Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 2
Margie argues that if happiness or “receiving love” is the goal, divorce will “make sense” as soon as happiness leaves; where have you seen this logic operating (in yourself, your church culture, or your generation), and what would have to change for “God’s glory” to become the controlling aim?
Another way to ask: Where do you see the idea that divorce makes sense once happiness fades (in yourself, your church, or your generation)? What would need to change for “God’s glory” to matter more than personal happiness?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
The transcript suggests this logic shows up whenever marriage is measured by personal feelings—“Do I feel happy? Do I feel loved?”—instead of by faithfulness to God’s purpose. For God’s glory to become the controlling aim, a couple must treat happiness as a byproduct and pursue “oneness” and God’s purposes together.
- She says some people equate marriage “only with happiness,” adding, “If happiness is our end goal… we’re going to get a divorce as soon as happiness leaves.”
- She adds, “If receiving love is our goal, we’re going to dump our spouse as soon as we don’t feel loved.”
- She contrasts that with: “If we marry for God’s glory to pursue Him together… then divorce just does not make sense.”
- She teaches, “Happiness in marriage should be a byproduct and not the end goal of a Christ-centered marriage.”
- She says we must stop asking marriage to give “perfect happiness, stress-free living, and idolatrous obsession.”
- She frames marriage’s true aims as “love relationship, shaping, intimacy, and the ability to pursue and glorify God as one.”