So Dave made a comment in another thread that got me thinking and before I could respond to his statement, the thread was locked.
Here it is;
For instance: I don't know about this concept of "being married in God's eyes". Maybe it's in scripture...I'm not the world's greatest bible-scholar by a long shot...but it sounds to me like a 'made-up' phrase.
I will admit I am guilty of using the above phrase or even just the phrase "In God's eyes" when I think something is different from God's perspective than it is from man's.
So perhaps "being married in God's eyes" is a made up phrase but is the concept of something being different in the eye's of God than in man's a made up concept too?
I decided to search scripture and see if such an idea is scriptural. I also thought of ray's relative verse absolute comment and I think that it is a perfect example of something being one way in the eye's of man and entirely another in the eyes of God:
------------------------------------------------------http://bible-truths.com/fulltext/fulltext.htm
RELATIVE VS. ABSOLUTE
If a theologian can't see the "absolute" versus the "relative" in Scripture, he is in no position to teach anyone.
A little boys asks: "Why did God say in Gen. 3:9: 'Where art thou [Adam]?' Mommy says that God knows everything." (I Jn 3:20). You say, "Of course God knew where Adam was. Adam sinned. Adam felt bad. He thought he could hide from God. God was condescending to man's level. It was for Adam's benefit that God asked, 'Where art thou Adam?'" You say, "That's not a problem. That's easy to understand and answer. It's stupid to think that God didn't know where Adam was."
And, of course, we have Scriptural proof that God knew where Adam was because "He [God] knows all" (I Jn 3:20)
Neither did our Lord ask questions out of ignorance: "Believe ye that I am able to do this?" (Matt. 9:28) "Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?" (Matt. 12:48) "How many loaves have ye?" (Matt. 15:34) "Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?" (Matt. 116:13)
Christ asked dozens of questions during His ministry. But He already knew all the answers: " ... because of His knowing ALL men ... " (Matt. 21:27).
Christ even answered questions by asking questions. The Pharisees asked why His disciples transgressed the "traditions." Our Lord knew how to "answer a fool according to his folly" (Prov. 26:5) by asking: "Wherefore are you also transgressing the precept of God because of your tradition?" (Mat. 15:3)
This brings up another apparent contradiction, however, because Prov. 26:4 says: "answer not a fool according to his folly ... " Our Lord knew how to do that as well: "Neither am I telling you by what authority I am doing these things." (Mat. 21:27). These two scriptures in Proverbs should teach us to never pit one verse of Scripture against another. Verse 4 and 5 do not contradict. They are both true.
So if it's stupid to think that God didn't really know where Adam was, a relative statement condescending to man's level, isn't it then, likewise, stupid to believe that God contradicts Himself in the following verses:
THE RELATIVE:
THE ABSOLUTE:
" ... seek, and ye shall find ... " (Mat. 7:7)
"Not one is seeking out God" (Rom. 3:11)
God changed His mind (Ex. 32:14)
God is not a man Who changes His mind
(I Sam. 15:29)
" ... choose you this day whom ye will serve."
(Josh. 24:15)
"Ye have not chosen me,
but I have chosen you ... " (Jn. 15:16)
" ... whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God ... " (I Jn. 3:10)
"All is of God" (II Cor. 5:18)
Zechariah was just before God (Lk. 1:5)
(Comparing him to the corrupt priests)
"Not one is just" (Rom. 3:10)
(Comparing man with God)
One is the "relative" the other is the "absolute." One is from man's point of view, comparing men with men, the other is from God's point of view. One shows how a thing is perceived while the other shows how it actually is. One is for minors while the other is for the mature.
Both Scriptures are true. The relative is true and the absolute is true. They do not contradict. However, one really is "relative" while the other is "absolute."
Theologians are always taking Scriptures that speak of the relative, from man's point of view, and insist that these verses are absolute. By doing this they commit a double sin. Because then they insist that these relative truths actually nullify God's absolute declarations. They won't admit to this in their own words, but this is what they do when they retain the "relative" at the expense of rejecting the "absolute."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also found these verses:
Isaiah 55:8 For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways," declares the LORD. 9"For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways And My thoughts than your thoughts.…
2 Samuel 7:19 And this was yet a small thing in thy sight, O Lord God; but thou hast spoken also of thy servant's house for a great while to come. And is this the manner of man, O Lord God?
Chronicles 16:9 For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to shew himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward him. Herein thou hast done foolishly: therefore from henceforth thou shalt have wars.
Proverbs 15:3 The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good.
So I think in relation to the marriage concept, one might percieve a thing to be a certain way, i.e. being married to a new woman, while God percieves it differently, i.e you left your first wife without an acceptable cause (pornea) therefor I [God] am still holding you to your first contractual marriage and calling this second marriage of yours nothing but adultery.
Am I stretching this relative verse absolute concept too far in applying it to marriage? Does anyone have any thoughts to share on this? I'm completely open to discussion on the matter.
God bless,
Alex