We live in a society characterized by change. In fact, sometimes it seems like change is the only constant. And change can be a good thing, even in spiritual matters, for the disciple is to daily change into the image of Christ. In terms of principles, standards and requirements, however, God and Christ do not change.
Man’s audacity
In Romans 1, we are told that people tried to change God’s glory into the image of mortal man and even animals. In Galatians 1, false brethren are condemned for changing the gospel. In this society, it would seem there are those who are trying to change God’s design for marriage and marital roles.
None of us would argue about the obvious audacity of trying to change God’s glory or His everlasting gospel. There appears to be some difficulty, however, in recognizing the audacity of trying to redefine marital roles, and thus the family, as if these were not of God’s creation and design but merely social inventions. And apparently there is little recognition of the far-reaching effects of changing the familiarly structure for we see it being altered before our eyes.
A divine design is evident
God did not leave male and female roles without defining guidelines or without specific purpose. In the very requirement of two to make one flesh, it is inherent that each partner makes a different, albeit complementary, contribution to the marriage in order to create a complete whole.
Furthermore, marriage is to be a living parable of the Lord and his ecclesial bride (Eph. 5:22-32). The faithful carrying out of the roles in this spiritual relationship are designed with an objective in mind — developing children who will reflect God’s glory. In the parable, Christ is the provider of life and the ecclesial bride is the keeper of the house in his absence. She bears responsibility for his children, the individual believers.
In like manner, marriage was designed by God to provide the most beneficial environment for the spiritual, physical and emotional nurture of children that they might grow up into Christ. It is an environment in which two people work together toward a single, shared goal for their own mutual benefit and the benefit of their children. As with Christ and the ecclesia, the goal should be developing children who participate in filling the earth with God’s glory. Deviation from the divine design can create a marked distortion in the goals of the marriage. A loss of focus may seriously endanger the physical, emotional and spiritual well-being of the family, both individually and collectively.
Danger of the feminist movement
Today, a common deviation from the divine pattern owes its origin to the feminist movement — the working mother. The idea has been promoted that mothers who are fulfilled in careers outside the home possess greater self-esteem and are better equipped to perform their duties in the home. A supplementary argument is that it is a woman’s “right” to pursue a personal career whether or not she has children.
This idea has so changed families that it has changed the face of society. It has led to a majority of mothers engaging in careers outside of their homes. This often results in the removal of the – children from the God-designed environment to one of man’s design and provision.
Thinking in terms of Christ and the ecclesia, we cannot imagine the Lord Jesus being pleased with his bride removing herself from the home he has provided that she might seek fulfillment for herself apart from him. Nor is it possible to conceive that he would be pleased with the unnecessary placement of his children into the nurture of the world so his bride might be free to pursue a separate goal. The Lord would surely not feel as one with a bride who had a focus different from his own, or with a bride who was double-minded in her objectives. In James 1:8, the Lord associates double-mindedness with instability. Is double-mindedness in marriage and motherhood less unstable?
Self-fulfillment a wrong goal
The core philosophy behind this massive movement of mothers into the workplace is self-centered, not God-centered. If it is true that a self-fulfilled person is better equipped to serve others, then we should expect to see this idea demonstrated in the life of the Lord Jesus himself. Instead, in his life, we are met with a consistent pattern of self-denial first in the service of God and then in service to others (his bride).
In his epistle to the Philippians, Paul says of the Lord Jesus, “He emptied himself taking the form of a servant [slave]” (Phil. 2:7). The total absence of a self-gratifying attitude is evident in all of the Lord’s works. While he refused to make bread to satisfy his own extreme hunger after a 40-day fast in the wilderness, he made it freely for the multitudes that they might not faint on their way home (Mt. 15:32).
Personal sacrifice was Christ’s way of life. His bride is called upon to imitate his example becoming a “living sacrifice” (Rom. 12:1) as the cross is taken up on a daily basis. The bride’s sacrifice should be a fitting complement to that of her husband. Surely this should also be true of the marital relationship that was designed to mirror the relationship between Christ and the ecclesia. Is not marriage the mutual self-sacrifice of two people for the glory of God and the benefit of each other and their children?
Feminist goal contrary to Christ’s
The feminist philosophy is that women have the “right” to seek personal fulfillment in worldly endeavors in spite of family responsibilities. This philosophy is entirely inconsistent with the doctrine that should be adorned by sisters in Christ, particularly those with children.
By command, women are exhorted to be “keepers at home” (Titus 2:5 KJV) or “homemakers” (NKJV). This command is not without specific purpose which is brought out by the meaning of the word in the concordance; women are to be “guards (or guides) of the dwelling (and by extension, the family)” (Strong’s). Thus, responsibility both for the home itself and all who are in it is placed upon the woman.
The use of the military figure (guard) is significant of the seriousness of the commission and stresses the duty incumbent upon sisters to perform this task faithfully. It brings to mind the consequences incurred by a soldier who leaves his post unprotected. In time of war, the penalty is most severe. We need to ask ourselves, What is God’s view of a woman who unnecessarily and selfishly leaves her post unprotected, thus exposing her family to the onslaught of the world?
The world can seize our families
This issue seems to be addressed by the apostle Paul in II Timothy. We know Paul saw something of our own time because of the very comprehensive description of the world in the “last days.” In a discomforting warning, he characterizes our day as being a period of self-centeredness, materialism, human pride, blasphemy, ingratitude (which is epitomized in the relentless pursuit of “rights”) and unrestrained children. This list grows to include disloyalty, obstinacy, arrogance, lack of self-control and brutality. When we look at the circumstances around us, we must feel that this is a remarkably apt description of our times as revealed by the eternal Spirit of God.
Immediately following this list is a description of the devastation of homes and capture of “foolish women” by an undetected intruder “of this sort.” The intruder is the world in the form of reading material, electronic mass media and individuals dominated by the philosophy of the age.
In Timothy, the women are depicted as unaware of the intruder’s entry and are thus captured “as prisoners of war” (Strong’ s). Here is a military figure again. Its use focuses our attention upon the divinely appointed guards who are inattentive to the intrusion of the world into their homes in the war of flesh against the Spirit.
Paul here paints a picture of women guards who, being burdened with sin, are drawn away or separated (either literally or figuratively) from their spiritual focus on their families because of many longings for forbidden things. Though they continue to learn, they are never able to come to a full knowledge of the Truth. This is thus a capture not only of the body, but also of the mind. It is a graphic warning to all sisters that they not lose their single-minded focus upon the spiritual well-being of those whom God has entrusted to their care. And a broader application of this warning surely applies to the entire ecclesia. It is a call to maintain vigilance to all of us in these last days.
Selflessness the key
Ultimately, the attitude of mind that must be maintained, both individually and collectively, is one that places the needs of those whom God has entrusted to us ahead of our own. In this way, the sacrifice of Christ is evidenced in our own lives. We must remain vigilant against the intrusion of the world into our homes and ecclesias.
Clearly, the philosophy that emphasizes the needs of self over the needs of others is contrary to the example of our Lord. And it is a foolish philosophy that seeks to elevate the male’s Edenic curse, to work for a living by the sweat of his brow, to a privileged goal to be sought by women.
Follow the parable
We should all try to maintain our marital and family relationships so that they are living illustrations of the parable of Christ and his ecclesial bride. The way may be narrow and at times difficult, but the Lord is faithful. If we are faithful in seeking first His kingdom and His righteousness, He has promised to supply our needs. May we all earnestly strive to demonstrate our confidence in His promise.
Useful test questions
Following are three questions useful in determining whether or not a personal pursuit is in harmony with divine principles.
- Is this pursuit self-centered or God-centered?
- If there is a material motivation for the activity, is the need real or imagined?
- Is there an alternative strategy to accomplish the same purpose that is more in keeping with the divine pattern?
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One