I gave my sister a book about marriage for Christmas. I would have hesitated giving this book to her three months ago. However, my views on marriage have changed substantially since entering college last August.Many people assume that their main calling in life is a vocation, and their spouse should be compatible with that calling. Therefore, people look for a spouse on the premise that if an eligible person cannot or is even uncertain about his or her ability to exist with a partner who does "X" for a living, that eligible person is not "the one."
However, I believe this logic is twisted. What is more important to God? I think if we look honestly at the Bible, it is very clear that God places the institution of marriage over the institution of work. Family comes first, right? If you think you have found "the one," there is no need to try to add likely employment position as a qualifier to his or her eligibility.
Am I making sense? What I am simply trying to say is this: find a mate and then worry about your job. Well, I suppose you do not have to agree with me, but that is what my philosophy will be from here on out.
And I'm not trying to downplay other qualifiers - by all means, qualify for godliness! Qualify for integrity! Qualify for personality compatability! But don't rule out or rule in on the basis of work!
Comments
"Many people assume that their main calling in life is a vocation, and their spouse should be compatible with that calling...
However, I believe this logic is twisted."
Me say...
Interesting note: "Vocation" comes from the Latin "vocare", meaning "to call." In other words, taken literally, everyone's main calling in life actually IS his/her "vocation", because the word means just that!
One of the problems in our societal thinking is that most of us view "vocation" and "job" as being the same thing. Family IS important, but I believe the most biblical view is to place God's "calling" for our lives (i.e. our "vocation" in life) above BOTH marriage AND job. Jesus says in Matt. 19 that there are those who don't marry for the sake of God's Kingdom. Singleness, in that case, is their "vocation", and I think it (or any other calling) is a legitimate thing to consider before one marries.
As far as D's strategy to "find a mate, then worry about your job": Not meaning to put it too harshly, but I think this might stall some unfortunate mate-seekers in life for quite some time! God, by design, gives us all a season of singleness, however short or long. It seems most wise to me to pursue God's purpose in life (whether one calls this a "job" or a "vocation"), and let Him "find a mate" who will match it. Sorry to have to dissent, D, but I do appreciate the blog and the thinker behind it!
Hey D! I love you're blog. The pictures are awesome and the writing is really good. You're a great blogger! I have a question though... How do you do that currently reading feature?
I appreciate the feedback, whoever you are! Allow me to defend myself.
Oops on my choice of words. Vocation may have too strong of connotations to have been used properly in this blog. You are right in this. I simply intended that which we do to earn income - the job.
However, there is a flaw in your argument. Just as some have a vocation to be single (which I completely agree with), most do not. In fact, most people's "calling" is to be married. It is serious business! In other words, I am not so sure that you can so easily seperate the concepts of marriage and vocation. For most people (like me), they are one and the same.
Another problem with your argument is that nowhere do you show an example of what a vocation is, besides singleness. According to you, it is not a job of any kind, and it is not marriage (which is odd, since you indeed define singleness as a vocation). What is it?
If it is to be a good Christian, I totally agree! However, that is not necessarily seperate from finding a Christian wife. If it is to spread the gospel, I agree! However, that is not something that must be done when single. If it is to make an impact on your family for Christ, I agree! But finding a godly spouse may be just the thing the family needs. You see, Dissenter, your argument holds no water, because you give no tangible examples of *how* vocation could come before, and is mutually exclusive of, marriage.
Finally, in your last paragraph, you seem to swing full circle and equate "job" with "vocation", the very thing you were arguing against at the beginning of your comment! Here you define it as "God's purpose in life." Apply all of my earlier arguments to this statement, for they all (for the most part) apply.
As to your comment, "God... gives us all a season of singleness": this kind of thinking is true, but is misused by many to stall marriage for later and later years. Finding a spouse is not something that should be taken lightly, nor is it something to be procrastinated at. As soon as one reaches a "marriage-able" age, I think that person needs to get on the ball and start looking for a wife!
So, to summarize, you do not clearly define "vocation" yourself, something that your argument hinges on for the first chunk of your argument. Secondly, you do show how "calling" and "marriage" are mutually exclusive. Thirdly, your "season of singleness" argument is indefensible.
So where, Dissenter, do you draw your conclusion from? I think you say it yourself in the last paragraph. "It seems most wise to me..." It appears that you have merely a personal qualm with my post. I am simply saying that when I look at the Bible, it appears that God puts more focus on finding a spouse than on finding a career. Family always comes before job. And one's "calling" or "vocation" usually includes this finding of a spouse and finding a career.
I would like to conclude by saying that I am by no means going to forgo a job until I find a spouse. But I am also not going to forgo a spouse until I find a job either.
To Yokanchi:
I just add an element to my blog under a picture. For the title I put "Currently Reading" and for the subtitle I put the book's title.
“There is a flaw in your argument. Just as some have a vocation to be single (which I completely agree with), most do not. In fact, most people's "calling" is to be married. It is serious business! In other words, I am not so sure that you can so easily seperate the concepts of marriage and vocation. For most people (like me), they are one and the same.”
I says:
Granted. I was not thorough in defining my usage of “vocation”, as I believed this to be a somewhat untechnical discussion. I agree -- that marriage is to be included under the umbrella of “vocations”. This is because, a discussion of “calling” must necessarily include anything God might have called us to as human beings (e.g. marriage in 1 Cor. 7:17, eternal life in 1 Peter 2:9, a particular ministry as in Paul’s apostleship in Gal. 1:19, or even social status, as in 1 Cor. 7:21). Hopefully this satisfies your request for examples (to name but a few). So, in effect, my understanding of the biblical doctrine of vocation is that it can include ANY station in life to which God has called a person, and that God’s calling must take precedence over particular pursuits which arise simply out of my own desires. (Note: nowhere did I state that “[a vocation] is not a job of any kind.”) Hopefully this clarifies somewhat.
Clearly, then, a vocation is not mutually exclusive of marriage (and even sometimes INcludes it). However, we must prioritize what we believe to be God’s various calls on our lives according to how God does so in His word. *FOR EXAMPLE*(cough), marriage and family, as you suggest, are valid and even admirable vocations, Biblically speaking; and the majority of people are called to them. However, Paul exhorts the Corinthians in 1 Cor. 7:26 that they are better off remaining single “in view of the present distress.” Clearly there are times in which the desire to marry must bow to other pressing concerns. It appears that Paul here is speaking in general principles of calling, so I don’t know how a person can avoid the conclusion that marriage is but one among many possible callings that a person must discern between and time appropriately.
Deric says: “So where, Dissenter, do you draw your conclusion from? I think you say it yourself in the last paragraph. "It seems most wise to me..." It appears that you have merely a personal qualm with my post. I am simply saying that when I look at the Bible, it appears that God puts more focus on finding a spouse than on finding a career. Family always comes before job. And one's "calling" or "vocation" usually includes this finding of a spouse and finding a career.”
I says:
One last note: I’m immensely pleased that D corrected me on a point I’ve hammered into him for the past 3 years: Authority! I have no basis for making universal pronouncements. My sole authority is the word of God. Good eye!
Your ever-loving Youth Pastor
1) "Vocation," meaning "calling," includes the whole of what a person is called to be AND to do (marriage/singleness, salvation, employment, holiness, etc.)
2) While most people are called to marriage, there are *special* circumstances (such as in I Cor 7) when we must reconsider our calling.
That being said, I have a few questions. First, what is the distress that Paul is talking about in I Cor 7? He is talking to the entire church in Corinth, correct? What is it that would move Paul to persuade an entire church congregation to remain single?
When that question is answered, we must ask ourselves: at what point are we ourselves "in distress" enough that we must reconsider our calling? My only worry here is that some people will say, "I don't have a degree yet, so I'm in distress." Or, "I don't have a steady job yet, so I cannot look for a wife." Or again, "I don't have a house of my own, so a spouse is out of the question." Perhaps, "I don't quite make enough money to comfortably support both myself and a spouse."
These same things can be said about a married couple who are wondering when to have children. At what point does our cultural mandate to "Be frutiful and multiply" actually kick in?
The Dissenter is right in that there is a time when it is unwise to marry. My question is, how far can we push that? I'm afraid that many people try to push it too far.
1. "What is the distress that Paul is talking about in I Cor 7?"
From what I can tell in scripture, it is a well-established condition that every church which began during Paul’s ministry sprouted under a culture of general persecution (cf. Thessalonica, Philippi, Berea, Ephesus, etc); = “distress”.
2. "He is talking to the entire church in Corinth, correct? What is it that would move Paul to persuade an entire church congregation to remain single?"
This universal first-century culture of persecution is why Paul uses the phrase “it is good for a man [i.e. generic for “person”] not to marry”, as a general principle, as opposed to saying something like, “it is good for you Corinthians not to marry.” (We gotta recognize, though, that he went on to say, “If you marry, you have not sinned.” So neither marriage nor singleness is wrong, biblically speaking.)
3. "At what point are we ourselves "in distress" enough that we must reconsider our calling?"
This is a good question, and I certainly concur with your conviction that many Americans today are so self-comfort driven and non-committal that it keeps us from earnestly pursuing marriage –-and instead settling for a dime-store substitute like long-term dating or co-habitation. However, I think we must also be careful not to assume that all of Adam and Eve’s descendents naturally begin with a calling from God to marry. Yes, Moses and Jesus both state that “for this reason 'a man' [cf. Paul’s general terminology above] shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh” (Matt. 19:5). But I think Paul’s statement above demonstrates that Jesus (and Moses) were, once again, speaking generally, not necessarily universally. So we have to ask the question, “What circumstances might justify my remaining single?” Some possible scenarios I see in Scripture:
1. “I am not mature enough to handle a committed relationship, and fear that my immaturity may cause me to divorce.” (Matt. 19:9-11). When the disciples hear the strong standard Jesus lays down against divorce, they freak out and say, “Fine, then! We might as well remain single!” Jesus, in effect, says, “Yep – if that’s what God has revealed to you about yourself, the single life is for you.”
2. “I suffer from some physical infirmity that would interfere with my marital responsibilities to my wife or husband.” (Matt. 19:12, 1 Cor. 7:3-5)
3. “I am living under such severe and life-threatening circumstances that it would be irresponsible to the point of sin to take on marital commitments (1 Cor. 7:26, 28).
4. “I know that God has called me to a life of singleness specifically for the purpose of serving Him and His Kingdom.” (Matt. 19:12, 1 Cor. 7:32-35)
5. “When I was called to Christ, I was single, and He doesn’t seem to have changed the plan yet.” (1 Cor. 7:17, 20, 24, 27). This principle suggests that we are to remain in whatever state we were in when we became Christians, and let God change the course of our lives for us. That way, whatever change comes along, it will run along with God’s current of spiritual growth in our lives, and not against that current.
D, shut me down here: I'm using up too much space on your blog! I'm done, so let's hear your final thoughts.
First, in regards to your last post, you claim as your first reason that one might not marry is due to one's immaturity. In addition, you use Matthew 19 to justify this claim. Allow me to use some sarcasm here.
Mike is 23 and still spends most of his time playing video games at his parents' house, where he still lives. He doesn't need a job (because he still lives with his parents), so he has lots of free time to play around. Mike never got a college education, because he is too lazy and cannot see the value therein. When his parents approached Mike about possibly thinking about marriage, he decided to do some looking online for some tips. Then he found Deric's Play Place. He took some advice from a guy named dos.enter and took careful examination of his life. "Well, I'm obviously not mature enough to take on a wife. I suppose I'll just continue playing StarCraft until my eyes rot out of my head. Heaven forbid I try a hand at marriage and end up divorcing my wife!"
Maturity grows with three things (generally speaking): age, experience, and knowledge. Of course, experience and knowledge come with age. In the case of Mike, I do not believe it is more glorifying to God to remain single. In fact, in such a case as this (immaturity), I think marriage is one of the best things he could think about doing at this point in his life. It would force him to go out and get a job, start taking responsibility for a family, possibly make him think about getting an education, etc. It would certainly 'sober' him up and force him to take a look at where his life is headed. Is marriage not one of the many things God uses to mature us? I would contend the answer to that is "yes."
As far as Matthew 19 is concerned, I think your reasoning horribly mars the meaning of the passage. In the passage, Jesus is highlighting the sacredness of the institution of marriage, and that Moses only allowed divorce because of their "hardness of heart." He then says that anyone who divorces and remarries except for cases of sexual immorality, commits adultery. Matt. 19:10: The disciples said to him, "If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry." What does Jesus say? "Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it." Now does this sound to you like Jesus is saying, "If you aren't mature enough, you shouldn't get married"? I think not! Again, I would argue that God gives the gift of singleness to a few people, but it is the exception and not the rule.
The second problem I have with your last post is your fifth and final point. Here it is for everybody to see:
5. “When I was called to Christ, I was single, and He doesn’t seem to have changed the plan yet.” (1 Cor. 7:17, 20, 24, 27). This principle suggests that we are to remain in whatever state we were in when we became Christians, and let God change the course of our lives for us. That way, whatever change comes along, it will run along with God’s current of spiritual growth in our lives, and not against that current.
My first problem is again the passage you use to back up your statement. We've already looked at this passage, and by your own admission, the apostle here is advising these Christians who are under persecution not to be married (presumably due to the danger). I am willing to guess that nobody reading this blog is under persecution, and in fact nobody in America has to worry about being married as a Christian couple, because America doesn't persecute it's citizens.
Next, I find it extremely alarming that you think that the proper way to grow as a Christian is to "let God change the course of our lives for us. That way, whatever change comes along, it will run along with God’s current of spiritual growth in our lives." Whoa! I 100% disagree with this assertion. Spiritual growth is not a passive activity. We cannot just sit back and expect God to feed us and water us, like we're a bunch of dogs running around in his backyard. Spiritual growth is active. Pursuing holiness involves pursuit! We need to be serving others, learning theology, praying hard, and perhaps searching out a suitable marriage partner.
Now, let me finish by laying out what we have agreed on throughout this conversation:
1) Marriage, while for most, is not for everybody. God has indeed called some to remain single. When this happens it A) is a gift, and B) is for the purpose of enabling the individual for more intensive ministry.
2) Some men, due to medical reasons, cannot support a family and therefore cannot fulfill the obligation of a husband. Of course, there may be ways to solve this, but in many cases, marriage is out of the question.
3) Some people are experiencing persucution in countries where, if they were to get married, their spouse and/or future children would immediately be in danger. In such case, marriage may be avoided, but is not wrong.
In summary, I believe people like to add all sorts of excuses why they should remain single, when in reality they are simply too lazy or unmotivated to take this important step. I have, in this discussion, attempted to show that many of these excuses are bunk. If you are at a marrying age, aren't being persecuted, and haven't been called by God to live a single life, and don't have a serious infirmity, you should be *looking* for a spouse.