Marriage: A Biblical Key to Success and Fulfillment
The early chapters of Genesis give us the ground rules for playing out the great human drama which we call history, or more accurately, what should be referred to as redemptive history, for it is redemptive history that is the overlord of all particular histories. Redemptive history is God's fulfilling of His purposes and plans on the earth, for man, throughout the aeons, ages, centuries and generations. All human histories are but sub-sets or aspects of this great meta-history.
The Christian view of history is fundamentally different from all philosophies of history found in Athens. At root there are at least three things that set the Christian perspective apart from all the false alternatives:
The course of history in its entirety is pre-ordained and pre-determined by the Living God. His decree governs the course of mankind upon the earth exhaustively and completely. So, for example, we read: “Remember the former things long past. For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, 'My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure.'” (Isaiah 46:9,10)
Since AD33, all subsequent human history has come under the aegis of the Lord Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, and ascended to the right hand of the Living God, and seated upon the throne. He holds all authority in heaven and upon earth, and all the nations are now being gradually and inevitably brought under His authority, by His Word and Spirit.
All human history and histories are being ruled and governed so as to fulfill a fundamental divine purpose―the manifestation of the glory of the Living God. This purpose is all embracing and incorporates both the evil and the good, the righteous and the unrighteous, and the rise and fall of kingdoms, nations, principalities and powers. So, in Romans we read: “On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, 'Why did you make me like this,' will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use, and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so in order that He might make know the riches of His glory upno vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory.” (Romans 9:2―23)
Genesis gives us the “ground rules” as to how redemptive history has been and will be played out. It does not tell us everything about how the “game” is to be played, but everything that is added thereafter in God's Word is a development, or a refinement of what God tells us in these chapters. Genesis, then, gives us the goal posts and the boundaries of play; it also tells us the objectives of the game, and the essential rules of how the game of history is to be played out.
The Christian or Believing Mind is one which thinks God's thoughts after Him, seeking to ensure that every thought and imagination is in conformity with reality. The Christian knows that reality is that which has been ordained, commanded, and decreed by God. Bluntly, reality is what God says it is. There is no potentiality or actuality beyond God's all conditioning control of the world and what He has declared concerning the world and all that is in it.
This is why Jerusalem is culturally powerful. Jerusalem sees things as they really are. As the citizens of Jerusalem think and act according to the way things have actually been made to work, Jerusalem's power and influence grows. It is the difference between rowing with the tide or against it. Jerusalem, as she thinks God's thoughts after Him, and acts consistently with those thoughts, sails swiftly on a strong running tide.
All the “Foundations in Genesis” essays have sought to discuss one or more of these constitutive ground rules for human life and history. This essay deals with the central importance of marriage to the great drama.
In Genesis 1:26 we are told that on the sixth day, the Lord created man in His own image, “male and female He created them.” Genesis 2:18―25 provides more detail about the process of creating mankind male and female. The process was deliberate, and it is revelational―that is, the process teaches us some vital principles and truths about the world and how it is made to work.
The key points are:
Both male and female are equally in God's image: they are metaphysically equal. From this point on, any role differentiation or any “superior-inferior” distinctions between the sexes have only to do with operational functionality, not with relative metaphysical value of being. In an orchestra, the conductor is “superior” to the instrumentalists; the second and third violinists take their lead from the first violin and he or she from the conductor, in turn.
Everyone understands that this is necessary to make the orchestra play as one, with each part integrating into the whole. But, it would be preposterous to suggest, therefore, that the conductor was more, or a better human being than the instrumentalists. He or she leads for reasons of operational functionality, not for reasons based upon the essence or superiority of being. (This needs to be emphasized in our day because our age seems to have become grossly confused at this point.)It was not good for man to be alone. (Genesis 2:18) Man was incomplete and imperfect (not “good” with “good” here being used in exactly the same sense as God reviewing His work of creation and pronouncing it to be “good.”)
There was no adequate helper found for Adam amongst the other creatures. (Genesis 2:20) Adam saw things correctly, as they really were. He discerned the true nature of every creature, and named them correctly. This process led to the conviction that none of the other creatures was suitable as a companion for Adam.
The woman was created in such a way as to underscore and reveal her closeness to, and metaphysical sameness with, Adam. (Genesis 2:21,22). Adam, the perfect categorizer and namer of creatures, saw immediately what Eve represented when the Lord brought Eve to Adam and so he named her accordingly: “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called Woman because she was taken out of Man.” (Genesis 2:23) He acutely and intuitively named her with the feminine form of the Hebrew noun for “man” (“ishah”, the feminine form of “ish”, Hebrew for “man”). He saw immediately and correctly that she was the female version, and he the male version, of mankind―that they were equally part of the whole.
To have a woman as his helper, a man must leave his parents house, and cleave to his wife. Leaving and cleaving remain one of the most basic fundamental principles of successful marriage to this day―and always will be. (Genesis 2:24)
The closeness of the union is evidenced by the declaration that the man and the woman will be “one flesh”, and that they were both naked in each other's presence without shame.
This is marriage as it was ordained and created to be, before the Fall, before sin corrupted it. Nevertheless, as we shall see in due time, despite the corruption of sin, the Lord reinstituted marriage and restored it. Moreover, He subsequently made emphatically clear that marriage holds a legitimacy and authority directly from God, such that man is expressly forbidden from separating a man and wife. They are understood to be joined together by God, and no human authority can legitimately overrule God's appointment. (“What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” Matthew 19:6)
Marriage, however, is failing on every hand today. Many Athenians offer this as evidence that the teachings of Scripture are outmoded and archaic. Modern man needs new up-to-date social arrangements. In fact exactly the reverse is true. The widespread failure of marriage simply reflects the current ascendancy of unbelief in the Western World. It reflects that we are in a post-Christian world. It indicated declension and retreat, not an advance. The truth is that in general the Unbelieving Mind is incapable of sustaining the disciplines and callings represented in marriage. The contemporary failure of marriage is a failure of man to be properly human.
But, God is not mocked. If a nation or an age lifts up the hand of rebellion against God, a torrent of consequences flows down which result in the eventual collapse of a culture--usually from within. Every passing moment saps contemporary Athenian culture of its vitality; its ennervation is from within. The fever heat of summer will be followed by the long dark of winter, as sure as the sparks fly upwards.
We all know the psychological devastation that comes from the battleground that is the modern Athenian relationship between man and woman. Whether in marriage, or in semi-permanent “relationships”, whether in serial promiscuity or serial monogamy, whether in homosexuality or hermaphroditism, the hearts, minds, and bodies of men and women are being shredded and progressively dehumanised. Added to this fearsome concoction is the devastating impact upon children who are born into this maelstrom, where families are constantly breaking apart, reforming into different composites, with an endless succession of “step parents” or “whanau” posing to be family but all to often little more than an idiotic demonic aping of the truth.
This is what Athenian alternatives to marriage become—the great dehumanizer of our time. Under the temporary aegis of Athens, man becomes more animal like, and less image-of-God like, with every passing day. Governments hypocritically wring their hands and bemoan the rise in violence, abuse, drunkenness, drug addiction, neglect, butalisation, and the burgeoning breakdown of the social fabric. Hypocritically, because it is the fundamental axiom of Athenian unbelief, that each individual person is a law and standard unto himself―and it is this which has produced the chaos in the first place. The unbelief of Athens cannot therefore philosophically or ideologically sustain the institution of marriage. Athens has welcomed with open arms the modern “alternatives” of open marriages and the endless cycle of recycled partners as an avatar of enlightenment. Athens, in the end, would like to abolish the institution of marriage―yet is unwilling to accept the consequences. If you play with fire, any complaint about being burnt is not to be taken seriously. If you sow to the wind, you will reap the whirlwind. Don't moan about it when it comes.
Of course, the downward spiral has yet got a way to run. Unbelief and its consequences take time to play out. But, in the past ten years we have entered the next, more insidious phase of the breakdown. As society reels from the social disorder and damage that comes from broken families, the State rears its ugly misshapen head and tries to respond to the crisis. Faced with the increasingly manifest social problems arising out of disfunctional families, the city of Athens does not, and will not, repent, and insist upon a return to the biblical mores. Rather it will always be true to its nature: It will set itself forth as the Great Redeemer, the Saviour, which will deliver society from the fruits of marital breakdown. It progressively arrogates to itself more and more power, more and more control over family life, over children, over schools; more and more interference―even to the point of specifying how families are to conduct themselves, with increasingly minute presecriptions, even down to hectoring everyone over what is to be eaten!―so that in the end, the State becomes the Uberparent.
We are in this phase of devolution now. This phase―the emergence of theState as Uberparent―will merely serve to exacerbate the damage and destruction many times over. It adds to the already volatile mix the ingredient of rights or entitlements. If things are not solved, because the State has taken upon itself both to correct and provide, then to the fire of victimhood arising out of marital breakdown is added the high octane accelerant of a belief that injustice is at the root of all problems. As the number of sociopaths grows, to their ingrained sense of victimhood, Athens encourages them to add a self-righteous, self justifying conviction that they have been treated unjustly “The government has not given me what I deserve by right, by reason of justice.” When individuals increasingly see themselves as being unjustly treated, as the State itself is regarded as traducing their legitimate demands and rights, law and order can break down, and break down rapidly. Substitutes to the State emerge, such as gangs, which have their own code, their own laws, and their own justice. The spectre of the warlord society looms.
Too far fetched for an enlightened society such as New Zealand? The structures of civilisation are skin deep. They can, and are, easily flayed away. Let me offer some illustrations of what is occurring now, and what it is likely to turn into.
Firstly, an extended quotation from historian, Dr Michael Bassett. This is the text of a speech, delivered early in 2008, in which he is contemplating the issues that would swirl around in the 2008 election.
The collapse of the two-parent household, and of self-reliance, has become a Kiwi tragedy. Radio and TV perpetually carry stories that any sensible person can see indicates that a sizeable chunk of Maori and Polynesian society is collapsing. Labour’s policies propel that collapse with a rocket in the tail. There are parts of Northland, South Auckland, Rotorua and Taupo that are now no-go areas at night. The Domestic Purposes Benefit (“DPB”) didn’t cause the breakdown of two parent households, but it gave it a permanent adrenalin rush. However, Labour resists debating the DPB like the devil shuns incense. . . .
We must remember that the DPB is an ancient article of feminist faith. But the depredations it has wrought are appalling. The perpetrators of child bashing, mothers driving with unrestrained children on their way home from the pub on benefit night, and the relentless over-production of fatherless children, can be traced directly to the DPB. It quickly became a state licence for tom-catting. Two-parent households have largely vanished from the underclass, ensuring that children stay in permanent poverty. They live desperate lives down there, yet politicians refuse to face one of the main causes of the continuing misery. For too many biological parents it’s not the children they want, only the money that goes with them. We shouldn’t be surprised that parents don’t read to them, or even talk to them. A recent Herald interview with several young Maori women in Taupo had them complaining “there’s nothing to do”. Most parents in the underclass have never taken their children out for a treat to the zoo, the speedway, a concert, or even fishing or tramping, or to the public park. Kids who tag, who commit petty crime, and increasingly use knives, have no idea of the opportunities open to them in the wider world. The young Taupo women I mentioned sat there, thumbing their cell phones, and waiting for their inevitable dead-end careers on the DPB. Too many parents don’t care about their kids - except on benefit day. Then it’s off to the pub.
Since 1999 it has become clear that Labour doesn’t believe in contracting out anything - except parental responsibility. This government funds an army of social workers while the problems get steadily worse. Now we are told that police will soon be attached to schools, acting of course in loco parentis. The notion that state-paid agencies can adequately substitute for parental responsibility must be one of the greatest fallacies of modern times. Yet Labour Party branches are full of representatives of the “caring industries”. Their livelihoods depend on a willingness to keep contracting out parental responsibility. Labour has locked these people into its electoral coalition at the expense of the wider welfare of society. A social work army dominates Labour these days. . . . Meantime the underclass that Labour has helped to create will continue to inflict untold damage, at huge expense, on the rest of us.
Dr Michael Bassett, “The Political Outlook in 2008: A speech given in Waiuku, 22 February 2008”, http://www.michaelbassett.co.nz/articleview.php
Note Bassett's telling point: far too many biological parents today don't want the children they have generated, only the money that goes with them. Dolling out money (rorted off its citizens) is the government's initial way of dealing with the problem. When that fails, a veritable army of state paid agencies attempting to substitute for parental responsibility follows. How does the state justify this? By a fallacious appeal to justice. “It is right, fair, just that we give these disadvantaged people money.” What this means, is that modern Athens believes (and believes religiously) that these people are owed such help. Then, when that palably fails, the government intrudes directly as the Uberparent with its army of social workers structured around state funded help agencies. It has even got to the point where the police are to be stationed in schools. The state's taking over of parental responsibilities is only limited by cost and resources―which are expanding at a rapid and unprecedented rate. If it could, the state would have a policeman living in every household. Let me introduce you to our new father. “Our Father which art in Wellington, Hallowed be Thy Name. May Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done . . .”
The Taupo syndrome, as described by Bassett, ends in almost total alientation from society, nursed by an underlying, brooding, volcanic anger. “I am a victim. I have been treated unjustly.” It is this social environment that breeds the world of the warlord. In New Zealand―nah! Really?
Take a good long look at the sociology of the gangs in New Zealand. They are incredibly powerful within their ghettoes and sub-cultures. Their women and children are literally enslaved―there is no other word for it. It is not tribalism, it is warlordism―and it is an inevitable fruit of the Athenian imitation of marriage.
Another variant of the same phenomenon is the rise of radical Islam in the UK. This is not Islam per se―that is merely its garb of the moment. It is the rise of the warlord, with the degradation of females, its suicide foot soldiers, its honour killings, its beating up of those competing with Muslims for jobs, its no-go areas for non-Muslims, its own justice system, its own banking system. This is the UK's version of warlordism and parallels almost exactly the gangs in New Zealand. People are recruited to the warlords when they believe they have been afflicted wickedly and unjustly. And Athens consistently, inadvertently tells them that this is indeed the case. The warlord offers them hope of revenge, of payback, of a different justice. This fertile ground upon which the world of the warlord feeds has come about because of the Athenian version of marriage and family, with the whirlwind of devastating social consequences which come in its wake. In the end, Athens―the world of Unbelief―is the ultimate sociopath.
Marriage in Athens is at root nacissistic. It begins and ends in a dreadful pre-occupation with self. Marriages (or “relationships”, to use the modern parlance) in Athens, more often than not, are entered into with a motivation to gain something from the other party. When the other party stops serving me, and meeting my needs, “Sayonara, baby,” or more realistically, explosions of disappointment, frustration, anger, hatred, vitriol, substance abuse, and, increasingly, physical violence, then sayonara. And the children fearfully watch, and learn. Oh, how they learn!
In Jerusalem, marriage is not an end in itself. It is a means to an end. So far, Jerusalem agrees in a formal sense with Athens. Both cities enter marriage as a means to an end. For Athens, the end is narcissistic. For Jerusalem, the goal is to to serve God more effectively. This is clear in Genesis―and it makes the institution of marriage a fundamentally different prospect to the Athenian imitation.
Adam was under divine command―to go forth and subdue the earth―to rule over it in God's Name, acting as His representative in the world. What an amazing honour! Hence the dignity of man above all other creatures. In order to do this effectively, it tuned out that Adam needed a helper that would be fit for the task. He could not succeed on his own. Thus, marriage was to make Adam more effective in serving God in the world, carrying out the responsibilities and duties of the Cultural Mandate. God declares, “I will make him a helper suitable for him.” (Genesis 2:18)
Thus, the end of marriage in Jerusalem is to advance God's Kingdom and honour. The end of marriage is not a nacissistic meeting of my own needs―as in Athens. Of course, as we serve God and fulfill His purposes, so our needs are abundantly met. But marriage is first and foremost an institution to enable me to give to God. And when that is the case, the promise, "Give, and it will be given to you. They will pour into your lap a good measure--pressed down, shaken together, and running over. For by your standard of measure it will be measured to you in return,." (Luke 6:38) comes true.
In the history of Athens, the institution of marriage has always been more stable when the particular society or culture believes in a greater goal towards which marriage works. So, in those ages when overarching goals are important in a particular Athenian society, such as making the nation great, children, provision for one's old age, or maintaining a blood line of descendants, marriage tends to be a more stable and stronger institution. The ethic of “others” makes marriage much, much stronger. But these, while definitely better than modern nacissism, are a pale reflection of what marriage is supposed to be and achieve―which is captured only in Jerusalem.
Marriage is a core institution of the Kingdom of God. Through it, man becomes comprehensively equipped to succeed in going forth to multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. As men and women take on the duties and commitments of marriage with the objective of serving God more effectively, so they experience the deepest human fulfillment. But always in that order! Only then does marriage have a foundation which can last through the generations. Only then the ship sails with a fast moving tide.
No comments:
Post a Comment