Secondary Doctrines That Should Be Primary in Marriage

This week my daughter re-posted a great piece by Matt and Lauren Chandler on what Christian couples should doctrinally agree on before marriage. [1]   I mentioned in my Facebook update that " I would be more desirous of agreement even on a lot of secondary doctrines -- not all, but a lot!" That got me thinking. What "secondary doctrines" would I recommend that Christian couples agree on? Here's some reflection on that:

First of all, what do we mean by primary doctrines? They would fall into the class that essentially would say, "You don't believe this, you cannot be a Christian?" Dr. John MacArthur has a good article on that HERE. I would include, as MacArthur does, that all this includes a right understanding of the Gospel. Many evangelical Christians have an impoverished, human-centered view of the Gospel.  

This is not a mute point. When Christians fail to answer correctly questions like: 

A. How did the Old Testament saints get saved; 
B., What is essence of Law and Grace; or, 
C., Are indicatives important distinctions from imperatives; etc., 

then these indicate a poor or false understanding of the Gospel.  

So what, you ask? Well Gospel-centered marriages are the product of the true Gospel. This means that our spouses don't need to earn our love, acceptance or appreciation. This means that our love is unconditional, and our service to him or her is the product of my love, not the reward. Gospel-centered marriages don't say things like, "I did this yesterday. Today it's your turn." Gospel-centered marriages don't operate on the basis of punishment and reward. Gospel-centered marriages are epitomized by grace, forgiveness, humility and unconditional acceptance. Gospel-centered marriage partners say, "I am more unworthy and unlovely than anyone knows, but I'm am valued and loved more than anyone can imagine."  

That's why an humanistic, Arminian, gospel -- that is no Gospel, will erode, if not destroy a marriage.

Now to secondary doctrines. Here's my top three:

#1. Couples should agree on millennial issues like Covenantalism, Dispensationalism, New Covenantalism, etc. Why? Not so you can be raptured at the same time, secretly or publicly. No! People who embrace these different perspectives read the Bible differently. If marriage partners read the Bible differently it will affect everything!

#2. In addition and because of #1, couples should agree on the role and the ordinances (sacraments) of the Church. Obviously things like Church membership, service, baptism, etc. are important to couples and to the children that God may give them. Speaking of baptism, that is not an incidental doctrine. Presbyterians, Mennonites etc. have a distinctly different view of what baptism is. The issue is not form. It is substance. For example, when you were baptized did it simply include you in a mixed community of people; did it wash you from your sins; or were you really rendered dead to sin and alive to God in newness of life?

#3. The gifts of the Spirit and the conversation about continuation and cessation of gifts is important for couples to agree on. Again, these issues are not unimportant. Yes, one partner may be fine with the other praying in tongues. That's not the point. The point is how do you make decisions. Will your spouse come to you one day and tell you, "God told me to ..... ?" Are you going to be OK with mystical, supernatural impressions? If not, why not? How are you going to handle this? You need to agree on the role of the Spirit, the Word and wisdom in decision-making.

We can live in some disagreement on secondary doctrines with other Christians. They are not particularly areas of salvation or dis-fellowship. Fellowship and intimacy are not the same. Intimacy requires that these areas of Christian life and doctrine are determined beforehand.  

Perhaps there's more. Comment if you think of others! Thanks for hearing me out ...






_______________________________________
1. (https://twitter.com/MattChandler74/status/537276279565742081).