Some would describe love as a powerful emotion, while others might claim that, “love is a choice” and to some degree, there is truth in both of those statements. There are indeed strong emotions that accompany love, though I would submit that the feelings themselves do not constitute its substance. Likewise, there is a conscious decision involved in entrusting our hearts to someone else’s care. Though both of those elements are integral to the overall process, neither fully encapsulate the nature of love itself. Ultimately, love is a relational dynamic that exists between two entities.
In western culture, we tend to gravitate toward the emotional end of the scale. Often times, our concept of love is little more than a volume knob for our affection. If it stirs up positive feelings, we say that we “like” it, but if it stirs up intensely positive emotions, we claim to “love” it. But again, love amounts to more than just the magnitude of our feelings.
Often times the intense desire to be with someone is rooted in something other than love for them. One can certainly be strongly attracted to another, but that would more rightly be characterized as lust. Loneliness, or the fear of being alone can produce extreme emotions, just as hurt and insecurity can, but they rarely produce healthy, loving relationships. More often, they result in unbalanced, emotionally manipulative, or co-dependent dynamics that are ultimately destructive.
One of the byproducts of the sexual revolution is a quid-pro-quo aesthetic, where relationships are largely viewed as vehicles to get what we want out of life. Instead of finding the value in a partner, we look for ways to leverage each other, both emotionally and practically.
We can love what someone brings to our life (e.g. stability, support, security, the feeling of being wanted…), without ever really loving them. In such cases, that person becomes a tool for our pursuit of happiness. Their job is to fulfill whatever role we assign them in our lives, but their value is in the results they produce. If that diminishes, they can be replaced by someone who produces better results. It’s like trading your phone in for a newer model.
Aside from the strong emotions involved, there are the mechanics of the relationship itself. People can have genuine affection for one another, but divergent perspectives, value systems, and/or goals, which can create an almost constant discord. It is said that opposites attract, but that doesn’t mean that they live happily ever after. It is a rare relationship that can sustain that type of relentless conflict, and just because we possess strong feelings for someone doesn’t mean that the relationship can overcome it.
I believe that this is why the scripture admonishes that spouses should be equally yoked. In biblical times, a yoke was a rigid piece of wood. If the oxen weren’t moving at the same pace, the faster one was carrying the entire load. If they were moving in even slightly different directions, they were literally pulling against each other. I would suggest that this passage is saying something more than simply Christians should only marry other Christians.
The Bible gives a very clear definition of what love is, “Love is patient. Love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.(1Cor.13:4-7)”
If you read those words slowly, and thoughtfully, they can be pretty intimidating. Is this how the people we claim to love would describe our demeanor toward them? For that matter, would any of us claim that these are characteristic of the “love” we profess to have?
To that end, we like to rationalize that the love described in the scripture is really just God’s (agape) love, and that we simply possess some lower form of (Eros or Philo) love. We further like to dissect it into categories like brotherly/sisterly love, and romantic love; and then blur the lines even further with statements like, “I love them, but I’m not in love with them…”.
Ultimately, God takes these caveats away with the command to, “love one another as I have loved you (John 13:34)”. The God who is love, specifically tells us what love is to Him, and then lets us know that He expects us to love one another that way. He makes no provision for some lower form of affection or fascination, which is too often characterized by traits like selfishness, vanity, envy, manipulation, scorekeeping and destructiveness; all of which are so directly counter to His definition that they could not be considered a watered-down version of the same.
Considering that the Lord Himself boiled down the whole of the law to the quality of our love (for Him and for each other), and that He said that the way people will be able to distinguish His children was by the love they have for one another, our concept of what “love” is makes a huge difference. Perhaps, our understanding of what love is can be enhanced by considering what it is not:
It’s Not Really Love
It’s not really love
just because I was stirred at the first sight of you
*
and
It’s not really love
simply because I like the way you make me feel
*
and
It’s not really love
just because you fill a void in my existence
*
and
It’s not really love
simply because I appreciate all that you’ve done for me
*
and
It’s not really love
just because I feel drawn to you
*
and
It’s not really love
simply because I like to think of you as mine
*
and
It’s not really love
just because I want what you bring to my life
*
no
It’s not really love
until it stops being about what I think I want or need
*
and
It starts being about who You are
Bjcorbin's Blog 
The Institution of Marriage
Posted in Commentaries, Heart of "The Father", tagged abuse, adultery, covenant, divided, divorce, equally yoked, God hates, institution, institution of marriage, marriage, oath, promise, relationships, vow on September 16, 2024| Leave a Comment »
I was raised to believe that marriage is a “sacred institution”, and like so many of the ideas I grew up with, I never really questioned it. Even now, the concept still sounds reasonable to my ears. But in our years of trying to represent God’s heart to hurting people, the Lord has opened the eyes of my understanding in terms of what truly matters to Him.
I will warn you that I’ve never heard anything like this preached anywhere, and as with everything I share, I encourage you to test it by the Holy Spirit (which is significantly different than pondering how it might make you feel).
I should also preface this article with the fact that I have been divorced. For some that will taint my perspective, and for others it might lend some weight to it. I mention this because I have personally wrestled to understand God’s perspective on such things. I was raised to believe that marriage was forever, and that was always my plan. But when my first marriage was derailed (after 12 years) by infidelity, I found myself in a category that I never wanted to be in.
Despite this painful betrayal, I worked for over a year to keep the door open for reconciliation, even when my Christian friends pointed out that I had biblical grounds to end the marriage (Matt.19:9). When it was obvious that the relationship could not be mended, I still found myself wrestling with the notion of the “sin of divorce”, and the Lord said, “the sin occurred when you chose to build a life without me, and the divorce is simply the natural consequence of that.”
God’s design for marriage is that two people, who are equally yoked (i.e. on the same path, headed to the same destination, near the same point in the journey…) would join their lives together, and that the new entity formed by their union would be a conduit for new life to flow to and from them. His intent is to create something greater than the sum of its parts, and that on this foundation He can build families, communities, and ultimately nations.
The impact of a marriage done God’s way can be felt throughout the generations. Unfortunately, the damage and destruction done by unions that don’t live up to this standard also resonate well beyond the failed relationship itself. This potential was at the root of God’s prohibition of intermarrying with pagan tribes.
At the center of a marriage is the covenantal promise, and there is no question that such vows are sacred to God. Entering into any sort of covenantal relationship is a very serious matter, and a step that should not be undertaken without the Lord’s guidance. Unfortunately, we live in a culture where almost nothing is sacred, and relationships are frequently treated as a disposable commodity.
Given the widely held notion that the truth is relative, one only needs to conjure a “new truth” in order to void the terms of their oath. With the simple matter of letting our “yes be yes”, and our “no be no” (Matt.5:37), already in question, every relationship can hang precariously from a weak-willed vow.
I would suggest that this common flaw in our collective character is viewed as sinful by a holy God, even before we actually break our promises. It is evidence of our failure to fully surrender to Him and to His purposes.
The conundrum before us is how to respond in the face of such failures, and it was in the process of attempting to provide wise counsel to those with marital difficulties that the Lord began to change my view of such things. Given the (previously mentioned) frivolous approach towards relationships, it is easy to understand the temptation for ministers of the Lord to double down on the serious nature of divorce. Indeed, God does hate divorce (Mal.2:16), but have we ever stopped to ponder why that is?
In our years of ministering we’ve frequently encountered folks (most often women) who find themselves in the midst of a destructive relationship. In many of those instances there was sustained emotional, mental and physical abuse occurring, with children often trapped within the crossfire. Sadly, the consistent counsel that these individuals received from Christian sources (i.e. counselors, pastors, church leaders…) was that God hates divorce, and He expects you to endure whatever it takes to remain in the marriage. Implicitly, this indicates that the “Institution of Marriage” is so sacred to God that He expects individuals to suffer whatever abuse is necessary to preserve it.
As I prayed for and about these situations the Lord confronted the notion of the “Institution of Marriage”. He said that institutions are things that man creates, and that they are not sacred to Him. He showed me that the sacred element of a marriage is the people involved within it, and He posed the question, “Was man created for marriage, or was marriage created for man?” This of course mirrors Jesus’ challenge to the Pharisee’s about healing on the Sabbath (Mark 2:27), which was His way of telling them that they were not reflecting God’s heart in their attempt to be guardians of His law. From this, I inferred that we were similarly missing the mark.
At the point that a marriage has become a conduit for manipulation, abuse, and destruction, it has completely perverted God’s design and desire. And when a spouse no longer honors their vow to love, serve and protect, the covenant promise is already shattered (regardless of their legal marital status).
God’s hatred for divorce isn’t rooted in the damage it does to the “Institution of Marriage”, it is in the destruction it does to the people involved. And if that is so, then God also “hates” the marriage that falls into this condition. The concept that He is somehow served by continuing on with such a facade is highly questionable. In fact, Jesus said that a house divided against itself cannot stand (Mark 3:25).
To be sure, if two people were able to completely submit to the Lord’s authority, and to obey the things He told them, there is no relationship that He couldn’t heal. Of course, two people who were willing and able to do such a thing wouldn’t likely find themselves in such a dilemma. But if one or both choose to exercise their own will, God will not force them to stay together.
Certainly, their divorce would be sinful, but so would continuing on in this divided state. The decision to do so only perpetuates the damage, and allows it to spread like cancer throughout those involved (i.e. the children, the in-laws, friends…) and to pass down through the generations. Indeed, children should be the natural byproduct of a healthy loving relationship, which sets the stage for them to prosper. But children born into dysfunctional relationships become victims of the chaotic environment in which they are raised.
I once knew a man, who left his wife and children to live with his mistress. He continued to pay the bills, but abandoned his family physically and emotionally. Though this went on for a number of years, the man never divorced his wife. Eventually, she became ill, and their children cared for her until her death. After her passing, the man married the mistress.
While this man may have been able to console himself that he wasn’t guilty of the sin of divorce, I can assure you that God was not fooled nor impressed. If looking at a woman lustfully amounts to committing adultery in your heart (Matt.5:28), how would this evasive maneuver be accounted by God. The damage done by this man can still be clearly seen in both his children, and grandchildren, as they all consistently struggle to sustain healthy relationships.
Such is the byproduct of counseling folks that divorce is never an option. By sending a spouse back into a destructive, or even abusive situation, the marriage becomes an instrument of annihilation. If maintaining the union means that neither the spouses nor their children ever become who they were created to be, God is neither served nor glorified. Though we know that what God has joined together no man should separate (Matt.19:6), what happens when we join ourselves together (as I did in my first marriage) without His input or guidance?
Part of God’s redemptive nature is that He will allow diseased things to be destroyed so that they can be replaced with new life. He cuts off unhealthy branches (John 15:2), he curses unfruitful trees (Matt.21:19), and when we build our house on the wrong foundation, He allows storms to wash it away (Matt.7:26-27). He goes so far as to say that if our eye causes us to sin, we would be better off to gouge it out than to continue on in our sinful state (Matt.5:29).
This is significant, because it was God Himself that gave us two eyes, both as a gift and a provision, yet He’s saying that if this gift becomes perverted, it is better that we lose it. I would suggest that this could apply to the gift of marriage as well.
I am not in any way trying to diminish the seriousness of divorce, or the sacred nature of marriage vows. But I am challenging the presumption that it is always God’s will to preserve a marriage, regardless of what it might cost or where it might lead.
Most certainly God hates divorce, but He also hates haughty eyes, a lying tongue, false witnesses, and people who stir up conflict within a community (Prov.6:16-19). To single out divorce, and make it the unforgivable sin is a distortion of His heart.
As with all things, we need to learn how to be led by the Spirit of God in these matters, and to not trot out the same old rote religious responses we grew up with. Only He knows the truth of men’s hearts (Jer.17:9), only He has the words of life (John 6:68), and only He knows the end from the beginning (Isa.46:10). We need to be saying what He is saying, and not be saying what He is not saying (John 5:19-20).
Rate this:
Read Full Post »