Understanding Autism in Marriage Through Joshua 22:10-34

Have you ever realized you were completely wrong about someone you love? For ten years, I watched my wife spend what seemed like hours browsing shopping websites. Every evening, there she was on her phone, scrolling through Amazon, looking at clothes, purses, and anything Snoopy-related. I assumed I knew exactly what it meant. I was wrong, and my misinterpretation nearly damaged our marriage.

Like many husbands, I interpreted her behavior through the lens of my own experience. When I shop, it’s because I need something. When I browse, it’s because I want to buy. So naturally, I concluded that my wife’s constant shopping meant she was never satisfied with what we had. She always wanted more. No matter how hard I worked, how much I provided, it was never enough.

This interpretation shaped everything. I worked extra hours, picked up additional responsibilities at church, and made financial sacrifices to buy her the things I noticed her looking at online, trying to be a good husband. Yet after ten years of this pattern, she still didn’t seem content because there she was, night after night, looking at more things to buy. The bitterness that grew in my heart was like a slow poison. I felt like I couldn’t provide what she needed, and worse, that my efforts were unappreciated.

What I didn’t understand then was that my wife is autistic, and her brain processes the world differently than mine. That “shopping” I observed for a decade? It had almost nothing to do with wanting to buy things. I was interpreting her actions through my neurotypical lens and reaching completely wrong conclusions.

When Good People Make Wrong Assumptions

This kind of misunderstanding isn’t unique to neurodiverse marriages, but it’s especially common when one spouse’s brain works differently. Every marriage faces moments when one partner’s behavior seems inexplicable or hurtful. But when autism shapes how one spouse experiences and regulates in the world, the potential for misinterpretation multiplies exponentially.

Joshua 22:10-34 provides a powerful biblical framework for addressing these dangerous assumptions. Here we see an entire nation nearly go to war based on a misunderstanding that could have been resolved with one conversation. The Israelites saw their brothers building what appeared to be an altar and immediately assumed the worst. Sound familiar?

Just as the Israelites interpreted the eastern tribes’ actions through their own experience and nearly destroyed their unity, spouses can damage their marriages by interpreting behaviors through their own neurological framework rather than seeking understanding. The solution in Joshua 22 wasn’t complex psychology or marriage therapy. It was biblical investigation before accusation.

The Text: A Case Study in Dangerous Assumptions

The Situation: An Altar of Imposing Size (Joshua 22:10-12)

When the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh returned to their inheritance east of the Jordan, they built “an altar of imposing size” (verse 10). The western tribes heard about this and immediately assumed they knew what it meant. An altar could only mean one thing: they were setting up their own place of worship, violating God’s command and breaking covenant with the Lord.

Notice that their observation was accurate. There was indeed an altar. It was indeed imposing. But their interpretation of what that altar meant was completely wrong.

The response was swift and severe: “When the people of Israel heard of it, the whole assembly of the people of Israel gathered at Shiloh to make war against them” (verse 12). They were ready to go to war with their own brothers based on an assumption.

The Investigation: Following Proverbs 18:13 (vv. 13-20)

Before the first blow was struck, wiser heads prevailed. Instead of attacking, they decided to investigate. “The people of Israel sent to the people of Reuben and the people of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh, in the land of Gilead, Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest” (verse 13).

This decision reflected biblical wisdom found in Proverbs 18:13: “If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame.” Rather than assuming they understood the situation, they chose to create space for explanation.

Notice how they approached this conversation. They didn’t hide their concerns or pretend everything was fine. They were honest about their interpretation: “What is this breach of faith that you have committed against the God of Israel in turning away this day from following the Lord by building yourselves an altar this day in rebellion against the Lord?” (verse 16).

This is crucial for marriages. Creating safety for honest conversation doesn’t mean avoiding difficult topics. It means approaching your spouse with the humility to say, “This is what I observed, this is how I interpreted it, help me understand what you were actually thinking or feeling.”

The Explanation: Truth Revealed (vv. 21-29)

The eastern tribes’ response reveals the power of allowing people to explain themselves. The altar wasn’t for sacrifice at all. It was “to be a witness between us and you, and between our generations after us, that we do perform the service of the Lord in his presence” (verse 27).

Their motivation was actually the opposite of what the western tribes assumed. They weren’t trying to separate from Israel’s worship; they were trying to ensure their children would never be excluded from it. They feared that future generations might look at the geographical separation and conclude that the eastern tribes weren’t really part of Israel.

The altar was built not in rebellion, but in love for their children and commitment to unity.

The Resolution: Truth Brings Peace (vv. 30-34)

The result of this biblical investigation was immediate relief and celebration. “And when Phinehas the priest and the chiefs of the congregation, the heads of the families of Israel who were with him, heard the words that the people of Reuben and the people of Gad and the people of Manasseh spoke, it was good in their eyes” (verse 30).

Instead of war, there was worship. Instead of division, there was unity. Instead of condemnation, there was celebration. All because they chose investigation over assumption.

The Parallel: When Assumptions Meet Autism

The Reality of Invisible Differences

My shopping misunderstanding perfectly illustrates what happens when we interpret autistic behaviors through neurotypical assumptions. What looked like materialism was actually self-regulation. What appeared to be dissatisfaction was actually a coping mechanism.

As John Elder Robinson writes in Look Me in the Eye, “A person with an obvious disability—for example, someone in a wheelchair—is treated compassionately because his handicap is obvious… With me, though, there is no external sign that I am conversationally handicapped. So folks hear some conversational misstep and say, ‘What an arrogant jerk!'”

This is the challenge of autism in marriage. There are no external signs that your spouse’s brain processes sensory information, social cues, and emotional regulation differently. So, when we observe behaviors that seem strange or inconsiderate through our neurotypical lens, we’re likely to interpret them as character flaws rather than neurological differences.

In my marriage, I was essentially speaking a different language than my wife, but neither of us realized it. Shopping meant one thing in my language (wanting to acquire) and something completely different in hers (needing to regulate). Without a common understanding of these differences, misinterpretation was inevitable.

The Danger of Interpretive Grids

Biblical counselor Johanna Pressley, in her book Biblical Counseling for Children with Autism, identifies three ways we interpret challenging behaviors: “interpreting through bad,” “interpreting through broken,” and “interpreting through beloved.”

“Interpreting through bad” means assuming behaviors are “just willful sin” or deliberate disrespect. This was exactly my approach to the shopping. I saw it as evidence of materialism, lack of contentment, and disregard for my hard work. Like the Israelites assuming the altar meant covenant-breaking, I assumed the worst about my wife’s motives.

“Interpreting through broken” means dismissing behaviors as “just a disability symptom” that removes all responsibility and agency from the autistic spouse. This approach can lead to patronizing rather than partnering in marriage.

“Interpreting through beloved” is Pressley’s biblical alternative. It means viewing behaviors through the lens of our loving relationship and considering multiple factors: physical differences, knowledge gaps, need for training, and yes, sometimes sin.

Pressley suggests what she calls an “elimination test”: What percentage of this behavior stems from physical weakness (neurological differences), lack of knowledge (not understanding expectations), lack of training (needing to develop new skills), or willful sin?

Applying the “Beloved” Framework to Marriage

When I finally applied this framework to my wife’s shopping, everything changed. If I had asked myself Pressley’s elimination test questions years earlier, I might have concluded:

• 75% neurological difference: My wife’s brain needs more sensory input to stay regulated when overwhelmed or overstimulated. Looking at colorful pictures and interesting products online provides that input.
• 15% lack of communication: She never told me what shopping meant to her, and I never asked.
• 10% need for training: We both needed to learn better ways to communicate about internal experiences and coping strategies.
• 0% actual discontentment: The behavior had nothing to do with wanting more things.

This analysis would have led to a completely different response. Instead of working myself to exhaustion trying to buy her contentment, I could have focused on understanding her regulation needs and finding additional ways to support her when she felt overwhelmed.

Practical Applications: Learning from Israel’s Example

Developing “You Are Here” Honesty in Marriage

Biblical counselor Esther Liu uses a powerful metaphor in her work about creating safety for people to share honestly about where they actually are in their struggles. She calls this “You Are Here” honesty, like the markers on mall directories that help you navigate from your actual location.

This concept is especially crucial in neurodiverse marriages. Before we can help each other grow, we need to know where we’re actually starting from. For my wife, this meant being able to say, “When I look at shopping websites, I’m not thinking about buying things. I’m trying to help my brain feel less overwhelmed.” For me, it meant being able to say, “When I see you shopping, I feel like I’m failing to provide for you.”

Moving beyond assumptions requires creating the kind of safety where both spouses can share their actual internal experience without fear of judgment or immediate correction.

The Seven Steps of Wisely Interpreting Your Spouse in Marriage.

Based on the pattern in Joshua 22, here’s a practical process for addressing misunderstandings in neurodiverse marriages:

1. Observe without immediate interpretation (James 1:19: “quick to listen, slow to speak”). Notice what you’re seeing without immediately deciding what it means.
2. Recognize your interpretive limitations (Proverbs 16:25: “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death”). Acknowledge that your first interpretation might be wrong.
3. Choose investigation over accusation (Matthew 18:15: go directly to the person). Decide to seek understanding rather than nurse assumptions.
4. Create safety for explanation (following Liu’s “You Are Here” model). Make it safe for your spouse to share their actual experience.
5. Apply Pressley’s “elimination test” (physical, knowledge, training, or sin?). Consider multiple possible causes for the behavior.
6. Respond appropriately to actual causes (1 Thessalonians 5:14: “Admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with everyone”).
7. Celebrate understanding when it comes (like Israel’s relief in Joshua 22:30). Thank God for the gift of insight and the preservation of your unity.

Building “Monuments of Understanding”

The eastern tribes showed remarkable wisdom in building their altar as a witness “between our generations after us” (Joshua 22:27). They anticipated future misunderstandings and took steps to prevent them.

Neurodiverse couples can apply this principle by creating their own “monuments of understanding” shared language, documented discoveries, and agreed-upon interpretations that prevent future conflicts.

For example, after our shopping conversation, my wife and I developed new vocabulary. She can now say, “I need to regulate,” and I understand what that means. I can ask, “Are you shopping or actually wanting to buy something?” without offense. We’ve created monuments of understanding that help us navigate similar situations in the future.

My Story: A Decade of Wrong Assumptions

Let me return to my shopping story and show you how the Joshua 22 principle played out in real life. For ten years, I was like the western tribes, certain I understood what I was observing. I had convinced myself that my wife’s constant browsing meant she was never satisfied with what we had.

This interpretation shaped everything I did. I worked extra hours at the church, took on additional consulting work, and made sacrificial financial decisions to provide her with the things I saw her looking at. But no matter what I bought, she kept “shopping.” The bitterness in my heart grew like a cancer.

Finally, I reached my breaking point. The anger and resentment had grown so strong that I knew I had to address it or risk serious damage to our marriage. Now, at this point, I wish I could say that the pattern we see in Joshua 22 would have come to my mind. But like many of my epiphanies with scripture, this understanding came after I failed. Instead of investigation, I launched into accusation, but through God’s grace, we got to a better place. Just one more personal reminder of why I, like you, need Jesus. However, given what I know now, this is how I would approach things.

The Joshua 22 Approach: Choosing Investigation

“Help me understand something,” I would say to my wife. “I’ve noticed that you spend a lot of time looking at things online, and I’m trying to understand what that means for you.”

Notice what I didn’t say. I didn’t say, “You’re always shopping and you’re never satisfied with what we have.” I didn’t say, “No matter how hard I work, you always want more.” I would simply present my observation and ask for an explanation, just like Phinehas did with the eastern tribes.

Her response would have changed everything.

“Shopping?” she would say, looking genuinely confused. “I’m not shopping. I don’t want to buy those things.”

“Then what are you doing when you’re looking at all those products online?”

“I’m regulating. When I feel overwhelmed or have had too much social interaction or noise during the day, looking at pictures, colors, and interesting things helps calm my brain. It’s like… visual white noise, I guess. I barely even notice what the actual products are.”

The Revelation: Ten Years of Misunderstanding

In that moment, I would have felt exactly what the Israelites must have felt when they realized the eastern tribes hadn’t been rebelling at all. Relief, embarrassment, and gratitude all at once.

Everything would have made sense. The reason buying her things never satisfied her “shopping” was that shopping had nothing to do with wanting or buying things. It was a neurological need, not a materialistic desire. I had been trying to solve a problem that didn’t exist while ignoring her actual needs.

Applying Pressley’s framework retrospectively, I could see that perhaps 85% of what I had interpreted as sinful discontent was actually a neurological difference, her brain’s need for sensory regulation. Maybe 10% was a lack of knowledge on both our parts about how autism affects daily life. Another 5% was a need for better communication about internal experiences. The actual “sin” component was virtually zero.

Lessons Learned and Gospel Connections

The cost of my wrong assumptions was enormous. Ten years of extra work, financial stress, and growing resentment, all because I interpreted my wife’s behavior through my own neurological framework instead of seeking to understand hers.

But the greater cost would have been continuing in that misunderstanding. How many marriages suffer because spouses assume they know what behaviors mean rather than investigating? How many neurodiverse couples struggle because they interpret each other’s actions through incompatible frameworks?

The gospel connection is profound here. How often do we misinterpret God’s actions in our lives? When He doesn’t answer prayers the way we expect, when circumstances don’t unfold as we hope, when His timing doesn’t match ours, how quickly do we assume we understand His motives?

Yet God is patient with our misunderstandings. He doesn’t abandon us when we wrongly interpret His love, His discipline, or His silence. In the same way, we’re called to extend that same patient grace to our spouses, especially when neurological differences create additional opportunities for misinterpretation.

Marriage, especially neurodiverse marriage, becomes a laboratory for sanctification. Each misunderstanding becomes an opportunity to practice the Joshua 22 principle: investigate before you accuse, seek understanding before you judge, assume love before you assume malice.

The Special Calling of Neurodiverse Couples

Couples like my wife and I have a unique opportunity to model something beautiful for the church and the world. We get to show what it looks like to love across significant differences in processing, communication, and experience.

We’re called to be pioneers, showing the church how to create the kind of safety where people can share their actual internal experience without fear of judgment. We get to demonstrate what it means to investigate before accusing, to seek understanding before drawing conclusions.

This requires extended patience as we learn each other’s languages. It requires humility to admit when our interpretations are wrong. It requires wisdom to distinguish between neurological differences and actual sin. And it requires grace to forgive each other for the misunderstandings that are inevitable as we figure this out.

Conclusion: From Assumption to Investigation

The choice before every spouse is the same choice that faced Israel in Joshua 22. When you observe behavior that confuses or hurts you, you can rush to judgment based on appearances, or you can investigate before accusing.

The Israelites came within moments of destroying their unity over a misunderstanding that could have been resolved with one honest conversation. How many marriages suffer similar damage because couples assume they understand each other’s motives rather than creating space for explanation?

For neurodiverse couples, this choice is especially critical. The potential for misinterpretation is higher when processing differences are involved. But so is the potential for deep intimacy when understanding is reached.

The altar that nearly caused a war became a monument to unity and understanding. Your misunderstandings can also become monuments, reminders of the grace that investigation brings, the peace that understanding creates, and the love that assumes the best until proven otherwise.

In a world quick to judge and slow to listen, your marriage can model God’s investigative love. You can show what it looks like to follow the Joshua 22 principle: when assumptions threaten to lead you astray, choose the harder path of seeking understanding.

Because sometimes, what looks like shopping is actually regulation. What appears to be rebellion is actually love. And what seems like rejection might actually be your spouse’s way of trying to connect.

The altar was built not to divide, but to unite. Your next conversation could be the bridge that turns misunderstanding into deeper intimacy. Choose investigation. Choose understanding. Choose love.