fbpx
Articles

Should you cohabitate before marriage?

/
May 13, 2015

Don’t you love a free trial—a no-strings-attached chance to try something out before you shell out your hard-earned cash? Most of us do.

When it comes to a new car, a test drive is a wise idea. If you’re thinking about investing four years and a wad of Benjamins into a college, it’s a good idea to spend some time on campus first. Before you sign on the dotted line for that new house, you ought to go over the place with a fine tooth comb a time or two. But what about marriage? Is it a good idea to enjoy a free trial without the commitment of a permanent arrangement?

Some people think so.

Beta testing your relationship

In fact, somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 percent of people between the ages of 18 to 34 said they like the idea of a “beta marriage.” If you’re a non-techie like me, that phrase might not mean much, but it’s connected to the practice of “beta testing.” That’s geek for simply testing a product before its official release. If you’ve ever done a free trial download of software or been given a free sample of something and asked to provide feedback, you’ve been a beta tester.

In our culture of constant feedback, some people think that beta marriages are a good idea. This is an arrangement where a couple takes the marriage for a “test spin” before committing for life. They give the marriage a trial run and then decide to formalize or dissolve the marriage after a two-year trial period. Besides being terribly unromantic . . .

“Do you promise to love, honor, and cherish this woman for at least the next two years?”

“I do.”

Do beta marriages fit into God’s plan for marriage? Is giving the marriage a “trial run” by living together first a wise and holy idea?

Before I answer those questions, a few disclaimers:

It may be that not many readers of this blog are running out to sign up for a marriage trial run. And the social data isn’t all bad; 31 percent of young people surveyed said that they are still in favor of traditional marriage—the kind where a couple is committed “until death do us part?” But I still wrote this post (and hope you will read it) because . . .

  1. More and more couples are choosing to live together before marriage, including Christian couples. When I see a trend, I always want to filter it through God’s Word.
  2. Sometimes we give marriage a “trial run” in ways that don’t include moving in together. (For more on that, check out this great post Divorced . . . at 18?). Because of that, it’s good to remember what God’s plan for marriage looks like.
  3. As the culture moves toward wider acceptance of cohabitation, it is wise to know where God stands and to be able to articulate that well and with love. Those of us who are specifically in the trenches of speaking truth to the next generation (parents, pastors, teachers) need to look this trend in the eye and have compelling biblical reasons to choose to stick with God’s plan.

So, with that in mind, is it a good idea to live together before marriage?

The facts don’t lie

Here’s a snapshot of this trend.

But, cohabitation rarely leads to “happily ever after.”

Why? What is it about living together that impacts marriage so negatively?

Simply put, it is not God’s plan.

The permanence and holiness of God’s design

We see our first description of marriage in Genesis 2:24.

“Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.”

In Matthew 19, Jesus was teaching about marriage when He said, “So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate” (v. 6).

God’s plan for marriage is a permanent merger. It’s combining two people into one new family through a covenant. It’s intended to endure. There is no way to have a “free trial” of the kind of commitment God designed to be enjoyed between husbands and wives.

Couples choose to live together to get a foretaste of what marriage will be like, but the very things that make marriage work are absent in that situation. Specifically, the commitment that allows couples to weather the trials of life together. There’s no way to fast track a lifetime commitment.

From a human perspective, living together may seem like a good idea. It allows couples to spend lots of time together. It is economically cheaper than maintaining two households. Most couples see it like a “trial run” to determine if their relationship can stand up to the day-in and day-out challenges of life without the total commitment that marriage requires.

Some will argue that they need to make sure that they are “sexually compatible” before agreeing to share a bedroom for life. But I’m just going to say it, “sexual compatibility” is hogwash. The Bible calls men and women to refrain from sex outside of marriage and enjoy it after. Even non-Christian researchers have found that the most sexually satisfied among us are those who stick to this plan. In contrast, those who choose to have sex outside of marriage, bring to the altar the baggage that comes with sexual sin.

Take it from someone who has been married for more than a decade, these are things best practiced within the context of marriage. My husband Jason and I had no money, terrible communication, and zero sexual experience when we got married. If we had beta tested our union, we might have quickly decided it wasn’t a match made in heaven.

But God’s design is that we learn those things within the loving protection of a lifetime commitment. The goal isn’t to have a perfect marriage from day one, but to grow into the people and couple God wants you to be together.

Jason and I have counseled many couples who didn’t wait to have sex until their wedding night. They bought the lie that sex was something best explored before saying “I do.”  Ten, 15 and 20 years into their marriage, the consequences of stepping outside the guardrails of God’s best in this area of their lives is still wreaking havoc. There is absolutely no way that sinning together before marriage can do anything but hinder the holy union God designed marriage to be.

Does your marriage need a “test run?” The short answer is no.

There is no such thing as “no strings attached” love. God’s design is for our hearts to become so tethered to our spouse that it’s as if we are “one flesh.” In fact, there is a deeper, mysterious, spiritual union that takes place. When it’s time for you to say “I do,” opt for the not-so-free trial by saying “no” to living together and reserving the most intimate parts of yourself for after you’ve made a lifetime commitment.

Note: Portions of this post are taken from a book I wrote with Josh McDowell, The Bare Facts: 39 Questions Your Parents Hope You Never Ask About Sex.

Erin Davis

Erin is a speaker, author and blogger who addresses women of all ages nationwide and is passionately committed to sharing God’s Truth with others. She is the mother of three boys and the author of 13 books which can be found on her website. Erin lives on a small farm in rural Missouri and … Read More

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24