As some of you may know, I am an advocate against the cultural tendency to willfully and purposely delay marriage late into our 20s or 30s. It is my conviction that this is a recipe for sexual immorality in the church, and that it is a contributing factor to Peter Pan Syndrome (20-, 30-, and 40-something men who are still acting and thinking like teenagers), since marriage—and the responsibilities that come with it—are a key part of the maturation process. So I was delighted to read Mark Regnerus’s article in Christianity Today, “The Case for Early Marriage.”
Some of my favorite excerpts include:
- In a nationally representative study of young adults, just under 80 percent of unmarried, church- going, conservative Protestants who are currently dating someone are having sex of some sort. … [W]hen people wait until their mid-to-late 20s to marry, it is unreasonable to expect them to refrain from sex. It’s battling our Creator’s reproductive designs. … Very few wait long for sex. Meanwhile, women’s fertility is more or less fixed, yet Americans are increasingly ignoring it during their 20s, only to beg and pray to reclaim it in their 30s and 40s.
- Unfortunately, a key developmental institution for men—marriage—is the very thing being postponed, thus perpetuating their adolescence.
- [T]he focus of 20-somethings has become less about building mature relationships and fulfilling responsibilities, and more about enjoying oneself, traveling, and trying on identities and relationships. After all the fun, it will be time to settle down and get serious. Most young Americans no longer think of marriage as a formative institution, but rather as the institution they enter once they think they are fully formed. Increasing numbers of young evangelicals think likewise, and, by integrating these ideas with the timeless imperative to abstain from sex before marriage, we’ve created a new optimal life formula for our children: Marriage is glorious, and a big deal. But it must wait. And with it, sex. Which is seldom as patient.
I would encourage you to read the entire article.
See also:
“Stop Test-Driving Your Girlfriend” by Michael Lawrence
“Looking Back at ‘The Mystery of Marriage’”by Albert Mohler
“Racing to the Altar” by J. Budziszewski
“The Cost of Delaying Marriage” by Danielle Crittenden (and follow-up)
HT: Al Mohler
Thinking to Believe 
August 4, 2009 at 4:56 am
Goes to show how much the world has had an influence over the modern-day church. IMO, i don’t think it’s wrong, in of itself, to wait until you meet that ideal mate. But, the problem is that we, in our society, makes it a universal rule that you should wait until you are 30ish to “settle down”.. Funny thing is that, I got married at 27, and people were admonishing me for getting married too young (from both Church people and non-chruch people)..lol..I was told that i should “play the field”..So this gets into another issue. Why is ‘casual dating’ so accepted among believers? Should dating (courting) be done ONLY with the intent to marry?…
LikeLike
August 4, 2009 at 8:00 am
truthofgod
So true! The church seems to be losing touch with its mandate to uphold the Word of God. In our local church which is a typical white middle class, there seems to be an acceptance of couples living together and dating without any future plans.
Personally, I think that the ONLY reason to date is with intent to marry. What else is it for?? We as believers need to stand once again on firm principles laid out in scripture and be examples of holy living.
While I do not think there is a problem with waiting (for you should not seek your partner) I do agree with Jason that it is harder to abstain from certain activities. Especially if you end up going to university where the main purpose is drink/drugs/sex/study.
LikeLike
August 4, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Good observations. I think part of the problem is the quest for the “ideal mate,” or “soul-mate.” While I think it is good to find a person that you are compatible with, we have idealized marriage and romanticized it to such an extent that we are never satistified with the people we date. They never match up to our unrealistic ideals (that we get from the movies). We are waiting for a perfect human being to come into our lives, but no such person exists. That doesn’t mean we marry the first person we date, but it does mean we should be more concerned about being the right kind of person for marriage, rather than finding the right person for marriage.
Another part of the problem is the desire to have achieved everything one wants to achieve in life before marrying (travel, school, financially settled, etc.). But why wait for those? Why try to become a fully formed human being on your own, and then try to mesh as one flesh with another human being? Why not mesh together and form your persons together? I think it makes it all the more difficult. It’s like trying to mix two slabs of concrete once they have fully dried. It creates fiction, not one slab of concrete. If we want to become one in spirit and mind with our spouse, it’s best to join together with them while we are still rather wet slabs of concrete.
Another reason is that we have overly romanticized and idealized marriage. It is not just about gooshy feelings and bliss. It is tough work as well. We are too self-centered when we enter marriage. We go into marriage for what it can do for us, rather than what it allows for us to be able to do for our spouse. If you begin a marriage with self-centeredness, and don’t grow toward selflessness, is it any wonder it doesn’t work out (regardless of age)?
Jason
LikeLike
August 5, 2009 at 10:31 am
Jason, I couldn’t agree with you more! Marriages work because of commitment and self-sacrifice. The world’s view of love and marriage has crept in to the church. That is why divorce is more prevelant in the church now. People want someone to make them feel good–but real life is not always like that. The influence of Hollywood…Lord help us!
LikeLike
August 8, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Marrying later is a wonderful development. Young marriage all too often leads to divorce. No wonder that evangelicals and the Bible Belt are such hotbeds of divorce.
LikeLike
August 8, 2009 at 10:30 pm
Arthur,
The reason people end up divorced has very little to do with the age they got married. My father’s generation (he’s 75) married much younger than we do today, and they had a much lower divorce rate than people do today who even marry in their 30s. There are a host of factors that contribute to the high divorce rate today, some of which include unrealistic expectations of what marriage should be like, and selfishness.
Many want to say that people who marry young are too immature. But the reason people remain immature for so long today is because they are postponing the responsibilities that play a big part in the maturation process, including marriage. That’s why we have so many men still playing hours and hours of video games well into their 30s! They are dragging out their adolescence and postponing adulthood. While someone who marries at age 21 may be immature when they get married, I’ll almost guarantee you that within a couple of years they will be much more mature than their peers. That’s what marriage does to a person (and having kids puts the whole maturation process on steroids).
If we spent time preparing our kids for marriage as much as we spend time preparing them for college and careers, they might have better marriages.
If you want later-in-life marriage, what is your answer to the problem of rampant sexual immorality in the church? How can we tell people to postpone marriage, and then fend for themselves in the area of sexual temptation for the next 15-20 years of their life. It can be done, but it’s hell!
Jason
LikeLike
August 9, 2009 at 11:49 am
I don’t think that an 18 year old is too immature to get married. But too many 18 year olds would prefer to marry than to burn, and for that reason they marry the wrong person.
I don’t think it’s a bad thing that adolescence is being extended. A comedian once said that if you eat right you’ll live five years longer, but what they don’t tell you is that it’s not five more years of being twenty, but five more years of being ninety and wearing a diaper. I think it’s great that people are getting the chance to “find themselves,” and to explore their dreams that they wouldn’t be able to when married. As a famous radio personality often says, “women are dream killers!”
I don’t know what needs to be done to address the issue of premarital sex. One approach would be to say that there’s no problem at all, as married people still have “lust in their hearts” ala Jimmy Carter, porn, etc, and you’re not causing sinners to become saints through marriage.
Another possibility might be to separate marriage from living together. A couple could marry at a younger age, say 25, but continue to live apart (or at least not have children) until older. So they would have a monogamous sex partner but not be living the “married life” as we know it, but instead would live something more like boyfriend and girlfriend. But if the maturation process is your goal, this wouldn’t accomplish it.
“Divorce rates among conservative Christians were significantly higher than for other faith groups, and much higher than Atheists and Agnostics experience… While it may be alarming to discover that born again Christians are more likely than others to experience a divorce, that pattern has been in place for quite some time.”
“The AP report stated that ‘the divorce rates in these conservative states are roughly 50 percent above the national average of 4.2 per thousand people.’ The 10 Southern states with some of the highest divorce rates were Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas. By comparison nine states in the Northeast were among those with the lowest divorce rates: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.”
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
The same link notes that the Catholics don’t have the same level of divorce issues, due apparently to proper marriage preparation before marriage and a refusal to recognize divorce after marriage. Maybe Protestant churches can offer better preparation for people in finding the right partner and in being successfully married?
Arthur
LikeLike
August 10, 2009 at 5:32 am
Arthur…The guidelines and concepts regarding marriage should revolve around the scriptures. You quote the radio personality which says: “women are dream killers!”, I suppose to insist that women/wife is a hinderance of some sort. Yet the scriptures say about a wife:
(proverbs 18:22) “22Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favour of the LORD.” And then again this is the command that the Lord gives to husbands regarding their wives:
(Ephesians 5:25-29) “25Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;26That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. 28So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. 29For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:”
So we have the mentality of the world which states that a wife is a hinderance vs. the scriptures that commands the husband to honor, love, and cherish his wife. And if you love an honor her, then why would you not want to share the same dwelling with her, because you want to have “friends” on the side? I don’t see how this will keep anyone pure before God and men. But again, I maintain this is another instance of allowing the world to shape and mold our concept of marriage vs. what God says.
LikeLike
August 10, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Arthur,
True. People can make an unwise marital decision just for the sex. But this applies to young and older alike. I know of people in their late 20s and early 30s who have done this. Indeed, people in those age groups not only are dying to have sex after waiting for 15+ years, but furthermore, they realize that they are running out of prospects and/or running out of time to make babies, so they also marry unwisely. The fact of the matter is that we can always get married to someone for the wrong reasons, regardless of our age.
I don’t think women are dream killers at all. God made men and women to be together. I don’t think we can truly find ourselves until we find our spouse. They are the other half of us who is missing.
Why get married if someone is going to act like they are single? The purpose of marriage is not just to have sex, but to grow together as husband and wife. That seems rather difficult living apart.
As for divorce rates among Christians, I’m not sure of what to make of that data. It sounds counter-intuitive. It would be like saying Christians steal more than non-Christians. I have read other statistics, however, which showed that the divorce rate was the same for Christians as it is for non-Christians. Regardless what statistic is right, they are both shameful. But I think the church is suffering from some of the same problems in the world. If you think marriage is about your own personal happiness and that divorce is an option when your spouse ceases to make you happy, you will likely get divorced.
Jason
LikeLike
August 10, 2009 at 2:28 pm
truthofgod,
You state that “Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favour of the LORD.” I suppose if that’s taken literally, then it’s always a good thing to marry any woman at any time. But I don’t think that’s the meaning and intention of the scripture at hand.
I think we all agree that a man should have a wife (and a woman should have a husband), and that the relationship should be a blessing. If a man marries and have children young, thereby preventing him from going to college and he ends up working dead-end jobs rather than pursuing the career for which he was intended, his “dreams” were “killed.” That’s not a knock on marriage or women really, but the consequence of marrying too young, before he’s had the opportunity to pursue his dreams.
Jason,
You ask what’s the purpose of marrying if you are to act like you are single? There are many married people who play hours of video games, delay having children for 10+ years, and otherwise engage in the behaviors you consider “single.” If you asked them why they would marry, I presume they’d say because they love that person and want to in a life-long monogamous relationship with their partner, and eventually have children.
It’s definitely counterintuitive that evangelicals would have higher divorce rates than the general population. Just within the last half-hour, I learned that an 18-year-old relative from the Bible Belt learned she’s pregnant. Her grandfather is an evangelical preacher. When her parents found out at 15 that she was having sex, they didn’t tell her to use birth control but demanded abstinence. She’s keeping the baby. Though I don’t know any details yet, I would presume she will marry the father, her college plans over, divorce after a couple of years, become another statistic. Another relative a few years back had the same thing happening, but not an evangelical and not in the Bible Belt and put her 15 year old on the Pill. In that case there was no pregnancy and she was able to go to college.
Arthur
LikeLike
August 10, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Arthur
Men who are married should act like they are married, period. That includes video games.
If I found out my daughter was having sex outside marriage, I would not advise her to do it more safely. I would advise her to stop doing it. It is immoral. As Christians, should we advise our children to be more careful in their sin, or to stop sinning? If you discovered that your child was in the habit of stealing from department stores, would you advise him how to be a better thief so that he doesn’t get caught and go to jail and ruin his future, or would you tell him he needs to stop stealing? What is the difference between that, and premarital sex?
Jason
LikeLike
August 10, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Jason,
If your daughter were in college and you learned she was getting drunk at parties and riding home with a drunk-driving friend, would you simply tell her not to drink? Or would you say that, apart from the sin of drinking, she should be careful not to get killed by riding with a drunk driver? Does it not matter whether she dies? Is only the sin the issue?
Arthur
LikeLike
August 10, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Arthur,
The consequences are not even comparable! Death (bad thing), or having a baby (good thing, even if bad timing)?! This seems like apples and oranges to me.
I think there is also an age difference here. I have in mind a child who is still under my custody, not an adult who is on his/her own. As a minor, I think our stance should definitely be “no.” But if they are old enough to be beyond our direct authority, we have less control, and might want to opt for a wider range of advice. So, for example, if I have a 16 year old daughter that I find out is drinking, I make sure she doesn’t go anywhere where it is possible to drink. But if she is an adult on her own and I cannot control her environment, I will counsel her both against drinking and to make sure that if she does, she doesn’t drive or ride with those who have been drinking.
Jason
LikeLike
August 10, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Another example:
If your daughter is diabetic and stealing sugary sweets and eating them, can’t you say (a) it’s wrong to steal and (b) I don’t want you eating the sweets because they’re bad for you? Or does (b) contradict and/or weaken (a)?
In the end, I think we can condemn sin because it’s sinful, and we can tell people to avoid health risks because it’s bad for their health. We shouldn’t take joy out of others suffering simply because that suffering is tangentially connected to a sin.
LikeLike
August 10, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Arthur,
No, b does not contradict or weaken a. It is simply an additional rationale for a (the prohibition). They are consistent messages. But telling a child not to have sex, and then telling them how to do it more safely are contradictory messages. The latter statement is not a rationale for the former statement, but an undercutter of it.
Furthermore, pregnancy is not a health risk.
Jason
LikeLike
August 10, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Arthur, quick question (i hope you don’t take offense to this): Are you a believer in Christ? I’m just curious…
Secondly, as believers we uphold the commands of scripture above all situations and circumstances. We are not, by any means imaginable, supposed to circumvent God’s direct commands to appease the flesh or our desires. If we as believing parents are actively living out our faith, based on what is written. (We go to church, sing, testify of God’s goodness)…etc., yet we teach or endorse or allow the contrary to our children, then REALLY, what are we doing!? Is that not hypocrisy? Even for nonbelievers (as Jason was eluding to)…Nonbelievers have a standard by which they live, and likewise, teach thier children. However, if the children are involved in a situation, or rather place themselves in a situation that would be problematic to what they would deem as a convenient solution. And then you go along with thier desires, then the same question arises…”What are you doing as a parent?”
The term Christian means to be Christlike and being Christlike is valuing and upholding His words as our authority and example for us to follow. Yet if we disbelieve him due to deliberate and habitual disobedience, then at the very least your sincerity has to come into question: This goes to.. what do we teach our children about fornication, do we give our children condoms, birth control…and the list goes on.
Honestly Arthur, bottom line is that whether from a spiritual or natural point of view, you are making no sense…Please make me understand.
LikeLike
August 10, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Arthur, to address your earlier rebuttal..When i quoted Proverbs 18:22, it was to prove that in GENERAL a wife is a good thing. I’m aware that the passage is not a to be applied universally, because marrying a harlot wouldn’t be deemed as “a good thing”…However, assuming that we are speaking about Godly women (proverbs chapt 31), then I will maintain that God’s view of a wife is an noble concept to grasp.
To your other point about a man’s his “dreams” being “killed” for marrying too young, is not really proving anything, for i know, personally, of many couples who married “young” and still were able to maintain a healthy relationship, provide for thier family (while the wife is at home). Now sure, they as a couple would probably be better off financially had they started having children later on in life, but the problem with your theory is that you assuming that “success” revolves around a person’s material possessions. Have you thought that God could use marriage as a way to draw the couple closer to Him? If so, then we must determine what’s more important, being financially well off, or drawing closer to the Lord.
LikeLike
August 10, 2009 at 6:08 pm
truthofgod,
Yes, but I’m not an evangelical.
Our discussion revolves around what Scripture requires, not whether it should be circumvented. I don’t consider an upbringing that results in a divorce rate 50% above the national rate, and the acceptance of divorce within the church, to be either healthy or Christlike. There is too much handwringing over why evil fruit keeps coming from a good tree; if it were a good tree, it would be bearing good fruit. God is not the author of confusion.
Arthur
LikeLike
August 11, 2009 at 2:36 am
Arthur,
In your 15 year old scenario, you presume much. Given the following scenario what would you choose:
the christian girl – has baby, gets married, lives at home, raises child with moral guidance all supported by father (who doesn’t divorce)
the non-christian girl – has sex during college, ends up with HIV.
I have deliberately scewed the response in the opposite way to you and now the first girl is by far the better off but even if the second girl leaves without HIV and becomes a success, my opinion is as long as the child grows in Christ, the christian girl is better off.
While divorce is high in Christian circles, I do not think it is due to age but due to something else. What? I don’t know as there could be multiple factors. What the church needs to do is focus on problems in the family and address them.
LikeLike
August 15, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Jason writes:
>>As Christians, should we advise our children to be more careful in their sin, or to stop sinning? If you discovered that your child was in the habit of stealing from department stores, would you advise him how to be a better thief so that he doesn’t get caught and go to jail and ruin his future, or would you tell him he needs to stop stealing?<<
This is a common line of argument, that sin against God is akin to a crime against the State, and that in either case our goal should be to stop the wrongdoer from engaging in the behavior rather than helping the wrongdoer avoid getting caught.
However, when it comes to sin, the "police" is God. He knows if somebody is engaging in premarital sex regardless of whether there's a pregnancy. Birth control has nothing to do with preventing God from realizing that sin is taking place. So I don't believe the analogy works. Additionally, one might infer from the parallel that you believe children are a "punishment from God" for having sex, akin to serving jail time.
Arthur
LikeLike
August 16, 2009 at 8:42 pm
Arthur,
Of course God knows what they are doing. A parent does not tell his child not to sin so as to prevent God from finding out. He tells his child not to sin because it is his responsibility as a parent to train up his child in the ways of righteousness.
Jason
LikeLike
August 17, 2009 at 1:55 pm
This is an interesting topic, and one that I’ve had discussions with other church members about.
Of course, with a topic like this, we all point to our subjective experiences or reference others relationships. So let me indulge.
I was saved when I was 21-years old. I’ve known no other organized religious group as an adult. Having said that, I’ve determined that there are a lot of peculiar cultural pressures young people in our org. face that the world doesn’t. Namely, the pressure of marrying young.
I would also say that these pressures are unhealthy. I remember speaking with my then girlfriend (now my wife) and she expressed to me how she felt she was an old hag as a 23 or 24-year old woman.
Whether its perception or reality, I’ve always felt it a shame that in our org. (UPC)young women feel pressure to be married early.
I’ve witnessed quietly far too many young women not have any ambition to go to college, work or have a fulfilling career. Rather, they hop around from service to service looking for a young minister or someone, anyone to marry.
This ia such a strange phenomena to me.
For those who do marry, they have a tough road ahead of them. It goes without saying that any marriage requires work. Let’s be real though, whether in church or in the world, the person you’re at 21 or 22, is not the person you are when you’re at 28+.
It’s funny, I’m 32 and just got married this year. My wife was asking me if I thought we would have lasted if we got married when I was 25. I told her point blank, no.
My church (leaders)and mind was telling at that age I should be getting married. But I never felt the strong unction to do so (thankfully).
As I said, we all point to our subjective experiences on topics like this. Having said that, I would venture to guess that a larger number of committed, life-lasting marriages (in or out of church) happen to those who have married later than early.
LikeLike
August 17, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Phillip,
I have not experienced that myself. In my experience, the church is generally like the world when it comes to promoting the delay of marriage (although not quite as bad). Rarely do I meet someone who supports marrying younger. Maybe it is a regional thing.
I don’t see what is wrong with wanting to establish a family. That is what God made us to do. And at 21, that urge has been active already for about 7-9 years.
You are right, you are not the same person at 28 that you are at 21, but the same is true of age 50. We are always changing. If we can marry at age 28 and experience all that change together as a married couple, why not experience the changes between 21-28 as a married couple? I would think that experience of growing together as a couple could only help the marriage bond, not hurt it.
Again, I’m not saying someone has to marry young. I waited until 27 myself, although I was willing to get married earlier. But I don’t think we should be opposed to marrying younger. Indeed, I think we should promote it. While there are some advantages to waiting longer, there are also some advantages of marrying earlier. But most of the reasons people give for waiting longer don’t hold water in my opinion. While I would like everyone to think like me on this matter, they won’t. But at the very least they should be supportive of those who are ready for marriage at a younger age, rather than sending the message that doing so is a death-sentence to their marriage and to their life’s happiness.
Jason
LikeLike
August 17, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Jason,
In American culture today and generally every modern society or westernized country, young people finish their secondary schooling and many go onto some sort of post-secondary education (junior college or university)at or around the age of 18-years old.
From there either stay in school (apx. 21-22+ years old) persuing some sort of degree or do a combo of school and work while figuring out what they want to do with their life.
This is also a time when a lot of young adults first move away from home, develop political views, gravitate towards various social-groups, et cetera.
The point is in this culture, these young adults are going through a lot of change in regards to developing into a independently thinking young adult.
To state that we change from age 50 to whatever age is a bit of an oversimplification of concept. At the very least is missing the reality of this important transitional stage most young people go through.
I can’t argue with the virtues of “going through it together” at a young age. But I could just as vehemently argue the potential drawbacks of doing so as well.
I’m not opposed to young folks marrying. It goes without saying everyone (and in this case, every couple) is different.
BTW, I’m from San Jose, and have been attending a District 9 church my entire life. So I can’t really speak to whether it’s just a regional thing, lol.
Every church, pastor, et cetera is different.
Best-
Phillip B.
LikeLike
August 18, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Women who get married before the age of 25 make up about 64 percent of all divorces in the U.S. On the other hand, women who get married in their late twenties make up only 16 percent of the divorces. This means that any woman who gets married before she turns 25 is about four times more likely to get a divorce. (Women in their 30s have even better odds of staying married.)
Men have similar numbers, though they are somewhat more likely to get divorced if they marry before 30. [divorcerate.org]
http://divorce.suite101.com/article.cfm/divorce_rates_are_falling_as_couples_marry_later
LikeLike
August 18, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Arthur,
Thanks for the link. I haven’t explored the statistical side of this issue much, so I’ll take what they said as being true. But again, the reason people get divorced has little to do with their age, even if there is a correlation. If you look at data from decades gone by you would see that people married younger and divorced less. Clearly there is no logical connection. The problem is culture. When you have a culture that promotes continued adolesence into the 20s and 30s, that promotes materialism above family, and that is accepting of divorce, you’ll end up in the situation we are in today.
While the culture may be changing, our biology is not. So long as we continue to delay marriage we will continue to see high numbers of young Christian men and women engaging in sexual activity before marriage, and we will continue to see women struggling to bear children (as their fertile years are already waning when they get married, and most couples still want to wait 3-5 years to have children after marriage).
Jason
LikeLike
August 18, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Jason,
Do you consider sex with another person after a divorce to be sinful, even if you’re “remarried”? If you believe Jesus’s teaching that God does not recognize divorce (with the possible exception of divorce due to adultery), then these divorces and “remarriages” result in lifetimes of sexual sin. This is apart from the damage that divorce causes to children, of course.
Arthur
LikeLike
August 18, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Arthur,
A little off-topic, but I’ll bite.
For those who do not divorce because of adultery, and remarry, they have sinned in doing so. Whether their sexual relations with one another should be considered ongoing adulery, I tend to think not. In Deuteronomy 24 God seems to have recognized the legitimacy of the new spouse, even if entering the marriage itself was sinful.
Jason
LikeLike
August 19, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Philip,
Yes, I recognize that this is the way Western culture is. But who says one cannot be married and attend school at the same time? Most of those in seminary, for example, are married. They did just fine (although admittedly, they are older). In fact, I remember hearing that studies have shown married people do better in college than non-married people (higher “stick it out” rate, and better grades). I haven’t seen the studies, however, to be able to vouch for them.
I’ll give it to you that we are undergoing more change in the 18-30 year period than in our 50-65 year period, but my point is simply that it’s better to develop as a person with your spouse than it is to do so independently. The goal is to mesh together as one. What better way to do so than when the clay is soft (rather than later when we’ve already hardened to a great extent).
I’m in Mountain View, so we are neighbors! In my church, I don’t know anybody in their early 20s who is married. They are all single.
You wouldn’t happen to be friends with Manny, would you?
Jason
LikeLike
September 3, 2009 at 5:53 am
Jason,
Changing gears a little (but still related), I’ve always found it interesting that Jesus never explicitly advocated marriage, but endorsed it.
I think as Christians we do some subconcious arithmetic and take it as a given that we should all marry and have children, because it sounds like a good, wholesome, God-approved concept.
But like I said, I don’t believe the scriptures (NT) imply that at all.
We know that Paul certainly wasn’t a fan of folks getting married.
So I think the notion of “it’s beter to develop as a person with your spouse than it is to do so independently,” is not a given.
Does it have advantages? Sure, in certain aspects I would assume it would. But as Paul indicates, being single also has its advantages.
————
Yes, I’m very good friends with Manny! I was just at your church’s picnic at Cuesta park a week or two ago. Not sure if you were there or not.
Phillip B.
LikeLike
September 3, 2009 at 10:31 am
Phillip,
Yes, I was there at the picnic. I wish I would have known you’d be there.
There’s no question that the Bible does not teach a “you must marry” message. Both Jesus and Paul spoke of those who choose to remain single. I don’t think it is accurate to say Paul was not a fan of marriage. He did not marry (or at least re-marry if he was a widow as some argue), and he advised the Corinthians against it, but only because of the “present distress.” That’s not to say he didn’t see advantages to being single, but he also saw advantages to being married as well.
Jason
LikeLike