It is Not a Woman’s Consent That Matters, It is God’s

The Bible’s teachings on when sexual relations may occur between a man and a woman are in direct conflict with the American Sexual Consent ideology that sadly even many Christians believe in. Some Christians are simply ignorant about what the Bible says regarding when sexual relations may occur.  Other Christians actually know what the Bible says about when sexual relations may occur and they choose to ignore such passages or explain them away as being irrelevant for our society.

If you are a Christian who knows what the Bible says about when sexual relations may occur between a man and woman and choose to ignore it or explain it away this article may do little to change your mind.  I pray that you will repent – but it is in God’s hands and not mine.

But my primary focus in this article is to talk to Christians, especially young Christians, who have grown up in Churches that have abandoned the teachings of the Bible.  I hope that when you are exposed to the teachings of God’s Word regarding sexual relations between a man and a woman you will open your heart and mind to what God has to say and let it change your life.

It is interesting to watch the civil war in feminism caused by the MeToo movement play itself out in feminist circles. On one side we have feminists like Christina Cauterucci at arguing that MeToo has made “little progress” since its inception and much more needs to be done.  But on the other side we have feminist writers like Daphne Merkin at the New York Times that admit to having “misgivings” about the MeToo movement and its impact on male female relationships and especially on things like flirting and how men and women enter into sexual relationships with one another.

Daphne Merkin makes the following statement in her article entitled “Publicly, We Say #MeToo. Privately, We Have Misgivings.”:

“What happened to women’s agency? That’s what I find myself wondering as I hear story after story of adult women who helplessly acquiesce to sexual demands. I find it especially curious given that a majority of women I know have been in situations in which men have come on to them — at work or otherwise. They have routinely said, “I’m not interested” or “Get your hands off me right now.” And they’ve taken the risk that comes with it.

The fact that such unwelcome advances persist, and often in the office, is, yes, evidence of sexism and the abusive power of the patriarchy. But I don’t believe that scattershot, life-destroying denunciations are the way to upend it. In our current climate, to be accused is to be convicted. Due process is nowhere to be found.

And what exactly are men being accused of? What is the difference between harassment and assault and “inappropriate conduct”? There is a disturbing lack of clarity about the terms being thrown around and a lack of distinction regarding what the spectrum of objectionable behavior really is. Shouldn’t sexual harassment, for instance, imply a degree of hostility? Is kissing someone in affection, however inappropriately, or showing someone a photo of a nude male torso necessarily predatory behavior?

I think this confusion reflects a deeper ambivalence about how we want and expect people to behave. Expressing sexual interest is inherently messy and, frankly, nonconsensual — one person, typically the man, bites the bullet by expressing interest in the other, typically the woman — whether it happens at work or at a bar. Some are now suggesting that come-ons need to be constricted to a repressive degree. Asking for oral consent before proceeding with a sexual advance seems both innately clumsy and retrograde, like going back to the childhood game of “Mother, May I?” We are witnessing the re-moralization of sex, not via the Judeo-Christian ethos but via a legalistic, corporate consensus.”

While Daphne Merkin raises many good points in the above article the point I wanted to zoom in on is her statement that Expressing sexual interest is inherently messy….

And why is expressing sexual interest a “messy” endeavor today? I submit to you the reason for the messiness of expressing sexual interest lies squarely at the feet of the Free Love movement in America that begin in the mid-19th century as a theory that eventually became an American cultural reality in the 1960s’.

The majority of this article will be spent showing how the whole “sexual consent” philosophy in America finds its roots in rebellion against God.  I will also show how it directly conflicts with the Biblical view of how men and women are to enter into sexual relations with one another.  At the end of this article I will show why God’s appointed way for men and women to express sexual interest in one another is not “messy” like methods of showing sexual interest are today. In fact God’s way in this regard is far less complicated.

The Roots of “Sexual Consent” ideology and the Free Love Movement in America

One of the founding fathers of Feminism as well as the Sexual Consent and Free Love ideologies in America was a man named Moses Harman (1830-1910).

William Lemore West penned an article entitled “The Moses Harman Story” for the Kansas Historical Society on Mr. Harman’s life and his accomplishments.

In that article he states of Moses Harman that he “not only denounced all forms of government and religion, but added a new dimension in reform by advocating that women be freed from sexual slavery by abolishing the institution of marriage. Harman did not develop these views until comparatively late in his life.”

West also alludes to Harman’s name change on the publication he would later gain fame for:

“The publication changed title again in 1883. Harman maintained that subscribers objected to the term “Kansas” in the paper’s title because the name was local in character. His subscribers also opposed the term “liberal” since so many newspapers and journals used the term in their titles. For these reasons he changed the publication’s title to Lucifer the Light Bearer (hereafter called Lucifer). The title was selected, stated Harman, because it expressed the paper’s mission. Lucifer, the name given the morning star by the people of the ancient world, served as the symbol of the publication and represented the ushering in of a new day. He declared that freethinkers had sought to redeem and glorify the name Lucifer while theologians cursed him as the prince of the fallen angels. Harman suggested that Lucifer would take on the role of an educator. “The god of the Bible doomed mankind to perpetual ignorance,” wrote Harman, “and [people] would never have known Good from Evil if Lucifer had not told them how to become as wise as the gods themselves.”

West shows us Harman’s defining belief in “equal freedom”:

“”Yes, I believe in Freedom — equal freedom. I want no freedom for myself that all others may not equally enjoy. Freedom that is not equal is not freedom. It is, or may easily become, invasion, and invasion is the denial or the death of freedom. The Spencerian formula — ‘Each has the right to do as he pleases so long as he does not invade the equal right of others,’ tells what freedom means. It is equivalent to saying that liberty, wedded to responsibility for one’s acts, is the true and only basis of good conduct, or of morality.” — From a “Free Man’s Creed,” by Moses Harman. The picture and quotation were copied from the Memorial of Moses Harman.”

West shows Harman’s animosity toward religion and “particularly Christianity”:

“Religion, particularly Christianity, came under heavy verbal attack by Harman. He contended that religion was based on ignorance of nature’s methods and fear of the unseen powers that were supposedly warring over human destiny. Religion was dangerous, declared Harman, because “fear begets hate, and hate results in oppression, war, and bloodshed.” [55] Later he suggested:

Cling not to the cross of a dead god for help in time of trouble, but stand erect like a man and resolutely meet the consequences of your acts, whatever they may be. . . . Every man [and woman] must be his own physician, his own priest, his own god and savior, if he is ever healed, purified, and saved. [56]”

West speaks to Harman’s hatred of the institution of marriage below:

“Harman opposed the institution of marriage because he considered it an unequal yoke. [65] He maintained that marital rights were limited to the rights of the husband, with the wife being but a slave to her master husband. [66] The promises of marriage to “love, obey, and honor,” said Harman, were immoral because there was no reasonable assurance that the two persons would be able to carry out the promises. [67] Love and freedom were supposedly destroyed by marriage. “If love survives marriage,” alleged Harman, “it is not because of it but in spite of it.” [68]”

West presents Harman’s vision of a “rational” family:

“He believed that the abolition of marriage would result in the birth of fewer children since children would be welcomed and cared for by mutual affection. He looked forward to the emergence of a new “rational” family where each member would “drop to his place like stones in an arch when artificial props are removed.” [72] This new family would be under the domination of the mother. [73]”

West shows Harman’s view that women needed financial independence from men:

“On another occasion he stressed that women would never have political independence until they earned enough money to command respect. This was not possible, said Harman, because women spend most of their good years bearing and rearing children. [75]”

David S. D’Amato in his article “Free Love: Moses Harman” for writes that Harman’s views formed the basis of a “lexicon” for the values that Americans now hold today:

“Moses Harman was a dauntless and pioneering early voice for feminism, sexual and reproductive freedoms, and free expression. His periodical Lucifer was arguably the most important publication of the free love movement, so important a part of latter nineteenth century American radicalism. Harman’s work anticipates much of a lexicon we now take for granted in the public conversation on women’s rights and family planning.

Fighting censorship and the oppression of women, Harman finds victory today through the strength of his ideas and their legacy, even if he often lost to the forces of reaction and authority in his own time. Harman thus offers a glimmer of hope to libertarians, to a group that looks forward to a freer and more tolerant society, yet realizes that it likely waits far off, beyond the horizon. For while Harman was widely considered an insane old crank in his lifetime, he is vindicated in the present.


Moses Harman And the Invention of Marital Rape

Wendy McElroy wrote an article for entitled “Spousal Rape Case Sparks Old Debate” arguing against the historical marital rape exception that has existed in Western law until recent decades. In this article she alludes to who was responsible for first nationwide discussion of the possibility of marital rape:

“Western jurisprudence has a long tradition of absolving husbands from the possibility of rape. The first significant discussion in America of forced sex within marriage being categorized as rape, and of the need for a legal remedy, may well have been “The Markland Letter,” which was published in 1887 in a Kansas newspaper.

The letter read, “About a year ago F——— gave birth to a baby, and was severely torn by the instruments in incompetent hands. She has gone through three operations and all failed…last night when her husband came down, forced himself into her bed, and the stitches were torn from her healing flesh, leaving her in worse condition than ever...

The Markland letter became nationally notorious largely because its graphic description of violence left little doubt that the husband was a rapist despite the law.”


The “Kansas newspaper” she alludes to was Moses Harman’s “Lucifer the Light Bearer”.

Merril D. Smith in her book “Sex Without Consent: Rape and Sexual Coercion in America” gives us some more detail on the Markland letter:

“A good example is provided by Dr. W.G. Markland who sent Moses Harman, the editor of Lucifer, Light Bearer a letter from a close female friend which described the experiences of a woman who had recently given birth. Because of the incompetence of her attending physicians she suffered lacerations and subsequently endured several painful operations to correct her condition. While she was recuperating from her latest experience under the surgeon’s knife, Markland reported, her husband “forced himself into her bed and the stitches were torn from her healing flesh, leaving her in a worse condition than ever.” Incensed by this behavior, Markland was even more irate that the wife had no legal recourse to punish her attacker. “Will you point to a law that will punish this brute?” he rhetorically asked is reader. “If a man stabs his wife to death with a knife,” he continued, “does not the law hold him for murder?” But if he “murders her with his penis, what does the law do?”” – page 214

And from this letter from Dr. Markland published in Harman’s Lucifer the Light Bearer publication a national debate was started about the possibility of marital rape. Harman would quickly receive many letters from others that would claim there was an epidemic of women across America dying as a result for forced sex from their husbands.  Merril D. Smith concedes that there were many who doubted the accounts and many who believed the Free Lovers contention that “thousands” of these events were happening across the nation were exaggerations:

“Throughout the nineteenth century critics of the Free Lovers were quick to deny their claims of the prevalence of marital sexual abuse in the Victorian bedroom. In 1854, for example, Adin Ballou Argued that these sexual radicals “are prone to exaggerate the evils of dual marriage. They seem to think the best half of their battle is won, if they can only make these evils appear sufficiently dreadful. Accordingly, they harp incessantly on this string.” As part of their project to eliminate marriage, the Free Lovers clearly had a stake in publicizing these incidents of abuse.  They did not, however, make them up.” – page 218

The problem with the Markland Letter case was not with its condemnation of the husband’s behavior. I think the vast majority of Christians would agree both then and now that what he did to his wife was wrong.

As a Bible believing Christian and a firm believer in God’s institution of marriage and a husband’ sexual rights to his wife’s body I can easily show that God condemned the behavior of the husband in the Markland Letter based on the Biblical principle that husbands are to care for the needs of their wife’s bodies as they do their own.

“28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. 29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church”

Ephesians 5:28-29 (KJV)

Would the advocates of the false proposition of marital rape agree with us as Bible believing Christians that what the husband in the Markland Letter did was physical abuse even to the point of possibly endangering his wife’s life? Of course, they would.

But from a Biblical perspective it is absolutely impossible for a man to rape his wife because a man can only rape a woman he is not married to.  

In other words, from a Biblical perspective forced sex within the confines of marriage is not and cannot ever be classified as rape, but only forced sex outside of the confines of marriage can rightly be considered rape.

Also I need to point out something very important for Christians to understand about rape.  The world says rape is immoral because it violates a woman’s consent to sexual relations but the Bible shows us rape is wrong because it violates God’s consent for a man to have sexual relations with a woman.  God only consents to a man having sexual relations with a woman if he has entered into a covenant of marriage with her and then he may have sex with her “at all times” as Proverbs 5:19 commands.

However, Ephesians 5:28-29’s command for men to care for the needs of their wife’s body is a Biblical caveat to Proverbs 5:19’s exhortation for men to sexually satisfy themselves with their wife’s body at all times.   

While we as Christians should reject the false construct of marital rape we should certainly recognize the possibility of a husband physically abusing his wife and this Markland Letter case shows the husband did just that.  A woman’s genitals need time to heal after giving birth.  Even if the surgery was for something different than complications after child birth – if a husband forces himself on his wife with complete disregard for the damage it may cause her after surgery this is a clear violation of the Ephesians 5:28-29 principle that he is to care for the welfare of his wife’s body.

The truth is that free love advocates and feminists had (and still have today) a more insidious agenda.  They did not want to simply condemn physical abuses which occurred in this marriage situation or others.  They wanted to condemn the entire concept of Christian marriage itself with the husband as the head of the wife as an abusive relational construct and they wanted to eliminate traditional marriage from American society.

Now that we have shown the evil roots and true agenda of the Free Love and Sexual Consent ideologies we will now look at the fruit of these wicked movements in the form of modern “Sexual Consent” teachings.

The Biblical View of Sex Vs the Sexual Consent Ideology

Planned Parenthood has an article on their website entitled “Sexual Consent” which I think is a good representation of the tenets of modern Sexual Consent Ideology.  Below I will take several of those tenets they list and compare these tenets to what the Bible says about sexual relations between men and women.

Marriage is in Agreement to Sexual Activity

Sexual Consent Ideology says “Sexual consent is an agreement to participate in a sexual activity” but the Bible says Marriage IS an agreement to participate in a sexual activity:

“Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.”

I Corinthians 7:3 (KJV)

“If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.”

Exodus 21:10 (KJV)

Before You Can Be Sexual With Someone You Must Marry Them

Sexual Consent Ideology says “Before being sexual with someone, you need to know if they want to be sexual with you too” but the Bible says before being sexual with someone you need to be married to them first:

Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.”

Hebrews 13:4 (KJV)

The Only Sexual Consent Required in Marriage is Consent to NOT have Sex

Sexual Consent Ideology says “Both people must agree to sex — every single time — for it to be consensual.” But the Bible says both people within a covenant of marriage must agree to NOT have sex.  Yes, sir and Yes mam you read that right.  The only mutual agreement regarding sex the Bible speaks to is the cessation of sex for short periods of mutually agreed time and then the couple is admonished to come back together in sexual union again:

“Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.”

I Corinthians 7:5 (KJV)

A Man Has God’s Consent to Have Sex with His Wife at All Times

Sexual Consent Ideology says “Without consent, sexual activity (including oral sex, genital touching, and vaginal or anal penetration) is sexual assault or rape” but the Bible says God has given a man his consent to have sex with his wife “at all times” regardless of her consent:

“18 Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth. 19 Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.”

Proverbs 5:18-19 (KJV)

Sex in Marriage is a Duty, NOT a Choice

Sexual Consent Ideology says “Consenting is a choice you make without pressure, manipulation, or under the influence of drugs or alcohol” but the Bible says sexual relations within marriage are a duty that the spouses have towards each other, not a choice (Exodus 21:10, I Corinthians 7:3).

Wives are to Sexually Submit to Their Husbands in Everything

Sexual Consent Ideology says “When it comes to sex, you should only do stuff you WANT to do, not things that you feel you’re expected to do” but the Bible commands wives to be in subjection to their husbands in everything:

“Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.”

Ephesians 5:24 (KJV)

The only exception to “every thing” is Acts 5:24’s exception that “We ought to obey God rather than man”.  That means if a woman’s husband asks her to participate in a threesome with another man she can rightly refuse his request because that would be a sin against God.  If, however he as her husband asks her to manually stimulate him, perform oral sex on him or have intercourse or other types of sexual activity with him this would fall under Ephesians 5:24’s “every thing” clause.

The Implicit Sexual Consent of the Marriage Covenant is Non-reversible

Sexual Consent Ideology says “Anyone can change their mind about what they feel like doing, anytime. Even if you’ve done it before, and even if you’re both naked in bed” but God says sexual consent which is given in the marriage covenant is NOT reversible but rather is a lifelong commitment:

“For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.”

Romans 7:2 (KJV)

You Don’t Get the Final Say Over Your Body, God Does

Sexual Consent Ideology says “You get the final say over what happens with your body” but God says your body belongs to him and in marriage he has given your body to your spouse for their sexual use:

The earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.
Psalm 24:1 (KJV)

“What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?”

1 Corinthians 6:19 (KJV)

The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.

I Corinthians 7:4 (KJV)

The entire American concept of “It’s my body I can do what I want with it” flies directly in the face of a central tenet of Biblical Christianity that the world and all of us who live in it or have ever lived belong to God.  This false philosophy of bodily autonomy was a foundational building block of the Sexual Revolution and also formed the basis of heinous so called “abortion rights”.

I am fine with God having authority over my life and body, but no man is going to tell me what to do!

Many Christian women have this attitude toward male headship in marriage and they refuse to see the utter contradiction such an attitude is with the clear teachings of the Scriptures.

It is absolutely true that the Bible says “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty” (II Corinthians 3:17) and there is no doubt in my mind that the spirit of the Lord was present at the founding of the United States of America.

On June 28, 1813 America’s second president John Adams wrote these words in a letter to America’s third president Thomas Jefferson:

The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”

The Writings of Thomas Jefferson (Washington D. C.: The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1904), Vol. XIII, p. 292-294.

As we previously pointed out, one of the general principles of Christianity is that we are not our own and that God has authority over our person and our bodies (Psalm 24:1, 1 Corinthians 6:19).   But many Christians reject the fact that God as our owner can and does delegate authority over us to other human beings.

Yes – God has made us free, both men and women, but we are warned not to use our freedom to serve our own selfish and sinful desires:

“For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.”

Galatians 5:13 (KJV)

God has not freed us so that we can serve our own selfish desires, but he has freed us to serve him. King David spoke of the relationship between the freedom God wants his people to have and the service to his law:

“And I will walk at liberty: for I seek thy precepts.

Psalm 119:45 (KJV)

What this means is – we are free to serve God and live our lives within the bounds of his law. Moses Harman’s ideology that “Freedom that is not equal is not freedom” does not match up with the Biblical teaching of what freedom actually is.  Sadly a lot of American Christians over the last century or so have bought into Harman’s false philosophy that everyone must have equal rights or they are being treated as less than human or in an unjust manner.

The Bible actually teaches that there are several classes of people to whom God gives different rights.  The slave class was the lowest social class and contrary to assertions otherwise God did give slaves rights(Exodus 20:10, Exodus 21:26-28, Job 31:13-15 & Colossians 4:1) .

The Bible teaches that slaves were to be taken care of and treated justly and fairly by their masters.  It tells masters that just as they came from their mother’s womb, so too did their slaves reminding them to treat them as fellow human beings. The Bible condemned masters who killed their slaves and if they seriously injured their slaves they were required by God to grant freedom to those slaves.

So in this way the slave class of the Bible actually formulates basic human rights under God’s law.  Every social class above the slave class has these same rights and then more rights. Other Biblical social classes include indentured male and female servants, children, slave wives(concubines), free wives and finally free men.  Free men had the most rights of any social class under God’s order.

Even in the New Testament slaves are still commanded to obey their masters and the Apostle Paul even returned a runaway slave(Philemon 1:10-18). Wives are still commanded to submit to their husbands(Ephesians 5:22-24) and children are still commanded to obey their parents(Ephesians 6:1-3) clearly proving that these social classes remain as part of God’s order.

The point is that the Bible in direct contradiction to Moses Harman and the modern American philosophy that “Freedom that is not equal is not freedom” shows us that freedom is not in fact based in equality.

God calls slaves “freedmen” in the sense that they were spiritually free but yet he told them to accept their earthly position as slaves while if they could be free to take that opportunity.

“20 Each man must remain in that condition in which he was called. 21 Were you called while a slave? Do not worry about it; but if you are able also to become free, rather do that. 22 For he who was called in the Lord while a slave, is the Lord’s freedman; likewise he who was called while free, is Christ’s slave. 23 You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men. 24 Brethren, each one is to remain with God in that condition in which he was called.”

I Corinthians 7:20-24 (NASB)

For more on what the Bible actually says about slavery see my article “Why Christians should not be ashamed of slavery in the Bible“.

But in the context of the discussion of this article – men and women do not have the same rights and freedoms under God’s law yet they are both considered to be free.  God does not base our human value on our equal rights and freedoms with one another – but instead he bases it on the fact that we were created for his honor and glory and our value comes from fulfilling the role he has given us to play.

Isn’t it Selfish For a Man to Have Sex With His Wife When She is Not in The Mood?

Now some Christians at this point may be asking “Even though men and women have different rights under God’s law, isn’t it a selfish desire for a man to want sex with his wife when she tells him she is not in the mood?”  One of the most popular articles I ever wrote on the blog addresses that topic and it is entitled “Is a husband selfish for having sex with his wife when she is not the mood?” I hope you will take the time to read it with an open heart and an open mind. The answer I show from the Scriptures in that article is NO it is not selfish for a man to desire sex with his wife when she is not in the mood.

The Giving and Taking of Women in Marriage

Now I will demonstrate from the Scriptures that God’s law regarding a woman’s consent to sexual activity does not resolve around her choice, but rather it is based in God’s consent and the consent of the men whom he has placed in authority over women.

We start with the fact that God has granted ownership to a father over his daughter. Under God’s law, a father could sell his daughter as an indentured servant (Exodus 21:7-11) with the possibility that his daughter could become a wife to the man or a son of the man she was sold to.

In fact, in the Scriptures there is a consistent teaching that women are GIVEN in marriage (mostly by their fathers) and TAKEN in marriage by their husbands.

God commanded men to take wives for themselves and to give their daughters in marriage and take wives for their sons as well:

Take ye wives, and beget sons and daughters; and take wives for your sons, and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; that ye may be increased there, and not diminished.”

Jeremiah 29:6 (KJV)

Jesus recognizing this principle of men taking women in marriage and women being given in marriage stated:

“For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.”

Matthew 22:30 (KJV)

So yes ladies – that cute tradition of a father walking his daughter down the isle and giving his daughter away in marriage is not just tradition – it is by the command of God and has been practiced in one form or another since the beginning of creation.

Now that we have shown the ownership of the father over his daughter we will now discuss the ownership of a husband over his wife.

The sad fact is many Christians in American society refuse to accept that the Bible is crystal clear in its language that marriage is in fact a transfer of ownership of a daughter from her father to her husband.

The Hebrew Word ‘baal’ meaning “owner/master” in noun form or “to be owned” in verb form is often used when referring to a woman’s husband and it is always used when speaking of marriage occurring between a man and woman. While there are many Old Testament examples that prove this the follow passage from the book of Deuteronomy demonstrates the noun and verb uses of ‘baal’ and the ownership of a husband over his wife:

“If a man be found lying with a woman married [‘baal’ verb “owned by”] to an husband[‘baal’ noun “owner”], then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.”

Deuteronomy 22:22 (KJV)

Ephesians 5:22-31 clearly states that God created marriage to be a model of the relationship of God to his people with man representing God and woman representing the people of God. In the Old Testament this was pictured in God’s marriage to Israel and in the New Testament this is pictured in Christ’s relationship to his Church.

The fact is that even in Christ’s relationship to his Church it is clear that he “purchased” his bride (Acts 20:28) as all other husbands had since the beginning of creation.

Many Christian feminists while proudly claiming that men should follow Ephesians 5:25’s admonition for husbands to love their wives AS Christ loved the Church then in the same breath deny what the verses in front of it just said that the husband is the head of the wife AS Christ is the head of the Church and that wives are to submit to their husbands AS the Church submits to Christ.   Ladies – you can’t have your cake and eat it too.  You can’t take one part of what God says about his design for marriage in Ephesians chapter 5 while rejecting the other parts of it.  You take it all or you reject it all.

A Biblical Case Study in Sexual Consent

In the book of Exodus, we find a very interesting case study into the mind of God regarding the issue of sexual consent.

“16 And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife. 17 If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.”

Exodus 22:16-17 (KJV)

In verse 16 we are told that if a man entices a virgin (literally he seduces her) into having sexual relations with him we are told he has an obligation to make her his wife which would require him to enter into a covenant of marriage with her.  But then in verse 17 we read that God allows the father to “utterly refuse to give her unto him”.

When you look closely these two verses handle two different situations.  The first verse covers “Casanovas” or what we today would call “players”.  The second verse covers the “forbidden love” scenario.

God Condemns the Scheming Ways of Casanovas and Players

When the Bible commanded that the man must make the woman he enticed into extramarital relations his wife this was civil punishment and restitution that had to be made for his breaking of God’s moral law. This covers the Casanova who tries to have that “one-night stand” with a woman.  This covers the playboy who thinks he can seduce women into having sex with him outside of a covenant of marriage.

So, in this first scenario the man had no intention of marrying the woman – he just wanted to get some and he may have used all kinds of emotional trickery on the woman to convince her into having sex with him.  He may even have told her he loved her and wanted to ask her father’s hand in marriage.  He just wants a “taste” of the goods and then he will ask her father – or so he told her.

The next day after she naively gives herself to him he acts as if it never happened leaving her with the loss of her virginity and ruining her for other men.   This is the situation God was meaning to address by forcing the man to marry the woman he had just enticed.

Most men and women would call this first man I have just described a pig.  We would all be equally disgusted by his deceitful actions toward these young virgins while at the same time we must recognize these women also sinned by allowing him to entice them into sexual relations outside of a marriage covenant.

God Also Condemns Forbidden Love

But in verse 17 we see another scenario God is addressing.   This is a scenario that has played out in many “romance” stories over the years. Perhaps a daughter comes to her father and tells him of a cute young man that she wishes for him to arrange marriage for her to.  Her father refuses.  His reason might be character issues with the man or it might simply be economic issues.   The father may have told his daughter that he had a few other men in mind that were wealthier and could care for her better than this man she is attracted to.  Perhaps her marriage to one of these other men will provide a political or business alliance that will benefit her father. She tells her father “but I am not attracted to any of those men and I love this other man”.

Her father puts his foot down and tells his daughter “Enough! You are not marrying that man and I will hear no more of it.  I will let you know which of these other men I have chosen for you shortly.”  So, the daughter decides to take things into her own hands.  She decides she will go and have sex with the man she loves (lusts after) believing her father will be forced to give her to him in marriage.  Perhaps this man who also wants her for his wife has planted the idea in her head that her father will give her to him rather than refuse and risk her never marrying.

So, she comes to the man whom her father has refused and gives herself to the man who has so desperately wanted her.  At this point in the story most women and even a lot of men – Christian men and women would be rooting for the poor girl as she should have been able to chose the man she wanted right? WRONG.  The young virgin woman had absolutely NO right under God’s law to consent to sexual relations with that man. This entire scheme would be wicked before God.

This is why God grants father’s the right of refusal even if a man entices their daughter into sexual relations which means she has freely given herself to him (she was not forced).  This part of God’s law would work as deterrent to women who thought they could control their own sexuality or control what man they would marry.

This law taught women “If you give yourself to a man outside of lawfully approved marriage by your father – you might end up an old maid that never marries”.  So, a woman would be faced with this scenario – “Do I want to risk my father saying no because I sinned against him and God and risk being single the rest of my life or will I simply follow my father’s wishes and marry a man I am not attracted to but at least I will not be alone and I will have a husband and children?”

Men Can Make Women’s Virginity Precious Again

The sad commentary on our time is that a woman’s virginity is no longer the precious commodity to our culture that God declared it to be in the Scriptures.  Women have no fear that losing their virginity could relegate them to a lonely life with no marriage and no children as the women in the Bible feared.

We as Christians and especially young men and have allowed this to occur.  In the same way we men allowed feminism to rise we gave up the preciousness of a woman’s virginity by dating women who are not virgins.  Imagine if every Christian man made a commitment that he would never date or marry a woman who was not virgin unless her virginity was lost under these conditions:

  1. It was lost to her husband who died.
  2. It was lost to her husband from whom she was divorced (and she was the innocent party).
  3. It was lost because she was raped.

Would this not motivate young women to greatly guard their sexual purity? And yes, I know what all the egalitarians are saying – “what about the men?” Could these same rules be applied to men in order to promote sexual purity among young men as well? I think the answer is yes with the caveat that under Biblical law men may not be virgins when they marry a woman because they can have more than one wife.  But that is part of a larger discussion on polygamy which I have had elsewhere.  Another caveat in applying this to men is that as we have discussed in regard to young virgins living in their father’s home it is not the daughter that sets criteria for potential spouses but the father.

And just to be clear on this passage from Exodus – the man being forced to marry the woman he enticed to have sex with him and also the payment of the bride price even if the father refused were part of the civil laws of Israel.  These were restitutions that had to be made for breaking God’s moral law in either of the two scenarios we just described.

That’s just the Old Testament!

There are many Christians right now that have completely tuned out everything I have just written with the following thought in their head:

“Well that is just Old Testament and we as Christians are no longer under the Old Testament so Christian fathers have no right over their daughters sexual or marriage choices! Do you still stone people for adultery and do you still eat pork? If you don’t do these things then don’t talk to me about fathers control over their daughter’s decisions with their own bodies and their own lives. These decisions are between women and God.”

If you actually want to understand how the Bible works and the difference between the moral, ceremonial and civil laws of Israel and the fact that the Jesus Christ himself asserted the moral laws of the Old Testament I encourage you to read these articles I have written on the subject.

What is the distinction between the Moral, Ceremonial and Civil laws of the Old Testament?

What are the Moral Laws of God in the Old Testament?


The sad commentary on our time is that David S. D’Amato is absolutely right that our society has almost completely embraced the ideologies of Moses Harman with the big exception of his anarchist views. Feminists and Free Lovers actually went the opposite way on government and used the power of government to impose their views on American society.

Harman’s views of Christianity, men and women, gender roles and marriage which were considered “insane” a little more than a century ago are now “taken for granted” as truths that may no longer be questioned.

In the beginning of this article I alluded to Daphne Merkin’s statement in her New York Times article that “Expressing sexual interest is inherently messy…” in our modern American culture and I said I would explain at the end of this article why God’s appointed method of men and women expressing sexual interest is not messy at all but actually it is very easy when we do things his way.

Previously I alluded to several important passages of the Scriptures that directly speak to sex in marriage and they are Exodus 21:10, Proverbs 5:18-19, I Corinthians 7:2-5 and Ephesians 5:22-24.

Proverbs 5:18-19 teaches that a husband is commanded by God to sexually satisfy himself with his wife’s body at all times. Exodus 21:10 teaches that a husband has an obligation to provide his wife sexual access to his body.  I Corinthians 7:2-5 teaches that in marriage sex is both a right and responsibility for both the husband and the wife. Ephesians 5:22-24 teaches that wives are to submit to their husbands in everything and that includes their husband’s sexual preferences as long as he does not ask them to engage in sinful sexual acts (I gave the example a husband asking his wife to have sex with another man as an example of a sinful sexual request).

I also talked about God’s process for how men and women are to enter into sexual relations.  I showed how God only consents to a man and woman having sexual relations in the covenant of marriage.  I also showed God’s process for men and women entering into marriage after which they are allowed and are in fact commanded to have sexual relations with one another.

In modern America men have to flirt with women, flatter women or otherwise try and romance them to even have a chance of having having sex with them.  It is actually a very risky proposition for men and in the advent of the MeToo era it is even riskier as it might cost you your job. It truly is a “messy” process as Daphne Merkin calls it.

But in God’s design men did not have to flirt with women, flatter women or romance them to get them to have sex with them but rather they purchased the women they desired as Christ purchased his Church in Acts 20:28.

This was the process under normal conditions.  A man went to the woman’s father and expressed his interest in his daughter.  If he agreed to give his daughter to the man the man would return and present the bride price at which time the father would give his daughter to the man and he would then consummate the marriage by taking her sexually as his wife. From that point on he would take his wife sexually anytime he pleased and the wife would also have sexual access to his body as well.

A little note on the bride price.  While a man did not literally have to die to purchase his wife as Christ did to acquire his Church many men often had to save a half a years wages to purchase a wife.  That could take them several years to save. The Bible tells us of Jacob that he purchased Rachel by giving sevens years of labor to her father:

And Jacob served seven years for Rachel; and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had to her.”

Genesis 29:20 (KJV)

The Bible tells us that Rachel was a beautiful woman and her sister was something other than “beautiful and well favoured”.

Leah was tender eyed; but Rachel was beautiful and well favoured.

Genesis 29:17 (KJV)

The Hebrew phrase that is translated as “beautiful and well favoured” in the KJV is not as literal to Hebrew text.  In the Hebrew it it reads yâpheh[beautiful,lovely,fair] tô’ar [form, figure, shape] yâpheh[beautiful,lovely,fair] mar’eh[sight, vision, appearance].  So when we take this phrase together it said Rachel had “a beautiful figure and was lovely to look at”.  In modern terms we would say “Rachel had a hot body and was easy on the eyes”.

So apparently Rachel was so hot that Jacob served not one year or two years but seven years to purchase her as his wife!

But as we can see with God’s method of men and women entering into sexual relations with one another there is no mess, no fuss and no games. Some might argue that there was in fact a game that was played by Laban when he tricked Jacob into taking Leah as his wife first.  But that was a false contract and was sin before God. Regardless though Jacob being a noble man still kept Leah as his wife.

The point is it is a lot less complicated than what Daphne Merkin described as the MeToo movement’s goal of sex as “the childhood game of “Mother, May I?”.

What that means in practical terms is since I married my wife I can come touch her sexually any time I want.  If I want to come up behind her in the kitchen and cup her breasts in my hands as she washes the dishes I can do that.  I don’t have to ask her permission to do so.  If I want to slide my hands down her thighs and touch her groin area I don’t have to ask her permission to do so. If I want to slap her on the rear end as I walk by her, again I don’t have to ask her permission to do so. And finally, if I want to initiate sexual relations with her I don’t have to ask her permission before doing so.

In the same way if my wife wants to come by and grab my groin she has every right to do so as my wife.  If she wants to come by and slap me on the rear end she has every right to do so.   If while I am sleeping in the morning my wife decides to get on top of me and start having sex with me she has every right to do so as God has given her sexual access to my body.

Now we also understand that there is a Biblical caveat to our sexual access to our spouse’s body in that we are to care for the wellbeing of our spouse (Ephesians 5:28-29).  That means as Christians we can rightly condemn the actions of the husband who forces himself on his wife after surgery or child birth and thus endangers her by do so but at the same time we can uphold a husband’s right to have sex with his wife even if she may simply not be in the mood.

My point is if we enter into sexual relations following God’s design there is absolutely no chance of sexual harassment ever happening.  It is impossible for me to grope my wife (because she belongs to me) or for her to grope me (because God has given her sexual access to my body).  There is no messiness to sex in marriage when we remove the world’s evil ideas about sexual consent.

It is only when we bring the tenets of sexual consent ideology into sexual relations in marriage that sexual initiation then becomes “messy”.  If a husband has his hand slapped away by his wife she is sinfully making sexual initiation “messy” for her husband and sadly many women do that today.  If a husband would rather look at porn and masturbate than have sex when his wife reaches for him that makes sexual initiation “messy” for his wife.

And finally, on this topic of sexual consent – I have demonstrated here with conclusive proof that both in their origins and their agendas that the Sexual Consent and Free Love movements were founded in evil philosophies that were directly opposed to the God of the Bible and God’s institution of marriage.

God does not consent to two men or two women having sexual relations with one another even if they have given their “free” and “enthusiastic” consent to one another.

God does not give his consent to a man and woman having sexual relations with one another because they have both freely and enthusiastically given consent to one another.

God ONLY gives his consent to a man and woman having sexual relations when they have lawfully entered into a marriage covenant according the Scriptures.  Once a man and woman have entered into the covenant of marriage, not only does God consent to them having sexual relations but he commands it.

As Christians we would agree with the MeToo movement that men should not be making unwanted sexual advances in the work place or implying that their female coworkers or subordinates need to perform sexual acts to get promotions or keep their jobs.

But while we agree with MeToo that these actions by men are wrong – we very much disagree as to WHY these actions are wrong.  MeToo following the false Sexual Consent ideology says these unwanted sexual advances are wrong because they violate a woman’s consent.  For MeToo – if the woman expressed clear consent to having sexual relations with a coworker or even her boss then there is no wrong committed by the man in responding to her.

However, for us as Bible believing Christians a man making unwanted sexual advances toward a woman he is not married to whether in the workplace or elsewhere is wrong not because it violates the woman’s consent, but because it violates God’s consent to him having sexual relations with that woman.

We can all agree that physical abuse does occur in some marriages even if we might debate what actually constitutes physical abuse. Also as Christians we can agree that Ephesians 5:28-29 condemns husbands physically abusing their wives.  But as Christians we may never classify any physical abuse in marriage as rape because the false construct of marital rape implies that a wife may reject her husband’s sexual advances.

The Scriptures show that a woman may only resist a man’s sexual advances if she is not married to him and in the case of the man not being married to her she is required to resist his advances. That is why from a Biblical perspective a woman’s consent to sexual relations is really an oxymoron. Before marriage she has no choice but to say NO and after marriage she has no choice but to say YES.

It is not the woman’s consent that matters, it is Gods.


55 thoughts on “It is Not a Woman’s Consent That Matters, It is God’s

  1. Absolutely spot on BGR!

    Have you considered uploading a YouTube version of this?….please do as this message needs to get out there in the world
    In here you’re quite limited unfortunately

    Anyway, another outstanding article BGR. ….the sad thing is I don’t think many women let alone Christian women would agree with this. ..they have been too brainwashed by feminism and their wicked need to usurp the power of their husbands in the home

  2. kryptonian51,

    Thank you sir. Yes it is tough message, but it is the truth of God’s Word. I was utterly horrified to read on the life Moses Harman and it is incredible that in just a little over a century his views which were roundly condemned by American society are now the norm of American thinking.

    I did make a few tiny edits after you read it – but the biggest thing is I just added some pictures to break it up a bit as it is long. I did cut some stuff out believe it or not or it would have been longer.

  3. I’m a wife and it is actually something I cannot comprehend to say no to sex with my husband. When I read about refusing wives, it is like my internal computer says “does not compute, does not compute.” Even recovering from child-bearing, I offered myself in alternative ways (manual, oral, outercourse between my thighs, between my breasts). I agree that consent is given at the wedding. The default is yes until it is a mutually agreed upon “not now.” No pretty much means breaking the marriage. Sometimes, childbirth, surgery, puking with the stomach flu needs a not now.

    I listened to your gender roles YouTube and one thing that struck me was your statement of the wife should conform herself to his sexual preferences. Now, this is typically said to encourage wives to perform oral sex, or wear lingerie, or try an exciting new position rather than demanding missionary. But, it struck a blow to me because I am the more adventurous spouse and my husband is far more vanilla. He refuses oral and manual in our marriage bed. He only allows intercourse. I cannot orgasm from intercourse, so it became a real problem for me, and then a point of resentment and bitterness. He does now allow for me to manually stimulate myself during intercourse so I can orgasm.

    Anyhow, for years now I have been harboring resentment about it. But, after hearing your statement, I crumbled….and peace came. Trust in the Lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding…..I will respect hubby’s preference and trust God and not my own ideas.

    As for hashtag metoo, I am appalled at how far it has gotten. I fear for my sons when they start getting interested in girls. It has gotten to a point where the woman calls all the shots and if you don’t react fast enough, you get burned. I’d rather my sons enter into vows of celibacy than play with that fire. All it takes is her word against his and he is on the sex offender registry.

    Womem spent the 60’s and beyond really pushing for free love and sexual equality. They wanted the sexual freedom they assumed men had. So, when they started acting like men, men acted like men back. Suddenly, women didn’t like it. Now, it is harassment. They stripped away manners and social etiquette and rules and complained about the results.

    They advertised their bodies like hookers and complained that they get treated like one.

    They flock to watch Magic Mike and cry sexual harassment when the guy at the bar sends a dick pic to her phone.

    They read rape fantasies, watch aggressive porn, and think 50 Shades of Gray is so hot and sexy, and cry sex abuse when a man acts more aggressive.

    I’m talking in the dating scene, the bar scene here. The guy at the office shouldn’t be putting moves on his female coworkers (and vice versa). That’s just unprofessional and not conducive to the work environment.

  4. In my own mind I think I’ve always considered the initiation of sex to be the consent. What I mean is, say my husband comes home from work and starts to talking to me while I’m cooking and while doing that he starts caressing my body and kisses me on the neck. In that moment I would never reject him as though I’m disgusted but instead respond in a way that conveys the message ” hey send the kids upstairs because it’s about to go down by these homemade biscuits” or the message “hey there a few things I need to handle but when I’m done expect your toes to curl”.

    No spouse should ever have to flat out ask for sex because it simply kills the mood and it is no longer organic. If my husband ever made me ask for sex I would feel slightly demeaned and probably would not ask anymore.

    A girlfriend of mine dreads sex with her husband because he makes it impersonal. Because of an experience she had many years ago she knows martial arts and keeps pepper spray on her at all times. Well one day while she was doing laundry and listening to music. The first thing that he did was grab her underneath her robe so he got kicked. It is that sort of behavior that as submissive wives we find hurtful and demeaning. He also gets upset when she tries to make sex more personal by kissing him or trying to face him, he just stops.

    I will say that there are many times women are completely dreading sex with their husbands, however the husband can do or say many things to actually change her mood before she even gives the vibe that she is uninterested.

    I don’t know if my husband knows but one thing he does that send me over the moon is when he comes in the house while I’m cleaning or cooking and is able to corral the children without me saying a word or if I’m frustrated and overwhelmed and he says “my wife is tired or give my wife some space”. I see him saying my wife as a way of claiming me and letting me know that he has my back so my mood flips.

    Now it’s is very rare but there are times I’m simply not feeling it when that is the case I don’t believe I should be made to feel guilty for it especially when we have 5 kids and being a mother never stops. Even when my husband gets home from being on call. If I’m up late and in the mood I usually leave out something for him to eat and some clothes for him to change into, to make his transition easier. If he is still too tired some times I roll over and cuddle or just sleep and wait for tomorrow. What a lot of women are trying to get across is that your sacrifice and allowing me to rest does not go unnoticed and shows me you do care and I’m more than the live in maid you have sex with. Sometimes putting your wife’s needs above your own can be a very powerful tool to put your wife in the mood.

  5. Also it seems that in the rise of the manosphere you have guys like Matt Forney and Roosh V. that believe women aren’t capable of thinking for themselves. With that I’ve seen tons of articles written by men that state that men should be able to opt out of monogamy, the female orgasm is unimportant and is nature’s accident due to the fact that she does not have to orgasm to get pregnant, all women should swallow and men should not perform cunnilingus on women because it is unhealthy and a form of SUBMISSION.

    I hear tons of women that say they would rather be housewives and be taken care of on a regular basis. They are willing to serve their husbands in 6 inch heels and an apron and pull out the whip cream when he wants dessert. However because female submission is a gift and a choice, the ideas that these men have spit in the faces every woman out there, especially women that are submissive, so then women despise and or fear submission.

    I say all of that to get across the point that yes a lot of women do have unrealistic expectations and these women in the modern age of feminism have completely lost it, but the idea of respect for women especially the woman you chose to spend your life with and to bare your children should not be a foreign concept.

    We read on religious and nonreligious sites about men leading and their duties as the HOH. We also see the guide lines for the role of the wife there too but I’ve notice on this site and many others a laundry list of things wives should do and a list of things that husbands don’t have to do. At some point wives would like some reciprocity. If you see me struggling don’t watch me fall apart help me because team work makes the dream work. And if I can put on this complicated backless strapless lingerie with 8 inch spikes I think you can wear the briefs I bought you because they have same affect on me that this lingerie has on you. Reciprocation is not evil and always makes the marriage better.

  6. Tamara,

    Your Statement:

    “In my own mind I think I’ve always considered the initiation of sex to be the consent. What I mean is, say my husband comes home from work and starts to talking to me while I’m cooking and while doing that he starts caressing my body and kisses me on the neck. In that moment I would never reject him as though I’m disgusted but instead respond in a way that conveys the message ” hey send the kids upstairs because it’s about to go down by these homemade biscuits” or the message “hey there a few things I need to handle but when I’m done expect your toes to curl”.”

    What you have setup is this scenario – “if my husband comes to me and initiates sex on my terms and the way I want it done then I would never reject him”. Now sure that might be better than some wives who even if their husbands jump through all the hoops and do everything the way they want it they still might get turned down just because it is the wrong day.

    But what if your husband did what your girl friend’s husband did and just came behind you and grabbed you under your robe? Would you kick him? If he just took you from behind with out a word or kissing you nicely and talking to you first would you shove him away? If your answer is yes you would kick him or shove him away for doing these things then you are saying you as the wife get to set the terms of how sexual initiation will occur between you and your husband.

    What does the Scriptures say about your intended purpose in creation – were you created for your husband or was he created for you or were you created for each other? The answer is found here:

    “7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
    8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.
    9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
    I Corinthians 11:7-9 (KJV)

    Just as God created man(male human beings) to image him and by imaging him bring him glory he created woman for the glory of man. The scriptures could not be more clear here – you were made for your husband, he was not made for you. And when you or you girlfriend set the terms of how sexual initiation is to occur between you and your husband you are rebelling against the principle that he was not made for you but you were in fact made for him.

    I encourage you to check out livinginblurredlines comment on this thread. As a wife she realized she was trying to get her husband to mold himself to her sexual preferences instead of her as his wife molding herself to his sexual preferences.

    Now everything I have just said up to this point was to you from the wife’s perspective.

    Now if I were speaking to husbands I would tell them as I often have on this blog that they should be considerate kind and gracious toward their wives in the area of sexuality. We as Christian husbands should seek to make sex as pleasurable as possible for our wives. However that does not mean that we have to let our wives set all the terms and conditions of how our sex life will be. That is not leadership.

    Men are to lead in all areas of the marriage and that includes sex and by leadership I don’t mean that men have to be the initiators of sex all the time. I think it is great when women do this as well. When I talk about a husband’s sexual leadership in his marriage I mean setting “sexual policy” for how things will be done. In this way he may seek out his wife’s advice on what she likes so that on some occasions he can set things up just the way she likes it. But then he also teaches his wife submission and service when he tells her it will not always be the way she prefers and that she must also agree to sexual initiation scenarios she may not prefer. She may need to perform some sexual acts she does not prefer.

    A lot of Christian marriage books teach that husbands should let their wives control how sex is initiated as well how it is performed but they are in violation of the principle that the woman was made for the man, and not the man for the woman and that the husband is to lead and teach his wife in all things and that includes the area of sex.

    A husband who lets his wife set all the ground rules for sex is not being selfless, but instead he failing to lead his wife. He is allowing her to be selfish. The Scriptures tells us this regarding selfishness:

    “Do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others.”
    Philippians 2:4 (NASB)

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with a husband having different preferences for both how sex is initiated and how it is actually performed and there is nothing wrong with a woman having these same preferences. But part of a husband’s sexual leadership in his wife’s life is showing her she will not always get things her way in the area of sex. But another part of his leadership in the sexual arena is showing her that he does not always have to have it his way either.

    But going back to the wife’s perspective – your perspective – let me just end with this. If you have a husband who looks out for your sexual preferences as well as his and practices the Philippians 2:4 principle in your sex life thank God for that. But maybe your husband is not following this principle well and he always has to do it his way and never asks your preferences. Does this mean you can get angry with him because he is failing in this area and refuse sex or refuse to submit to him other areas? The Biblical answer is no. Can you gently and kindly bring this to his attention? Sure. But don’t badger and rebuke him as if you are his authority which you are not. Don’t do so in a way that attacks his male sexuality – but do so in a soft, fun and suggestive way.

    If he does not respond to your soft and kind suggestions of how sex could be better for you then you pray for him and continue to serve him in love as God has designed you to do. Leave him to God.

  7. Tamara,

    Your Statement:

    “Also it seems that in the rise of the manosphere you have guys like Matt Forney and Roosh V. that believe women aren’t capable of thinking for themselves.”

    I might agree with some things these other manosphere bloggers say in attacking feminist principles but I have a great deal of disagreements with them and the Red Pill folks from a Biblical perspective. From the day I founded this blog – my guiding principle was that this blog will be entirely based on the Bible. Occasionally you will see me site statistics and psychological studies that support Biblical principles but those types of things don’t make up the foundations for my positions. My positions find their foundations in the Scriptures.

    I also understand that I am not perfect in my understanding of the Bible – I am not a prophet or an apostle – I am simply one called by God to teach his Word to the best of my ability as the spirit leads. I have made many modifications to my beliefs on gender roles long before I made this blog as the Lord lead me to and I have made even more since I started this blog. We should never stop learning what God has to show us and as I have said many times we should continually be stripping away the filters that our culture puts in our heads.

    Some Manosphere bloggers say:

    “the female orgasm is unimportant and is nature’s accident due to the fact that she does not have to orgasm to get pregnant”

    From a Scriptural perspective we know this teaching of some manosphere bloggers is completely wrong. The Bible does not teach that sex was only designed for reproduction. It also shows in Proverbs 5:15-19 and in the entire book of the Song of Solomon that sex was also designed by God for pleasure. Every part of a woman’s body was designed by God for a purpose – we may not always understand those purposes but God has a purpose in all he does. So why did God give women the capability of having orgasms? Why did he give them erogenous zones?

    When we have questions as to why God created various female attributes we must start with the I Corinthians 11:9 principle that woman was made for man and not man for woman. So that means God gave women erogenous zones and the ability to have an orgasm for the pleasure of man. God designed men to receive pleasure from giving their wives pleasure. So if a man is unconcerned at all with his wife experiencing sexual pleasure he is leaving out half of God’s design for sex.

    Some Manosphere bloggers say:

    “all women should swallow”

    Scripturally speaking a husband is to drink his fill of his wife’s body – use her body for his pleasure(Proverbs 5:19). Ephesians 5:24 tells wives they are to submit themselves to their husbands in “everything”. Is a wife who refuses to perform oral sex on her husband or a wife who refuses to swallow letting her husband drink his fill of her body? The answer is no. If you place restrictions and tell you husband what he may or may not do with your body you are rejecting his ownership over you as Christ owns his Church. You are not submitting to him in everything as the Church is to submit to Christ.

    Some Manosphere bloggers say:

    “men should not perform cunnilingus on women because it is unhealthy and a form of SUBMISSION”

    This again is something these bloggers are wrong on. While Scriptural examples do not compel us to do something they do in fact tell us that something is allowed as long as the example is not framed as bad or against God’s law.

    In these examples a husband is desiring to perform cunnilingus on his wife:

    “Until the day breaks
    and the shadows flee,
    I will go to the mountain of myrrh
    and to the hill of incense.”
    Song of Solomon 4:16 (KJV)

    The “mountain” and “hill” specifically refer to his wife’s pubic mound and more generally to her genitals.

    “I went down into the garden of nuts to see the fruits of the valley, and to see whether the vine flourished and the pomegranates budded.”
    Song of Solomon 6:11 (KJV)

    The “pomegranate” and “garden” in ancient middle eastern erotica were used as symbols of a woman’s genitals. He was literally going down to see if his wife’s genitals showed that she was sufficiently excited for sex.

    In the passage below the wife is actually inviting her husband to perform cunnilingus on her:

    “Awake, O north wind; and come, thou south; blow upon my garden, that the spices thereof may flow out. Let my beloved come into his garden, and eat his pleasant fruits.”
    Song of Solomon 4:16 (KJV)

    “north wind” refers to her husband’s head where he invites her to bring his head “south” to “blow” on her garden(her genitals) that the spices(her vaginal fluid) “may flow out” and we can see that a man eating his wifes’s p… is right there in the Bible.

    Another passage with a similar request from a wife to her husband to perform cunnilingus is found below:

    “I would lead thee, and bring thee into my mother’s house, who would instruct me: I would cause thee to drink of spiced wine of the juice of my pomegranate.”
    Song of Solomon 8:2 (KJV)

    So do these Biblical examples of a man desiring to perform cunnilingus on his wife or her asking him to perform cunnilingus mean that Christian men are required to do this by the example of them? The answer is no. It does show that a woman can ask for this from her husband, but it does not show he is commanded to do this by God.

    Biblical examples like these tell us that something is allowable and even blessed by God, but they do not require us to do those things. Do I think husbands should do this for their wives? Yes. In fact I know many men(including myself) that rather enjoying performing cunnilingus on their wives. But the example is not a command, it is an allowance.

    But then we also have an example of fellatio in the Song of Solomon as well:

    “As the apple tree among the trees of the wood, so is my beloved among the sons. I sat down under his shadow with great delight, and his fruit was sweet to my taste.”
    Song of Solomon 2:3 (KJV)

    Just as a garden and a pomegranate can be symbolic of a woman’s genitals in ancient middle eastern erotica so too an apple tree could also be symbolic of a man’s genitals. The woman sitting in the shade of his apple tree is symbolic of a woman kneeling before her husband to perform fellatio. The Scriptures tell us this gave her great delight to perform fellatio on her husband. Finally it tells us “his fruit” and the fruit of his apple tree(his penis) is his semen was “sweet” to her taste.

    So this gives us a Scriptural example of a wife performing fellatio on her husband with an attitude of “delight” and her desiring the fruit of his apple tree(his penis) seeing at sweet to her taste. Again as with the other examples of cunnilingus does the example itself here act as a command to women by itself? The answer is no. It simply shows that fellatio by a wife toward her husband is allowed and blessed by God.

    However, and this is a big “however” – remember that a wife is to submit to her husband in “everything” as Ephesians 5:24 states and a husband is to satisfy himself and drink his sexual fill of his wife at all times according to Proverbs 5:19? This means that even though Song of Solomon 2:3 is only an example – a husband can rightly command his wife to perform this example shown in the Scriptures. She cannot command him to perform examples, but he can command her. That is a big difference between the husband and wife. Remember he is her head and she was made for him.

    The vast majority of men if they are honest with themselves want their wives to perform fellatio on them – and while many would not force the issue of their wives swallowing if she does swallow with delight acting as she craved his “fruit” this sends men into levels of ecstasy I think no woman could ever understand even if cunnilingus were performed on her.

    When a woman acts like she craves her husbands semen – it makes him feel fully accepted and loved by her. It is just a fact of the masculine sexual nature.

  8. The scenario I described was not about how I think the initiation should be done but really describing a situation that is quite common in the sense that the spouse is busy at the moment and how the other spouse handles it in the moment should not give the impression that they are irritated by the advance.

    There is a significant difference between the scenario I gave and a man walking into his home and his wife cutting onions and instead of making a pass at her that the let’s her know that he is the mood, he shoves her over the counter and takes her regardless of her plea to stop because it may be painful or you don’t want to burn the food.

    And I guess you may have missed the part where I said my friend has actually been through a traumatic situation so that is why she is typically guarded. She didn’t kick her husband because she was mad, she did it because she was very distracted by the task of laundry and having her headphones in listening to music.

    I read a comment you left on an article giving an example of a man telling his wife “we need to have a meeting”, which was a code phrase for sex. I agree with everything in that went along with that. I’m not talking about a woman setting the guidelines for all sexual activities. Both spouses should initiate sex, I gave the example of my husband getting off late for work and me wanting sex when he comes home late from being on call sometimes I get it other times I don’t.

    I even take initiative to make sure that when he gets home his food is in the microwave, the water is hot for his bath and sleep wear is on the chair, but I don’t show any sign of anger or disappointment if it doesn’t happen, because I’m really not. If I’m exhausted from tending to 5 children sometimes even getting up several times during the night , the house and running errands all day my husband considers that.

    Now being tired should never be a recurrent excuse but a man is not bowing to his wife giving her some occasional time off. Plus I’ve never heard of any man or woman that enjoyed unenthusiastic sex. I get that some people like roughness but to actually force yourself on to your spouse can be dangerous not just because of the possibility of retaliation but you could actually harm them.

    Yes some people are into those extreme scenes but to do that to your wife unexpectedly and you see the terror in her reaction but you continue doesn’t exactly scream loving and protective husband. It’s pretty far fetched to expect your wife to think you have her best interest at heart after that scenario. “He caused me physical pain or could clearly see that I was not prepared yet he didn’t stop so I could even get comfortable. Did he enjoy my fear and pain, how do I trust him”.

    Once again I understand what you are saying referring to the roles we play in the marriage. We know what men don’t have to do but consideration, appreciation and respect are a woman’s 3 biggest turn ons. Not catering to her or jumping through hoops. I would also like to know your opinions regarding guys like Roosh V. And Matt Forney.

  9. Tamara,

    Your Statement:

    “I hear tons of women that say they would rather be housewives and be taken care of on a regular basis. They are willing to serve their husbands in 6 inch heels and an apron and pull out the whip cream when he wants dessert. However because female submission is a gift and a choice, the ideas that these men have spit in the faces every woman out there, especially women that are submissive, so then women despise and or fear submission.”

    A wife’s submission is not ever presented as a gift to a her husband or a choice in the Bible. That is an invention of Christian Feminism out of thin air. A wife’s submission to her husband is command by God – she has not choice but to submit. See my article where I tackle the false Christian feminist teaching that a woman’s submission to her husband is voluntary and may not be compelled by her husband.

  10. Addendum!!! I just read your passage on swallowing and I definitely agree. Personally I do enjoy it and believe it has medicinal properties but even if I didn’t you know the saying about spitters. Plus men don’t shy away from our fluids so neither should we.

  11. Tamara,

    Your friend’s statement regarding her husband’s behavior:

    “He caused me physical pain or could clearly see that I was not prepared yet he didn’t stop so I could even get comfortable. Did he enjoy my fear and pain, how do I trust him”

    I can see this from a couple different angles. I have actually counseled with some privately via email about what I have called their sinful desire for causing their wives fear and pain in a sexual way for their own pleasure. If a man get’s off and actually get’s pleasure from his wife’s fear and pain this is not of God. This is not him imaging God as all men are commanded to do.

    Now I have said on this site multiple times that the Scriptures clearly say that women are to fear their husbands as the Scriptures show:

    “Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence(phobéō – Greek for “fear”) her husband.”
    Ephesians 5:33 (KJV)

    “1 Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; 2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear(phóbos Greek for “fear”).”
    I Peter 3:1-2 (KJV)

    The same word for wives fearing their husbands is used for us all being called to fear God:

    “Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear(phobéō – Greek for “fear”) God. Honour the king.”
    1 Peter 2:17 (KJV)

    This type of fear is not speaking to women regarding their husbands as monsters that they dread. That is not how God wants us to fear him. This is talking about a respectful fear or reverence to someone and frankly this type of fear that God commands of wives toward their husbands is utterly lacking in our Christian culture today. Wives say all the time “I respect my husband” – but respect is not the same as reverencing someone.

    My point is if this husband gets his kicks out causing his wife pain and dread and this gets him off sexually that is a problem.

    But now let’s look at this from another angle. What if he is not purposefully doing this to cause her fear or dread? What if he like may other husbands just loves to come behind his wife and put his hands under her clothes to feel what belongs to him?

    If you read this article all the way through at the very end I alluded to the fact that the Bible allows husbands and wives to touch each others bodies. That means my wife can “cop a feel” on me when she wants and I can “cop a feel” on her when I want and we don’t have to ask permission to do so. However the fact that the Scriptures allow this does not mean my wife actually likes it – the vast majority of the time she does not.

    When I first married my wife (almost eight years ago) she was not a touchy-feely kind of woman. My wife likes to be in control at all times and if I were to come up behind her and cop a feel it would often bother her. But I told her that as her husband I am a touchy-feely man and she needed to work on that part of her self. I did give her some room to change and did not do it all the time at first but I did occasionally do it and worked my way up to doing it more often. Now for the most part after seven years of marriage she accepts this while at times she still does revert to her old ways and push my hands away which she knows does not please me.

    While my wife did not suffer any past sexual trauma to my knowledge(and I have asked her several times to confirm that) for her I think the reason she has a hard time with me just coming up and “coping a feel” is because she does not like surprises and even if I came in front of her and it is not a surprise that my hands are moving in she likes to be in control and this violates her sense of control.

    I have actually shared with her on multiple occasions that the reason I have continued “coping a feel” throughout our marriage fully knowing she is not comfortable with it is this is two fold:

    The first reason is that Proverbs 5:19 tells me as my wife’s husband to let my wife’s breasts(symbolic of her whole body) satisfy me at all times. That means I am to feel comfortable at any time cupping my wife’s breasts in my hands, slapping her rear end or placing my hands where I want to. The fact that this brings me joy is holy and righteous before God because he designed me to enjoy it and commands me to enjoy it.

    But there is a second reason that I continue after seven years of marriage “coping a feel” on my wife at random times. It is me teaching her as her husband to let go. It is me reminding her she is mine and her body belongs to me.

    There are some days where she really tries to let go remembering what the Scriptures say of her body belonging to me – and I love those days when there is no resistance from her. This is what all husbands want from their wives.

    So I am not sure of the situation with your friend. It is easy for a woman to say to her husband “you just like making miserable, or fearful or…” when her husband does something she does not like or asks her to have sex or do something she does not want to do. But sometimes that is a cop out that women use when they simply do not want to change or adapt to their husbands. They don’t want to do as livinginblurredlines allude to and mold themselves to their husbands desires and preferences – but rather they want him to mold himself to them.

  12. Ok as an atheist man that practices male headship with domestic discipline and the consequence of spanking, I think I have to ask a what point does logic come into play? I often go find books and websites that challenge my way of thinking and even though I’m not a religious man I agree with a lot of these concepts however from what I have learned from my studying different religions and even other cultures is that there is a massive lack of simply logic. Now if I am correct we do know that biblically all women are to submit to there husbands and fathers and mankind is to submit to God. We required to do this but not begrudgingly. Common sense tells me that if I am disrespectful and hurtful to my wife I know that serving me willfully becomes harder. But if I am kind to her even when she falls short, yes I can take action if needed heck I spank my wife but not in anger. Be it some form of punishment or simply talking to her in a way that lets her know she was wrong but doing so in a constructive way, her feelings regarding her submission to me won’t decrease but actually make them grow. So is submission in and of itself a gift maybe not but willful, loving, genuine and passionate submission is. No woman should live in fear of her husband and he shouldn’t expect a woman to submit to him with love in her heart if he is a tyrant. She may not disrespect him, may never refuse him in bed, and may even respond with “yes dear” with biggest smile on her face even though he yelled at her, and called her out of her name and told her to make him a sandwich. But her heart will never be in it completely no matter how good she is at hiding her sadness and eventually that too will show. Once again submission in itself may not be a gift, but loving willful submission is.

  13. Derek,

    While I still reject the paradigm of submission being a gift from a Biblical perspective when God commands it I do see where you are coming from. Grudging submission does not give God pleasure, and it should not give husbands or parents pleasure either. We as husbands and fathers want our wives and children to willingly love us and submit to us. This makes for a peaceful and joyful family environment. I also agree that we as husbands and fathers can do things that humanly speaking make it much harder for our wives and children to willfully and joyfully submit to us. If we are being too harsh or unfair or selfish and showing no regard for our wives or children’s wellbeing they will have a harder time respecting us and submitting to us.

    When it comes to respect and authority figures there are two kinds of respect. There is the respect for the position and the respect for the person. Respect for a person’s position of authority and especially of a husband is unconditional. But respect for their person is very much conditioned on the how they treat the people under them and the sacrifices they make for their family. In the same way, from a Biblical perspective there is a love that is commanded and is unconditional and then there is a conditional affectionate love. I have spoke many times on this site that a wife does not have to earn her husband’s unconditional love in the sense that God calls him to provide for her and care for her needs no matter what she does. But if she wants his affectionate love – this kind of love is earned by her conduct.

  14. Sadly so many modern day Christians have been so compromised by culture that your words will simply anger them. So much of modern understanding is not “what does the bible say” so much as “what do I BELIEVE the bible says”.

  15. I thank you for allowing my comment to be posted because I know you probably get overly combative and rude comments from atheists all the time. I think that is where people make the association that submission is a gift because they stand by the assertion that love is a gift and loving submission is the only kind that actually has substance and value.

    To be honest this is not a negative thing and I read your article on female submission that you posted in the comments. If men viewed submission as something that had to be earned, and we are both clear on the type of submission, men would be less likely to trifle with it and treat like a toy. If you add that into the mix then you have a loving leader and a loving follower constantly working to make their home cohesive and harmonious, while not over stepping boundaries and respecting each spouse’s position as HOH and submissive.

    If you’re looking at this from that perspective I don’t think the teaching is false because you aren’t saying men should act like they are in a 3 ring circus to get their wives to submit, but by you doing what a husband is supposed to with a positive and loving demeanor you are earning your wife’s trust and loving submission. I don’t know if you have a daughter but I’d much rather my daughter be with the man who wants to be someone worth submitting to than the man who is complacent and takes it for granted because he thinks because it is required my actions should not effect her mindet or demeanor as a wife.

  16. Derick,

    You are absolutely right that probably 98% of Atheist comments and emails I get(and I get a lot of them) are to use your words “combative and rude” and that is why they don’t make it through moderation. Also the primary mission of this site is to preach, teach and discuss the doctrines of Biblical gender roles and compare and contrast those with gender thinking in America today.

    This blog takes for take for granted that God exists and that he gave us his Word in the form of the Bible – I don’t even allow that to be debated as there are plenty of other Christian sites atheists can go to to debate the existence of God or the reliability the Bible. But on a rare occasion if an atheist such as yourself comes on here with respectful comments – even with respectful disagreements and they stay on the topic of gender roles as you have I will let the comment through.

    And to answer your question – yes I do have a daughter and yes I would prefer that she marry a man that is of good Christian character, a man who loves God and then his family and who serves others and is fair, wise and kind by the Bible’s standards. I agree if she marries such a man it will be easier for her to submit to him and respect him.

    But I also realize that my daughter and her future husband are both sinners. They both will have failings. And I also realize that a man being a good man of good character does not mean a woman will automatically submit to him and follow him as so many Christian teachers and others falsely claim. Many a woman has been married to a good man that she did not appreciate and treaded all over and so too many a man has been married to a good woman that he did appreciate and treaded all over.

    In the Bible in the Old Testament it pictures God as the perfect husband to Israel in every way – yet his wife trusted in her beauty and ran around with other men and disobeyed his commands. So while a husband having a respectable character does make it easier for many women to submit – the truth is for many women their own sinful and rebellious natures are their own worst enemies.

  17. I agree with you that one won’t guarantee another, my stance is that in a relationship like the one we are describing we can’t stoop to a level that undermines what we are trying to build. Now of course we arent perfect so yes we’ll make mistakes and do things that hurt our wives and children but it’s how we take responsibility for those actions and striving to make sure it is not a frequent problem that determines how are wives and children perceive us. I actually have quite a few friends that practice dominant and submissive roles in relationships and it’s interesting to see how that plays out in traditional and not so traditional couples.

    One thing that I thought was very interesting, was a friend talking about how her relationship began with her husband. They are quite liberal people as am I but when it comes to there marriage it screams patriarchy, but it took them a while to get there. They met in church and my friend is a bit of a firecracker surprisingly so is the man she married so they were a great match but it took her a while to simply let go and fall in line.

    They dated for about a year and a half. She said that they never really had extreme arguments but she was a worrier and always had a but . . . . She said that one day he sat her down and asked her she would start trusting him and stop fighting him. Her response was that he was being dramatic but then he said ” by doubting me and not letting me handle my duties as your man you are fighting against me”. She let that sit and she tried to become more aware of her behavior and started to think to her self if he hasn’t given me a reason to fight why do it. She felt foolish. She approached one day with an humble attitude and apologized for not allowing him to be her man, her provider, protector and hero.

    Moral of the story, when we as leaders of our homes show the people we are leading that there is no reason to rebel or fight, if you’re dealing with sane individuals, they’ll realize that submission is not a curse. But anyway I liked this discussion. I have a question that I’m going to email you about later because I would like to pick your brain. One religious believer in patriarchy to an atheist believer in patriarchy.

  18. I think this was a great discussion and I’ve taken a lot from it and Derick you definitely explained what I meant regarding submission perfectly. As for “coping a feel” I understand your position on that. We as wives can be ornery so, sometimes you have chip away at ice. The key here is knowing each other sexually and going from there. Marriage without phenomenal sex, won’t have longevity.

  19. BGR, Bravo, outstanding! Applause amen and amen!

    There is much work to be done to continue to show that gender equality and feminism, even the kind taught in the church, are the doctrines of demons and the deception of Satan. There is God’s design and then there is Satan’s. Satan offers a life with no authority but autonomy, to be as a god, but in the end it leads to hell on earth and eternity. Lucifer and his deceived followers will find themselves eternally separated from fellowship with their creator. The LORD is good and His blueprints are righteous. His way in the end leads to joy, peace and manifold blessings. Unfortunately the church often supports and validates Satan’s deceptions for sex and marriage.

    If there is any way that I can support your ministry please let me know, I want to see your ministry affect more believers. I am convinced that what you are doing is among the most significant kingdom work in our time. Let’s face it the murder of children in the womb is the fruit of “consent” thinking, as the vast majority of divorce. The kingdom languishes because the Word of God has been abrogated for the promises of Lucifer.

  20. Jonadab,

    I appreciate your support and kind words and I also appreciate your prayers. I have recently set up a new donation button(because I had a few readers insisting they had to send me some support and one actually helped me in setting it up).

    You can find it here:

    When I first started this site I was kind of shy to ask for donations as I did not want people to think I was doing this for money. This is a labor of love for me and a passion I have to give the truth of God’s Word regarding gender roles to a society that has either forgotten or rejected them. But then I realized that the Apostles were not ashamed to be supported in their work and neither are the various evangelists and other who come through my local church – why should I be? With that said any small amount you wish to donate will help.

    Most of the money I receive in donations I actually just turn around and use for Facebook ads for my articles. I am looking at expanding to other social media as well. Right now I make a little over a $100 a month on ads generated through wordpress(who hosts my blog) and most months I just turn that money around for facebook ads. For example – I just paid for an ad campaign for this article and it cost me $200.00.

    A lot of people on facebook have accused me of wanting attention for myself and putting “click bait” by having controversial titles like this one “Its not a Woman’s Consent that Matters, Its Gods” but I have told them I don’t want the attention for myself – I want to bring the attention back to God and his design for our lives. So yes I do speak on highly controversial issues like consent and rape to truly make people think about God’s design for us and how Satan has corrupted his design.

    And yes on Moses Harman – I read for many hours many sources on his life(not just the ones I gave here) and he was a scary individual to say the least. Yet his wicked agenda which was called “insane” at the time he wrote in the 19th century is what our society holds as the truth and the worst part is a lot of professing believers would hold to majority of his beliefs.

    This is the adulterous and wicked generation that we live in today. I am getting a lot of hate mail because of this and I realize that only a small percent will hear the truth and change – but God says his Word will not return void and I believe that.

  21. Thanks for the donation link. My donation is not much, more like the widows mite, but by the power of the Holy Spirit I hope it will be multiplied. One thing that may help publicize your good work, is to encourage readers to link to your posts on their own facebook wall. I have and yes, it brings out the haters and the feminists.

    It is curious to me how they accuse others of twisting the scripture without ever quoting it or showing how the hermeneutic is wrong. IMO, It all boils down to autonomy and eisegeses. It is sad that so many have been so convinced of what is right that their heart is not soft to the Word of God. The opportunity for repentance and blessing is taken from then because of the hardness of their hearts. I believe this is why any meaningful repentance for the church must being in the pulpits, what is being taught is contrary to the Word and even a blasphemy. There are so many that seem to have the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. I have lost my voice, but maybe by supporting yours I can still advance the Kingdom and the truth of God’s Word. God’s speed! You have my prayers and support!

  22. Jonadab,

    Thank you for very much for your donation and it is greatly appreciated and yes I agree with you that I encourage all my readers to let their friends and family and link to my Facebook page and articles. Just as with spreading the Gospel, it is all about reaching one person at a time for Christ and more often than not we are in a better position to reach our friends and family for Christ than a stranger is that has no relationship with the person.

  23. livinginblurredlines,

    Your Statement:

    “As for hashtag metoo, I am appalled at how far it has gotten. I fear for my sons when they start getting interested in girls. It has gotten to a point where the woman calls all the shots and if you don’t react fast enough, you get burned. I’d rather my sons enter into vows of celibacy than play with that fire. All it takes is her word against his and he is on the sex offender registry.”

    This is a great point you brought up that I meant to address. I heard a police officer in our city recently talking about an uptick in women making sexual assault allegations against their ex-boyfriends as a form of revenge – many times it was because the guy broke up with them but other times it was because the girl got mad at him for cheating with another girl or some other reason. Sexual harassment and assault allegations by women are currently being weaponized.

    The only way your sons or my sons can combat this is by not being alone with these girls. I know it sounds old fashioned – but I have said it time and time again that our modern version of dating where couples go off alone together is bad for so many reasons. From a spiritual perspective it puts both the man and woman in a very temptation position to have pre-marital sex. But from a legal perspective it puts the man in a very vulnerable position because it is a he-said, she-said scenario and unfortunately in the current culture if “she says” then he is considered guilty until proven innocent.

    I think the courtship model is best where there is relative from both sides of their family at all times with the couple. But even if you can’t get the relatives – Christian couples should always stay in groups(like maybe church youth groups or college and career groups) and NEVER EVER be alone together for the reasons I have mentioned.

    Now in marriage it is a different story. Police officers are extremely leery to make arrests in marriage situations with no physical evidence and prosecutors are extremely leery to bring cases where wives claim rape by their husbands unless there is actual evidence on her body that shows assault(bruises, torn tissue, bleeding…ect). So far – marriage is the only place where the man is still considered innocent of a sex crime against a woman until she proves him guilty with signs of physical assault to back it up.

  24. We just got our proverbial asses kicked BGR over on your Facebook where this article is mirrored lol

    I’ve already had some of my comments deleted, and Facebook has put me on a 24 hour ban Ha!

  25. kryptonian51,

    I appreciate your zeal and I am not sure what comments you got banned for but I actually have yet to ever even have a warning from Facebook because I always attack the argument, and never the person personally. I will say that I am a bit surprised that some people who attack me on a very personal level have not been banned by Facebook(although sometimes I just ban them from the thread). I don’t generally report people – I just ban them from the page.

    Facebook just took a 3 billion nose dive in stock value because Mark Zuckerberg (it’s founders) decision to alter how people can publish on news feeds. This is part of is said of his goals for these massive changes to FaceBook:

    “Earlier this month, Zuckerberg said his personal goal for 2018 is to focus on “fixing” Facebook’s many problems. The short list he cited includes “abuse and hate, defending against interference by nation states, or making sure that time spent on Facebook is time well spent.”

    Under the guise of “abuse and hate speech” it is very likely that Conservative Christian Facebook pages like mine and others will come under attack from Facebook. Basically they can claim anything that does match up with the Liberal progressive Agenda is classified as “hate” and will be censored from Facebook. But I think in 2018 and 2019 there is going to be a massive conservative backlash toward Facebook if they do this.

    In many ways Facebook is like what CNN used to be – it used to be the only 24 hour global network in the World and the monopolized the conversation politically. Then Fox News came along and blew CNN out of the water. I think there probably a few conservative billionaires out there waiting for Facebook to completely alienate conservatives and then they will assemble a group of some of the best technical minds to take on Facebook the same way Fox News took on CNN. So there will be some conservative version Facebook somewhere in the future.

  26. Yup absolutely agree with you my friend
    I’ve learnt my lesson from Facebook and I’ll be toning down my “zeal” a little bit
    We truly are in a massive war
    Fun times ahead!

  27. Kyptonian51,

    This an example of messages I just received in the comments on Facebook:

    “David Tibbetts – the divorce rate is high because women are done dealing with pieces of s# like you. you should end your own life.”
    “Mary Hannah Bates – Thank you david. Can you imagine being a woman raised by this nut and having to deal with the good men like you and not knowing how? What a mind f# his poor daughters have.”

    The other day I received this comment to this blog that did not make it through moderation by someone calling themself “TrueAdvice”:

    “Holy f#, please hang yourself.

    I’m serious, commit suicide, and do it right now. It’s the only true way to make sure that you don’t reproduce. Also, murder your family if you have one. You shouldn’t leave any survivors.

    Anyone who found this article helpful, you should kill yourself too. You’re useless to the future of humanity. Please die.”

    But this visceral hatred for what the Bible and what God commands is nothing new. Christ said:

    “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)

    And Peter told us Christ is our example when we endure persecution and all manner of grief for his Word and his Name:

    “19 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.
    20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.
    21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
    22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
    23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: 24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.”
    1 Peter 2:19-24 (KJV)

    The passages above tell us as Christians we are not to trade insult for insult with people – that is not what Christ would do. Instead we attack the false arguments themselves pulling down these wicked strongholds(like feminism and egalitarianism) and other wicked imaginations that tell us Jesus was “the biggest feminist there ever was”. We must fight on God’s terms, not theirs.

    “3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
    4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
    5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ”
    II Corinthians 10:3-5 (KJV)

  28. BGR

    I’ll respond more in depth when I get time
    I just need you to know that I’m praying for you my dear brother….I’m interceding on your behalf that your faith fail not and you remain strong in the faith from these vicious Satanic attacks on you

  29. BGR….I went to your facebook page to see what the stink was. No one seems to have debated you in an intelligent, reasonable way. You either get threats, allegations, or red herring arguments of hypothetical extremes.

  30. BGR, I think you hit the nail squarely on the head here. Sex has become a dicey proposition for any but those couples who are truly grounded in God’s word. I’ve been married for 18 years now and am just starting to see just how backwards this world really is compared to God’s original plan. I can understand why young men don’t want to work or get married with what they are facing. I’m partly facing this myself with my wife. I was given the “my body, my say so” speech on sex the first month into marriage. I was so naive back then.

  31. Mr. E,

    Thank you for your kind words. And yes we have gone far, very far, from God’s original plan for men, women and marriage. But one of the things the Lord has lead me to do through this site is not simply for us as Christians to lament how far we have gone away from God – but to call people back to God’s plan for men, women and marriage. To do something about it, not just be angry about it(and yes we as Christians should be angry at sin against God’s Word).

    Remember that more than a century ago those who believed in Biblical principles of manhood, womanhood and marriage were in the vast majority in this country and those who embraced the feminist and sexual consent ideologies that are considered mainstream today were a very small minority. Back then feminists and those who taught about sexual consent and a woman’s right to do what she wanted with her own body were the ones who were called insane and crackpots. Today that has completely reversed itself and we are the ones called insane and crackpots.

    I don’t know what the Lord’s plan is for the future – only he knows. Biblical prophesies seem to indicate the world is going to become more and more wicked before Christ’s return when he comes to take “vengeance”:

    “7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
    8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
    9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;”
    2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 (KJV)

    But while we await the coming of Christ as believers we are called to spread his Gospel and give the truths of his Word(including, but not limited to Biblical gender roles) to those we come in contact with. To our friends, to our families and to our coworkers. It is about educating our young people so that they will enter marriage on the right track. It is also about taking back our marriages and families for Christ. Imagine if your wife had been in a church when she was a young teenage woman that taught her that her body was actually not her own – that it belonged to God and God was going to give stewardship over her body to her future husband? Your marriage would have been different.

    But even now it can be different if you are brave and want to take the steps necessary. Take the Scriptures I have presented here and share them with your wife.

    “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” Hebrews 4:12 (KJV)

    The Word of God is powerful my friend – it is far more powerful than you or I to change someone’s heart. God calls you to wash your wife’s spiritual spots and wrinkles with the Word of God as her husband(Ephesians 5:25-27) – and this attitude that she has that it is “my body, my say so” is a very big spiritual spot on her that needs to be washed.

  32. You’ve definitely narrowed the passage about virgins having sex without the parent’s consent. The law was not meant only for “casanova’s” but for any pair. The case of the father who hasn’t started seeking a spouse for his daughter who has mutually fallen for a young man is never addressed. The law’s purpose is not only for casanovas and forbidden marriage. The father had a HUGE disincentive to “utterly refusing” and the only reason he might do so really that makes sense is severe fears of his daughter’s well being. So the one place in the bible where “sex before marriage” (as if that were a biblical category; it’s not) is addressed, the consequences of sex are marriage. This matches the worldview of the Bible which is that sexual union IS marriage, it IS the uniting itself. There is no ceremony or agreement or anything of the sort apart from sex that forms a marriage anywhere in scripture; it’s always the sexual union. So much so that when Jacob first had sex with Rebecca soon after seeing her, the Bible says he took her into his tent and married her (they got it on).

    Secondly the interpretation of the above verses ignores a humongous distinction in scripture that MUST be observed in order to harmonize it and allow God to speak forever in a way that isn’t self contradictory: Obligation to give does not justify to take. My wife is obliged to have sex with me by God’s law, I should be stoned to death if I ever forced myself upon her by God’s law. This is non-negotiable. Rape is rape regardless of who does it to whom. I agree with you that Lucifer’s ideas of consent and the abolition of marriage are wholly evil, but to say that therefore there should be and isn’t any such thing as marital rape is to completely ignore biblical categories and definitions.

    Understand this would be a tempting position for me to take, given that there are certain marital needs that I feel are lacking or are unfulfilled in my marriage even though we engage in intercourse often enough, but even I cannot in good conscience follow through physically with it nor could I ever ideologically endorse it specifically because of what the Bible says about these issues. So I must reject your assertions. I should also point out that I read several assertions of yours about marriage and how marriage comes to be that were never backed up by scripture at all, especially regarding your definitions of “sex before marriage”. As I said before, such a category is unbiblical so I’m not surprised you didn’t back that up with scripture.

  33. Gino,

    Your Statement:

    “The father had a HUGE disincentive to “utterly refusing” and the only reason he might do so really that makes sense is severe fears of his daughter’s well being.”

    What I think you are missing is that fathers back in Biblical times and really not too long ago(a century or so ago) were more concerned with just their feelings or their daughters feelings. They were concerned with what was good for society in general. That is why some parents would bring their children to be stoned as is prescribed here:

    “18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

    19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; 20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. 21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.”
    Deuteronomy 21:18-21 (KJV)

    Now just as Joseph chose not to have Mary stoned before he knew her child was from God, so too parents could act in mercy toward the rebellious child. But some would bring their child to be stoned – knowing that their child was setting a bad example for others and if all children acted in this way toward their parents society would crumble.

    In the same way while I am sure some fathers would not refuse after their daughters rebellious ways in giving herself to a man whom her father did not approve of or bless some would choose to make examples of their daughters for other would be young women who would do the same thing. They were thinking of what was best for society as whole – not just what was best for them or their daughter. Sometimes examples must be made – this is something we as a society have forgotten.

    Your Statement:

    “Obligation to give does not justify to take.”

    I agree that the obligation to give does not always mean that the one whom the obligation is owed to has the right to take it. For instance a husband is obligated to provide for the physical needs of his wife(Ephesians 5:28-29) but she does not have the right to come steal his ATM card and go buy what she wants. She must wait for him to give her such provisions(whether it is money, or permission to spend money on items).

    However sir sometimes in the Scripture God gives both the obligation to a person to give, and he gives the person to whom they are to give to the right to take.

    “15 Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well.
    16 Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad, and rivers of waters in the streets.
    17 Let them be only thine own, and not strangers’ with thee.
    18 Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.
    19 Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.”
    Proverbs 5:15-19 (KJV)

    Husbands are commanded by God to TAKE their wives sexually – to drink from the sexual well that is their wife’s body and satisfy themselves with her body “at all times”.

    Your Statement:

    “My wife is obliged to have sex with me by God’s law, I should be stoned to death if I ever forced myself upon her by God’s law. This is non-negotiable. Rape is rape regardless of who does it to whom.”

    “25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die.
    26 But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:
    27 For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her.
    28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
    29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.”
    Deuteronomy 22:25-29 (KJV)

    Do you see any place in that passage or any other passage of Scripture where a husband is “stoned” or killed in some way for forcing himself on his wife? Every instance in Scripture of a man being punished for forcing himself on a woman is if that man was not her husband. Never ever is it condemned or a husband punished for forcing himself on his wife. If you know of such a passage I am all ears.

    You see you are looking at rape through modern American lenses and not the lenses of Scripture my friend. You are also missing the central theme of the crime of rape. Read every passage in the Bible where rape is mentioned – it never ever centers on the wrong being the violation of the woman’s consent – not once. Biblically speaking what makes rape – rape – is because it is a man violating God’s consent to have sex with a woman and because the man has violated the rights of the woman’s father or her husband. Look at these passages and you will see the true victim of a woman’s rape was a father, a husband and ultimately God.

  34. BGR,
    Change doesn’t happen overnight and seldom comes without resistance, especially when it requires the giving up of power, real or perceived, of some sort.

    I believe that I read in one of your posts not too long ago that marriage is very similar to the relationship we have with Christ. I believe in fact that marriage is almost a mirror image of the salvation relationship we hold with God himself. God has a special care for those that embody the Holy Spirit, much the same that a man has for the woman that carries his seed.

    It behooves the one with the power and resources to give those that are recipients of the seed of life for a blessing and continuance. We are hosts to the Holy Spirit and we are taken care of because of that relationship. So to then are those that would carry a man’s seed.

    Refusal to carry that seed is a refusal of trust and character of the one who offers the care that is to bestowed in so doing. The marriage relationship is nothing more than half-hearted partnership, at best, if sex is not present and null and void as far as a covenant is considered.

    Man’s universal programming is so akin to that of God it’s not even funny. It’s funny that the saying that a man thinks with his member between his legs has a lot of truth to it. Except he doesn’t think but subconsciously acts upon his God given programming. There can be no shame for that in and of itself.

    We must be careful to stay withing the bounds that God has created for us and He is gracious to supply our needs to fulfill his Holy will.

  35. @Gino Vincenzini

    I find myself in the strange position of agreeing with you wholeheartedly that there is no such thing as sex before marriage, because sex=marriage
    Yup, you won’t get me to argue with you on that point…..For far too long we have condemned those in common law relationships and those who live together in serious, monogamous relationships as being “not truly married” just because they didn’t get a marriage license/certificate, or have a priest/justice of the peace pronounce them man and wife etc
    I often say to my well meaning, but severely misguided Christian brethren, get over yourselves, they’re married according to the bible

    Ye on the other hand I can’t fathom how you can still conclude that there is such a thing as rape in marriage?

    I don’t believe you can rape your wife, because her consent was given the very moment you agreed to live with each other as husband and wife….In other words, her consent was given at the “marriage”, no more consent is needed, so if a man takes his wife when she’s not in the mood, that might be considered “brutish”, but it’s certainly not rape
    A wife’s body does not belong to her, it belongs to her husband, so he can take it and use it any time he chooses

    I say that with the disclaimer that there will be times that a husband will show his love and care of his wife, by not indulging in sex, if for e.g she is sick

    I believe women are just children in adult’s bodies, so of course there will be times that she will be asked to do things she is not happy with….it’s akin to asking our kids to do chores around the house, they might hate us, or resent us asking them to do such things, but it’s NOT unloving for us to insist they do those things

  36. I am a grown woman and I am not a child in an adult’s body. My IQ, my EQ, my experiences, age, motherhood, and education all prove I am not a child. We don’t need to believe such false ideas in order to understand or follow submission beliefs. Even BGR has posted how wives and children are different and treated differently by the man of the house.

  37. First observation-your wife washes dishes? Can’t you afford a dishwasher?!! Second observation–you agree that a wife has the right to make any sort of sexual demand of her husband and he cannot refuse. Suppose she is into BDSM and she likes to use whips–real ones–does hubby have to submit to that?

  38. @livinginblurredlines

    I’m not talking about a woman’s I.Q, or age or whatever, I’m referring to a woman’s emotional level, which as far as I’m concerned, with her hard wired natural resistance to male authority, their inbuilt narcissistic tendencies, their manipulative ways, their actions controlled by their emotions, moods and hormones, and NOT rationality or logic, their stubbornness and entitlement mentality, ALL of that contribute to making women basically “children in adults bodies”, as these attributes are in children as well

    I DO NOT speak for BGR, these are my own views shaped by many many years of exposure to women’s behavior

    This is why it is imperative that women are quickly brought into line via submission to male authority, and especially to their husbands, as left to her own devices, women ran rampant with destructive behavior

    Our society, and now ALL marriages are reaping the vicious and terrible evils of allowing women to be the “boss”….we sowed to the wind, and now we’re reaping a whirlwind

  39. Gino,

    I forgot to address this very important statement you made:

    “So the one place in the bible where “sex before marriage” (as if that were a biblical category; it’s not) is addressed, the consequences of sex are marriage. This matches the worldview of the Bible which is that sexual union IS marriage, it IS the uniting itself. There is no ceremony or agreement or anything of the sort apart from sex that forms a marriage anywhere in scripture; it’s always the sexual union. So much so that when Jacob first had sex with Rebecca soon after seeing her, the Bible says he took her into his tent and married her (they got it on).”

    Let me review Exodus 21:16-17 for my readers:


    “And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed and lie with her,”

    If a man seduces a woman that was not betrothed he has broken the moral law of God. God says in Hebrews that the only sex he honors is that which is in the context of the marriage covenant.

    Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
    Hebrews 13:4


    “he shall surely endow her to be his wife…he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.”


    If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him

    So no is it incorrect to say SEX = MARRIAGE in the Bible. Only a marriage covenant that is “lawfully” entered into is considered marriage in God’s eyes.
    To say that SEX = MARRIAGE would violate God’s moral law that a woman’s father has veto power over ALL her life decisions(including marriage as seen in the passage above) while she is “being in her father’s house in her youth”(Numbers 30:3).

    Now let me explain my position on what I see in the Scriptures as a lawfully entered into marriage covenant.
    1. The state has no authority over marriage – this is institution which God gave strictly to the family. No marriage license is required. No judge required.

    2. The church has no authority over marriage – no where in the Scriptures does God give the church the ability to preside over or annul marriages. No priest or pastor is necessary to officiate a marriage and no ceremony in a church is necessary.

    3. A father may refuse an annul any marriage covenant his daughter may make based on the explicit teaching of Exodus 22:17’s phrase “If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him” in addition to the implicit power of the father over his daughter while “being in her father’s house in her youth” found in Number 30:3 allowing him to cancel out any vow she makes. Incidentally Numbers 30 also reveals to us that widows and divorced women may be held to their vows and widows could actually seek out husbands on their own as Ruth did with Boaz (although technically she was following her mother-law’s advice). There is also no prohibition on divorced women seeking out marriage to new husbands(except if the woman treacherously divorces her husband for wrong reasons and then she is off limits to all men but her former husband to whom she can be reconciled – I Corinthians 7:10-11)

    So in conclusion – while I agree with you that no marriage license, no judge, and no church wedding ceremony is required for a marriage covenant to be valid in God’s eyes I completely disagree sex and sex alone makes a man and woman married in God’s eyes. The context is clear in Exodus 22:16 that the man had done something sinful in enticing the woman to lie with him BEFORE she was betrothed to be his wife. This is indicated even stronger by the fact that father could refuse part of the restitution God called him to make – which was to make him his wife while the father could still collect the bride price as the penalty. If a woman is divorced or widowed then yes she could take him as her husband and he as her wife and then they have sex and they are married in God’s eyes. But if she is a young woman still living in her fathers house she has to have her father’s permission – that was and is the moral law of God.

  40. I have to say this thread took a nose dive at the end there. I’m male and I practice male headship but that was a little extreme to say women are children in adult bodies.

    I simply don’t believe a relationship can function if all you do is throw around the E.P. (executive producer) card or in this case the authority card. If your wife doesn’t want to have sex one night give it a rest and move on. She makes an excuse the next day evaluate and investigate to see what may have happened that day or some day prior but let it go. If she shuts you down a third time then a serious conversation needs to be had so we can get back to really bonding on that higher level.

    How can any man really call themselves a man if they have to get physical with a woman? I get it we as men have the right to do many things but at that point what message are we sending to our wives if we literally start taking sex from them? Sex in that moment would become punishment and those two things should never meet. If my wife was going to dance around the subject of sex and try to avoid the activity itself I would divorce her before I make her because at the point I would only be a monster in her eyes.

    If you practice male headship in your home and your wife is consistent with her duties you already have the bigger end of the stick. To continuously use your authority to get what you want at expense of the person you call yourself protecting and loving especially when she is doing the majority of what you want anyway, would only make you look like the very child like individual you described. You then fall in to the category of a man that is trifling with submission. I get it, women can be difficult but on a real not men can be just as bad.

  41. Gino,

    I forgot to address your statement about Jacob and Rebecca:
    “So much so that when Jacob first had sex with Rebecca soon after seeing her, the Bible says he took her into his tent and married her (they got it on).”

    Context is key in properly interpreting the Scriptures. Jacob and Rebecca did not just randomly meet and have sex. He knew his father had sent the servant away to get him a wife and he knew the woman returning with him would be that person. Jacob and Rebecca had sex in order to consummate a marriage arranged by this father. This is in no way proof that if you have sex with someone that equals marriage in God’s eyes or that you are required to marry them. It simply proves that a man and woman who are arranged to be married consummated their marriage with sex.

  42. Kryptonian51,

    Your Statement:

    “I find myself in the strange position of agreeing with you wholeheartedly that there is no such thing as sex before marriage, because sex=marriage
    Yup, you won’t get me to argue with you on that point…..For far too long we have condemned those in common law relationships and those who live together in serious, monogamous relationships as being “not truly married” just because they didn’t get a marriage license/certificate, or have a priest/justice of the peace pronounce them man and wife etc
    I often say to my well meaning, but severely misguided Christian brethren, get over yourselves, they’re married according to the bible”

    As one of your “well meaning, but severely misguided Christian brethren” I would ask that you be respectful in your disagreement on this subject. You and I have had a heated discussion on this in the past and I have no wish to ban you as long as you keep it respectful. I totally realize that those of us who believe in Biblical gender roles will have disagreements on some issues whether it is about what constitutes marriage, marriage licenses and even when divorce is allowable. But let’s keep it respectful and civil.

    And really I have already said my peace on this here and I have these articles in my guide section that articulate what I believe to be the Biblical perspective on this topic so I will leave the reader to consider your comments and Gino’s and then compare them with my comments and the Scriptures:

  43. livinginblurredlines,

    Your Statement:

    “I am a grown woman and I am not a child in an adult’s body. My IQ, my EQ, my experiences, age, motherhood, and education all prove I am not a child. We don’t need to believe such false ideas in order to understand or follow submission beliefs. Even BGR has posted how wives and children are different and treated differently by the man of the house.”

    As kryptonian51 rightly said(and I appreciate that he did make this clear) he does not speak for me on this subject but only for himself. You are absolutely right that I have written many times on this blog that God calls men to honor their wives and mothers and even calls on children(which would include boys) to “My son, keep thy father’s commandment, and forsake not the law of thy mother” (Proverbs 6:20). Children don’t obey children – they obey the adults in their lives that have authority over them – their mother and their father. And they are to equally honor both their mother and their father.

    The Bible says of the virtuous wife that “She openeth her mouth with wisdom; and in her tongue is the law of kindness.” Proverbs 31:26 and Paul exhorts older women in this passage to teach the younger women how to be godly wives and mothers:

    “3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;
    4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”
    Titus 2:3-6 (KJV)

    Of course we realize that even older women should always teach under the spiritual direction of their husbands and if their husband has passed place themselves under the another male spiritual authority like perhaps their father, their brother or the Pastor of their church as God has said that “man is the head of woman”(I Corinthians 11:3).

    With all that said I have also stated this in my article “Why Does God Call Women the Weaker Vessel”:

    “What God is saying is this – “Men I want you to recognize that your wife is not as strong as you, both emotionally and physically. You need to be considerate of those qualities, and appreciate those qualities for the many ways they help her to be a good wife and mother. Don’t belittle her for being weaker or more fragile than you, but instead honor her position as your wife and the mother of your children.”

    So I do believe that women are often emotionally weaker by men. What I mean by that is that in most cases a woman can be more easily deceived by her emotions and controlled by her emotions to make bad decisions than a man can. I am not saying men don’t make bad decisions – they do all the time. And in the same way women can be controlled by their emotions men can allow themselves to be controlled by their sex drives to the point they will do crazy things for it as well.

    But a woman’s emotional nature can also be an asset to her in her caregiving roles as a mother or helper to others. Her empathetic nature can be of great value when properly directed according to God’s law.

    I have stated elsewhere that God has created three classes of human beings – men, women and children. Children do not have fully matured minds or bodies – adults have both fully matured brains and bodies. But an important thing to remember is that just because a man and woman have fully matured brains and bodies does not mean their natures are the same. Children are very emotional – trust me I witness this all the time with my two year old great nephews coming over all the time. Children especially at a younger age are almost completely controlled by their emotional impulses.

    As adults – both fathers and mothers – it is our job to teach them not to be controlled by their feelings, but rather to let their mind and then spirit(once they are saved) control their actions and keep their feelings in check.

    But there is big difference that happens in the development of boys and girls into men and women. Boys as they grow older typically grow far less emotional eventually as they become men they naturally learn to compartmentalize their emotions. This is how a man can keep his work separate from his home often times. As girls age they do learn some control over their emotions and it would be inaccurate to say that women have as little control over their emotions as children do.

    Usually adult women do have more control over their emotions than children, but still typically less control than adult men. I think that is better way of describing the differences between men, women and children.

  44. BGR

    “As one of your “well meaning, but severely misguided Christian brethren” I would ask that you be respectful in your disagreement on this subject”

    Is disagreeing with a person now considered “disrespectful” now BGR?
    Is saying that I consider some of my Christian brethren “SEVERELY MISGUIDED”, which I might add, is to disagree with them, is that now considered disrespectful?

    To be quite honest I’m quite shocked that you think so, and to threaten me with a ban was a bit over the top….I’ve ALWAYS been respectful of you and your beliefs, and I wish to apologize to you PERSONALLY if I have offended you with my comment…..When I penned that comment I actually didn’t have you in mind, as I had completely forgotten our last exchanges on this subject LOL

    I actually had in mind a blogger named DALROCK, but Like I said I apologize if I came across as “disrespectful” and it won’t happen again

    Your statement here: “So in conclusion – while I agree with you that no marriage license, no judge, and no church wedding ceremony is required for a marriage covenant to be valid in God’s eyes”

    I think your statement there is more in line with what I believe, where we disagree though is on the nature with what else extra is needed to formalize a true marriage

    But that’s for a topic for another day

    I’m actually going to read all of those articles you linked to on this subject, and prayerfully consider your wisdom on this subject

    Like I said BGR, I’m truly sorry for upsetting you, I consider you a true brother in Christ, and I depend a lot on your wisdom and biblical knowledge, and I have no wish to be banned here

    Respectfully sorry

    Your brother in Christ


  45. I wish to retract and clarify a comment I made in here:

    I claimed that women are nothing more than “children in adult bodies”
    I think perhaps that was a little too harsh and too generalized….what I should have said is “some NOT all women, ACT like children in adult bodies”….It doesn’t mean they literally are children, only that some of their behavior could be classified as being that of a child

    I’m especially referring to the modern Western woman who has qualities now so distasteful and repugnant that men are choosing to avoid women altogether…It doesn’t mean ALL women are like that, and as usual our goal as Christians is to find ourselves good, godly women who don’t exhibit the entitled, narcissistic, contentious attitudes that are plaguing the West

  46. kryptonian51,

    Your Statement:

    “Is disagreeing with a person now considered “disrespectful” now BGR?
    Is saying that I consider some of my Christian brethren “SEVERELY MISGUIDED”, which I might add, is to disagree with them, is that now considered disrespectful?

    To be quite honest I’m quite shocked that you think so, and to threaten me with a ban was a bit over the top….I’ve ALWAYS been respectful of you and your beliefs, and I wish to apologize to you PERSONALLY if I have offended you with my comment…..When I penned that comment I actually didn’t have you in mind, as I had completely forgotten our last exchanges on this subject LOL”

    I think you may have misunderstood me. I don’t consider simply disagreeing to be disrespectful. People come on here all the time and do that. I even said this that I recognize those of us who believe in Biblical gender roles will disagree on other topics like this:

    “I totally realize that those of us who believe in Biblical gender roles will have disagreements on some issues whether it is about what constitutes marriage, marriage licenses and even when divorce is allowable.”

    What you actually said was not disrespectful – I just was concerned that it might descend into that. I can take “misguided” all day long…LOL. But a while back you called my teachings on sex before marriage “doctrines of devils” and that is when I had to ban you. I just did not want to rise to that level so this was just a warning not to take it there again.

    Again respectful and civil disagreements without a name calling are perfectly fine. I appreciate your zeal as I said before – but you just need to channel it a bit, that’s all.

  47. Kyptonian51,

    Your Statement:

    “I claimed that women are nothing more than “children in adult bodies”
    I think perhaps that was a little too harsh and too generalized….what I should have said is “some NOT all women, ACT like children in adult bodies”….It doesn’t mean they literally are children, only that some of their behavior could be classified as being that of a child”

    Paul said:

    “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.”
    1 Corinthians 13:11 (KJV)

    Paul says we as adults can sometimes act childish(both men and women) and I regularly use this verse to admonish my 20 year and 18 year old sons to stop acting “childish” as they sometimes do in not being responsible in various areas(like laundry, or their managing their money). I have also on many an occasion told my wife to stop acting “childish” when her behavior merits it. So I can agree with you that whether it be young men like my sons or our daughters and wives that sometimes even young adults or adults in general do act in childish ways. That is a better way of framing the issue.

  48. Peggy,

    Your Statement:

    “You agree that a wife has the right to make any sort of sexual demand of her husband and he cannot refuse. Suppose she is into BDSM and she likes to use whips–real ones–does hubby have to submit to that?”

    Actually I do not “agree that a wife has the right to make any sort of sexual demand of her husband and he cannot refuse”. In the husband wife relationship the Scriptures are clear that it is the wife who must submit to her husband in “everything” Ephesians 5:24 – and this certainly would include the sexual arena).. Saying that husbands and wives have to submit to each other in “everything”(as some people falsely use Ephesians 5:21 to say when it is not speaking of marriage) creates what we call in the programming world “an infinite loop” and is illogical because then they could just keep giving each other opposite commands and overriding the other.

    Exodus 21:10-11 and I Corinthian 7:2-5 in light of our understanding of Biblical submission and male headship means that a husband must provide his wife with sexual access to his body, not that he must submit to her everything as she must do toward him. I have actually written on why I believe BDSM is not right for Christians here:

  49. I agree with BGR that BDSM has no place in Christian marriages. I get Peggy’s question, though, as people today tend to do, they hit up hypothetical extremes, and meaning gets lost within it.

    If a wife tells her husband she wants oral sex and he refuses, she cannot demand her right to it.

    If a husband tells his wife he wants oral sex, she ought not to refuse. He cannot grab her by the hair and force his member down her throat, though.

    Did I get that right, BGR?

    My husband and I disagree on sex and sexual activities. It actually limits me and my pleasure greatly, but I have submitted to his preferences. I just don’t see any other way besides being petulant about it. It just naturally doesn’t seem to work that way…me demanding. I did throw a fit about it once because he hadn’t given me an orgasm for years, and he put a stop to all sex until I submitted. I prayed and God told me to trust Him. Sex will resume at the appointed time. It did and it opened up new experiences. I miss the old, I miss oral, but it is no longer stress filled and argumentative, and he has started calling me his Queen and being more loving and respectful towards me.

    I admit, I still feel like I have lost something and am being treated unfairly….like in submission I always get the fuzzy end of the lollipop and he always get a what he wants, but when I fight him, when I want my way, everything suffers.

    I’d love BGR’s insight into this.

    Hubby and I do agree that consent came with saying “I do.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.