li0scc0,
Long time no see!
Ever since a class in 8th grade I have absolutely
detested impossible conundrum questions of the "there are only 7 people left in the world, but only 5 will fit in the lifeboat--who do you shove out?" variety. I now know that they play havoc with our minds because they invert our finitude and God's providential sovereignty: in the world of the conundrum people are judged for making decisions which would require omniscience, and God is passively inert in allowing ethical situations to develop which He cannot even resolve. In reality, neither of those occurs in real life.
In addition to your example assuming that the woman has perfect knowledge of her future psychological reaction to each choice, it also falls apart by falsely asserting that the "secular choice" is de facto motivated by "self-interest", and the "regious choice" by "morality", when in fact either or both choices could be so motivated, and then falsely asserting that even those two motivations are somehow either meritorious or condemnatory in God's sight. In other words, the conundrum is a mere tangle of false assumptions.
For a refreshing, reformed view of vocation, this
White Horse Inn program touches on many aspects of a biblical, Christ-glorifying approach for the person in your example to take to heart; it fleshes out what John was pointing to above. Please listen and let me know what ye think.
