Isaac and Rebekha, Boaz and Ruth, Hosea and the Immoral Woman.
Captain Sensible writes: The advocates of the "wait on the Lord" and "trust in God" for your husband, school of thought (if one can call it "thought"!) sometimes use the passage in Genesis 24 as an example of a woman -- Rebekha -- going about her daily business and being found by a husband, or more accurately, the servant of the father of the husband!
But that's the part that is missing in all the contemporary "contentment lecture" equations.
Sure, Rebekah was not actively looking for a spouse herself. But someone on her husband's side certainly was!
This is the side that we have lost today. Contemporary Rebekahs may well be acting just as she did -- but is anyone doing the job of the chief servant?
The onus is very much on proactivity on the part of the husband-to-be's side. Abraham was confident that the Lord would "send his angel before you (ie the servant) so that you can get a wife for my son". But what good would the angel do by going "before" the servant, if the servant did not himself go looking in the angel's wake?
Another example that is brought up (by Carolyn McCulley I seem to recall - who else?!?) is that of Ruth. Yes, God is sovereign and He works all things for the good. But it was Ruth's idea to go to Boaz's field, encouraged by her mother-in-law Naomi, and then Boaz himself notices Ruth and asks who she is. Naomi then becomes highly proactive on Ruth's behalf and advises her to take a very bold initiative, which would have been extremely risky. Not exactly an example to be followed, so much as an act of desperation when there is no protective male figure around!
There is nothing to indicate in either of these examples that God intends to bring spouses to people without action themselves, and in fact the rest of the Bible seems to show that God expects us to get on and marry who we want -- providing that they are "believers" (not "church-goers" necessarily note!)
In fact, I believe I am right in saying that the only other specific instruction given by God regarding whom to marry is given to Hosea, who is instructed to marry an unfaithful wife in order to illustrate God's anger.
I am not trying to minimise God's orchestration of events, of course; God is sovereign. Merely that it is unbiblical to expect God to just "provide" a spouse, without proactive pursuit on behalf of the man.
So why are Christian men, as well as women, encouraged to just "wait on the Lord"? Is it possible that God is waiting for them to act? Is it really showing "trust"? Or merely a distortion of Scripture?
But that's the part that is missing in all the contemporary "contentment lecture" equations.
Sure, Rebekah was not actively looking for a spouse herself. But someone on her husband's side certainly was!
This is the side that we have lost today. Contemporary Rebekahs may well be acting just as she did -- but is anyone doing the job of the chief servant?
The onus is very much on proactivity on the part of the husband-to-be's side. Abraham was confident that the Lord would "send his angel before you (ie the servant) so that you can get a wife for my son". But what good would the angel do by going "before" the servant, if the servant did not himself go looking in the angel's wake?
Another example that is brought up (by Carolyn McCulley I seem to recall - who else?!?) is that of Ruth. Yes, God is sovereign and He works all things for the good. But it was Ruth's idea to go to Boaz's field, encouraged by her mother-in-law Naomi, and then Boaz himself notices Ruth and asks who she is. Naomi then becomes highly proactive on Ruth's behalf and advises her to take a very bold initiative, which would have been extremely risky. Not exactly an example to be followed, so much as an act of desperation when there is no protective male figure around!
There is nothing to indicate in either of these examples that God intends to bring spouses to people without action themselves, and in fact the rest of the Bible seems to show that God expects us to get on and marry who we want -- providing that they are "believers" (not "church-goers" necessarily note!)
In fact, I believe I am right in saying that the only other specific instruction given by God regarding whom to marry is given to Hosea, who is instructed to marry an unfaithful wife in order to illustrate God's anger.
I am not trying to minimise God's orchestration of events, of course; God is sovereign. Merely that it is unbiblical to expect God to just "provide" a spouse, without proactive pursuit on behalf of the man.
So why are Christian men, as well as women, encouraged to just "wait on the Lord"? Is it possible that God is waiting for them to act? Is it really showing "trust"? Or merely a distortion of Scripture?
posted by Captain Sensible at 3:52 PM
4 Comments:
Other than in the case of the first man and woman to be created, can anyone give any examples from the Bible that back-up "waiting on the Lord", and not being proactive about finding a spouse?
Dear Captain,
It does seem contradictory if one is jobless hunt for a job. If one has cancer proactively treat it. Yet, find a spouse its wait on God.
Kim
I've read the Book of Ruth and somehow it doesn't look that much like Ruth was initiating a relationship, but was simply trying to get Boaz to notice her. Maybe people who are really strict on the subject of relationship initiation might say that Ruth is an initiator but she ended up being happily married to Boaz, right?
Some people make it look as if Ruth did this objectionable thing. While I agree that men SHOULD be the initiators, I am unsure if I would label Ruth's actions as initiating. Maybe it's just me.
I would have said it was actually Naomi, Ruth's mother-in-law from her first marriage, that actually did the initiating. And their culture was pro-marriage, unlike our contemporary church culture, so Boaz was expected to do his duty.
We have the situation at the moment that modern day "Ruths" are left to their own devices, in at best a marriage-neutral culture (and I am still talking about the church culture here!).
Post a Comment
<< Home