant Kristie veto power for blogs that use her to make a point? You don’t need to answer that here.
dcarrington on 17 Nov 2008 at 12:07 pm #
I’ve only been married a little over three years and I must agree that this is certainly true in the case of my marriage.
Although there have been many times that I have asked the question about whether or not this was the right person for me, when I truly consider whether or not my wife and I are SUPPOSED to be together, I get a very undeniable conviction in my heart that…YES! We ARE supposed to be together.
If someone is unhappy in their marriage, they must remember to approach their relationship scripturally. The love a husband and wife have for one another should be UNconditional. I find that many times when I withhold being loving to my wife, it’s due to something conditional. I tell myself that I would…IF..she would….
“IF” is a conditional word. We should love one another without “IFs” and without conditions.
My $.02.
Sharon on 18 Nov 2008 at 12:15 am #
Michael,
Very interesting post. And interesting comments.
I think it is possible to marry the “wrong” person – but that once you are married, they are the “right” person. That probably doesn’t make sense, but what I mean is, that you could marry someone who is not the best choice for you either in their beliefs and values or in their personality – but once you are married, you are the “right” person for each other. By that, I mean, marriage is not something to be taken lightly, and one cannot just say, “you are not the nice guy (or girl) that I dated, so I am out of here”. I think we are called to love our marriage partner unconditionally, and that love will grow over time, and through struggles. The problem is not so easy, however, in real life, but that doesn’t change the answer. For example, I thought my husband was a Christian when we got married, he said he was, after all! Looking back, there were probably signs that I ignored. Years later, when it became evident that he was not a Christian, was that a reason to divorce? No. Neither was the emotional abuse. I don’t believe in the “soulmate” idea – it is too based on emotions. Not that emotions and passion are not important, they are, but when the going gets tough, you have to know that there is commitment.
I am not learned enough to get into all the different kinds of God’s will that you all have spoken about, except to say that I think there is a certain amount of tension between saying that I believe that God is Sovereign (which I do) and that We have Free Will (which I do). In my simple way of looking at it, I just think that God allows us to have our own way, or make our mistakes, and even backslide at times, because He has given us Free Will, but if we are believers, -[or overcomers, as I am now studying Revelation, and I hold that all true believers are overcomers, but that is another post] – He takes everything and makes good come of it eventually (my limited paraphrase of Rom 8:28).
Sharon
Seeking and Discovering Life on Other Blogs « Thinking Out Loud on 19 Nov 2008 at 8:54 pm #
[...] the same blog, same page, Michael Patton’s discussion (confession?) and about 60 comments on Can You Marry The Wrong Person?. (Yeah, I gotta bookmark this one; I was reading it several months ago, and got away from [...]
Jabes on 20 Nov 2008 at 4:03 pm #
This is my parents life story right here. And something, as a single, I struggle with. But you have put such a Biblical perspective on it. God is sovereign and you CAN’T marry the wrong person because it’s in His will. Now, will it be “ideal”…well, no because nothing on earth is.
Wm Tanksley on 26 Nov 2008 at 2:15 pm #
In a practical sense, though, if God knows that an event is going to happen, and He could prevent it but doesn’t, then that event takes its place in God’s plan, even if the event is not essential to the plan as a whole. Jesus uses the example of the hairs on our head or the fall of a sparrow; how much greater is your spouse than they?
Admittedly, Jesus wasn’t talking about foreknowledge or eternal decrees there; He was talking about providence. But clearly it’s useful to talk about providence when discussing one’s spouse.
If we can suppose, for the sake of argument, that God’s plan of redemption for the universe and glorification for Himself would be equally satisfied by one spouse as another — then yes, surely God could have made either plan. And if God did NOT know the future, or if His knowledge were purely conditional, then surely it would be reasonable to talk about either one fulfilling His plan.
Again, though, this is academic; in practical terms counterfactuals (such as “if I’d chosen a different wife”) are not really useful.
But the Bible says that God does control randomness: see Prov 16:33. Do you have a verse that says men’s wills are not under God’s control? I have a verse that says the heart of the king is in the Lord’s hands.
The Bible also gives God the credit for “knitting” us in our mother’s wombs… Even though we now know the mechanism precisely, we can also continue to give God full responsibility, because He uses the mechanism as the means for His creative work. This doesn’t dismiss the mechanism; it glorifies it.
I definitely don’t argue that we’re not free; instead, I argue that our freedom, and the universe’s randomness, happens under the sovereignty and knowledge of God.
But God created from nothing — He therefore wasn’t limited in where those boundaries would go by anything aside from His own counsel. In effect, He completely determined those boundaries, even if He didn’t create them as part of the initial creation of the universe.
But surely there are many ways God answers prayers and shows grace. Some of the answers are given by natural means (which are still to the glory of God), and some are given by miraculous means.
But again you’re using counterfactuals. If God’s plan is sovereign, then God planned that intervention as much as He planned the non-intervention most of the rest of the time. The reason for the intervention wasn’t to cause a result that wouldn’t have happened otherwise, because God could have arranged that result.
The Bible doesn’t say what the reason for all miracles are, but I suspect (from looking at the stories) that God’s purpose with explicit miracles is to communicate with us.
But God speaks of hardening Pharaoh’s heart, and yet “the heart of the king is in the Lord’s hands, He turns it however He wishes.” It seems to me that hardening someone’s heart isn’t the only way God can control desires (in fact, a hardened heart might be more a matter of punishment than of control). Note also the talk about the “natural man” versus the fruit of the Spirit; God certainly gives those desires at His own discretion, and they are not available to the natural man!
I hope that’s only semi-Pelagian! Pelagius taught that the human will alone was enough to free one entirely from sin and its curse. Christ’s only purpose was to serve as a good example, not any kind of savior.
Semi-Pelagian is too often an insult rather than an accurate description, so I prefer not to use it; if you’d like to use it to describe yourself I’ll accept your self-description on your own terms and by your own definition of the term.
I’d expect Semi-Pelagian to mean that you believe that redeemed humans can work to earn the favor of God, and can perform works that earn the condemnation of God. An extreme semi-Pelagian would believe that it’s possible for a mature Christian to become sinless.
-Wm
Arukiyomi on 05 Dec 2008 at 3:12 am #
Blepo said that he married a total opposite and therefore that he married the wrong person.
This greatly saddened me.
How much more opposite can Christ and the church be? And yet, simply by grace, he considers us the right people for himself. And we are the right people not because of what we do but because of what he has done for us.
If Christ can marry us, if his love means anything to us, surely it means that there is not a single person (of the opposite gender!) out there who we could not marry, because, as Hosea was asked to demonstrate, any marriage has the potential to reflect the grace of Christ loving the church.
Love is unconditional. By definition, it cannot be restricted to the idea of a ’soulmate.’
If we’re struggling to love our spouses, it isn’t a case of us marrying the wrong person. Rather, it’s a case of us being the wrong person for them.
But, in Christ, all things, including our personhood, are made new!
Larry on 09 Dec 2008 at 12:36 pm #
Interesting stuff regarding God’s will.
Can someone explain to me how God’s will comes into play in htis situation:
Married at 21 to wife 1 , 1 child, divorced at 22
Married at 25 to wife 2, 1 child, still married [though both parties are miserable]
This can’t possibly be God’s will, moral or decretive, can it?
Wm Tanksley on 09 Dec 2008 at 2:50 pm #
Larry, that kind of thing is exactly what we’re talking about. It’s a hard problem, a hard situation, and it seems hard to believe that God would even allow it, much less include it as part of His providence.
Yet the Bible clearly states that God does providentially care for situations like that, which means that He foreknows them (in fact, it actually states that God foreknew the worst such situation, the crucifixion of Christ).
The only explanation that fits with the idea that God is good is to suppose that He must have a good reason — a better purpose, something that would not be achieved without that horror. And if He does have a purpose for that, then having that happen must be in His will.
John C. on 09 Dec 2008 at 4:41 pm #
An “if . . . then” statement is called a conditional statement. An “if . . . then” statement in which you are speaking of what would happen if something were true is called a counterfactual conditional statement.
Conterfactual conditionals tell us something about the world as it actually is, but by referring to unactualized possibilities. They are useful and are used in analysing a number of different concepts, including causation, free will, dispositions, and abilities. Wm. T. is not necessarily correct to argue aagainst counterfactuals by, among other reasons, stating that they are merely of academic interest and “in practical terms counterfactuals (such as “if I’d chosen a different wife”) are not really useful.”
Whether counterfactuals are useful and appropriate to use depends on one’s view of other aspects of the issues engaged. If one is a hard determinist, believing that the laws or regularitys of the natural and material world are such that only one future can result from or after any given past, then of course counterfactuals are irrelevant. That is, of course, not the only position one can take toward counterfactual conditions.
Counterfactuals are useful because there is, or at least profoundly seems to be, an asymmetry between the past and the future based on the direction of the flow of time and the normal direction of causation. Consequently, the future is open in a way that the past is not.
The asymmetry between past and future is illustrated by the fact that we don’t deliberate about the past in the same way that we deliberate about the future. We deliberate about whether a past action was really the best action that we could have done, but we don’t believe that we can actually gchange what has occured in the past if we decide that we would rather have done something different. We are stuckl with the results of our choice. In short, we have no choice about what we have done in the past (i.e., we cannot change the past) but we do have a choice about the future (it will be different depending on what we choose).
We can (are able to) both deliberate about what future acts would be best, and also deliberate about which acts we will in fact do, or should perform. That is, the future looks open to us in a way that the past is not. Thus, it looks like the future is open to Allison, or up to her, in a way that the past is not. What we by exercising our free will (our ability to both do or not do something, or to do one of a number of mutually exclusive actions) do, is to select from a range of different options for the future, each of which is possible given the past and the laws of nature. For this reason, this view of free will is often called the “Garden of Forking Paths Model.”
Wm. T. muddles things by stating, as if true, such contradictory propositions as “randomness” occurs “under God’s sovereignity”. Randomness, as usually defined, is a LACK or ABSENCE of order, purpose, cause, or predictability. Randomness in that sense cannot be experienced by God, nor be a true attribute of our universe. It can only be something that appears to us in that fashion (i.e., with a lack of predicability or purpose, etc.) because of some inadequacy in us, such as limited knowledge or mental faculties.
It seems that Wm. T. subscribes to some variety of determinism that he believes is compatible with the expression “free will”–as he defines free will–for he makes statements such as ” If God’s plan is sovereign, then God planned that intervention as much as He planned the non-intervention most of the rest of the time. The reason for the intervention wasn’t to cause a result that wouldn’t have happened otherwise, because God could have arranged that result.”
Those statements don’t describe the kind of moral responsibility or ability act that I believe the Bible describes.
Under a deterministic view, even one that purports to be compatible with some kind of free will, Alice’s marriage to Bob, who regularly beats her physicaly and who’s beatings have resulted in miscarriages and permanent physical injuries was determined from the moment of creation (since time did not exist before creation, it would be nonsense to say “before the moment of creation” unless “befgore” is used in some sort of timeless manner). By Wm. T’s explanation, if one were to restart the universe aseveral times with the same initial conditions and the same actions by God, then it would turn out the same every time. Alice would always marry Bob. Hence, it would always be God’s will (in some sense) that she marry Bob.
Indeed, Wm. T. states above that “Not everything that happens is according to God’s moral law. Everything that happens is part of God’s plan.” Inherent in the notion of “plan” is “intention”, and so it follows that God planned for and intended that Alice marry Bob and be physically abused. Of course, one could try to extricate God morally by having the actual events (the marrying, and the beating) caused or undertaken by secondary or tertiary events or actors. That is, God did not directly by some mind control force Alice to marry Bob, nor did he motivate Bob to beat her. However, to get God off thge hook this way requires one to use a very restricted sense of morality, one that we wouldn’t allow ourselves to get away with.
CMP raises the story: ““Acts 17:26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of
their dwelling place.” If it is as simple as saying that God, in no sense, willed the marriage or the conception of the child spoken of above, but simply allowed it and worked through it, how it is that he “determined” the time and place that they were to be born?”
That verse does indicate that God is sovereign over nations, but it does not indicate the detail to which God exercises his sovereignity nor the manner in which he does it. If one reads further in the chapter (and earlier) one readily see that Paul does not mean that God meticulously controls every action of people, such that there is only one way that world could have turned out in the past up to tehat point (or in the future, either). If it were so planned, why would God “now commandeth ALL men everywhere to repent” (vs. 30)? Yet many people do refuse to repent, as did some of the Stoics and Epicureans to whome Paul preached; they mocked him (v. 32) and only “certain men” believed (v. 34).
CMP asks, “If you are talking to a person who is the result of a rape/incest happening, and they ask you “Was it God’s will that I was conceived” what do you say?” I would say that the question itself is misconceived for it uses a vague term “God’s will” that can have any one of several meanings. Depending on the meaning intended, the answer would be different. I wold answer by saying that God has no desire that anyone should suffer evil. The rape of her mother was an evil that God had no desire should come to pass. However, God has allowed Satan to be the prince of this world for a short time, and God has allowed us humans to live in sin and in our flesh until His kingdom is fully come. Consequently, these evil actors (Satan and his demons and sinful people) a re allowed to act in rebellion to God and to do evil. God has not come yet, and allows evil to conitnue, because he delays his coming because he does not want any to perish (2 Peter 3). So, the circumstances of her conception are sinful, but that does not define her. All life is a gift of God, every conception is a gift, and God died for her. It is not necessary for God to specifically plan that the rape occur and her conception result in order for her life to have value and significance and for her to experience the love of God.
Apart from whatever else is said, Arukiyomi has expressed a very important insight, one that is consistent with Chris S.’s point (post no. 48).
John G. on 04 Sep 2009 at 4:11 pm #
I think it depends what we want. If we choose to marry an unsaved prostitute and decide that we don’t want God’s will, then he may very well give us what we want but we will also experience the consequences of that choice. On the other hand, if our desire is to marry someone who reverences God, then God will give us that type of girl. It that to say if we choose the other, God had someone else for us? No. Why would God have a wonderful Christian experience pain of not getting married or marrying the “wrong one” because of our desire not to want His will? No, if you choose wrong God will give you what you choose just as if you choose the kind of person He desires for you, He will surely give them to you unless He wants you to be single.
Cadis on 04 Sep 2009 at 7:44 pm #
Abagail did……..
or did she? hmmm