πας ο μισων τον αδελφον αυτου ανθρωποκτονος εστιν και οιδατε οτι πας ανθρωποκτονος ουκ εχει ζωην αιωνιον εν εαυτω μενουσαν εν – τουτω εγνωκαμεν την αγαπην οτι εκεινος υπερ υμων την ψυχην αυτου εθηκεν και ημεις οφειλομεν υπερ των αδελφων τας ψυχας θειναι 1 John 3:15-16
When we speak of foundational truth, it may seem reasonable to assume that we are talking about doctrine. And whilst this does become its meaning, foundational truth speaks of something that precedes belief and rightly informs the importance of doctrine. Therefore, what is a foundational truth?
“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”
“And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.”
“And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.”
“And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”
In these few verses from Genesis Chapter two, we can see what foundational truth means. The interplay between these four verses speaks of the will and purpose of God, His creative authority, as well as the action in words of the man as an expression of that will and original work of God.
“Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”
In this verse, we see doctrine. It is essential to grasp what this means. We live in a time when marriage is changed to mean many things according to the law of men. Doctrine is always directed into the future in its meaning because it necessarily binds men and women to the foundational truth of what God has willed. The will of God still has its evidence in created things. Yet whilst those things do indeed represent the will of God, they are intentionally directed into the doctrine that protects and preserves.
We must see that God does not create randomly. He creates purposefully. Yet even though the man who is created can speak of the woman who was taken from his body, the direction becomes not that fact, of male and female, but expressly speaks of a man leaving his father and mother and cleaving to his wife as one flesh. To speak of a man’s father and mother, when there are no children, speaks to a fuller meaning. Yet the doctrine is formed from the foundational truth that God wills and purposes through creation according to His pleasure. It is also needful to realise that for there to be children; then there must be consent between a man and a woman. In that consent, there must be a choice on the part of the man and the woman to have children. God creates the instrument, directs His will in those instruments and the man and the woman consent in obedience according to their nature – male and female.
The Apostle Paul also gives us a way of seeing this spiritual and physical doctrine. But before we look ahead to the Church, we must know the man and the woman according to God, and only then can we see the doctrine that directs their lives.
“So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the Church.”
It is only when we see that the will and creative acts of God give rise to doctrine, and that doctrine is intentionally set to preserve and keep the things that God creates, that we will also see that even these things of men and women in obedience to God also speak of the Lord Jesus Christ in jealousy of His own body, the Church. Foundational truth gives rise to doctrine and holding to sound doctrine gives rise to a spiritual outcome.
In this prominent but straightforward example, the Scripture is explicit. “He that loveth his wife loveth himself.” We cannot change that meaning because the woman was taken from the man. If we do change its purpose, then it will cost us dearly. We also need to see that thereafter are all men taken from the woman’s body. If we change either the meaning of a man or a woman, we will have neither male nor female, but reckless disobedience and in the end, we will even change the meaning of the body of Christ. That some have done this is clear. We will never yield to that demand or that outcome regardless of the cost to ourselves.
One might wonder why any doctrine that represents foundation truth would be so crucial unless of course, we also understood that the entire creation is outward evidence of God. So we read in the Scripture, “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.”
As a former occult theosophist, I also know that Satan does not invent things, even though he is a liar; instead, he utilises the things of God and does so to drive men into themselves. It is the body and soul created in Genesis 2:7, that informs men of themselves and a desire for self-reliance, or else an instinct for self-reliance.
Things have become so sophisticated today that deception seems to be a material reality as a proof of God. So that believers in creation conceive God as the neurophysiological man – and that fallen man is becoming the means of being healed of our problems. And so we are increasingly seeing no need for the cross unto death of self-life, and prefer wholeness and fullness. Such an attitude is a gross overthrow of the adjunction of the Lord that whosoever desires to follow Him must take up his cross to be found in the same place He is found. And whilst that is not an issue of repentance unto eternal life by the blood of Christ, it is a rejection of His death. Moreover, it is increasingly a refusal to be convicted of sin and how that real conviction gives rise to a love of the truth. If we say that many churches are carnal, we would have said nothing more than one could easily prove by material ambition.
If we say that many churches do not teach the cross and instead teach a fabled version of the cross that lends itself to self-reliance, we would be said to have been judgmental. If we press the cross harshly, then we may incite a judgemental attitude in those that agree with us, and then we are indeed judgemental. In our Church, we can find a correct balance that does not give rise to harsh speech, and instead discover just how important it is to hold to a biblical account of marriage in a time when marriage is set in secular meanings that demand tolerance and diversity.