It has been brought to my attention that a woman going by the name “Dana” has been attacking other Christian bloggers that support this blog falsely claiming that I am “the man who thinks it’s fine to marry off young girls as early as ten years old- just cause bleeding and boobs” and calls this blog the “Pedophile blog“.
Let me unequivocally state that this is FAKE NEWS and is more than that – it is libel.
Anyone can examine my writings and you will NEVER see me advocating for women to marry at age 10. Here is an excerpt from a previous post I wrote entitled “Women’s ovaries don’t agree with Feminism” that Dana has twisted and maligned into trying to say I said something I did not:
“We hear people say things like, “we have to let children be children”, which basically means that our children have little to no real life responsibility until they reach 18, besides keeping up with their schooling in most cases. Even then we extend the childhood years with college, where they can party and have more fun for about 4 years before they graduate at 22 and are forced for the first time in their life to take on the full responsibilities of being an adult.
In pre-modern times, the idea of a child hood experience with absolutely no responsibility was a very short period. By the time children were 6 or 7 they were being taught the realities of life.
Boys hunted with their dads at a very young age, and girls learned to cook and make clothing at a very young age. By the time most children reached the age of 10, they knew what a hard day’s work was, the boys knew about hunting, farming and fighting, and the girls knew about caring for infants (helping their mother, or cousins or aunts) and they had seen many births. These girls were excited about the day when they would have their first period, and they were excited about when they would be able to marry and have children (usually around 13 or 14).”
So as anyone can clearly see I was having a discussion about the fact that children in premodern times had to grow up and take responsibilities in life far earlier than what we have children do today. In many families we don’t make our children take responsibilities for their lives until they are in their early 20’s.
I talked about by “the age of 10” that boys had been learning hunting, fishing and farming and girls knew about caring for infants and had seen many births by that point. And yes these young 10 year old girls were looking forward to in just a few years them being betrothed and being married. These were the priorities they were raised with.
But notice I did NOT say these girls were married at 10, but “usually around 13 or 14“.
So no never once on this blog have I ever advocated for 10-year-olds to be married.
What if a Girl has her First Period at 10 or Younger?
This is the logic Dana and perhaps some others have been following. They reason that if I think that girls should be automatically married after their first period then what if she has her first period at 9 or 10 or even some girls might have it earlier?
The answer is that a girl’s first period was only ONE indicator of her being of allowable age for marriage. If you look at previous articles I have written I have said these are all factors for deciding at what age a girl may marry:
- Ezekial 16:7-8 indicates that the girl must have outward indicators of puberty such as developed breasts and pubic hair to indicate it is “the time of love for her”. In fact, in Song of Solomon 8:8 it seems to indicate that if a woman had no breasts it would be difficult to get a man to marry her.
- I Corinthians 7:36 uses the phrase “ if she pass the flower of her age” which is a reference to her having her first period(that she is literally “ripe”).
- Exodus 22:16-17 indicates that a woman’s father has the final say over when and who she will marry.
So it is not just one of these three factors that allows a girl to be married – it is ALL three. Most girls do not start their periods until around age 12 and even if they do start earlier they have not developed breasts and pubic hair by that point.
But let’s say some girl is a miracle of nature and she has fully developed breasts, pubic hair and had her first period at age 10. We still then have the discretion of the father in this case. I have mentioned on more than one occasion that the Jewish tradition outside the Bible held that the minimum age for a girl to be married no matter what her physical condition was age 12 and I agree with that.
I even mentioned at the time I wrote some of these articles that my daughter was 12 and I could not imagine allowing her to marry at that point because of the culture she and I was raised in and she was not ready for it. I mentioned that perhaps by the time she was 15 or 16 if the perfect man came along that could provide for her and he was a good Christian man of good character I would consider allowing her to marry. Realistically I doubt that will happen even as she approaches her 16th birthday next year.
But NEVER ONCE I have ever advocated on this blog for girls to be married off when they are 10 years old!
So Dana and others at least if you are going to attack me or other bloggers who support this ministry please do so based on what I have actually said without twisting my words.
And just for those who will say “Even if you are saying girls should wait till 13 or 14 to marry that still makes you a pedophile!” let me say this. Let me educate you a bit.
Moving the Goal Posts on Childhood
Our culture has moved the boundaries God has set in many areas. We now are told that a person’s gender is not determined by their actual biological sex characteristics but by whatever they feel they want to be. In fact we are hearing people say they are “non-binary” as in neither gender. I even heard on the news the other night that a white man wanted to be identified as a Filipino woman and they are labeling it “transracial“.
This is what you get when you base your society on the shifting sands of feelings and not the truth of God’s Word.
In this area of childhood we are no different. We decided to move the goal posts on childhood. In times past a boy became a man at age 13 and most women became a woman at age 12 or it may have been LATER than 12 if her first period was delayed. Although boys became men at 13 they did not usually marry until between the ages of 18 and 20 as they had to be able to support a bride.
With that being said let me educate you on a few words:
Pedophilia – sexual attraction of those older than 19 to those under the age of 11.
Hebephilia – sexual attraction of those older than 19 to those 11 to 14.
Ephebophilia – sexual attraction of those older than 19 to those 15 to 19.
Before recent decades Pedophilia used to refer to adults that had attractions to prepubescent children which is something the Bible would also condemn as it does not allow children by this definition to marry.
But over the last few decades we moved the goal posts on the definition of Pedophilia to mean a person who is 18 or older finding young adults(those who have experienced the changes of puberty) attractive or wishing to date them.
We also set artificial age boundaries based on a modern principle of “mutuality” which we are told we must apply to relationships between men and women. What this means is if an 18 year old is attracted to say a 16 year old we will tolerate that as a society. But if a 28 year old is attracted to a 16 year old our society calls that “disgusting” and “creepy”. But the reason we call it “disgusting” and “creepy” has nothing to do with logic or men’s biology or psychology. It all has to do with women now taking over the narrative on what men should want in a woman.
According to women – men should only want women that are near their same age so they can have a “mutual” relationship with a woman who has shared the same life experience. We are told that if a woman marries a man that it is significantly older(such as a decade or more) that it is like she is marry her father and that is creepy.
The fact is that this whole “mutuality” concept is built on the modern partnership style of marriage and not the Biblical patriarchy style of marriage. In Biblical patriarchal marriage the husband much more resembles the woman’s father than her partner. In fact he has MORE power and responsibilities toward her than her father did. The father’s molding and shaping of his daughter is temporary in preparing her for her husband who will be the one who molds her for life.
With all that being said – this is why those Christian families today that still believe in Biblical patriarchal marriage strongly encourage their daughters to marry men that are at least 5 to 10 years older than them. It is also why they encourage women to marry young. This makes it easier for the woman to respect her husband and it makes it easier for him to mold her into the wife he wants her to be.
But contrary to the artificial constraints that women have put on men over the last half century, the fact is men have always been attracted to youth and beauty. It is built into the masculine nature for a variety of reasons one of which is the continuation of our species. The older a woman is, the less fertile she is and the younger she is(within puberty of course) the more fertile she is. The entire point of my post “Women’s Ovaries don’t agree with feminism” was this point about fertility:
“The biological reality that female fertility peaks in the teens and early 20s can be difficult for many American women to swallow, as they delay childbirth further every year, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. “
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/22/AR2010022203639.html
The cold hard fact that confronts our feminist society is that women’s ovaries don’t agree with feminism. Also a woman’s ovaries do not agree with our new definition of childhood, our concept of “mutuality” or with feminist ideals that women should be educated and have careers and then have children much later in life.
And do you know why a woman’s ovaries don’t agree with feminism or our new definitions of childhood? Because the one who created women and their ovaries along with the rest of their bodies doesn’t agree.
To my fellow Christian bloggers let me just end with this passage that gives me great comfort on a daily basis as I endure attacks simply because I am teaching what God says about the distinct reasons for which he created men and women:
“11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. 12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.”
Matthew 5:11-12 (KJV)
Biblical Gender Roles 
Ah yes, some people refuse to let pesky facts get in the way of their “moral outrage”. Anyone who has read your blog for anything more than a few minutes should understand where your coming from, but some people just need to stir up troubles.
We have seen this before. Here is the recipe, take a word and expand its meaning, rape for example. Rape is ugly and violent, but change it to mean any unwelcome sexual advance. Date-rape, regret-rape, eye-rape, and even spirtual-rape. Use the momentum to expand other words like abuse. There will be pseudo-authorities to codify the new definition, enter Duluth. Then in a slight of hand use the new definition to paint a lessor act with the emotional power of the original. Multiply angst and moral outrage with religion of the emotional connotations of the harsher word. For example, a husband who initiates sex with his sleeping wife is equal to the jump out of bushes violent rapist. A harsh word of correction is emotional abuse and is the equivalent to being Sybil’s mother. Simple discomfort is now the legal standard for harassment, same as the creep who says sleep with me or lose your job. Pedophilia is now undergoing the same transformation. Patriarchy has been twisted to mean “doormat owner”. Hate has been redefined as causing uncomfortable feelings, especially in gay (not happy) or in a transsexual (inny outy confusion).
Lather rinse repeat.
Thanks BGR, we’ll be meeting with my husband’s lawyer group tomorrow to show them this woman’s comments and the harassing emails from Seriously Serving (the blogger she mentions), to see if there’s anything we can do legally against her, about the blackmail against my husband’s career.
The Christian view is that sex, marriage, and child-rearing all go hand in hand, and Biblical Gender Roles assumes this as a foundational premise. The author would be wise to state this in the “About” page, or a similar page, and emphasize this in specific details.
Many people want to pick this trilogy apart, especially taking the sex part, and leaving out marriage and children. People who do this are more likely to have negative attitudes concerning marriage, and also find it easier (and often convenient) to conflate sex or marital situations with rape, pedophilia, etc. in it’s various (and sometimes ridiculous) modern forms. It is obvious (to me) that such people are immature, and are selfishly trying to get at the pleasures and benefits of life, while leaving the responsibilities thereof to the tragedy of the commons. But unfortunately for them, it cannot be done as a society.
It is my hope that this blog can present the traditional sex/marriage/children archetype as being the best overall approach to dealing with one’s sexual desires, as opposed to the troublesome, complicated and risky alternatives, which attempt to pick these three apart.
To this end, I kindly suggest that Biblical Gender Roles might explore some modern, non-Biblical arrangements of sex and marriage, and point out the risks and pitfalls that are associated with each one. (Actually, there are a lot of Biblical examples of these bad relationships which could be explored.) For an example on open relationships, see here.
https://sigmaframe.wordpress.com/2015/09/08/a-study-of-open-relationships/
Including discussions such as these would best benefit Christian young people, who are toying with the idea of experimenting or rebelling. However, I can understand if the authors feel that such subjects are not in line with the overall theme of this blog.
Keep up the good work! God bless!
No worries BGR. We, who actually read your blog and know where you’re coming from, know you far better than that!
Sigma Frame,
You Statement:
That is absolutely a foundational premise from which I work. I base this premise upon God’s first command to mankind – “Be fruitful, and multiply“(Genesis 1:28) and as I have said numerous times on this blog that one command tells us God wants us to seek out marriage, have sex and have children in that order. I have said celibacy is rare gift from God that is an exception to his rule to “Be fruitful, and multiply” and even in celibacy is should not be used selfishly to avoid the responsibilities of marriage and children but rather for service to God in some capacity.
However, I have shown here on my blog that as wonderful as God’s institution of marriage is – we must realize that marriage was not created simply for the sake of pair bonding or the propagation of our species. To be sure this was part of the reason God made marriage but marriage was actually made by God as part of a larger piece of his plan.
I have shown on this blog where God says in I Corinthians 11:7-9 that man is the image and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of man and that God created woman specifically for man and not man for woman as the Scriptures clearly state. So Biblically speaking, God created man(male human beings) to image him and by doing so bring him glory. But in order for man to fully image God he had to create a weaker vessel for man. He needed to create a weaker version of humanity(females) that would rely on his image bearer(males) for their protection, provision and leadership. In other words, God knew that in order for man to fully image him – man needed someone to love as God loves mankind. Thus God created woman and gave him to man(Genesis 2:22).
So when we look at sex – I believe we must look at it not only from the marriage perspective(that it may only occur in the covenant of marriage) but also from the larger perspective of why God created marriage in the first place. He could have made men as asexual self reproducing beings and solved the reproduction issue. Men could have pair bonded with men if God wanted that. But instead he chose to create a weaker human vessel to need and serve the stronger vessel and by placing men and women together in marriage they could perfectly illustrate the relationship between God and mankind(Ephesians 5:22-33). Then we know that sin entered the picture and corrupted God’s design and we are living with the consequences to this very day.
Your Statement:
I agree this is a big problem in our modern culture. Especially with the advent of modern birth control methods people think they can have sex and leave off the marriage and child aspect that God created to go with that. But this is a true perversion of God’s design for sex.
Your Statement:
While I strongly teach that God has reserved sexual relations to be within the covenant of marriage(Hebrews 13:4) I part with a great deal of conservative Evangelicalism and especially my Catholic brothers and sisters in Christ teach that the only way to deal one’s sexual desires is in marriage. Many Christians since the early church and even to this day teach that sexual desire must be suppressed and squashed until marriage and they make no difference between sexual desire and sexual relations. On this blog I draw a sharp distinction between sexual DESIRES and sexual RELATIONS.
I have shown in multiple articles that while sexual relations(including cyber sex, phone sex or mutual masturbation as well as intercourse and oral sex) are all strictly reserved for marriage that no where in the Scriptures does God reserve all our sexual thoughts and desires to be only when we are married. In fact I believe and teach on this blog that while marriage is the ultimate answer “to avoid fornication” (1 Corinthians 7:2) that while one is waiting for marriage as single person(especially young people) that allowing one’s self to sexually fantasize and masturbate is “a way to escape” (1 Corinthians 10:13) to avoid fornication before marriage.
In other words God condemns premarital sexual relations, not premarital sexual desire, thoughts or even masturbation.
Your Statement:
Honestly I come at this whole male/female relationship paradigm from a very different perspective than say “The Rational Male” or maybe even you might. Some people choose to tackle this more from then psychological and sociological standpoint as the “The Rational Male” blog does. Don’t get me wrong – I do love the study of human nature and especially the differences between the male and female psyche. But on this blog what I do is take a different approach to these issues.
I look at all the various traits of the male psyche and then I compare it to what the Scriptures say God wanted man to be. A big part is looking at God’s image and his traits and then merging that with desires that God says he has given to men in the Scriptures. Those traits which God honors in men I honor and encourage on this blog. Those traits in men that God sees as corruption of the nature he gave man I call out as sinful(in myself included).
I do the same thing for women. I compare the female psyche and behavior patterns of women to what God designed women to be. I look at the traits God honors in the female nature and those he condemns and simple relate what he says about each of the traits of women. In this way a woman can know from God’s word which part of her feminine nature are part of God’s design and which parts are a corruption of her God given nature by sin.
And in regards other arrangements of sex and marriage such as open relationships or even polyamorous marriage arrangements between groups of people this is my position. It is possible under the right conditions for two people, or five people for that matter(in the case of polyamory) to make a relationship work from a human perspective. If everyone in the relationship is honest about what they want and how they feel about various things it can work. Homosexual relationships, bisexual polyamorous relationships and even heterosexual marriage between a man and woman where the woman is the head of the house or they are equal partners can work.
From a Christian perspective it does not matter if the relationship simply seems to work and make the two people happy based on the parameters they have agreed to. It is whether such a relationship fulfills the model that God designed there to be between a man and a woman. The Scriptures tell us “And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully.”(2 Timothy 2:5) So a person can say they are happy all day long in their relationship – whatever it may be, but if such a relationship does not operate under God’s design it is by its very nature an “unlawful” relationship and does not bring honor and glory to God.
Anyway – welcome to Biblical Gender Roles if this is your first time here as I don’t recall seeing you comment on here before and thank you for your support.
Larry, thank you for your lengthy reply. It’s more than I expected.
Yes, I’m new here. I found your blog through Stephanie’s blog. A silver lining to the cloud.
I appreciate your views, and I think your blog will be a powerful hermeneutic influence for many, including myself.
If you could copy what you just wrote into a new “About” page, I feel that would strengthen the presentation of your blog. Just my humble two cents.
God bless!
It’s like I said BGR if Joseph was alive today he would be crucified by our self righteous society and they would accuse him of being a pedaphile
I think I would rather take God’s perspective on him as a righteous, holy man rather than our sex-hating, sex-fearing neurotic society
These idiot Christian feminists have probably never touched a history book in their life.
Maimonides (aka Rambam) “Mishneh Torah” Ishut 2:1-2
(1) From the day of a girl’s birth until she becomes twelve years old, she is called a k’tanah (minor). Even if several [pubic] hairs grow [on her body] during this time, they are [not significant according to Jewish law and are] considered to be merely hairs growing from a mole. If, however, two hairs grow in the pubic area after she becomes twelve years old [her status changes, and] she is considered a na’arah (maiden/marriage age).
(2) Growing two pubic hairs at this age is referred to as the lower sign [of physical maturity]. Once a girl manifests this sign [of physical maturity], she is referred to as a maiden for six months. From the last day of these six months and onward, she is referred to as a bogeret (mature woman). The difference between the stages of maidenhood and maturity is only six months.
Source: http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/952875/jewish/Ishut-Chapter-Two.htm#footnote5a952875
____________________________________
Bible Study Tools
http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/1-corinthians-7-36.html
1 Corinthians 7:36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age(12 and a half years old), and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.
If she pass the flower of her age;
that is, one that is arrived to years of maturity, is ripe for marriage, and is what the Jewish doctors call (trgb) ; who, according to them, was one of twelve years and a half old F20, at which age virgins were judged fit to marry: hence that saying of theirs F21
“if thy daughter, (hrgb) , “is ripe”, or come to the flower of her age, make thy servant free and give her to him.”
____________________________________
Encyclopedia Judaica. 1971″
“a marriage to which either or both the parties are legal minors. A male is legally a minor (katan) until the end of his 13th year; thereafter he is considered an adult (gadol or ish; Maim. Yad, Ishut, 2:10). A female is legally a minor (ketannah) until the end of her 12th year; thereafter she is considered an adult (gedolah) – but with one additional distinction: for the first six months after her 12th birthday she is called a na’arah and from the age of 12½ plus one day she is called a bogeret (Maim. Yad, Ishut 2:1–2). A child marriage involves two considerations: first, the capacity of a minor to change his personal status by marriage contracted as his own independent act; and secondly, whether others – such as parents – may validly give a minor in marriage and the resulting effect on the minor’s personal status.”
I could not have written this better myself. That said I would have liked the comments had the like button for them been turned on.