Does the Bible Teach that Women are Second Class Citizens?

I recently received an email from a woman asking for Scriptural proof that that God does not want women to be treated as second class citizens.  She could have sent this email to a lot of Christian sites and they may have sent her back Scriptures that they believe support the idea that women should be treated completely equal with men.

The most common Scripture passage used to try and say the Bible supports equal rights for women is found in the Apostle Paul’s letter to the Galatians:

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” Galatians 3:28 (KJV)

The advocates for woman’s rights hail this verse saying that it teaches that God intends for there to be absolutely no distinction and thus completely equal rights between men and women. But is this passage from Galatians God’s complete revelation on the subject of gender? We will explore the answer to that question later in this article.

I have changed the name of the woman who wrote me to Lauren in order protect her anonymity as she gave me her real name in the email.  What follows are several statements from her in the email and my response to her showing her from the Bible what God’s Word says on this issue.

LAUREN’S STATEMENT:

“I am raising daughters that have been in an environment that teaches them that women are second class… Do you know any podcast, bible verses, bible studies, websites, etc that can guide them back to trusting the Bible as God’s word and that the verses are not intending women to be second class citizens?”

MY RESPONSE:

First, we need to define what treating someone like a “second class citizen” is.  In common language usage today treating someone like a second-class citizen would be to show disdain for them or mistreat them in some way.  If we were talking about treating with disdain or hatred we can easily show that Biblically speaking this is wrong.  We are to be kind to all people no matter what their race, gender or ethnicity is.   We are also to treat others as we would want to be treated as Christ exhorted us in what has become known as “The Golden Rule”:

“Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.” Matthew 7:12 (KJV)

But often times this rule that we should treat others as we would want to be treated is vastly abused by many to cancel out entire sections of the Scriptures.

I get people writing me all the time saying “You only believe the way you do because you are a man and it is advantageous to you to believe in Biblical Gender Roles.  If you were a woman you would not so easily believe in such things.”   You know what my response is to such assertions? I tell them if I was a woman like my mother or my daughter or many other godly women I knew growing up I would absolutely believe the way I do about Biblical Gender Roles.  I don’t believe in Biblical Gender Roles because it is advantageous to me as a man – I believe in Biblical Gender Roles because that it is what the Bible teaches.

Trust me, it is not easy living counter to the culture you live in.  It is also not as easy as women think to be a man especially in this day when masculinity is attacked and women no longer respect men. Marriage has become more of a battlefield today than it ever was thanks to feminism poisoning the minds of women. Many men have just given up and given the reigns to their wife and they do whatever she says and whatever makes her happy.  That is taking the easy and cowardly way out.

Returning back to the subject of women being treated as second-class citizens – we are not talking about mistreating women in the sense of treating them with disdain, dishonor or unkindness by Biblical standards.

The key phrase in my last statement is “by Biblical standards”.   Our culture has a whole different set of standards by which women are said to be treated with disdain, dishonor and in an inhumane way.  Before I speak to this let me give a dictionary definition of a “second class citizen” according to https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/second-class_citizen:

“A person belonging to a social or political group whose rights and opportunities are inferior to those of the dominant group in a society.”

So, if one social group of people has inferior rights and opportunities to that of some other dominant group than they are said to be treated as second class citizens.

American and Western culture in general have devised a new standard of treating someone as “less than a person” or treating someone in “an inhumane way”.  The standard is equal rights.  If a culture has different classes of people with different classes of rights then they are said to be treating those people with hatred, disdain and in an inhumane manner.  No one is allowed to question this modern definition of treating someone in an inhumane way.

In fact, in America we have sacrificed the doctrines of our Christian faith as well as our marriages and many other things on the altar to our false god of equality.  It is ok if we worship the Christian god too, as long as our service to the god of equality comes first.

So now the question then becomes does the Bible advocate for women to be treated as second class citizens to men according to the dictionary definition I just gave?

The answer simply put is YES.  The Bible does in fact advocate for women to be treated as second class citizens to men if “second class citizen” simply means they are to have less rights and opportunities than men.

In fact, women occupy the second of three social classes of humanity that God designed.

The Three Social Classes Ordained by God

Contrary to modern Western and American ideals about equality God’s original design of mankind features a social order with three classes of people.

God’s First-Class Citizen – Man as God’s Image Bearer

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” Genesis 1:27 (KJV)

There are a great number of Christian theologians that misread this famous Biblical account of the creation of man and woman.  This passage does NOT teach that God created “them” (male and female) in his image. It clearly states “in the image of God created he HIM”. Many Christian teachers (even non-feminist teachers) have tried to argue that because “man” can refer to mankind that this can mean “So God created mankind in his own image”.  That is absolutely true that sometimes “man” (or Adam as it is in the original Hebrew) can refer to an individual man or mankind in general. The problem with this interpretation in this particular passage is found in the second phrase with the word “him” which is a translation of the Hebrew phrase “eth haa-‘adam” which literally means “this same man”.

So in Genesis 1:27 the Scriptures are telling us “God created Adam in his own image, in the image of God created he this same Adam.  Male and Female created he them.”

This passage tells us two very important truths.  God created man (male human beings) in his image and also that he created women as well.  It does not say he created women in his image, only that he created women.

And if there was any doubt as to the correct interpretation of this passage God gave the Apostle Paul this divine commentary on Genesis account:

“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.” I Corinthians 11:7 (KJV)

God’s Second-Class Citizen – Woman the helper to man

“And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” – Genesis 2:18 (KJV)

In Genesis chapter 2 we see that God did not want Adam to be alone and so he created a helper for him.  Now a helper can be one in authority (like a manager who helps his workers), a helper can be an equal partner or a helper can be a subordinate.  So which kind of helper did not create Eve to be? The Genesis account tells us that Adam named her type “woman” and later he even gave her personal name which was Eve.  This was a sign that she would be a subordinate helper, not an authority helper nor an equal partner.  Throughout the Old Testament this is maintained when we see that men ruled over women and that husbands could override any decision of their wives and fathers could override any decision of their daughters (Numbers 30).

Multiple New Testament passages confirm that woman was designed by God to be a subordinate helper to man.

“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.” I Peter 3:1-2 (KJV)

“22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.” Ephesians 5:22-24 (KJV)

God designed woman to be man’s subordinate helper in many ways.  She helps him by bearing and caring for his home and his children (1 Timothy 5:14). She helps him by being a faithful companion (Proverbs 31:11, Malachi 2:14). She helps him by bringing him sexual pleasure (Proverbs 5:15-19).  But another way she helps her husband is simply by being “the weaker vessel” (1 Timothy 5:14) and needing his leadership, provision and protection.  A man cannot fully image God as he was designed to do without being a husband and father and woman helps him in this way to fulfill image God to his fullest capability.

So, if you are asking “Why did God make women to be second class citizens?” the answer is found in a passage we just stated above:

“For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.” Ephesians 5:23 (KJV)

Not only was man made to image God and thus bring glory to him but marriage between a man and woman was made by God to model the relationship between God and his people. So, by fully embracing their status as second-class citizens to men women help men to fully image God and also model the relationship between God and his people.

To our equality obsessed world this makes no sense but this is why we as Christians are called to honor women for being the second-class citizens God designed them to be (I Peter 3:7).

Let me put this another way.  God could have made a partner for man that was his equal in every way. In fact, God could have created man as a hermaphrodite (with both sexes) and then humans could have just chosen any other human as partners. They could have equally broken up the division of having children, caring for the home, leading, providing and protecting.  If what I just said sounds familiar it is because this is exactly what our culture does today.  We promote homosexuality and gender equality – both ideologies which are in direct contradiction to God’s Word and his design.

But if humans existed in pair bonded relationships as equals this would not have properly modeled the relationship of God to his people.  Only if there were two genders with one dependent on the other for their leadership, provision and protection could the relationship of God to his people be properly modeled.

God’s Third-Class Citizen – Children as God’s inheritance to man

“Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.  4 As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. 5 Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.” Psalm 127:3-5 (KJV)

While man does not create life in exactly the same way God does – God wanted man to have a taste of his ability to create life and in this way, he blessed man with the ability to father children.

Children help both men and women to fulfill their God given God given roles by having someone who needs their care and support.  Children help men to exercise their father role in the way God is father to his children.

Summary of God’s three ordained social classes

Now let’s summarize the three classes and how they relate to one another. Men are to be the image bearers of God. One of the ways a man images God is by loving his wife as Christ loved his Church. Another way a man images God is by loving his children as God loves his children.  Women are to show respect and deference toward men in general and specific obedience and submission toward their father and later their husband.  Children are to show respect and deference to adult men and women and they are specifically to obey and honor their father and mother.  This is God’s original creation design and order of humanity.

A fourth social class allowed by God because of Sin

Sin’s entrance into the world resulted in crime, laziness, poverty and war.  These four human conditions would necessitate that God allow for a fourth class of citizen which is that of a slave.

“If a countryman of yours becomes so poor with regard to you that he sells himself to you, you shall not subject him to a slave’s service.  He shall be with you as a hired man, as if he were a sojourner; he shall serve with you until the year of jubilee.  He shall then go out from you, he and his sons with him, and shall go back to his family, that he may return to the property of his forefathers.  For they are My servants whom I brought out from the land of Egypt; they are not to be sold in a slave sale.  You shall not rule over him with severity, but are to revere your God.  As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you.  Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession.  You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another.”  Leviticus 25:39-46 (NASB)

While God allowed for slavery he also specifically gave rules regarding the humane treatment of slaves and the conditions under which slavery may occur.  The version of slavery that occurred in North and South America neither met the conditions allowed for slavery or the treatment of slaves.  See my article “Why Christians should not be ashamed of Slavery in the Bible” for more on this subject.

Is a woman’s second-class status only applicable if she is married or living with her father?

Some might think by the passages I mentioned previously that a woman’s second-class status only applies to her if she is married or perhaps is still a young woman living at home with her father.  Such thinking is flawed and does not take into account the entire witness of the Scriptures.  Yes, God allows and even praises celibacy in both women and men (I Corinthians 7).  However, celibacy is God’s exception to his first command to mankind to “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28) and to keep this command men and women must marry, have sex and have children.

Even if a woman feels called by God to celibacy in his service this does not remove her second-class status.  Paul’s divine commentary on the Genesis account of the creation of man and woman makes this clear.

“3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.

5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. 6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

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.

10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.”

I Corinthians 11:3-10 (KJV)

This is one of the most controversial and most un-preached passages in modern churches today. Why? Because it blows away our entire “equality based society”.  Men and women are equal in their humanity because woman was taken from man. However, Paul explains why women were to wear head coverings in worship services – because they were to reflect the order of God’s creation.  Notice there is no mention in this passage of marriage or the relationship between a husband and wife. Instead this speaks to the social order between men and women in general.  This is why women regardless of their marital status are to wear a sign of authority on their head when they come to worship.

LAUREN’S STATEMENT:

 “We attended home church and was told that women are to be submissive to their husbands, and not speak in the church.”

MY RESPONSE:

If you had church services in your home (as many churches do) then your husband would be right in teaching that you and your daughters should remain silent and simply listen during the spiritual instruction given by the men.  This is actually very clearly taught in the Scriptures.

“11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.” 1 Timothy 2:11-13 (KJV)

Now does these mean women can never speak in their home because it is also used for church services? No.  Paul even commands that elder women are to teach younger women in the Lord when he writes:

“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 2:1-5 (KJV)

So, it is perfectly Biblical for elder women in the Lord to conduct women’s Bible studies in their home or maintain blogs online with other women as long as this occurs under the authority of their husbands.  The women teaching should teach what is in accordance with their husband’s teachings and the women attending should do so with their husband’s permission.

LAUREN’S STATEMENT:

 “Some of the men in the church were not very caring and loving husbands and they did not honor their wives.  Last year I realized that my efforts to be a proverbs 31 wife has led me to have a relationship that is not what I consider to be what God wants.  My husband is verbally abusive, self-centered, and has neglected his role as Father and Husband.”

MY RESPONSE:

Who determines if a husband is acting in a caring or loving way toward his wife or honoring his wife? I can tell you who does not determine this.  Neither his wife nor his children. Ultimately it is God himself who judges whether your husband is caring and loving to you and honoring you in the way God expects of him.  And how does he determine God’s will in these areas? By examining the Scriptures and how God loves his wife.

Now this is not to say that men should not listen to the counsel of other men whether it be their fathers or their pastors or other spiritually mature men in the Lord.  The Scriptures tell us “Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety.” (Proverbs 11:14).  Also, men should hear their wife’s concerns but men must weigh their wife’s concerns by the Word of God. Is what she is asking for within the commands or example of God’s love toward his wife? Maybe.  But is it also possible that how a wife feels her husband should care for her and love her is not warranted or commanded by the Scriptures? Could she actually be selfishly ambitious for a type of love that God does not entitle her to?

For instance, what is verbally abusive? If a man simply raises his voice to his wife is that verbally abusive? You won’t find that anywhere in the Scriptures. If a man calls his wife foolish for acting or talking in a certain way is that verbally abusive? No – in fact we have the example of one of the most righteous men in the Bible doing just that with his wife and the Scriptures tell us he did not sin in doing so (Job 2:10).

LAUREN’S STATEMENT:

“As my daughters are growing up they are rejecting this unfair situation and are questioning the Bible.  They see how there are many verses that are not in favor of women and that we are not as entitled as men… My daughters are losing interest in the Bible as they feel how can God want us to be treated unfairly and they also think that because men wrote the Bible that their sin and attitude about women is revealed in their writing.”

MY RESPONSE:

If I had a dime for every woman that wrote me over the past few years saying something like this “Thanks for confirming for me from the Bible why I never want to be a Christian” or “Thanks for helping me to leave the Christian faith your gender role teachings” I would be a wealthy man. The Atheist emails are especially humorous with their “I love your site – keep up the good preaching! You will convert everyone to atheists like me.”

I have had others write me things like “Please stop teaching these gender role doctrines.  The Gospel is the most important thing people need to believe but people will never come to hear the Gospel if they first hear these gender role doctrines.  Let them discover these passages on their own and decide for themselves what they believe.  Stop putting a stumbling block for people coming to Christ.”

What are all these complaints really saying? They are saying that Christians need to leave behind anything in the Bible that conflicts with our modern culture.  We need to teach people what makes them feel good and things that match the values of our culture or so we are told.  A lot of big churches today do just that.  Even many small churches do this.  The sad fact is only a small percentage of Christian Churches today follow Paul’s example when he stated in Acts 20:27 “for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God.” 

The fact is the doctrines of Biblical gender roles are part of “the whole counsel of God”.  Pastors and Christian teachers do exactly what the Apostle Paul warned them NOT to do:

“1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” 2 Timothy 4:1-4 (KJV)

What do most Pastors and Christian teachers do today? They teach only what their congregation’s itching ears want to hear.  They have conformed themselves to the pattern of this world and the culture we live instead of transforming their minds and seeing the sin that the lays before them in our culture as the Bible exhorts us to do:

“And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.” Romans 12:2 (KJV)

We need to pray for preachers who will once again not be afraid to preach “Thus saith the Lord”.

But Christ didn’t treat women as second-class citizens!

The truth is that there are many Christian Pastors and teachers today that “preacheth another Jesus” (II Corinthians 11:4).  The Christ they preach is a feminized Christ who is not Lord of all, but one who bows the knee to the false god of equality.

Some online articles try and point to the fact that Jesus broke some social norms of his age when it came to interactions with women and that somehow shows he was a feminist or rejected patriarchy as I have shown the Bible clearly supports.

Their supposed evidence for this is that Jesus encouraged women to sit and listen to him rather than doing house work while he taught (Luke 10:38-42), he spoke to a Samaritan woman (John 4:6-30) or that he had women followers who came along with his disciples.

None of these actions by Christ prove one iota that Christ did not in fact treat women as second-class citizens to men.  What it proves is that he believed the men had had gone too far in forbidding women to hear the teaching of God’s Word (which many did).

Did Christ have even one of his twelve Apostles whom he commissioned to build his Church be a woman? No, he did not. Did Christ one time tell women they should be social equals with men? No, he did not.  Did he tell women not to submit to their husbands? No, he did not.

But the biggest problem with saying Jesus Christ believed in treating women completely equal with men is the fact that his Word says otherwise! Remember that what the Prophets before Christ and the Apostles after Christ wrote came directly from God.  Some Christians falsely believe that the words Christ spoke while he walked among men are more authoritative then the words he gave to his Apostles after he ascended to heaven. To attack the teachings of the Apostles like Peter and Paul regarding gender roles is to attack Christ himself who gave them his Word.

Conclusion

We have shown that those who use Paul’s statement that “there is neither male nor female“ in Galatians 3:28 and Christ’s actions in teaching women have built a false platform of support of equal rights for women.  When we examine the whole counsel of God as found in the entirety of the Scriptures we see this is not the case.

If you are a Christian woman who feels as Lauren and her daughters do toward your husband, father or just men in general this is what you need to do.  You need to heed the words of the Apostle James where he wrote:

“13 Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. 14 But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. 15 Such “wisdom” does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. 16 For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.” James 3:13-16 (NIV)

As a woman who feels the way Lauren and her daughters do – you need to recognize your feelings for what they are when measured against the Word of God.  If you desire anything God did not intend for you to have that is by definition selfish ambition.  If you are desire the status that someone else has that is envy.

If you as a woman desire to be a first-class citizen – meaning to have all the rights and privileges of a man, then you have selfish ambition and envy in your heart.  You need to get down on your knees and pray the prayer of David in Psalm 51:10 where he prays “Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.” You need to fully embrace your position as the weaker vessel and your place in God’s design.

If you are a father, husband or teachers of God’s Word you must have the courage to stand firm against the evil attitudes and ambitions in the women of our age.

“Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.”

I Corinthians 16:13 (NASB)

Advertisements

Why it is NOT Wrong for Men to See Women as Sex Objects

Feminists and Church leaders have taught a false dichotomy that men must choose between seeing women either as people or as objects of sexual pleasure. We are constantly warned in the media as well as our churches and educational institutions of the supposed need to combat the “sexual objectification of women”.  We are told this is a flaw in the masculine nature that must be rooted out.  But is this behavior a flaw in the masculine nature or could it actually be by the design of God?

Recently I receive a letter from a Christian husband who told me that his wife stopped having sex with him and this has gone on for a long length of time.  One of the reasons she cited for her stopping sex with her husband was that she felt he wrongly treated her as a “sex object”. He agreed to go to a Christian counselor and the counselor agreed with the wife that her husband was treating her as a sex object.  I am writing this article as a prelude to a second article where I will give the full text of his letter and address some other issues he is facing with his wife.

The main objective of this article is to prove both from logic and the Scriptures that men seeing women as objects of sexual pleasure does not mean they are “dehumanizing women” as we are so often told. I am also going to prove from a Biblical perspective that a man’s natural inclination to see women as sex objects is not part of his sin nature, but part of his God given nature.

In the following sections I am going to build a logical and Biblical argument in a step by step fashion proving that it is not morally wrong for men to see women as sex objects and even to use them as sex objects under the right conditions.

What are Objects?

Dictionary.com defines an object as “anything that is visible or tangible and is relatively stable in form.”  Are human beings visible? Are human beings tangible? Do human beings have a relatively stable form? The answer to all those questions are YES.  Therefore, human beings are in fact objects and please take note that I said “human beings” which means BOTH men and women are objects.

But then we have two types of objects – animate objects and inanimate objects.  Animate objects are objects which are alive and inanimate objects are things which do not possess life.  A hammer is an inanimate object.  A dog is an animate object and so is a human being.

Objects made in the Image of God

While dogs and human beings are both animate objects – a human being is so much more than a dog because human beings are directly or indirectly made in the image of God.

The Bible tells us regarding man that “he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man” (1 Corinthians 11:7).  Man is God’s direct image bearer and woman is God’s indirect image bearer because of her shared human nature with man from whom she was made.

Because of their common humanity men and women are so much more important to God than animals:

“Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?

Matthew 6:26 (KJV)

Now that we understand what objects are and that human beings are actually objects this leads us to the next truth we need to discuss.

Human beings use other human beings every day

Whether we realize it or not, every day we use other human beings as objects. When we get in a taxi we are using that taxi cab driver (an animate object) in conjunction with his car (an inanimate object) to take us to the destination we need to go to.

When you go to a sandwich shop and have the worker construct your sandwich just as you like it – you are using that person as an object to make your sandwich.  When you go to get you hair cut – you are using that barber or hair dresser as object to cut and style your hair.

Farmers use human beings as objects all the time.  During the harvest season a farmer may hire many temporary workers to harvest his crops before they go bad.  He may have machines (inanimate objects) to do some harvesting and for other harvesting he may use animate objects (human beings).

These are just a small fraction of the way we use other human beings in our everyday lives.

Now that we have discussed that human beings are indeed objects and that human beings may use other human beings for various purposes we now need to discuss the rules and boundaries for the use of animate or inanimate objects.

We must have the right to use objects

Whenever we use an object, we must have the right to use that object.  If we use an object without having the right to use that object that is a form of theft. For instance, if my lawn mower were to break down and I just went into my neighbors shed without asking my neighbor and used his lawn mower that is a form of theft.  Even if I intended to put it back, I have no right to go on his property or use his lawn mower without first having his permission.

The right to use a certain object may also come with certain limitations.  My neighbor may allow me to use his lawn mower, but he may allow me to use it with certain conditions.  He may insist that I check the fuel and make sure it is filled back to where it is when I am done.  He may insist that I agree to repair any damage to it should that occur during my use.  He may give me a time limit to use it and a time I must return it by.

In the same way, even if we are given the right to use various human beings as objects we may have stipulations on how we may use them.  For instance in my sandwich shop analogy – I can ask the worker to make my sandwich but I cannot ask him to go change the oil in my car.  If I want that done, then I need to go to an oil change place where I can rightly use a human being there as an object to change my oil.

So we have shown up to this point that human beings are objects which may be used by other human beings but that in each use we must have the right to use another human being and we must use them only within the conditions we are allowed to use them.  Next we need to discuss who gives us the right to use objects and who sets the conditions for the use of various objects.

Who gives us the right to use various objects and the terms under which we may use those objects?

The Bible tells us in Psalm 24:1 that “The earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.” which means every object on this planet, whether it is animate or inanimate belongs to God.  As human beings, we are simply stewards of what God has given us – including our own bodies.

But as stewards God has given us certain usage rights over both inanimate and animate objects (including our own bodies). But he commands that we use these various objects within the limits and boundaries of his law.

So going back to my analogy of the lawn mower – why do I have to ask my neighbor’s permission to use his lawn mower? The reason is that God gave him the right to earn a living, to buy and own property (including that lawn mower) and God expects us to respect the private property rights of others. In fact, respect for private property rights are so important to God that he dedicated two of the Ten Commandments he gave to Moses to the subject of private property rights.

“Thou shalt not steal.”

Exodus 20:15 (KJV)

“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.”

Exodus 20:17 (KJV)

Basically God was saying this in the 8th and 10th commandments:

“Do not violate another man’s private property rights by taking what is his private property and don’t even THINK about violating another man’s private property rights.”

Christ affirmed private property rights again in the parable of the land owner who hires men to work his fields when he stated of the land owner:

“Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?”

Matthew 20:15 (KJV)

When Christ speaks as the landowner saying “Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?” he is pointing back to the Law of Moses which protected private property rights.

So let’s now update the tally as to what we have learned about objects. There are living and non-living objects. Human beings are living objects, human beings can use other human beings as long as they have the right to do so for the use they want to use them for and who determines how humans may use all objects (including their own body)? It is God himself. God has given us stewardship over various objects and he determines the boundaries and rights to those objects that we have as stewards of his creation.

Must we account for human feelings before using another human being?

We have shown that God determines what our usage rights are when it comes to all types of objects both animate and inanimate. But just because we have the right to use another human being – does that mean we can do so without regard for their feelings of whether they wish to be used or not?

The answer in most cases is that human feelings are irrelevant when it comes to the use of one human being by another.

Let me illustrate this point by going back to some previous examples and adding in some new examples as well.

When I go to my favorite sandwich place must I take into account the feelings of the sandwich maker when I use him as an object to make my sandwich? The answer is no.

He has agreed to work for a certain wage and both his employer and I as his customer have the right to use him to make sandwiches regardless of his feelings.  He might be having a bad day because of personal issues at his home.  He may just be feeling tired because he did not sleep well the night before. He could have just been insulted in the back room by one of his fellow employees.   There could be a million reasons why at this particular time he does not feel like making my sandwich.  But his feelings are irrelevant.  It is his DUTY to make my sandwich both on account of his employer and to me as his customer.

Do we have to take into account the feelings of our barber or hair stylist before we use them as an object to cut our hair? The answer is no.

Do we have to take into account the feelings of the worker at our local oil change place before we drive in to have him change our oil? The answer is no.

And now some examples for the ladies.

If you hired a photographer to photograph your wedding and on the day of the wedding he just had a fight with his wife or girlfriend and does not feel like working that day is it ok if he does not take your wedding photos? Do you have to take his feelings into account to use him as an object to take photos of your wedding? The answer is no.  In fact you would expect him to have a smile on his face and not trouble you with his personal problems on your wedding day.  He was hired to do a job and he should do his duty regardless of his personal feelings or issues.

What if you and are your girlfriends planned a day to go to your favorite nail salon.  Just before you get there the three ladies who would do your nails got into a big fight and they just want to go home and not do anyone’s nails.  Would that be ok with you? Or would you expect them as their employer would expect them to do their duty with a smile on their face? We know the answer to this. You would expect them to do their duty with a smile on their face and for them to hide any ill-will or bad feelings they had as you used them as object to do your nails.

So here is the truth of the matter as far as humans using other humans is concerned.  If one human has the right to use another human being for a specific purpose then then human being using the other human being has no obligation whatsoever to take into account the feelings of that human being as to whether they want to be used for that function.  And from the perspective of the human being who is to be used for a certain purpose – they must always realize that their duty to perform their function as an object always trumps their feelings.

Earlier I said in most cases human feelings are irrelevant when it comes to one human being who has the right to use another human being for a specific task.  I said that duty in these cases always trumps feelings and in fact the one being used should not trouble the person using them for a certain task with their feelings.

But there are some times when feelings are part of the determination of whether someone can use another person. If I call up my guy friend on the phone to go out to dinner I might say something like “Hey do you feel like going out to dinner with me tonight?”  He has no obligation or duty to go out to dinner with me as his friend.  He may feel like it or he may not feel like it.  What am I doing when I call my friend and ask him to go to dinner? In most cases it is because I want to use him as a companion object to talk with and interface with.  To share my life stories and perhaps hear his as well.  Now in some cases I may not want to use him at all – maybe I know he has been having a rough time and I want to freely offer my services as a sounding board to him.

If my children ask me on a Friday night to take them to a certain movie – do I have an obligation and duty to take them that movie? Basically they want to use me as an object to take them to the show, buy their tickets and spend time with them at the movie. But I have no duty or obligation to let them make use of me in this way and it depends on how I feel at the moment. Now sometimes I might not feel like going to the movies but as an act of love and grace and I take them anyway despite my feelings.

So now let us tally once again what we have learned up to this point.  Objects are both living and non-living. Human beings are living objects.  Human beings may and can use other human beings as objects for various uses as long as they have the right to do so.  God determines how human beings may use various objects (including other human beings as well as our own bodies).  In the vast majority of cases when one human being uses another human within their rights to do so – they do not have to take into account the feelings of the human being that is being used for a particular task.

This brings us to the primary subject of this article.

God created woman as a sexual object for man’s use and much more

“Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”

I Corinthians 11:9 (KJV)

The Scriptures are clear throughout the Old and New Testaments that woman was created for man, not man for woman. These are the uses for which God created woman for man:

  1. Subordinate Helper (Genesis 2:18, I Peter 3:1-6)
  2. Sex Object (Proverbs 5:15-20, Romans 1:27)
  3. Companion (Malachi 2:14)
  4. Comforter (Genesis 24:67)
  5. Mother and Caretaker of his children (Genesis 49:25, Psalm 128:1-4, 1 Timothy 5:14)
  6. Keeper of the Home (Proverbs 31:10-31, Titus 2:4)
  7. Weaker vessel to need his love, leadership, strength, protection and provision (Ephesians 5:22-33, I Peter 3:7)

The fact that God created woman for man, not man for woman is extremely offensive to our modern feminist and egalitarian society but it the truth of God’s Word.

From time to time I peruse other blogs or look for mentions of my blog on other blogs.  I found this comment from a man on what he thinks is the only reason men should get married and why he got married:

“Companionship and sharing were the main reasons I got married…most men marry because they have found someone they enjoy being with, not to have sex.”

I wanted to find a bucket to barf in after reading this statement from this feminized man!

He literally sounds like a woman.  But the truth is that there are millions of men in the western world that will make statements like this man every day.  And while some of these men may just be asexual or have lower levels of testosterone so they are more like women –  some of these men are normal men with normal levels of testosterone and they just have been trained their whole lives to suppress their true God given masculine desires towards women.

The fact is that without societal conditioning that tells men their wants and desires are evil and selfish and women’s desires are noble and righteous we would be hearing some very different things from men.

Men marry women for sex! They marry women for companionship! They marry women to bear their children, care for their children and care for their home while they go to work.  Men want to have a beautiful sexy wife to come home to each day who makes their home warm and inviting and has dinner on the table each evening.   They want to know that whenever they wish they can drink from sexual well that is their wife!

These are desires that God has placed in man and no man should ever be ashamed having these desires towards a woman.  Some Christian sites talk about things like “when you feel more like a maid than a wife” when the reality is part of being a wife IS being a maid.   Other sites talk to women who feel like they are “more of a sex object than a wife”.  Are they kidding themselves? Being a wife and sex object are not mutually exclusive things.  A wife was designed by God to be a sex object to her husband.

The Scriptures are crystal clear that sex is “the natural use of the woman” (Romans 1:27) for the man and that he is to drink from the sexual well that is his wife and satisfy himself sexually with his wife’s body whenever he wants (Proverbs 5:15-20).

Is there a difference between seeing wives as sex objects or women in general as sex objects?

This is a question that is sure to come up in the context of women being seen as sex objects by men.  The fact is that men see ALL women (whether they are married to them or not) to a greater or lesser degree as sex objects excluding their blood relatives like their mothers, daughters or sisters. If the woman is less attractive to the man based on his preferences than he may see her less as a sex object and if she fits his preferences of sexual attraction he will see her much more as a sex object.

Some Christians reading this may not have a problem with men seeing their wives as sex objects but object to men seeing women that are not their wives as sex objects.  But such a distinction is false.  For the most part, every man who asks a woman on a date does so because he is sexually attracted to her and sees her as an object that could bring future sexual pleasure to him.  If he did not – he would never have asked her out in the first place.

Now sexual attraction is not the only reason men choose women as potential mates, but it is often the first reason.  Men also choose women based on what type of mother they think she would be, what kind of homemaker they think she would be and also how submissive she will be.  For many men – a woman could be a very attractive woman but if she appears to be a contentious and high maintenance woman they won’t go near her.  This is why many women who have high power jobs have a hard time finding men and when they do in most cases they have to find men who are softer and more submissive.

Can men go too far in sexually objectifying women?

Any behavior, even a God given behavior in man or woman, can be taken to an extreme so of course it is possible for men to go too far in sexually objectifying women.   For instance, if a construction worker sees a nice-looking woman walking down the side walk in front of him and he is sexually aroused by her form and has sexual thoughts about her this behavior is holy and by the design of God.   In fact, maybe he sees this woman walk by his work site every day for many weeks and then gets the courage to talk to her and ask her out on a date based on his sexual attraction toward her.  Again, this behavior is by the design of God and is holy and just.

However, if this same construction worker instead of asking her out and talking to her in kind way starts whistling at her and saying sexually suggestive phrases about her then he has now gone too far in sexually objectifying this woman.  The same would go for men that try and sexually touch or use inappropriate sexual language with female coworkers or other female acquaintances.

I know of a young man in his early twenties that tried to have vaginal intercourse with his wife only a week after she gave birth to their first child. He caused her a lot of medical problems by doing this.  Most doctors advise that men wait 6 to 8 weeks to allow their wives to properly heal after child birth before trying to resume vaginal intercourse.  Now as I have mentioned elsewhere on this blog – I think a wife can help her husband sexually in other ways during this waiting period for intercourse.  But this young man was wrong knowing the potential damage it could cause his wife and still doing it anyway.  Yes, God made his wife as a sex object for him – but God also says that a husband is to protect and care for his wife’s body as he would his own (Ephesians 5:29) and he failed to do that.

So yes, men can sometimes go too far in sexually objectifying women.

Application for women

If you as a woman are reading this and you are angry or hate that fact that your husband or men in general see you as a sex object this is what you need to do.  You first need to realize that your feelings on this issue are not holy and justified but are based in your own sinful pride.  You may not even have realized how you feel about being a sex object for men is based in the sin of pride because of what our culture tells you every day.

The Bible tells us this regarding our cultural conditioning:

“And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.”

Romans 12:2 (KJV)

God calls you to reject your cultural conditioning that goes in direct opposition to his word.  Once you have resolved to allow God to transform your thinking you need to mediate on these principles:

  1. You as a woman were created for man, man was not created for you. (I Corinthians 11:9)
  2. In keeping with your created purpose for man – you are in fact a sex object to men. God reserves the sexual use of your body for marriage (Hebrews 13:4) but when you are married your husband may fully use you as a sex object (Proverbs 5:15-20).
  3. While you are to guard your virginity as a sacred treasure for marriage – you should never scold men for being sexually attracted to you or for simply glancing at your female form.
  4. When you are married you should never allow yourself to have negative thoughts of being sexually used by your husband. In fact, you need to recondition your mind to WANT to be sexually used by your husband because that is one the purposes for which you were designed by God.

Finally, on the subject of feeling sexually used by your husband.

I always find it fascinating how many Christian women pray that God will use them but they only want to be used in the way they want to be used.  They have these grand visions and really selfish ambitions of how they want God to use them.

But to be used as a maid, a cook, a mother for his children and an object of sexual pleasure for a man – well that is just beneath them and they will have no part in this.

If you are having negative feelings about being “sexually used” by your husband you need to realize that such thoughts and feelings come not from your spirit, but from your sinful nature (your flesh).  Such feelings are not only unbiblical, they are in fact illogical and they fully based in sinful pride.

Why would you feel angry at your husband for using you for one of the purposes for which God made you?  Getting angry at your husband for using you for sex would be like your wedding photographer getting angry at you for using him to take pictures at your wedding.  It is part of your function, your design and your intended use.

I encourage and admonish you as a woman to pray the prayer of Psalm 51:10 “Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.”  Once you give your pride to God, humble yourself before and fully accept his design for your life you will truly find the peace and joy that God intended for your life.

Application for Men

Both the secular world and sadly even the much of the Christian world today tells men that their God given masculine desires are based in pride. If a man desires for his wife to submit to his authority and not argue with him all the time we are told this desire of his is based in his wicked “male pride”. If a man desires to be the primary bread winner or sole provider for his family again we are told this is based in his wicked “male pride”.  Finally, if a man desires to have sex with his wife anytime he wishes as opposed to only when his wife is in the mood and mutually desires sex he is told this is wicked “male pride” and “selfishness” on his part.

Christian men hear me now. The teaching that these God given masculine desires are wicked and sinful on the part of men is a teaching straight from the pit of hell.  The prophet Isaiah speaks of the false teachers we see today:

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”

Isaiah 5:20 (KJV)

Today they teach that God given masculine desires are evil and feminine sinful desires are good!

I do not deny that some men do deal with sinful pride in other areas – but a man desire the things I have mentioned from a woman is not sinful in the least bit.  It is holy and by the design of God.

The biggest problem for Christian men today is not pride – but cowardice.

We as men are too cowardly to call out those who attack the masculine human nature which makes man the image bearer of God (I Corinthians 11:7). We as men need to realize there is a reason why the world attacks the masculine nature while elevating the feminine nature.  It is symbolic of mankind’s rejection of God himself.   When we take the “weaker vessel” (woman) and elevate her above the image bearer(man) we are spitting in the face of almighty God himself.

So, to all you men out there I give you this advice – ask God to give you the courage to stand firm in the faith and act like a man!

“Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.”

1 Corinthians 16:13 (NASB)

Stop apologizing for your God given masculine nature whether it be your logical thinking, your competitiveness, your desire to lead a woman or you strong physically based sexual desire toward women.

You need to do as I encouraged the women to do and let go of the cultural conditioning you have grown up with that has taught you to hate your God given masculine nature.  You need to mediate on these Scripture principles:

  1. God created you as a man to image him (I Corinthians 11:7). This means that your masculine nature is the direct image of God where the feminine nature only indirectly images God in our shared humanity as men and women.  You image God by living out and acting out your various masculine traits.  When you compete with other men in various forms you image God’s competitive nature. When you exercise your protective masculine nature by desiring to train yourself or buy weapons for protection you image God’s protective nature.  When you find women beautiful and desire sex with women you image God’s desire for beauty and pleasure.
  2. Do not be ashamed of the fact that woman was created for man (I Corinthians 11:9), and specifically that your future or current wife was created by God for your blessing and pleasure. She was created by God for you to help you fully image God as a husband and later a father to your children. Embrace this and rejoice in this Biblical truth!
  3. Have the courage to fully act on your sexual desires toward your wife. There are many men that have great courage whether it be on the battlefield or in their careers or in sporting events but they cower like children when it comes to their sexual desires toward their wives.  Many men cover their sexual cowardice toward their wives under the guise of “being sensitive and unselfish” toward their wives.  But such thinking runs directly contrary to the command of God in Proverbs 5:15-20 toward men to liberally and freely satisfy themselves sexually with their wife’s body.

Conclusion

Women – stop having sinful pride against one of God’s purposes in your design and that is your design as a sex object.  You need to fully embrace the fact that a big part of your design was to bring visual and physical sexual pleasure to men and specifically your husband in marriage.  Stop judging men and scolding men for noticing your female beauty but rather rejoice in how God has made man and your purpose in his creation.

Men – stop having sinful cowardice in regard to your God given masculine nature.  Stop apologizing for how God designed you as men and the God given desires you have toward women. Fully image God by fully embracing your masculine human nature.  Do not feel guilty for wanting a woman to sexually please you, bear your children and care for your home.  All of these are God given desires and are part of your imaging the very nature of God.  Especially if you are married – have the courage to fully and completely act on your sexual desires toward your wife and stop allowing the world to tell you that you are selfish in engaging in the God designed natural use of the woman.

A Biblical Guide to Seducing Your Husband

For a woman, the difference between “slutty” and “sexy” is one word – Marriage. Proverbs 5:19 tells husbands to be ravished with their wife’s love. For a man to be ravished he must be seduced.

I know a lot of Christian women may be not like the use of the word “seduce”.  This word is often associated with people luring others into illicit sexual relations that violate God’s law.

But here is a key Biblical truth that every Christian wife must grasp.  Sexual seduction outside of marriage is sinful but sexual seduction inside marriage is righteous.

For more on why a wife seducing her husband in marriage is not only not sinful, but required, see my article entitled “Why God wants you to seduce your husband”.

The Scriptures tell us this regarding erotic (sexual love) in marriage:

“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 5:19 (KJV)

But how can you as a Christian wife show erotic love toward your husband? In other words, how do you go about seducing your husband?

While Proverbs 5:19 gives the mandate for wives to seduce their husbands – it does not give you the example of how to do it. Instead we must look to the Song of Solomon to find the examples of how a wife can seduce her husband.

With that being said below are several principles take from the Song of Solomon that will help guide in ways to seduce your husband.

Seduction Principle #1 – Ravish him with your desire for him

“By night on my bed I sought him whom my soul loveth…”

Song of Solomon 3:1 (KJV)

Seduction starts with desire.  You can’t seduce a man to whom you show no desire.  Think about it another way from your perspective as a woman.  If you are like 99 percent of women you want your husband to sit down and talk with you.  If your husband sits down to talk and acts like he really does not want to but he has too is that satisfying for you? Of course, it is not. In the same way as a wife you need to cultivate a sexual desire for your husband.

Seduction Principle #2 – Ravish him with your eyes

“Thou hast ravished my heart, my sister, my spouse; thou hast ravished my heart with one of thine eyes, with one chain of thy neck.”

Song of Solomon 4:9 (KJV)

Are you one of those women that says to your husband when he gives you “the look” – “I know that look and you aren’t getting any today!” Or do you flirt back with your eyes? Would you even consider starting the flirting with your eyes? This is what is called for as part of seducing and ravishing your husband.

You could be at a friend or family members house.  You could be sitting in some boring school meeting for your kids.  You could be in line at the grocery store together. All it takes is a look to stoke the fire and ravish your husband’s heart!

Seduction Principle #3 – Ravish him with your lips and your tongue

“Thy lips, O my spouse, drop as the honeycomb: honey and milk are under thy tongue;”

Song of Solomon 4:11 (KJV)

Do not underestimate the powerful effect that your kisses can have on your husband.  Kissing is a powerful teasing mechanism to seduce your husband and it is also an essential part of the sexual act itself.  I have heard of women who rarely if ever kiss their husbands except to give him a kiss on the cheek. And how unnatural and unloving is it that a couple could have sexual relations and never kiss in this most intimate way the entire time? Yet this happens far too often in many Christian bedrooms.  The Song of Solomon shows us that Christian women are to be letting their husbands get some tongue action! Yep right there we see French kissing in the Bible.

Seduction Principle #4 – Ravish him with your body parts

“My beloved is like a roe or a young hart: behold, he standeth behind our wall, he looketh forth at the windows, shewing himself through the lattice… O my dove, that art in the clefts of the rock, in the secret places of the stairs, let me see thy countenance…”

Song of Solomon 2:9 & 14a(KJV)

The allusion here in Song of Solomon 2:9 is that of her husband looking through windows at her or looking threw a wood screen that had vines on it.  He was basically peeping at his wife.  And guess what? It is perfectly ok for a man to peep at his wife anytime he wishes!

I could have titled this section “Ravish him with your beauty” but that would not have driven home the point that needs to be made to women. Women tend to see a man’s physical attraction in holistic terms where men see women as a collection of parts.  It is routine for men to say “she has nice breasts, but her rear end is not as great” or “she has great legs but she is flat chested”.  Women have a harder time breaking down men in this way and this is probably one of the hardest things for women to understand about the male nature.  In fact this idea of men breaking women down by their various body parts infuriates many women.

So if I would have said “Ravish him with your beauty” and you are a typical woman you are thinking wear nice dresses, slacks, blouses, do your makeup and and wear your hair nice and to you as a woman that makes sense.  While your husband appreciates all those things you do – those are not things that will cause him to be ravished by you.

You want to ravish your husband with your beauty? When you are wearing that pretty blouse and slacks – randomly pull up your shirt and show him your breasts. Sometimes instead of wearing that dainty blouse and pants you should find a nice tight pair of jeans or shorts(if it is warm) and a tight fitting V-neck T-shirt that will accentuate your breasts and reveal a little cleavage and make sure you tease him with your cleavage.  Tease him by “accidentally” dropping something in front of him and bend over in front of him in those tight jeans or shorts.

Want to transform that long tee shirt you wear to bed and around the house? It is easy – don’t wear underwear.  Who will know but him and you? And surprise him by pulling it up to reveal what you have hidden from him.

The husband of the Song of Solomon like all men asks his wife to “let me see thy countenance”. Your husband wants to see your form! Just the sight of you brings him great pleasure.

Let him see you getting dressed and undressed in your room.  Let him see you in that towel as you get out of the shower – invite him to talk about something and then “accidentally” drop your towel in front of him.

And let’s not forget lingerie.  Men love nudity but they also love variety.  Lingerie gives the man variety.  Really lingerie is like putting a lattice over your body – it lets him catch glimpses without seeing the full view until it is time. Men love this!

I want to come back to what I talked about earlier about wearing sexy clothes.  A lot of Christian women dress like old ladies the moment they dress go outside the bedroom because they have had a false ideology concerning modesty drilled into their head. Modesty in the Bible does not mean what many think today as “non-sexual” and “non-arousing”. It means “appropriate to the occasion”. See these articles “What does modesty mean in I Timothy 2:9?” and “Does God want a wife’s beauty hidden from the World?” for more on this subject.  It will really change your perspective if you look at what the Scriptures really have to say on the subject.

And hopefully after reading that you as a wife will feel more confident in dressing sexy for your husband inside the bedroom as well as outside the bedroom so that you can be doing everything you can on a regular basis to visually ravish(romance) your husband.

Seduction Principle #5 – Ravish him by tasting of his apple tree

“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)

In ancient middle eastern poetry, the apple tree was a euphemism for a man’s genitals. The image that the woman “sitting under his shadow” portrays is that of a man standing over top of his wife with his shadow over her and her down below him performing Fellatio (oral sex on a man).  The Scriptures tell us she did this “with great delight” or in other words with enthusiasm and desire.  What is the fruit of his tree? It is his semen. The woman says of her husband’s semen that it was “sweet to my taste”.

A lot of women are reluctant about performing fellatio on their husbands but the fact is that it is very difficult to seduce and ravish your husband without doing this.  Most men do not even understand their own feelings about their desire for fellatio from their wives but they are there even if buried deeply for some. When a woman kneels before her husband and performs fellatio on him and completes the act this is a show of submission, acceptance and sacrifice toward him.

A wife shows her submission to her husband when she kneels before him and takes his “apple tree” in her mouth.

A wife shows her full acceptance of her husband when she does this act with “great delight” showing her husband that she craves the “sweet” taste of his fruit.

A wife shows her sacrificial spirit when after performing fellatio on her husband to its natural completion she asks for nothing in return.

In this way, the act of fellatio is a powerful and spiritual act that a wife performs toward her husband. There are few things in this world that will ravish a man’s heart for his wife like the sacrificial act of fellatio we have just described.

But this does not mean fellatio must always be a one-way transaction.  Fellatio can be and should be a regular part of sexual relations between a man and his wife both as foreplay or as way to climax after regular intercourse.

Seduction Principle #6 – Ravish him by inviting him to taste of your pomegranate

“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)

In the same way that the apple tree was a euphemism for a man’s genitals in ancient middle eastern erotic poems so too the pomegranate was one of the euphemisms for a woman’s genitals.

Many women think of Cunnilingus (oral sex on a woman) as something that is simply for their own pleasure.  In other words, their husband is only doing it to please them and he gets little to nothing out of the act. But this could not be further from the truth in most cases. Because men are such physical beings they are often drawn to perform cunnilingus on their wives and this gives a man great pleasure to experience his wife’s body in this way. In the following passage the husband of the Song of Solomon expresses his desire to perform cunnilingus on his wife:

“Until the day break, and the shadows flee away, I will get me to the mountain of myrrh, and to the hill of frankincense.”

Song of Solomon 4:6 (KJV)

The “mountain” and the “hill” represent the woman’s pubic mound and this is speaking of her genitals.  Literally he is saying he wants to perform oral sex on his wife all night long – he loves the scent of her vagina and compares it to very expensive good smelling things.

It is unfortunate that there are some women that actually have phobias about their husbands performing cunnilingus on them.  They see their vulva and vagina as “unclean” and not just at “that time of the month”. Others have been taught that God only allows vaginal intercourse and nothing else and in doing this they are denying themselves and their husbands a great tool that can be used to ravish his heart for her.

Seduction Principle #7 – Ravish him by opening yourself to him

I rose up to open to my beloved; and my hands dropped with myrrh, and my fingers with sweet smelling myrrh, upon the handles of the lock.”

Song of Solomon 5:5 (KJV)

If you have not figured out by now, the Song of Solomon is a very erotic book. It speaks of sexuality between a husband and wife in very free terms as God meant it to be.  It has constant allusions to the bodily fluids that are exchanged between a man and woman.  Again, here as in other passages throughout the Song of Solomon it compares a woman’s vaginal secretions to myrrh.  Why are the woman’s hands literally dripping with her own vaginal secretions? It is because she was touching her own vagina moving the fluids in and out around her vulva.

This literally has the picture of a woman who is completely comfortable with her own body and she is opening herself to her beloved – spreading her legs and then using her fingers to open her vagina bringing its fluids out for her husband to see.

I realize what I have just said sounds disgusting to some women. If you have been raised in a prudish home where sex was never spoken of this may sound shocking. For others, it simply does not compute and the reason again is that most women approach sex primarily from the relational aspect with the physical aspect being a pleasant by-product.  They are thinking to themselves – “I would not find it attractive if I walked in my bedroom and saw my husband spread eagle playing with himself so how in the world he finds me spread eagle touching myself attractive?”

And that ladies, is one of the many ways we can prove that men and women approach sex very differently.  But the fact remains that men LOVE it when their wives “open” themselves to their husbands as their fingers drip with “sweet smelling myrrh”.

Both this principle as well as the previous principle dealing with not only allowing, but inviting your husband to  drink “the juice” of your “pomegranate” will require you to truly have not just overall body confidence but confidence in your vulva and vagina. You have to truly let go of any insecurities you have in this area and fully present yourself to your husband in this regard.

Seduction Principle #8 – Ravish him with your voice

“…let me hear thy voice; for sweet is thy voice…”

Song of Solomon 2:14b (KJV)

Do you know how to whisper sweet nothings in your husband’s ear? While a husband might like to hear a soft whispered “I love you” that is not what will ravish him.  No – the sweet nothings that will ravish your husband is “I can’t wait to get home and do [fill in the blank] to you” or “I can’t wait to get home and you do [fill in the blank] to me”.

Look at the speech here from the woman of Song of Solomon toward her husband.  She has literally told him that she loves to sit in the shade of his “apple tree” (his penis) and she take thought his fruit(semen) was sweet to her taste.

As we previously showed the woman of Song of Solomon literally invites her husband to “to drink of spiced wine of the juice of my pomegranate” (Song of Solomon 8:2). In addition to this she invites her husband to “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)

Guess what ladies – God wants you to follow the example of the woman of the Song of Solomon by talking sexy to your husband! Text him sexy messages.  Call him at lunch and tell him what you want to do later that evening.  Notice I said “sexy” and not “dirty” – and that is because in marriage sexual talk between a husband and wife is just that – sexy and it in no way is dirty.

Conclusion

As I said at the beginning of this article – For a woman, the difference between “slutty” and “sexy” is one word – Marriage.

The Bible compares a man’s sexual desire for his wife to the purity of desiring water from one’s own well (Proverbs 5:15).  We see the purity of sex in marriage attested to again in the New Testament:

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

Hebrew 13:4 (KJV)

We have shown examples from the Song of Solomon of a wife using all her God given feminine charms to seduce or “ravish” her husband as Proverbs 5:19 commands.

We see a woman using her attitude, her eyes, her lips, her body and her words to seduce her husband.  We even see her speaking in very explicit sexual terms to her husband. She seduces him with glimpses of her body throughout the day and the week knowing that each glimpse brings pleasure and joy to her husband. We see her taking great pleasure in giving her husband oral sex and she cultivates a desire for his semen. We see her inviting him into his garden and for him to drink of her pomegranate.  She freely opens herself to him and is not shy to touch herself in his presence knowing how much pleasure this brings him.

So as a Christian woman reading this you have to ask yourself what is holding you back from following the example of the woman of the Song of Solomon in seducing your husband? Was it how you were raised? Were you taught that sex was dirty? Were you taught that women were not supposed to desire sex?

Maybe you see sex in more romantic and relational terms and you see this very physical, visual, sweaty and fluid filled view of sex as “base” or “nasty”.  But is that how God frames it in his Word?

The Bible compares the Christian life to a race.  Men and women have different races to run based on our God given gender roles .  For you as a Christian woman, part of your race involves you following God’s command in Proverbs 5:19 to ravish your husband.  So, you need to ask yourself – what is hindering you in this part of your race?

“Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us”

Hebrews 12:1 (KJV)

The truth is that for most women reading this one of two things will be holding you back from following this guide based on the Song of Solomon.  Those two things are Fear and Pride.  You might be afraid to open yourself sexually to your husband in the ways I have described. You might have too much pride getting in the way and you may be telling yourself that the things I mentioned here are degrading to women.

But the Bible tells us this regarding fear and pride:

“There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.”

1 John 4:18 (KJV)

“But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.

James 4:6 (KJV)

Perfect your love for your husband by throwing off the spiritual weight of fear in this sexual arena. If you let go of your pride God will give you the grace and ability to bless your husband in the ways we have mentioned here.

And let me mention one last word ladies. You should ravish and seduce your husband because God commands it of you and because you recognize that God made you for your husband.  But do you know that often times when we do what God commands we will sometimes reap direct benefits as a result of that obedience?

“Delight thyself also in the Lord: and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart.”

Psalm 37:4 (KJV)

When you delight yourself in God by following his command to ravish your husband do you know what just might happen? You may see a passion come from your husband that you have not seen in years or maybe you never saw because you never truly acted on all these principles I have outlined here.

All over the world there are women laying in their beds at night wondering why there is no passion from their husband. “Where is his affection and his feelings toward me?” they may ask themselves night after night but most of these same women rarely asks themselves another very important question which is “What have I been doing to evoke affection and feelings in my husband toward me?”

What if the modern world has it all backwards? What if the world’s formula that “men must romance women first and earn sex from their women” is wrong? What if they are getting the cart before the horse?  What if it is the woman that must ravish her husband’s heart first to cause him to have affection and passion towards her?

Throw off the world’s way. Throw off pride and fear and go home and ravish your husband today and follow the example of the woman of the Song of Solomon.

Why God Wants You to Seduce Your Husband

Most Christian wives today are taught that their husbands must earn sex with them by romancing them. What if the Bible taught the opposite? What if wives were required to seduce their husbands?

I know it sounds crazy. The Bible couldn’t possibly tell women they need to seduce their husbands, right?

Well if you give me a few minutes of your time the answer might surprise you.

In my article “How the Church Made Sex Dirty” I explain how Church fathers like Clement of Alexandria made sexual desire, even in marriage, to be dirty and sinful. This false doctrine infected the churches like a disease shortly after the Apostles death.  I show in that article that the Bible in fact has a very positive view of sex and in no way, does the Bible support the false teaching that sex is only for procreative purposes.  This false teaching is still alive and well in Christian churches all across the world today.

The negative view of sex was even worse when it came to women than to men. Women were taught to view sex as dirty and women who expressed any pleasurable thoughts about sex were condemned as whorish.

This brings us to how women view sex today in our modern era.

Six Modern Feminine Views of Sex

Below are six views of sexuality that women have today. I know some people hate to be boxed into categories.  But if you are a woman reading this, and you are honest with yourself or asked your husband to be honest with you, you would find that you will come closer to one of these categories than the others.

The Frigid Wife

This Frigid wife views sex as a dirty activity that is a necessary evil for conceiving children.  She has no desire to be touched in a sexual way or to touch her husband in a sexual way. If her husband presses her for sexual relations outside the context of trying to conceive a child she may reluctantly and grudgingly agree to do this “dirty” act with him.  But she will have a nasty look on her face and be lifeless as he has sex with her.

The Submissive Wife

The Submissive wife has regular sexual relations with her husband whenever he desires it because she believes God tells her to and she believes this will help keep him from sexual temptation. But she views sex from the female perspective as more of a “receptive” position.  She does not take any proactive steps to sexually arouse her husband or seduce her husband. She may actually enjoy sex sometimes with her husband but never enough to want to initiate it with him – she always waits for him to initiate sex.

The Romantic Wife

The Romantic wife loves sex but only views sex from a relational, romantic and feelings oriented position. She would reject the view of the Frigid wife that sex is only for procreation and she would also reject the view of the Submissive wife that a woman should just be in a submissive position to have sex with her husband whenever he desires it.

The Romantic wife believes her husband must earn each sexual encounter with her by romancing her.  If for any reason, she does not feel like having sex then sex will not occur. Like the Submissive wife though, she rarely if ever initiates sex with her husband because she believes sex in a marriage should always center on a husband romancing his wife.

The Nympho Wife

The Nympho wife is a woman that has a sexual nature that is more similar to that of a man than a woman in that her sex drive is more physically oriented than relationally oriented. This type of woman could easily be having sex with multiple men in the same period in her unending quest for sexual pleasure.

The Nympho wife’s primary goal in sex is not procreation nor is it to please her husband but rather to meet her own sexual desires. She really has no desire to take the time or energy to seduce her husband or to truly concentrate on giving her body to him for his pleasure.  She just wants the clothes off and to have him pleasure her and fulfill her sexual desires – him getting his sexual needs met is of little to no concern to her.

The Evil Seductress Wife

The Evil Seductress wife uses her body and her sexual charms to get what she wants.  She uses sex to lure her husband into marrying her and then afterwards uses her sexual charms to control him and manipulate him for the remainder of their marriage.  The Evil Seductress wife sees sex primarily as a tool for power and only secondarily as an activity for procreation or pleasure. Her goals in seduction may be just to have control of the man and his money or it may also include her desire for him to be a sperm donor to give her children.

The Good Seductress Wife

The Good Seductress wife is one who views sex primarily through the lenses of pleasing her husband sexually, not just submitting herself to her husband sexually. She goes much further than the Submissive wife in that she takes an active role in trying to please her husband sexually rather than just taking a passive role and waiting for him to initiate sexual relations.

The Good Seductress wife makes herself a student of her husband’s sexual preferences.  She learns what turns her husband on and what turns her husband off sexually. She not only learns all these things about her husband – but she acts on this knowledge. The Good Seductress wife realizes that she cannot fully please her husband sexually unless she finds a way to truly enjoy sex herself so she becomes a student of her own body as well helping herself to work in concert sexually with her husband to bring him the maximum sexual pleasure that she can.

Which of these views of sexuality are most common among women?

I would say based on what I have read and observed through real life interactions and emails that the majority of women in American come closest to the Romantic wife position on sex.  There are also probably a good number of women who come somewhere between the Submissive wife position and the Romantic wife position in that they will sometimes give into their husband’s request for sex even though they feel he has not really earned it.

The Nympho wife’s are a rarity but sadly there are more Frigid wives and Evil Seductress wives than people generally realize.

In the realm of Christianity Romantic wives are extremely common but in more conservative circles there are more Submissive wives.  The Good Seductress wife is the rare jewel alluded to in Proverbs 31:10.

Now that we have presented these common feminine views of sex we now to need to measure these views against the Scriptures as we should all our beliefs about life.

Sex is both a Responsibility and Right in Marriage

First we need to establish the fact that under God’s law sexual access to one’s spouse is both a responsibility and a right within marriage for both the husband and wife.

The Scriptures teach both the responsibility to give sex and right to have sex in marriage:

“3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 4 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. 5 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 7:3-5 (KJV)

I once heard a Pastor say to the young women of the church “If you don’t want to have sex three to four times a week for the better part of your life then don’t get married.”  Unlike many Pastors today – he had a Biblical view of sexuality in marriage. A person who wants to get married and not have much sex is like a person who joins a baseball team but does not really want to play baseball.

It is absolutely amazing to me how many Pastors and Christian teachers today question this very clear Scriptural command. They look for all kinds of ways to give spouses (primarily women) excuses for denying their spouse sex in marriage.

Sex is not just a right a responsibility in marriage – it is like water for men

I think it is very telling that God chose to use water to describe a man’s desire for sex.  God could have chosen to compare a man desiring to have sex with his desiring meat but humans can survive on just fruits and vegetables.  God chose something that is necessary for all life on earth and something that we cannot live without to describe a man’s sex drive.  In this one verse God makes it clear to both men and women – sex is a need for men, not just a want.

From a larger societal point of view while men on an individual level will not die from not having sex, the human race would die out if men don’t have sex with women. Even on a relational level, if a couple stops having sex the relationship often dies.

But here in Proverbs 5 we see that God is showing us that sex is a need on a very personal level for a man in comparing it to water.

But there is another principle God is teaching us about the masculine sex drive.  Water is not just necessary for life but it is also beautiful in its natural state.  Just imagine a beautiful lake, a mountain stream or an ocean view – water is one of God’s most beautiful creations. A man’s sex drive which is often thought of as “dirty” is actually said by God to be a pure as water.

As human beings, we don’t just need to take in water to survive, but we are mostly water – human beings are 60% water! In the same way that human beings are mostly water men are mostly sexual beings.  It is a very important and defining aspect of who men are.

This brings up an important distinction between men and women.  While both men and women desire sex – a core defining attribute of men is their sexual nature.  For women, the core defining attribute of who they are is their relational nature. A man’s sex drive fuels all aspects of his life and gives him energy for him to go out and build, explore and conquer his world.

A man’s desire to touch, taste and experience a woman’s body on a sexual level is as pure and beautiful as water and like water is a defining part of who we are as human beings so too a man’s sexual nature is a defining aspect of his person.

So some women might be reading this and saying “Ok you proved your point that my husband has a right to have sex with me and I need to give myself to him for sex.  But that is a far cry from me having to seduce him! Where is that in the Bible?”

We are almost to that answer, but first we have to talk about a special type of command in the Bible.

Some Biblical commands require a team effort to be fulfilled

There are commands in the Bible that we as individuals can fulfill without help from anyone else.  For instance the Bible tells us not to steal, not to covet and not to murder. It tells us to be kind and caring to others. We each are responsible on our own for fulfilling these commands. A wife is told to submit to her husband and she can do this regardless of his behavior toward her unless he tells her to sin.  A husband is to provide for and protect his wife and he can do this regardless of her lack of submission or other sins she may commit toward him.

However there are certain commands in Scripture which require two or more people to act in concert with one another. God’s very first command to mankind requires that husbands and wives work together.

“27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”

Genesis 1:27-28 (KJV)

So what must happen for men and women to fulfill God’s command to “be fruitful and multiply”?

  1. A man and a woman must agree to a covenant of marriage.
  2. A man and a woman must willingly come together in sexual union to create offspring.

If men and women do not marry and do not have sex this first command of God cannot be fulfilled.  A man cannot fulfill this on his own and neither can a woman but only in working together can man and woman fulfill this command of God.

Sex in marriage is not just for procreation or to avoid sexual temptation

Most Christian married couples do not know is that God gave another command that can only be fulfilled by husbands and wives working together:

“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 & 18-19(KJV)

Proverbs 5 shows the third principle of sex that is often ignored in Christian circles.  Most Christians will agree that God’s command in Genesis 1:28 to” Be fruitful, and multiply” tells us that one of the reasons God wants us to have sex is for procreation.  Most Christians would also agree that I Corinthians 7:2 tells us that we should have sex in marriage “to avoid fornication”.

But what most Christians do not realize is that God wants men to satisfy themselves – to drink their fill of their wives’ body for their pleasure. This principle of God wanting us to seek sex for its pleasure is routinely denied by Christian writers today.  Sue Bohlin, writing for Probe.org, displays the typical attitude of Christian writers who down play pleasure as a major motivating factor in sex:

“If the purpose and goal of sex is primarily pleasure, then other people are just objects to be used for sensual gratification. Since people are infinitely valuable because God made us in His image, that is a slap in the face whether we realize it or not. The Christian perspective is that the purpose of sex is relational, with pleasure as the by-product.

https://www.probe.org/what-god-says-about-sex/

The truth is that men primarily seek sex from the physical (or pleasurable aspect of it) and women primarily seek sex from the emotional (or relational aspect of it).  Christianity and Feminism both falsely teach that the female perspective of sex “that the purpose of sex is relational, with pleasure as the by-product” is the right perspective and that men have it all wrong and need to become more like women in their sexual natures.

These same people who deny that God intended for men to freely seek sexual pleasure in their wife’s body try and reinterpret the command in Proverbs 5:19 for men to be satisfied by their wife’s breasts as it teaching that men should be content with whatever their wives do.

They actually reverse the true meaning of this passage and use this passage to excuse laziness and lack of effort on the part of a wife to please her husband sexually. If she gained excessive amounts of weight, dressed in frumpy clothes and failed to have basic hygiene that husbands were to make themselves satisfied with her and ravished by her.  If she only liked to have sex in one position and only once a week with the lights turned off, again men were required to be satisfied by whatever their wife did or did not do.  Rachel Pietka, writing for relevantmagazine.com, shows a common Christian attitude that God does not care about Christians making a good effort to have great sex:

“Although sex is indeed God’s gift to us, Christians are not directly commanded by God to have great sex. Couples may find themselves incompatible in the bedroom, and they should not be bombarded with pressure from the Christian community to start having good sex and lots of it.”

http://archives.relevantmagazine.com/life/relationships/christians-are-not-called-have-amazing-sex

But I will demonstrate to you that this modern interpretation and application of this passage is false.

 “Let her breasts SATISFY thee at all times”

The English word “satisfy” is a translation of the Hebrew word “Ravah” which literally means “to be satiated or saturated, have or drink one’s fill or to drench, water abundantly, saturate”.

So when we understand that “breasts” are symbolic of her whole body this is what God is saying to men regarding their wives:

“Drink your fill of your wife’s body whenever you are sexually thirsty and drink until you are satisfied”

So as we have shown here – the teaching that men are just to be content with whatever their wives do or don’t do in the sexual arena goes in direct contradiction to what this phrase actually teaches.  Men are to drink their fill and drench themselves sexually in their wife’s body.

This flies in the face of modern teachings about sex in marriage that men should just be content with however much their wives want to have sex.  It also contradicts the idea that husbands should be content with whatever their wives want to do sexually. “You should only have your wife do what she feels comfortable doing sexually” – is that not what we are told today? If a man desires anything more from his wife than what she is comfortable with then he is told that he is going too far and is being selfish.

But this passage tells us husbands are to drink their fill of their wife’s body!  Am I saying there are absolutely no limits? Of course not.  I have written about these limits in my previous articles. In my article “Does a Christian wife have to submit to a sinful request from her husband?” I stated that a wife does not have to submit to her husband wanting her to participate in orgies or sex with other men. In my post “Do Christian wives have to submit to requests for anal sex by their husbands?” I showed why I believe that Christians should not engage in anal sex because the anus is not designed for sexual penetration and wives do not have to submit to these requests from their husbands.

But let’s be honest – these are extreme cases but some wives try and use these types of extremes to justify any limitations they want to put on their sex lives. For instance I have heard of cases on the other extreme where wives do not feel “comfortable” touching their husband’s penis.  They literally have never placed their hands on their husband’s penis.  These types of “uncomfortableness” have no Biblical backing and women with these types of issues should be challenged by their husbands to change their behavior and thinking.

“and be thou ravished always with her love”

The English word “ravished” is a translation of the Hebrew word ‘Shagah’ which has to do with drunkenness or intoxication.  Literally husbands are called to be intoxicated with their wife’s sexual love.

We associate drunkenness with wrong doing and most of the time it is.  But the Bible tells us certain types of intoxication are not wrong.  Listen to what Paul says about the Holy Spirit:

“And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;”

Ephesians 5:18 (KJV)

Paul is telling us not to be drunk with wine – but be drunk with the Spirit of God!  In the same way men are not to be intoxicated by whores but instead they are to be intoxicated by their wife’s sexual love.

It is critically important to point out that God tells husbands and wives that sex is not just for procreation as so many Christians have been wrongly taught in churches for centuries. Sex was also designed for pleasure and enjoyment. In this passage from Proverbs, God tells a man that he is to be satisfied by his wife’s breasts (symbolic of her entire body) and that he is to be ravished(intoxicated) by her love which is clearly erotic love based on the context of the passage.

Great sex in marriage is a team effort

The modern formula for sexual relations is that a man seduces a woman into having sex by romancing her.

The Biblical formula for sex is a woman makes herself affectionate as the loving hind” and beautiful as the “pleasant roe” and available “at all times” and she ties her affection, her beauty and availability together to make herself sexually intoxicating to her husband.  In other words – in the Biblical model of marriage a woman seduces or sexually entices her husband to come to his well and drink of the waters of her body and by doing this she intoxicates him, or ravishes him with her sexual love.

Now the team effort is that the husband must respond – to her affection, her beauty and availability.  He must choose to “drink his fill” of his wife so that he may be intoxicated by her sexual love.

So as we can see, these commands require a husband and wife to work together in the same way they must work together to follow God’s command to be fruitful and multiply.

Solomon tells us here in Proverbs that the answer to a man not running after strange women (whores) is for him to find satisfaction in his wife’s body and be ravished with her sexual love.

But how can a man be intoxicated with sexual love for his wife if she makes no attempt to be affectionate toward him and she does not make herself beautiful and she does not show him that her body is always available to him?

The answer to that question is the same answer to this question – how can a man be fruitful and multiply if he can’t have sex with his wife? It is impossible.  In the same way, for a man to be sexually ravished by his wife and sexually satisfied by her body she has to give him something to be ravished and satisfied by.

And this is not the only passage in the Bible speaking of erotic love between a man and woman.  The entire book of the Song of Solomon is dedicated to this type of erotic, physical and sexual love that God commands there to be between a husband and wife in Proverbs.

“7 This thy stature is like to a palm tree, and thy breasts to clusters of grapes. 8 I said, I will go up to the palm tree, I will take hold of the boughs thereof: now also thy breasts shall be as clusters of the vine, and the smell of thy nose like apples; 9 And the roof of thy mouth like the best wine for my beloved, that goeth down sweetly, causing the lips of those that are asleep to speak.”

Song of Solomon 7:7-9 (KJV)

I also want to bring up one passage that does not speak specifically of sexual love in marriage but would still apply to how a woman shows her husband sexual love in marriage:

“She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life.”

Proverbs 31:12 (KJV)

This passage above from Proverbs speaks of the virtuous wife.

If a wife denies her husband sexually is she doing him good or evil?

She is doing him evil.

If a wife has sex with her husband, but does so in a grudging manner is she doing him good or evil?

She is doing him evil.

If a wife has sex with her husband but does so in a frigid manner is she doing him good or evil?

She is doing him evil.

If a wife refuses to make a good faith attempt to cause her husband to be satisfied with her body and be ravished with her sexual love by getting to know his sexual preferences and acting on those things is she doing him good or evil?

I would argue that a woman who fails to make a good faith attempt to know her husband’s sexual desires and satisfy them to the best of her ability in order to cause him to be ravished by her sexual love is in clear violation of the Word of God.

But why does God want women to seduce their husbands?

We have shown from Proverbs 5:19 that God wants wives to seduce their husbands to help fulfill the command that their husbands be ravished by them. But why did God setup such a paradigm wherein women must seduce their husbands to cause them to be ravished in their wives?

To answer that question, we have to ask another question first.  Why does the Bible say God created the world?

“Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.”

Revelation 4:11 (KJV)

God created the world and his most precious creation mankind, to bring him glory and honor and for him to exercise his power.  Not only does God have power over our lives – but he is worthy to receive that power by his very position as creator.  But God did not just make his creation to receive glory, honor and power – but he also created it for his own pleasure.

Like an artist or engineer that receives pleasure from their own creations God himself receives pleasure from his creations.

In this same way, God created woman to give man honor and glory and to allow him to exercise his power.

 “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. 10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.”

I Corinthians 11:7-10 (KJV)

“A virtuous woman is a crown to her husband: but she that maketh ashamed is as rottenness in his bones.”

Proverbs 12:4 (KJV)

And God has also created woman to be a source of comfort, blessing and pleasure for man:

“And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent, and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her: and Isaac was comforted after his mother’s death.”

Genesis 24:67 (KJV)

“25 Even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee; and by the Almighty, who shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts, and of the womb:”

Genesis 49:25 (KJV)

“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)

Conclusion

God has created woman to be a source of comfort, blessing and pleasure for man and this is why he commands that husbands are to find sexual satisfaction in their wife’s bodies and be ravished by their wife’s sexual love.

But a husband cannot fulfill this command on his own any more than he can fulfill God’s command to be fruitful and multiply on his own.  For a husband to find satisfaction in his wife’s body and for him to be ravished by his wife’s sexual love requires active participation rather than just passive participation on his wife’s part to accomplish these goals.

In order to do this a wife must make her husband to believe and feel that her body is available to satisfy his sexual desires whenever he wishes.  She must seduce him with her body and her sexual love for him.

A woman who simply spreads her legs and gives sex in a frigid manner is not cooperating with her husband to fulfill the command of God which requires BOTH their participation to fulfill. Wives must not just submit to sexual relations with their husbands but they must also give their husbands something to be ravished by!

In this article, we simply showed the command of God found in Proverbs 5:19 that women should sexually satisfy their husbands with their bodies and seduce their husbands with their sexual love. But we did not talk about how a woman could act out this command and set about to seduce her husband.

Many times, in the Scriptures God not only give us commands but he also give us examples to help us understand ways in which we can act out those commands.  For instance, in 1 Timothy 5:14 God tells women to “guide the house” and then if we look back to Proverbs 31 he gives a detailed example of how a woman can fulfill her duty to “guide the house”.

In the same way in the area of a wife seducing her husband God has not left women without an example.  In fact, God has given us not only a chapter like Proverbs 31, but an entire book in the Song of Solomon! In our next post, we will assemble a series of examples and principles found in the Song of Solomon that can act as sort of “A Biblical Guide to Seducing Your Husband”.

Why you should teach your daughter NOT to be independent

This famous cartoon created by Laura Foster in 1912, an opponent of women’s suffrage, has proven to be absolutely true a century after the passage of woman’s suffrage. A new study released this week confirms “women’s greater economic independence” as a contributing factor of rising cohabitation rates and declining marriage rates in the United States.

Here is more of the story from Reuters:

“More Americans 50 years and older are copying younger generations and eschewing marriage, opting instead to live with their partners, according to new research.

In 2016 about 18 million Americans were cohabiting, defined as living with an unmarried partner, and nearly a quarter of them were people over 50, an increase of 75 percent since 2007, data released on Thursday from Pew Research Center showed…

Government figures show that so-called “gray divorce,” or splits among adults 50 and over, has about doubled since the 1990s and could partly account for the increase in cohabitation.

Fewer marriages, changing social norms and women’s greater economic independence are other explanations for the rise, Stepler added.

As cohabiting has gone up, the marriage rate in the United States has dropped, from 8.2 per 1,000 population in 2000 to 6.9 in 2014, according to figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Stepler also pointed to an increase in the number of older Americans who have never married. Pew found that 27 percent of people 50 years and older who are cohabiting have never married, while more than half are divorced and 13 percent are widowed.”

Whenever reports like this come up about declining marriage rates and rising cohabitations rates you have to look very closely to see the actual cause buried in the fine print that no one wants to address.

Newtons third law of physics states:

“For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction”

And this law of physics actually applies to changes in society as well.  If you take social “action” there will always be “an equal and opposite reaction” in society for the betterment or worsening of society.

While this report tries to show “fewer marriages, changing social norms and women’s greater economic independence” as factors in the rise of cohabitation rates and decline of marriage they are not really three different causes.  Fewer marriages and changing social norms (the acceptability of cohabiting outside of marriage) are a direct result of women’s greater economic independence and what gave women greater economic independence? The women’s rights movement, the movement to make women be social equals with men that started in the mid 1800’s.

The Driving forces of Marriage before Feminism

For the history of mankind women had fewer rights than men. Women were for the most part owned by men.  Few women owned property and still fewer women held positions of power.  The result was that women were compelled to seek out marriage to men for their economic prosperity.

In fact, in many cases women did not even chose whom they would marry but rather their fathers did.  Often men would literally purchase their wives from the woman’s father.

This was the simple formula that served as the foundation of the human family for all of human civilization:

Man seeks out woman for her beauty, sexual pleasure, bearing his children, caring for them and caring for the affairs of his home. 

Woman seeks man for his protection and provision.

America and other westernized nations have neutralized both of these primary historical drivers of marriage for women and replaced it with something that was rarely if ever a driver for marriage before the modern times – romantic feelings.

Governments have now granted rights to women to be socially and economically equal with men and for those women who still cannot support themselves the government will step in and help through welfare benefits.  Modern police forces provide all the protection women need so again in this area women do not need a husband anymore.

So now romance is the only driver for marriage If a man sufficiently worships a woman telling her how wonderful she is and agreeing to support her as her equal companion in whatever she chooses whether it is a career or having children she will grant him the privilege of marrying her.

And since she has no need from him other than his emotional support of her and constant worshiping of her if either of these things diminishes there is no need for the marriage to continue.

This change in the foundation for marriage has directly lead to a decline in marriage itself.  Because after all if marriage is just based on feelings – why does anyone need a paper? Why make a commitment that will just cause more complications? Live on feelings and when the feelings are gone each person can go their separate ways.

This is not just about economics but about spirituality

As Christians, we know there is much more going on here than just the destabilization of marriage because of the economic independence of women.  We know that marriage is about more than just a mutually beneficial economic relationship (although God did intend for it to be a mutually beneficial relationship as well).

The Bible shows that God designed marriage as a spiritual symbol of the relationship between himself and his people:

 “23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing…

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 5:23-24 & 28-29(KJV)

The Biblical model of marriage is simple.

Man loves his wife by leading her, protecting her and providing for her as Christ does the Church.  Woman submits to and serves her husband as the Church submits to and serves Christ.

The Bible show us specifically how a wife serves her husband in this world:

She serves him by making herself affectionate, beautiful and sexually pleasing him

“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 5:19 (KJV)

She serves him by bearing his children and caring for the domestic needs of his home

“I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.”

1 Timothy 5:14 (KJV)

This is the model of marriage that our creator designed.  While human beings imperfectly followed this model for thousands of years it served human civilization well.

But then we thought we knew better than God.  We overturned thousands of years of civilization for an experiment with women’s rights and women’s independence. We broke God’s model for not only marriage but society at large – that model was patriarchy. And now we are reaping the consequences of that decision.

As a direct result of feminism, marriage as an institution is crumbling and women are having so few children that western nations can only keep their populations growing by importing people from less developed nations. Third world nations from Central and South America and Africa are overrunning Europe and America as a direct result of our failed experiment with equal rights for women.

What can we do in the face of this disaster?

The Scriptures tell us “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?” (Psalm 11:3).

It can be very disheartening to those of us who recognize the collapse of our culture and soon as a result the collapse of our nation.

We must restore the foundation for our society one family at a time and that foundation begins with Jesus Christ himself:

“For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”

1 Corinthians 3:11 (KJV)

But then what is next? We must build upon his Word as given by his Apostles and Prophets in the Bible:

“19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone

Ephesians 2:19-20 (KJV)

In keeping with the Word of God as our foundation we must teach women NOT to be independent of men but rather we should teach our daughters to depend on us as their fathers as we all should depend on our heavenly father.

We should teach them what God’s word says a young woman’s primary goals should be:

“I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.”
1 Timothy 5:14 (KJV)

There is not one passage in all the Bible that encourages women’s independence from men.  Not one.  And we as Christian parents continue to do a disservice to our society when we encourage our daughter’s independence but more importantly we sin against God’s design for men and women in this world when we do this.

It is up to Christian fathers and mothers to encourage our daughters to play the part that God has given them to play.  When we return to doing things God’s way – we will reap the benefits not only in our families and churches but in our societies and nations as well.

Should we discourage our daughters from being educated?

This question will certainly be asked in the face of my advocating for parents not to teach their daughters to be independent of men.  In fact , women not being educated was one of the ways in which society for thousands of years discouraged women’s independence.

However, I don’t think as Christians we need to completely discourage our daughters from being educated.  The Bible tells us in Proverbs 31:26 of the virtuous wife that she “She openeth her mouth with wisdom” and in the New Testament elder women are encouraged to teach younger women in the Lord:

“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 2:3-5 (KJV)

But we should teach our daughters that their education should be channeled toward the primary directives God has for them to marry, bear children and keep their future home in order. If they are pursuing education fields that are not supportive of those goals then that may be questioned.

I am not saying women can’t learn history or science or other such subjects even though they don’t directly relate to her home making duties.  Especially when we know that if she is going to home school or even help her children with their homework as mothers should she needs to have some knowledge of these subjects.

But we as parents should always be cognizant of the direction our daughters are taking.   We must ask a simple question in any activity our daughter undertakes:

Will this be a help or a hindrance to her following God’s directive for her to eventually marry, bear children and guide the domestic affairs of her home?

If we feel the answer is that it will be a hindrance  – then we should discourage whatever it is.

Should Christian women wear leggings as pants?

Since leggings and yoga pants very clearly reveal a woman’s form are they inappropriate to wear? Is a woman tempting the men who see her in leggings to lust after her or is it not her fault if they do?

The whole “leggings and yoga pants debate” was brought back to into the national spot light last week when two girls were not allowed on a plane because they were wearing leggings.  The Washington Post reported on the event as follows:

“A United Airlines gate agent barred two girls from boarding a flight Sunday morning because the girls were wearing leggings.

Another girl who was wearing gray leggings had to change before she was allowed to board the flight from Denver to Minneapolis, a witness said.

“She’s forcing them to change or put dresses on over leggings or they can’t board,” Shannon Watts, who was at a gate at Denver International Airport, said on Twitter. “Since when does @united police women’s clothing?”

United, responding to tweets about the incident tweeted that “United shall have the right to refuse passengers who are not properly clothed via our Contract of Carriage.” And added, “This is left to the discretion of the agents.”

The airline’s passenger contract says for the safety of all passengers and crew members, the airline can refuse to let a passenger board if the passenger is “barefoot or not properly clothed.”

So was it improper for these girls to be wearing leggings on this flight? And a much broader question would be is it improper for Christian women to wear leggings or yoga pants at all in public?

I want to clarify what we are talking about here.  For a long time women have worn leggings under dresses or long blouses and other clothing. But now for several years women have begun wearing leggings by themselves as pants.  That is the subject of this discussion.

Before we get into answering the question of the morality of women wearing leggings or yoga pants in public settings we need to establish a very important fact about men.

God made men with a much higher testosterone level than women. Most men have 10 times the level of testosterone in their system and probably 10 times the sex drive to go along with it.  A man’s sex drive is not only significantly stronger than a woman’s but the entire driving force of it is different.  While normal and healthy women desire sex too – their sex drive is emotionally and relationally driven.  A man’s sex drive is physically and visually driven.

So yes, for us as men when we see a woman in legging pants or yoga pants it is far more sexually arousing to us then if a woman had on baggy pants or a loose-fitting dress that hid the shape of her rear end, pelvic area and legs.

As man we cannot control the fact that the sight of a woman’s figure displayed in this manner brings us pleasure – our brains are wired by the design of God to receive pleasure from the female form.  Let put it this way to you ladies reading this article.

If you were to walk by your coworker’s desk and they had just sat down with hot cheeseburger from your favorite cheeseburger place – would the sight and smell of that cheeseburger not send you pleasure signals through you brain? Would you not be made hungry as a result? Of course you would.  The male physical and visual sex drive works exactly the same way when it comes to seeing women we find attractive.

The debate here is not about how men’s brains work – that is just a biological fact.  The debate is about what is sinful and what is not – what is lust and what is not and ultimately if women are tempting men to lust by wearing leggings and yoga pants in public settings.

Current Cultural Views of Lust

Most people have been taught that causing a man to lust means simply causing him to be sexually aroused by the mere sight of a woman regardless of her actions toward him.  So the thought goes – if a woman is fully covered this will sharply reduce a man’s chances of being sexually aroused by her form which they believe is lust on his part.

Because of this belief about what lust is some conservative Christians have their wives and daughters dress in very baggy dresses with that go to the floor with long sleeves to completely cover their arms.  They may even wear their hair tied up with a head covering of some sort.

This same concept when taken to its logical conclusion is why some Muslims make their wives be covered from head to toe with only a screen to see through on the face.

But true wisdom comes from being able to recognize our presuppositions or preconceived notions of morality.  Only when we are willing to question things that we have believed since before we can remember anything else will we be able to find the truth in many areas of life.

As Christians we believe that the starting point for our all the moral questions of life is the Bible. So if we are to truly understand what the Bible teaches about any subject of life – we must disregard all our presuppositions and let God’s Word to speak to us.  We must do as I have said on this site many times “remove our cultural glasses” and see the truth regardless of our presupposed ideas.

So take off your cultural glasses and put on your seat belt as we show you that the question that is the title of this article gets it all wrong.

What the Bible says about lust and causing your brother to stumble

Let’s first establish some two Biblical truths that are applicable to this discussion.

The Bible says it is sin to lust

“What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

Romans 7:7 (KJV)

As we can see from the passage above, the Apostle Paul makes it clear that to lust is to sin.

We then can see from the Gospel of Matthew that sexual lust is sin:

“27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Matthew 5:27-28 (KJV)

The Bible says we should not do things that tempt other to sin

““Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way.

Romans 14:13 (KJV)

The Apostle Paul makes it clear that we as both men and women should never do something to could cause our brother to sin.  We should not put things in front of them that might trip them up spiritually.

So this is an open and closed case right? These Scriptures prove that the question of this article truly is a rhetorical question right? Well not so fast. Keep your seat securely fastened and keep your arms in the vehicle as we continue our quest for the truth in this matter.

Distinguishing the Biblical definition of lust from the cultural definition of lust

This is the huge presupposition that sits right in front of us. We are presupposing what lust is.  In our language when we think of lust we think of sexual arousal.  If a person is turned on sexually by the sight of someone who is not their spouse that is lust according to our culture.

But is that the definition of lust according to the Bible? Let’s find out.

Remember that passage from Romans 7:7 where Paul was saying lust was sin and we were all saying “Amen!”? Well he actually tells us what it is sin – because God said in the 10 commandments “Thou shalt not covet”. So what does that tell us? It tells us that lust is synonymous with covetousness.

So if lust is synonymous with covetousness then what is covetousness?

“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.”

Exodus 20:17 (KJV)

So up to this point we have established with absolute certainty that lust is sin and lust is tied directly to the 10th commandment.

The 10 commandment shows us by the context in which covetousness is used what it means. Is covetousness finding your neighbor’s house desirable? No it is not. Is covetousness dreaming about or fantasizing about what it would be like to live in your neighbor’s house? No it is not. Covetousness is the desire to sinfully possess something that does not belong to you.

We have seen this story play out in many movies. A man desires the land or home of another man.  So he offers him money for it but he won’t sell.  He says he will never sell it. Was the first man finding the second man’s land desirable a sin? No it was not. But if he cannot legally acquire this land and begins to think of how he can illegally acquire that other man’s land he has now gone from righteous desire to sinful covetousness.

This exact same principle applies to a man’s wife, his daughter or any other woman.  It is NOT lust (covetousness) when a man simply finds a woman sexually desirable no matter her marital status. It is no more a sin for this man to imagine her naked or even imagine having sex with her than it is for a man to imagine what another man’s house looks like on the inside and what it would be like to live there.

Lust is born when a man’s natural God given sexual desires are turned into sinful sexual covetousness and he desires to unlawfully possess a woman.

I know your head is probably spinning.  Your presuppositions about lust have been completely blown out of the water.

But we are now coming to end our journey so just hold tight just a little longer.

Now let’s take the original question of this article and look at the presupposition right in the middle of the question:

“Is a woman tempting the men who see her in leggings to lust after her or is it not her fault if they do?”

So what is the presupposition? This question presupposes that if a woman dresses in any way which might cause a man to be sexually aroused by her or find her sexually desirable or fantasize about having sex with her that this is her causing him to lust.

But what we know from our journey in the Scriptures is lust does not refer to sexual arousal or sexual imagination.  It refers to covetousness which in the context of sexual lust means that a man has the desire to unlawfully possess a woman in a sexual manner.

I would argue that once we understand what lust actually is then we understand better what enticing someone to lust looks like. I would argue that for 99 percent of cases a woman causes a man to lust after her first by her actions and then secondarily by her appearance.

A woman has to draw a man with actions in the form of words or body motions before true lust develops in most cases. The vast majority of men will not desire to unlawfully possess a woman unless that woman motions in some way either verbally or through body movement toward him that she might be available to him.  In other words she flirts with him in some manner.  This is when the seed of lust in 90 percent of cases with men.

Now are there men who lust after women who have not flirted or motioned or talked in any sexual manner toward them? Yes! But if a man lusts after a woman simply because of her beautiful appearance and not any sexual flirting or actions on her part that would draw him to lust after her then his sin of lust lays 100% at his feet and she is innocent.

So now let’s change our original question to what Christian women should really being asking themselves in regard to causing men to lust after them:

Instead of asking:

“Isn’t it wrong for me to wear this because it might sexually arouse a man or make him have pleasurable thoughts about me?”

Women should ask themselves:

“Did I just flirt with him? Did I lead him on in some manner?”

So are you saying women can just walk around half naked or completely naked wherever they go?

No In am not saying that at all. But as the Scriptures say “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven” (Ecclesiastes 3:1). That means we should wear clothing that is appropriate to the occasion.  It may not be appropriate for a woman to wear a tight tee shirt and shorts to her job unless she works at Hooters and it may not be appropriate for a woman to wear a bikini unless she is going to beach, swimming pool or sun bathing.

But what about I Timothy 2:9’s admonition for women to dress modestly?

“In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array”

I Timothy 2:9 (KJV)

I am glad you asked that. I have written an entire post on that verse going in-depth into what modesty actually means and the context in which this verse is talking about women’s dress. You can read it here.

The very short answer is that like the word lust, our culture has made up its own definition of modesty.  Modesty in I Timothy 2:9 refers to women dressing in attire that is appropriate to the occasion. It then tell us that for the occasion of gathering in the church assembly for worship women should wear “modest apparel” or literally “be appropriate clothed in full covering garments”.

Paul gave a similar warning about food in worship.  He told the Corinthians not to abuse the communion table by turning worship into a feast when he wrote:

And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.”

1 Corinthians 11:34 (KJV)

Paul was not saying it was wrong for us to think about food or sex or be aroused to hunger for food or sex. He was saying that when we come together as a churches for worship and communion we need to put these natural God given hungers aside and fully focus on God.  He was not condemning sexual thought or women dressing sexually outside the Church in the same way that he was not condemning being aroused to hunger for food outside the Church.

It was all about time and place.

Combating Negative Views of Masculine Sexuality

This debate over women wearing leggings or yoga pants is actually a great opportunity to help both men and women have a better understanding and respect for male sexuality.  As Christians we must measure everything action, everything thought and every desire we have by the Bible.  The Bible has been called the “Canon” which means “measure” or “rule”.  It means the Bible should be the standard or rule by which we measure our lives.

Thousands of years ago back in the Garden of Eden God designed man and woman with distinct masculine and feminine natures. Contrary to many false doctrines promoted over centuries of Christianity – the distinct male and female sexual natures were not a result of sin and the fall.  They were made by the design of God from day one.

That means when Adam saw Eve for the first time he had the same dopamine rush that men get today when they see women they find beautiful and yes he probably got an erection.  This is not something dirty – it is by the design of God.

But as Christians we recognize that the fall corrupted the original masculine and feminine natures God designed.  That means man’s sexual nature and woman’s sexual nature was corrupted in some ways from the fall.  Our task is to discover what parts of our distinct male and female sexual natures are still by the original design of God and which parts are a corruption of that design.

In the context of the male sexual nature, we must measure male sexual behaviors by the Bible.  If a certain male sexual behavior conflicts with God’s moral law than we condemn it but if that behavior is not condemned by God’s moral law or is honored by God’s moral law than we honor it as God’s design.

How much honor does male sexuality get in our day and time? I would argue that most Christians have a very negative view of male sexuality and that is something we need to change.

I have chosen some excerpts from an article entitled A Man’s Perspective on Yoga Pants by Al Blanton at 78mag.com to illustrate how male sexuality is commonly dishonored in Christian circles.

“Do I like yoga pants? Of course I do. I think they may be the greatest thing ever invented. But that’s the barbarian in me. The Cro-Magnon. The man

To say that the leggings “cause” men to stumble might be a stretch (pun intended). Men cause men to stumble, not leggings.

When the gorgeous behinds pass by, we (men) always have a choice. Either a) look away and think nothing else of it, b) appreciate the female form while you sip your half-caf, or c) visualize scenarios that run the prurient gamut.

I believe the first glance is not the problem. It’s the second and third that begin to get us in trouble. But remember, we are always presented with a choice…

I do not write this to bash men; no, indeed I write this to help men, to liberate men…

So the Christian male is faced with a very difficult scenario: pursue purity or feed the beast. We justify the latter by saying it is “natural” or “just the way we were made.”

So in summary, the real problem is not yoga pants. The problem is our mind. The problem is our heart.”

 

I truly believe that Mr. Blanton did not write this article “to bash men” but instead to help “liberate men” from what he believes is sinful behavior. His intentions are noble.

But Mr. Blanton like many Christian men today has a “zeal of God, but not according to knowledge” (Romans 10:2). Specifically his knowledge of what lust actually is according the Scriptures is lacking and because of this he believes when men take that “second and third” look at a woman or when we “visualize scenarios that run the prurient gamut” (undress a woman in our minds and imagine sexual scenarios with her) that this is the very definition of lust and therefore sin.

He shows some feminist tendencies in his words as well. When he talks about why he as a man likes yoga pants and says “But that’s the barbarian in me. The Cro-Magnon. The man…” that is a nod to modern feminism.  The masculine physical and visual sex drive is seen as “uncivilized”, “piggish”, “dirty” and “base”.

Now I am not saying that some men do not act “uncivilized”, “piggish” and “dirty” sometimes.  Picture the construction workers whistling at women walking by yelling out comments about their bodies or men gawking at women and making them feel uncomfortable.  Men grabbing women or slapping women’s behinds.  That we would agree is barbaric behavior on the part of men.

But for Mr. Blanton to say that simply because he likes woman in yoga pants and it gives his brain pleasure that this is somehow barbaric or uncivilized is wrong.  His statement was dishonorable to himself, men in general and the God who designed male sexuality. This statement is textbook misandry.

Later Mr. Blanton compares masculine sexuality to the beast. This is again is a nod to false views of that equate male sexuality to animal sexuality while lifting up female sexuality as a more civilized and human sexuality that men should try to model in their lives.  Again comparing masculine sexuality to a “beast” dishonors men and dishonors the God who made men.

And I yes Mr. Blanton this is in fact “just the way we were made” by God himself. It is as natural for a man to be sexually aroused by women in yoga pants and even to get an erection as it is for a pregnant or nursing mother to lactate when she hears a baby cry, or when she even thinks of her baby. We don’t call women barbaric and uncivilized for their natural reactions to babies and infants yet we condemn men for their natural reactions to women. It is completely and utterly inconsistent.

Let’s take his statement again and translate this to the natural reactions of women to babies:

“To say that the leggings “cause” men to stumble might be a stretch (pun intended). Men cause men to stumble, not leggings.”

This is like saying this toward women:

“To say that crying babies or thoughts of babies “cause” women to lactate might be a stretch. Women cause women to lactate, not babies.”

This just puts the absurdity of the condemnation of the male sexual nature on full display.

I do agree with Mr. Blanton that “the real problem is not yoga pants.”, but I disagree with him that “The problem is our mind” as in the problem is the male sexual nature which he calls barbaric and animalistic.

The problem is not women wearing leggings or yoga pants or men being sexually aroused by or taking pleasure from seeing women in these pants.

The problem is the condemnation of the male sexual nature by both men and women. Men need to be at peace with their nature and as long as they are not being rude and gawking at these women if they take tasteful glances and enjoy the view there is no sin in this.

Women need to stop viewing men as barbaric and sexual beasts and appreciate them for the way God designed them.  If a man is gawking at a woman or making lewd gestures and remarks she has a right to say something because that is rude. If he is only taking passing glances at her she has no more right to shame him or that then she would her girlfriend for lactating because she heard a baby cry.

A final word for women on this subject of what you wear

Whether it is yoga pants, leggings, tight fitting dresses or blouses as a woman you must be aware of the fact that that the sight of your form brings sexual pleasure to men even if they hide it very well.  Normal men see you as God designed you – as a both a person and an object of sexual beauty and pleasure.

So in essence when a man sees you as a woman it is the same as when you see your favorite foods on TV or in restaurants and you imagine what it would be like to taste that food.  But you don’t just go and steal food that you like right? No you legally purchase it before enjoy eating it.

In the same way, because a good man sees a woman as a person as well as object of sexual beauty and pleasure he does not go up and just grab her and take her. He does not call out lewd remarks to her or gawk at her.

In God’s design he marries her.  Then as part of his marriage relationship to her he can “come into his garden, and eat his pleasant fruits” (Song of Solomon 4:16). I hope that this journey through the Scriptures has helped to change your perspective of what lust actually is. If you are woman – you don’t have to be ashamed to dress in beautiful clothing, or even clothing that might be sexually arousing to men provide that you follow these Biblical principles:

  1. If you are married or still under your father’s authority are they are ok with you dressing in this manner? If they are not then you need to submit to male headship that God has placed in your life.
  2. If you are able to wear clothing that some would consider more form fitting or sexually arousing are you doing so at the proper place and time? Maybe it is ok to wear tight fitting leggings for a night out with your girlfriends but it may be inappropriate for school(or on an airplane) It certainly would be for wrong for worship services in your church.
  3. Whether you are wearing more sexually appealing clothing or not – are you flirtatious with men to the point that you make them think they could have sex with you outside of marriage? If that is the case this needs to stop. That is the very definition of a woman causing a man to lust.

On the subject of United Airlines barring these two girls for wearing improper attire.  They have every right to do so.  It is their airline. They can determine what clothing must be worn to fly on their planes.

Being a stay at home mom should be illegal?

“We should make it a legal requirement that all parents of children of school-age or older are gainfully employed…So long as we as a nation cling to the lie that only a stay-at-home mum is best placed to assume the responsibilities of caregiver then working fathers will continue to feel insecure about stepping off the corporate treadmill to spend more time with their children.” This is the advice given by Australian journalist Sarrah Le Marquand writing for the Daily Telegraph in Australia.

Her advice comes as a result of public outcry in Australia regarding a study that recommended stay at home moms would be better off in the work place then at home:

“It’s the topic of stay-at-home mums. More specifically, the release of any data or analysis that dares recommend Australian women should get out of the living room/kitchen/nursery and back into the workforce.

So the outcry has been predictable in the wake of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) recent report which had the audacity to suggest stay-at-home mums would be better off putting their skills to use in paid employment.”

Now to be fair to Sarrah Le Marquand she has advocated for women to be able to choose to stay at home with their children until they reach school age:

“And yes, the role played by parents in the early months and years following the birth of a child is vital and irreplaceable. It also stands to reason that for many (but certainly not all) families, it is the mother who opts to take time off work during this period to solely focus on caring for her baby.

Once again, there is nothing wrong with this. In fact, that time at home should be a privilege afforded to more new mums, which is why a few years back I was a lone voice in supporting Tony Abbott’s grossly misunderstood and thus ill-fated paid parental leave scheme, which proposed all female employees receive their normal salary for six months.”

So this is Sarrah Le Marquand’s full position – she is arguing in this article that while women should have the choice to stay at home with their children while they are infants and younger, once they reach school age they should be forced by law to enter the work force full time alongside their husbands.

Near the end of the article she reveals what the ultimate goal of her advocating for forcing stay at home moms back into the workforce is:

“Only when the tiresome and completely unfounded claim that “feminism is about choice” is dead and buried (it’s not about choice, it’s about equality) will we consign restrictive gender stereotypes to history.”

The last line says it all. Forcing stay at home moms to enter the work force would be the final assault on gender roles as God designed them.

This is the logical progression of equality movements.  When you don’t get the results you want, then you use the government to force the results you want.  When you don’t have of the racial or ethnic representation in a given area whether it be higher education or certain areas of employment you force it through government quotas. When women don’t make the same amount as men you force it by taking away merit based pay systems. And when some women refuse to try and make themselves equal with their husbands by working outside the home like their husbands – you force it upon them.

Is it really better for both genders when women leave the home for careers?

I get emails and comments on a regular basis from women who after years have pursuing careers outside the home have come to regret that decision.

Recently I received the following comments from a woman that had what she described was her “dream job” as the chief editor of a newspaper only to realize the devastating impact her career had on her children and her marriage.

“Since the advent of feminism, women have in fact become slaves to the status quo and materialism. Children are being raised by institutions and strangers and, frankly, the consequences of that alone have been terrifying to watch unfold. Homes are falling apart and marriages are crumbling. Every woman struggles with going back to work after having a baby…

I am a mother to three girls, and over the past 11 years, I’ve worked and stayed home for periods of time. I am currently working in what I thought was my “dream job” as the chief editor of a newspaper, but this decision has brought my family and marriage nothing but pain and stress. My husband and I have prayerfully decided that, after the end of this year, I will stay home again and care for our family, permanently this time. I will not return to work again.

Although our budget is tighter when we don’t have two incomes, we are infinitely happier and, as this is God’s will for our family, He always provides abundantly for us.”

This woman’s experience is by no means unique. It happens to millions of women across the western world who buy into feminism’s lie to women that “you can have it all”.  When we break God’s gender roles that he has assigned to man and woman we will reap the consequences both on an individual level as well as a societal level.

But there is more than just anecdotal evidence to support the premise that the mass exodus of women from being keepers at home to career women has been bad for western culture.

See these comments from a study entitled “THE RISE OF DIVORCE AND SEPARATION IN THE UNITED STATES, 1880–1990”:

“Marital dissolution for reasons other than widowhood has increased dramatically over the course of the past century. Only about 5% of marriages contracted in 1867 ended in divorce, but over one-half of marriages contracted in 1967 are expected to end in divorce (Cherlin 1992; Preston and MacDonald 1979). Scholars and commentators have consistently explained this change as a product of the changing sexual division of labor. Writing in 1893, Durkheim (1960 [1893]) pointed to the sexual division of labor as a source of interdependence between men and women, producing what he called “organic solidarity.”

Less conservative scholars use different terminology, but most stress the same agent of change. They argue that the rise in economic opportunities for women was a necessary condition for the increase in divorce and separation (Cherlin 1992; Degler 1980; McLanahan 1991; Ross and Sawhill 1975). According to this interpretation, women in the past who lacked independent means of support were often trapped in bad marriages; as the opportunities for female wage-labor expanded, women were increasingly able to escape and live on their own. Thus, the rising economic power of women undermined patriarchal authority and destabilized marriages

The rise of individualism associated with urbanization and industrialization has meant increasing emphasis on self-fulfillment and growing intolerance of unsuccessful marriages. In essence, the cultural argument suggests that marriages in the past tended to be governed more by social norms and less by rational calculation to maximize individual happiness. Since the nineteenth century, increasingly individualistic values could have simultaneously contributed to rising female market-labor participation and to rising marital instability.”

The key phrase that from the analysis of women working as it relates to marriage stability is this one:

“the rising economic power of women undermined patriarchal authority and destabilized marriages”   

I would go a step further.

The Bible tells us that it is God, not man that instituted patriarchal authority:

“But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

I Corinthians 11:3 (KJV)

22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing

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 5:22-24 & 28-29 (KJV)

“4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

Titus 2:4-5

The Bible clearly establishes patriarchy – male headship over women.  It establishes the relationship of man to woman in clear and unequivocal terms.  Men are to be the leaders, protectors and providers for women. Women are to be dependent upon their fathers and then ultimately their husbands for leadership, provision and protection in the same way the Church is to depend on Christ for these things.

Western culture, and really the cultures of the entire world used to embrace this basic principle of society.  Only since the mid 19th century with the rise of egalitarianism which spawned feminism did the Western world turn its back on God’s design and we are reaping the natural consequences of that decision.

What if we reversed Sarrah Le Marquand’s advice?

What if instead of making it illegal for stay at home moms to stay home after their children reached school age we made it illegal for married women to enter the workforce at all? I know GASP! That is crazy right.  What if we restored by law the dependence of women upon men and reversed all the so called “progress” of the woman’s rights movement?

The fact is we know from the history of mankind that if we made it more difficult for women to work outside the home or own property husbands would once again have the help meets God designed for them and children would have their mothers back.  Women would once again be able to fully concentrate on their homes rather than dealing with the struggle between work life and home life balance that feminists like Sarrah Le Marquand think is so great but other women know has a horrible effect on their lives and that of their families.

Yes there would be some negatives. Some women would again be trapped in bad marriages or abusive situations.

But we have to ask ourselves this question.  Which was better for society? Was society worse off by having a patriarchal authority or by eliminating patriarchal authority to address injustices against women? I would argue that if the measure of a society is the strength of the family unit and not the size of our homes or bank accounts we have the answer to that question.

I have said it before and I will say it again.  Feminism will come to end one way or the other.  Either governments will abolish feminism before they collapse due to its negative effects on their cultures or those governments will collapse giving rise to new governments that will have the courage to do what must be done.