This new style of video I am trying out. Its less than 4 minutes.
I hope it will be a blessing.
This new style of video I am trying out. Its less than 4 minutes.
I hope it will be a blessing.
“Does the bible say anything about women being with men who aren’t followers of God? Is a man who doesn’t even believe in God still entitled to a submissive wife or am I now exempt from that?” – These questions and others were recently asked to me in an email I received from a newly married young Christian woman calling herself “D”.
“Hi there, If you don’t mind may I call myself “D?” I am a 27 year of woman and I have been quietly reading your blog for a while after I stumbled upon it while I was seeking out some answers online about my lifestyle. While I cannot say that I live a lifestyle that is completely working in tandem with the things you talk about, I do find your insight interesting and honest. I appreciate the thought and honesty even if I don’t always understand or want to agree with some of the things being said. If you don’t mind, I was wondering if you could help lend some insight on something that has been troubling me? I don’t really know where to go to find answers as it seems society throws people left and right, often even shaming people for wanting to understand.
I would like to start by explaining my lifestyle dynamic first so you can gain an understanding of where I am coming from. This might seem long and drawn out but stay with me, it’s sort of complicated. I do not attend church, well I have not committed myself to a church yet but I do go from time to time. I would consider myself a Christian, even if my choices didn’t always show that. While believing in God there has always been a somewhat liberal understanding of how things worked for me. As I grow older I realize how confused I really am, I was brought up one way, society tells me something else, while my heart yearns for more knowledge.
I have been happily married for 2 and 1/2 years, but here is where most Christians are going to frown down on me…
My husband doesn’t believe in God, we are intermixed in that way and I know that’s not the ideal circumstance! I will clear things up by mentioning it’s basically a mirror image of how my dad was, not believing in God while my mother did, it’s what is normal to me so I felt comfortable doing it. I wonder, did I mess up, am I wrong for this? I love my husband and I would NOT like to be one of the couples that ends up in a divorce due to our differences and arguing over stupid petty things. I hope that one day he can change his mind about God, I really have hope for that. Still in the back of my head I wonder am I wrong to be with him because of our religious differences, will we fail for this reason? I want to ensure that I won’t end up in a divorce, we really only fight about petty things for the most part.
Generally he tells me that “I don’t listen” or that “I argue with him too much.” His solution is just that I should do what he says. I feel that isn’t a reasonable for our situation for us though because our marriage isn’t exactly founded on those biblical principles, so why is he still asking for them? It frustrates me and even angers me sometimes.
Does the bible say anything about women being with men who aren’t followers of God? Is a man who doesn’t even believe in God still entitled to a submissive wife or am I now exempt from that? How do I deal with this? This is just such a strange situation and I don’t know what to do. Part of me says “I should do what he says so he is happy and we don’t fail in our marriage” while the other part says “well he is clearly wrong he doesn’t even believe in God, therefore he has no idea what he is talking about.” Also, I wonder which is worse for a Christian to be married to a non-Christian or for that couple to get in a divorce?
I would like to thank you for your time, I hope this didn’t sound too confusing. I know that you base most of your dealings with couples who are both Christians but it would mean a lot to me if you could look into my situation as well as it has been eating a way at me for a while now. If you’d like to use my story as a concept for your blog, I would be okay with that too. I wonder if there are other people struggling with my situation.”
Below are the answers to D’s concerns.
D’ Statement of her faith:
“I would consider myself a Christian, even if my choices didn’t always show that. While believing in God there has always been a somewhat liberal understanding of how things worked for me. As I grow older I realize how confused I really am, I was brought up one way, society tells me something else, while my heart yearns for more knowledge.”
I have said many times on this blog that the most important doctrine of the Bible and really the most important question of life is this:
Have we truly accepted the one true God, the God of the Bible and his Son Jesus Christ as our personal Lord and Savior believing that he died for our sins, was buried and rose again on the third day?
So, if you cannot answer with a clear and resounding yes to that question I encourage you to reach out in faith to God today and place your faith and trust in Jesus Christ today as your Lord and Savior.
Just because the Gospel is the most important doctrine in the Bible does not mean it is the ONLY important doctrine in the Bible. Many Christians and Churches today falsely believe that if they are preaching the Gospel and the Gospel alone that they are doing all God requires. They believe everything else should be left alone for each individual Christian to figure out on his or her own. But God did leave us to wonder on our own as believers and the Scriptures tell us he gives us teachers to teach us in his Word:
“11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ”
Ephesians 4:11-13 (KJV)
While the office of Apostle was temporary to start Christ’s Church and true Prophets will probably not appear till the end of days we do today still see God call men to serve him as evangelists, pastors and teachers. I believe God has placed a calling on my life to be a teacher of his Word and this how I minister to his people through this blog.
The Bible also tells us that husbands are to be spiritual teachers of their wives:
“34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.”
1 Corinthians 14:34-36 (KJV)
The Scriptures exhort husbands to follow Christ’s example and wash their wives with the Word of God and again this requires teaching, correction and sometimes rebuke:
“25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.”
Ephesians 5:25-27 (KJV)
Also, Christ when speaking to his Churches of which the Bible pictures him as their husband stated this:
“As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.”
Revelation 3:19 (KJV)
Having started with this as our foundation, let us now move on to questions for true believing Christian wives who are living with unbelieving husbands.
There are three ways a Christian could end being with an unbelieving spouse:
There is no sin on the part of a Christian who ends up with an unbelieving spouse because of the first two scenarios. However, if a Christian knowingly marries a non-believer than that Christian has a committed a sin against God according to the following passage:
“14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.”
2 Corinthians 6:14-16 (KJV)
However, the Scriptures tells us this if we find ourselves with an unbelieving spouse (not matter the circumstances of how we came to that position):
“13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace…
39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.”
I Corinthians 7:13-15 & 39 (KJV)
So here is what the Apostle Paul is stating by the inspiration of God in the above passage. If a man or woman find themselves with a spouse that is not a believer and that unbeliever wants to stay married to them they must stay in that marriage. However, if the unbelieving spouse wants to depart then they may let them depart and the believing brother or sister are not bound to that marriage in those cases.
When we look at verse 39 in the context of verses 13-15 of this chapter as well as passages like Exodus 21:10-11 then we understand that if a Christian woman’s unbelieving husband provides her with food, clothing, shelter and sexual relations and he wants to remain married to her she is bound to him for life and may not leave him.
So, if your unbelieving husband matches that criteria – you cannot leave him. You are bound to him for life.
So, even if you willingly married a non-believing husband (which was a sin) if you divorce him without just cause that God allows for you are compounding that sin and doing something even worse. The fact is God can forgive you of the sin of marrying a non-Christian and he may even use you to win him to Christ as we will talk about in the next section.
The Bible directly answers this question of yours in the following text:
“1 Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; 2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; 4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.”
I Peter 3:1-6 (KJV)
So, the Scriptures tell you as a Christian woman to do something that very much goes against your sin nature. If your husband is doing something your believe is disobedient to God whether it is how he conducts various aspects of his personal life or even how he treats your or your children your sinful response is to try and correct him, rebuke him and then free yourself from his authority.
But the Scriptures tell you to attempt to win your husband into obedience to God whether by accepting Christ as his savior or getting his life right with God if he is a Christian. It tells you to win him without the word, without preaching at him and instead win him by your subjection to him, your living a pure life before him and your reverencing him.
The key phrase “if any obey not the word” refers to husbands who are disobedient to the Word of God. This would cover unbelieving husbands who “obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thessalonians 1:8) as well as those husbands who claim Christ as their savior but are disobedient to his Word in various ways.
I have heard many Christian women say “if any obey not the word” is strictly speaking about unbelieving husbands and does not apply to Christian husbands who are disobedient to the Word in various ways. So, they literally try and have us believe that I Peter 3:1-6 does not apply at all to wives married to Christian husbands and they have thereby nullified the Word of God. In other words, they believe if their Christian husband is disobedient to God in his lifestyle in anyway they deem too serious they have the right to free themselves from his authority. His spiritual authority in their view is now forfeit.
The problem with this interpretation is that verse 5 blows it out of the water:
“5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: 6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.”
After Peter describes the type of submission that wives are to have to their husbands who are disobedient to the Word he then writes a key phrase “For after this manner” and then he goes on to talk about the holy women of old times like Sara who obeyed Abraham calling him lord. Was Abraham an unbeliever? We know he was not an unbeliever as the Bible presents him as a man who “believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness” (Romans 4:3).
Therefore, we know beyond a shadow of a doubt based on the full context of this passage that the phrase “if any obey not the word” absolutely applies to both unbelieving as well as believing husbands who are disobedient to the Word of God.
Another false teaching among egalitarians and sadly even most complementarians today is that a husband (whether he is a believer or not) cannot in any way compel his wife’s submission to him. In fact, that is why most complementarians in our modern times reject a husband’s authority to discipline his wife for her failure to submit to his authority. They teach the Biblical submission of a wife to her husband is completely voluntary and the part of the wife and this should not be any concern of the husband.
This false teaching comes from a faulty understanding The Greek word hupotasso which is translated as “submit”, “subject”, “subjection” and “obedient” in our English translations of the Bible.
This is the definition of hupotasso according to Thayer’s and Smith’s Bible Dictionary:
“to arrange under, to subordinate
to subject, put in subjection
to subject one’s self, obey
to submit to one’s control
to yield to one’s admonition or advice
to obey, be subject
A Greek military term meaning “to arrange [troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader”. In non-military use, it was “a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden”.”
So, like many words in the Bible, the context in which hupotasso is used determines if it is a voluntary attitude of giving in and cooperating with someone who is an equal verses the military use of the word which is an involuntary submission to one’s authority.
In Ephesians 5:19-24 we read the following:
“19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; 20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; 21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.
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.”
If you notice above I have put a separation in the text between verses 21 and 22. In the NIV and many modern translations they will be put a separation between verses 20 and 21 and the NIV even puts a note above verse 21 making it seem as though verse 21 is speaking to the husband wife relationship.
Again, just like we discussed with I Peter 3:1-6 context is key. Here in Ephesians 5:1-21 Paul is speaking to Christians in the Church in general about holy living. He then ends his general call to holy living for Christians with a call for Christians to submit to one another – this is not the military type of submission of one under authority to another, but it is the voluntary submission of equals serving and cooperating with one another.
Then he turns to the subject of marriage and the family in Ephesians 5:22.
First and foremost you will never find one passage in the Scriptures that tells a husband to submit to his wife. Not one. You will see egalitarians try and throw smoke up about God telling Abraham to listen to Sarah regarding Hagar (Genesis 21:12). But this was not God telling him to submit to his wife, but rather for him in this instance to act on her advice. Nothing in the Scriptures forbids wives from making requests of their husbands and giving them advice. And sometimes God will lead us as Christian husbands to act on our wife’s advice but this is not a husband submitting to this wife. This is no different than a King who grants the request of one his servants or follows the advice of one his advisors.
So how do we know what kind of submission it is that God calls wives to regarding their husbands? The found in the words surround the call for wives to submit to their husbands. First in verse 22 God calls wives to submit to their husbands “as unto the Lord”. In no other passage of Scripture do we find God calling someone to submit to a human authority as unto God. But only in the husband wife relationship do we see this comparison. Verse 23 further bolsters this by telling wives that their husbands are their head as Christ is the head of the Church and then in verse 24 he tells wives to submit to their husbands as the Church is to submit to Christ in everything.
So which kind of submission is God calling for? The voluntary type of serving submission between equals or the military type of submission where one is called to submit to and obey the one in authority over them? The answer is clear and indisputable. God is calling for the military type of submission from a wife toward her husband.
When egalitarians and even complentarians say that a wife’s submission in this passage is the voluntary submission between equals they are breaking the model that is being setup here. God is basing a wife’s submission on the model of our obedience to him and the Church’s obedience to Christ. Are Christ and the Church equals? We know they are not. Christ is the authority of the Church and he demands his Church’s obedience to him.
Therefore, we can say beyond a doubt that the submission that God calls wives to toward their husbands is the military type of submission which is mandatory. And just as commanders in the military must be concerned with and compel the submission of those under their authority so too husbands must compel their wife’s submission to them.
A husband who refuses to compel his wife’s submission to his authority is just as delict in his duty before God as the wife is who refuses to submit to her husband’s authority. They both are failing to model the relationship of Christ to his Church where he compels the obedience of his Church and the Church submits herself to Christ.
You stated this regarding your unbelieving husband’s insistence that you stop arguing with him so much and simply do what he tells you to do:
“Generally he tells me that “I don’t listen” or that “I argue with him too much.” His solution is just that I should do what he says. I feel that isn’t a reasonable for our situation for us though because our marriage isn’t exactly founded on those biblical principles, so why is he still asking for them?”
Based on all the Scriptures I have presented to you in this article I hope you realize that your husband’s motivation for asking for your submission is irrelevant in God’s view. God wants you to submit to him whether he asks for your submission or not. Your husband may want you to submit for totally selfish reasons but God wants you to submit to him, not to make him happy, but for two reasons. The first is just as I Peter 3:1-2 states that you may be able to win him to Christ by your submission, pure life and reference for him. The second is that by submitting to him you fulfill your role to model the Church’s obedience to Christ even if your husband is not fulfilling the role of loving you as Christ loves his Church.
So, D – you should absolutely listen more, talk less and don’t argue with your husband. It is one thing to give him respectful advice or make a request and let him decide what to do. It is another to argue with him. D – do you realize how if you completely changed your attitude on this and truly just talked less and submitted more that this change could cause your husband to inquire of you what happened? Then you could share with him how God changed your heart on this matter and that God showed you he wants you to submit to your husband and serve him as the Church submits to and serves Christ.
This will also remove a lot of your frustration. Because then you will realize this is not about you. This is about Christ. In way you are being just as selfish as you believe your husband is being. You are making your marriage about you. It’s not about you and your personal happiness. It’s about God and his plan for your life. Your service and submission to your husband is your service and your submission to God.
I pray that you and all Christian women who read this and who live with disobedient husbands will humble themselves today and truly submit to their husbands as unto the Lord.
Paige Patterson was ousted yesterday by a version of the MeToo which has formed within the Southern Baptist Convention. After a group of approximately 2500 SBC women sent a letter to the board of trustees for the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary where Paige Patterson was President the board voted to remove him as President.
Scott Neuman, writing for NPR.Org in his article entitled “Southern Baptist Leader Removed Over Remarks On Rape, Abuse Of Women” summarizes the events that lead to Patterson’s dismissal today:
“As NPR’s Tom Gjelten reported earlier this month, in an interview Patterson gave in 2000, the religious leader recounted how he had told one woman, who had been assaulted by her husband, to simply pray for her spouse:
“Returning some days later with two black eyes, the woman said, ‘I hope you’re happy,’ [Patterson said].
” ‘I said, ‘Yes, ma’am, I am happy,’ Patterson quoted himself as telling the woman. ‘What she didn’t know when we sat in church that morning,’ he said, ‘was that her husband had come in and was standing in back, first time he ever came.’ ”
Patterson had also been criticized for a sermon he gave in 2014 in which he said women were created by God “beautifully and artistically.”
“He related a conversation he had with a woman while her son and a friend were standing alongside. As they talked, a teenage girl whom Patterson described as ‘very attractive’ walked by, and one of the boys said, ‘Man, is she built.’
“The woman immediately scolded him, but Patterson said he interjected in the boy’s defense.
” ‘I said, ‘Ma’am, leave him alone,’ Patterson recounted. ‘He’s just being biblical. That is exactly what the Bible says.’ ”
Hearing Patterson tell that story, Karen Swallow Prior, a professor of English at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va., was outraged. She and about 30 other women immediately drafted the open letter addressed to the Board of Trustees of the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.”
The full letter can be found at a petition page here.
The letter from Karen Swallow Prior and her cohorts begins with this introduction:
“Over the past week Southern Baptist women have been grappling with the video of Dr. Paige Patterson preaching at the Awaken Conference in 2014, the audio of his counsel to domestic abuse victims in 2000, and his response this week to the Southern Baptist concerns over these matters and all that has subsequently come to light. These one on one conversations between women who are grieved by the comments and concerned for the poor gospel witness they reflect has resulted in the following plea for SWBTS trustees to take decisive action.”
Supposedly he allegedly told a rape victim not to report her rape to the police but to date there is no hard evidence supporting this claim. This is something both he and the Seminary are denying. Another one of his “crimes” according to the MeToo Southern Baptist women was his statements regarding women staying with abusive husbands. The truth is that he was fighting against divorce and later clarified his statement saying he believes women who are in danger from true physical abuse can seek separation for themselves and their children.
I have already laid out my position on what kind of “abuse” a woman can leave for Biblically and what kind she cannot leave for in my recent article “Why God Wants You To Stay in An Abusive Relationship”. When we remember that to “abuse” someone is to “mistreat” someone then you could say your spouse is abusing you if they call you a bad name or are crabby with you. To say that God’s word allows for women to leave their husband over such things flies in the face of the Scriptures. It is not saying men are right in doing these things, but the Bible does not allow a woman to divorce her husband for just any sin he commits against her. It strictly limits the types of sin for which a woman may be free from her husband in divorce.
Today we have people comparing a husband calling his wife a bad name with him punching her in the face saying it is the same thing. This is the absurdity of the world we live in now.
But what I really want to focus on here is the utterly ridiculousness of the attack on Paige Patterson for comments he and a teenage boy made about a teenage girl and how he corrected the mother for scolding her son for saying it.
In the letter from the SBC MeToo Women they write the following concerning these comments:
“His recent remarks of clarification do not repudiate his unwise counsel in the past; nor has he offered explanation or repentance for inappropriate comments regarding a teenage girl, the unbiblical teaching he offered on the biblical meaning of womanhood in that objectification, and the inappropriate nature of his own observations of her body.
This pattern of discourse is unbefitting the sober, wise, and sound character required of an elder, pastor, and leader. It fails in the call to protect the helpless, the call of Christ to love our neighbor as ourselves, and the biblical standard of sexual purity. These comments are damaging, sinful, and necessitate a decisive response. It seems inevitable, for instance, that a youth pastor in any of our churches would be removed from his position if he made the comments that Dr. Patterson made at the Awaken Conference in 2014.
The world is watching us all, brothers. They wonder how we could possibly be part of a denomination that counts Dr. Patterson as a leader. They wonder if all Southern Baptist men believe that the biblical view of a sixteen-year-old girl is that she is “built” and “fine” —an object to be viewed sexually.”
In the Scriptures we are told that Jacob loved Rachel, “the beautiful and well favored” of two sisters.
“17 Leah was tender eyed; but Rachel was beautiful and well favoured.
18 And Jacob loved Rachel; and said, I will serve thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter.
Genesis 29:17-18 (KJV)
The Hebrew phrase that is translated as “beautiful and well favoured” in the KJV is not as literal to Hebrew text. In the Hebrew it reads yâpheh[beautiful,lovely,fair] tô’ar [form, figure, shape] yâpheh[beautiful,lovely,fair] mar’eh[sight, vision, appearance]. So when we take this phrase together it said Rachel had “a beautiful figure and was lovely to look at”. In modern terms we might say “Rachel was built and was fine to the eyes”.
In the Song of Solomon we are told:
“How beautiful are your feet in sandals, O prince’s daughter!
The curves of your hips are like jewels, The work of the hands of an artist.”
Song of Solomon 7:1 (NASB)
The KJV calls a woman’s body “the work of the hands of a cunning workman” and the NASB translation I showed above calls a woman’s body “The work of the hands of an artist”.
So to my SBC MeToo lady friends YES I believe “the biblical view of a sixteen-year-old girl is that she is “built” and “fine” —an object to be viewed sexually”. AMEN and AMEN!
And Paige Patterson was absolutely right in calling out that mother for shaming her son’s God given masculinity. God created him to derive pleasure from female beauty just as he designed Paige Patterson and every other man to derive pleasure from female beauty.
This false notion that God wants men to have this “off and on” switch that women want is lubricious, stupid, absurd and unbiblical. What I mean is a lot of women want men to only derive pleasure from the beauty of a woman if he is either dating her, or married to her. Otherwise if a man has no relationship with a woman and especially if he far older than her there is this magic off switch that must be installed in his mind that all of a sudden makes him not derive pleasure from her beauty.
This belief of this mother and far too many Christians today is founded in a complete and utter misunderstanding of what the Bible actually says about lust.
This mother that Patterson scolded, like many Christians today, would probably defend her shaming of her son’s expression of his God given male sexuality with this verse:
“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)
This mother might think to herself – “the Bible says a man should not lust after a woman or else it is just like committing adultery with her”. How many sermons have you heard that in? But you know what you won’t hear in those same sermons? You won’t hear how the Bible defines lust for us:
“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)
The Bible tells us exactly what lust is – it is covetousness. So now let’s go to the 10th commandment to find out what covetousness is:
“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 21:17 (KJV)
Let me ask a question to all you ladies out there. Have ever admired your neighbor’s house? In fact have you ever gone over to a neighbor lady’s house hoping to get invited in to see the inside? And if you did get invited in to see the inside did you ever find it beautiful and desirable? I am willing to bet that a lot of women could answer these questions with “Yes”.
So were you coveting your neighbor’s house because you found it desirable and wondered what it looked like on the inside? The answer is NO. Covetousness is when you have an unlawful desire to possess someone or something. So maybe your neighbor lady had a nice piece of jewelry laying on a table as you walk through her house. If you have the desire to unlawfully possess that jewelry and you start to think of how you could swipe it when your neighbor was not looking that is covetousness. That is lust. Covetousness always proceeds theft of some kind.
But yet so many women would scold their husbands for thinking the neighbor’s wife is desirable.
Listen up ladies. I am going to lay down some logic for you.
A man thinking his neighbor’s wife is desirable is EXACTLY the same as a woman thinking her neighbor’s house is desirable.
A man wondering what his neighbor’s wife looks like under her clothes is EXACTLY the same thing as a woman wondering what her neighbor’s house looks like on the inside.
A man imaging how great it would be to have sex with his neighbor’s wife is EXACTLY the same as a woman imaging how great it would be to live in her neighbor’s house.
So we can rightly say that when Christ said that a man commits adultery in his heart when he “looketh on a woman to lust after her” he was talking about a man coveting a woman. In other words, he is having the desire to seduce her into sex outside of marriage. Christ in no way is condemning a man for being sexually attracted to a woman or him noticing her beauty or him even imaging what it would be like to be with her sexually. He is condemning a man thinking about adultery or fornication which is the act of a man unlawfully possessing a woman.
I highly encourage Christian women and Christian men to truly reconsider their views on masculine sexuality and lust.
Let us stop condemning our young men for noticing female beauty. Let us also stop condemning our older men such as Paige Patterson for still noticing it too. Ladies let me tell you something – just because we men get older does not mean we don’t still find young women attractive. There is no “age” switch that says we can find a young lady even her teens attractive. You may not like it, but that is how God made man.
I want to give a final word about “time and place”. The Bible says in Ecclesiastes 3:1 “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven”. For example we would all agree as Christian that sexual relations between a husband and his wife are a beautiful thing in marriage. But even in marriage there is a time and place for sexual relations. I am not going to have sex with my wife in the middle of the living room with my children or my parents present. That would not be the time and place for this activity even though the activity itself is not sinful.
In the same way I am not saying it would be right for a youth pastor or a pastor or even this young man to just walk up to a young woman or older woman and say to them “You are built” or “You are fine”. It’s not good manners. It’s not the right way to go about it.
However if a couple of young men say quietly after a teenage girl passes to each other “Man, is she built” there is no sin in this. Or if they leave the restaurant and were driving home and they mention this there is no sin in this. Even if a Pastor like Paige Patterson talks about a random girl in a restaurant and says she was “fine” there is no sin that. It is exactly as he said – “Biblical” for a man to do so. It is how God created us as men to notice female beauty.
But let’s say a youth pastor goes up to one of the teen girls in his youth group and says “Man you are built” would that be inappropriate? Of course it would be inappropriate. Because it is not the time or place for him to express such a thought.
But our SBC MeToo women and many other women in our culture today would have us believe that it is wrong for a man to ever have such a thought about a woman unless he is married to the woman. The problem with such thinking is that is utterly unbiblical. Ladies you might not like how God made men and you might not like that God did not put an off switch in men’s head when it comes to sexual attraction to women. But that is how he created men.
Ladies, I encourage you to study the Scriptures I have presented here and ask God to help you accept men as he created them and accept your place in his creation. I encourage you to stop shaming men for how God designed them.
And Christian men – I encourage to do the same and study out these passages I have given. Stop engaging in self-flagellation over your own God given sexuality. The pleasure you get from seeing the beauty of women around you or on TV or online is not sinful. Sexual desire toward a woman is not sinful. It is lust, which is the desire to fornicate with a woman (have sex outside of marriage) that is sinful.
I also hope and pray that some of our Christian leaders will grow spines and start standing up to all this man-shaming and character assassination that is rampant across our nation. We need to start standing up to the feminism that has poisoned our homes, churches and country.
I encourage to read more on how male sexuality actually works and the way God designed it these other articles:
With the mass shooting at a Florida High School by Nikolas Cruz we are not only seeing the call to restrict gun rights but we are also seeing the misandrists coming out again. Never missing an opportunity to express their misandry, these haters of all things masculine are now saying the traits of masculinity which the Bible commands are actually the cause of mass shootings.
Alia E. Dastagir in her article entitled “Are boys ‘broken’? Another mass shooting renews debate on toxic masculinity” for USAToday.com writes:
“The problem Black identifies is one feminists have been talking about for decades. It’s called toxic masculinity, the stereotypical sense of masculinity that embodies behaviors, such as denying help or emotions, which psychologists and sociologists say are harmful to men and to society. It’s the things in our culture — from toys given to movies watched to messages parents consciously and unconsciously send — that tells boys and men “being a real man” means repressing feelings and consistently demonstrating strength and dominance.
“We often talk about gender in terms of women … getting the short end of the stick. … Well, masculinity isn’t easy either,” Jennifer Carlson, a sociology professor at the University of Arizona who studies gun politics and gender, told USA TODAY after the mass shooting in Las Vegas last October. “That’s not your ticket to the good life. It isn’t easy to be a man in the United States. Demands put on men — whether it’s to be the protector, to be the provider, to respond to situations in certain ways, to prove yourself as a man — end up being not just outwardly destructive but also inwardly destructive.“
Is it American culture, Western culture or just remnants of Bronze Age cultures that places the demand on men to demonstrate “strength and dominance” and to “be the protector” and “be the provider”?
The answer is found in these passages of the Bible:
“Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.”
I Corinthians 16:13 (NASB)
“Therefore, keep up your courage, men”
Acts 27:25 (NASB)
“When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.”
Luke 11:21 (NASB)
“Man goes forth to his work and to his labor until evening.”
Psalm 104:23 (NASB)
“Do you see a man skilled in his work? He will stand before kings; He will not stand before obscure men.”
Proverbs 22:29 (NASB)
“A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children, and the wealth of the sinner is stored up for the righteous.”
Proverbs 13:22 (NASB)
“Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body.”
Ephesians 5:25-29 (NASB)
The answer from the Scriptures is it is God who places the demand on men to be strong, to dominate and to be providers and protectors. A man who lacks courage, displays weakness, fails to have a commanding influence over others and fails to provide and protect is not living up to God’s standard for men.
Why does God have these standards for men? Because God created man to be his image bearer:
“For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.”
I Corinthians 11:7 (NASB)
Why does God want men to be strong? Because he is strong.
Why does God want men to be dominant? Because he is dominant.
Why does God want men to be providers? Because he is our provider.
Why does God want men to be protectors? Because he is our protector.
Alia E. Dastagir in her article entitled “Are boys ‘broken’? Another mass shooting renews debate on toxic masculinity” makes an astounding statement about men and violent crime:
“A 2017 study in the Journal of Adolescent Health found many norms around gender, what’s expected of boys and girls, become entrenched in adolescence and have negative impacts that carry into adulthood.
Among consequences the study noted when boys conform to gender stereotypes:
Engaging in physical violence to a much greater extent than girls
Dying more frequently from unintentional injuries
Being more prone to substance abuse and suicide
Having a shorter life expectancy than women
Data shows gun violence is disproportionately a male problem. Of the 97 mass shootings in which three or more victims died since 1982, only three were committed by women (one of those being the San Bernardino attack in which a man also participated), according to a database from the liberal-leaning news outlet Mother Jones. Men also accounted for 86% of gun deaths in the United States, according to an analysis by the non-partisan non-profit Kaiser Family Foundation.”
Men commit vastly more violent crimes than women and men make up the vast majority of mass shooters and water is wet.
I love it when writers show they have a firm grasp of the obvious. Men by their very nature to a greater or lesser degree are capable of great violence much more so than most women. Every person since the beginning of humanity could tell us that.
In most cases the word “violence” is used to denote the unlawful or wrongful use of force. But we all know there are violent acts that are justified and that we would even welcome. We would all agree that what Nikolas Cruz did at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida was an unlawful and wrongful act of violence. But imagine if that school had armed security guards and they acted “violently” against Nikolas Cruz by filling him full of bullets when he started shooting? Both would be acts of violence. But one would have been a just act of violence and the other was unjust.
The Bible tells us that God actually puts in man his aggressive tendencies and his ability to perform violent acts:
“Blessed be the Lord, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle”
Psalm 144:1 (NASB)
My point is this. Men being capable of violence is not a bad thing. It is by the design of God. It becomes a bad thing when men use their ability to act in violence in sinful and wrong ways.
It irks me when I hear people all the time say that boys watching violent war movies, super hero shows or cop shows makes them violent. It is like saying women watching shows that are more drama based and less action and violence based makes them more emotional and relational.
The truth is that most boys like to watch violent war movies, super hero shows, cop shows and other action shows because they ARE action oriented and violent by nature in the same way that women more often watch drama shows because they ARE more emotionally and relationally oriented.
I actually encouraged and played war games like Medal of Honor, Call of Duty and Battlefield and many other “violent” video games with my boys growing up. But at the same time I taught them about the responsible use of force and gun safety.
Speaking of gun safety. When my boys were little and had toy guns if the gun looked anywhere near a real gun it would have to have a bright red tip on the end. I would never let my boys have a toy gun like the one in the picture at the top of this article that was totally black. There have been many sad stories where a police officer thought a toy gun was real and tragedy happened and I did not want that happening with my kids.
I own a hand gun which I have taught my boys how to use when we have gone on men’s camping retreats with our church. My second oldest son who is 18 is an avid hunter (which I am not) and he owns a couple of shot guns, several bows and he recently purchased an AR-15 assault rifle (the same style of gun used by Cruz) about a month ago. We plan on going to a state run outdoor shooting range where we can use his new gun with some of his other guns. Of course you know who has to buy the ammo for these excursions? Yep you guessed it – dear old Dad.
I am a firm believer in boys being able to exercise their aggressive tendencies in healthy and controlled ways like going to shooting ranges, playing sports and playing violent video games. As long as we do these things in balance and they do not over power us in our lives or become addictions (and yes sports and hunting and shooting can become an addiction just like video games) then they can be used for our benefit.
My boys know the answer I always give when women come around(whether it is step moms, aunts, cousins) and say things like “why do you boys always have to play those violent video games or watch violent movies” I tell them “Because we are men”.
I just took my boys and my daughter to watch the Black Panther movie this weekend as I have most of the Marvel Movies. Who do you think they were rooting for? The hero or the villain? The one trying to protect people or the one trying to hurt people? The God given masculine desire to be a protector goes hand in hand with the God given masculine ability to fight and be aggressive. It is a defining attribute of who men are.
When our culture says that violence and aggressiveness are a “male problem” they are in essence saying men need to be more like women. The problem is not violence and aggressiveness in and of themselves – it is the wrongful use of violence and aggressiveness that is the issue. That is part of the sin nature.
And all these pansies that are trying to neuter the aggressive and violent side of the masculine nature would be BEGGING for it if their home, cities or nation were ever invaded. We would be praising this side of masculinity – not trying to erase it.
And let me give another news flash to my liberal friends who think we can use social engineering to get rid of the sinful inclinations of mankind. Only God change the sinful heart of man. Only God can completely rid this world of sin and evil and one day he will. No social program, no rehabilitation program will do this. I am all for encouraging things like strong families and especially strong fathers in the homes teaching their wives and children the ways of God. This would go a long way to reducing violent crime and a lot of problems that our society is seeing.
But long before the corruption of feminism upon society in the last 150 years – violent acts happened. Massacres happened over the entire history of mankind. This is nothing new. Man has certainly used his violent and aggressive tendencies to prey on the weak and act in the some of the most evil and heinous ways. But man has also used his aggressive tendencies toward violence to defend the weak and powerless and to destroy evil aggressors.
So while we certainly should support mental health reforms and increased funding for mental hospitals where we can lock up those who are a danger to themselves or society we must also approach this from a defensive posture. It is our duty as men to defend our homes, our towns, our schools and our nation. We need to push for trained and armed security personnel whether they are security guards or retired police officers or retired military personnel to be stationed at our schools. We need to allow teachers who are properly trained in the use of weapons to carry hand guns. We need to stop having schools be gun-free zones which basically just paints a big bullseye on them for crazy and evil folks who want to hurt others.
It is not men following Biblical gender roles or the expectation that men should be strong protectors and providers that is a “destructive” influence that is causing these mass shootings. Rather the root of these heinous and evil acts is the same root of sexual sins like adultery and homosexuality. These evils that mankind does are caused by the corruption of sin upon our God given male and female human natures.
We all are “broken” – both boys and girls, men and women by sin and this is nothing new. It has been with mankind since Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden of Eden thousands of years ago. And only Jesus Christ can mend us.
“7 For one will hardly die for a righteous man; though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die. 8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”
Romans 5:7-8 (NASB)
Is forced sex in marriage wrong? If you are like most American Christians your gut answer would be YES! Of course, the Bible says it is wrong! Up until very recently I used to think the answer was YES as well. But as God began to peel back my American cultural presuppositions I realized the answer might be something other than what I was comfortable with.
In my last article entitled “It is Not a Woman’s Consent That Matters, It is God’s”, I proved from the Scriptures that God does not allow a woman to say YES to sexual relations to a man she is not married to and he does not allow her to say NO to sexual relations to her husband whom she is married to.
But this raises another question for those Christians who accept that the Bible calls it sin for a woman to sexually refuse her husband. What if a woman does refuse her husband? Can the husband under God’s law physically force himself upon his wife who sinfully resists him?
Here are some answers I have given on this blog in the past. In one of the most popular articles on this blog entitled “8 steps to confront your wife’s sexual refusal” I wrote this:
“I have not, nor would I EVER advocate for a husband to force himself physically upon his wife or to physically abuse her in any fashion. The issue being discussed is how a husband can confront a wife who chronically or willfully denies his sexual rights in marriage without just cause (be it legitimate health or mental conditions). He has the right, both under Biblical law, as well as under American law, to reason with his with his wife and try to convince her to willingly(even if grudgingly) yield herself to him, and thereby fulfilling one her most important duties in Christian marriage.”
And in my article entitled “The Rape Straw Man” I stated:
“Biblically speaking, there is no such thing as “marital rape” – HOWEVER, there is such a thing as physical abuse. While the Bible does not speak specifically to this case of a man forcing himself on his wife, I believe it is a case of physical abuse.
So what others call rape, I call abuse. In the same way that when someone is wrongfully killed it might be first degree murder, second degree murder or man slaughter what we call “physical abuse” and what we call “rape” is dependent on the relationship between the man and woman in question. There is no doubt a wrong has been committed. But what we call it, and how it is punished or dealt with is very different depending on the circumstances.”
The emergence of the MeToo movement lead me to restudy and reconsider my understanding of what the Bible says about sexual consent. I have been pouring over the Scriptures for the last couple of months really asking God to reveal to me any presuppositions or cultural biases I might have on this subject and I have written many articles related to sexual conduct from a Biblical perspective recently. My last article “It is Not a Woman’s Consent That Matters, It is God’s”, not only traced the wicked origins of modern American sexual consent ideology but more importantly it laid the foundation for a Biblical view of when God consents to a man and woman entering into sexual relations.
Because of what God revealed to me through his Word in that study as of today I am officially changing my position on the issue of forced sex within marriage. My new position is as follows:
Forced sex within marriage by a husband toward his wife is not in and of itself a sin but it can be a sin under certain circumstances. The “Markland Letter” case which I addressed in my article “It is Not a Woman’s Consent That Matters, It is God’s” where the man forced sex on his wife after surgery would be an example of a husband sinfully forcing himself on his wife.
Now a lot of Christians at this point are shutting me down. But I want to encourage you and challenge the view you have been raised with in our culture with what God’s Word actually says on this very controversial subject.
In their article entitled “What does the Bible say about spousal/marital rape?” GotQuestions.org states:
“Spousal or marital rape is a form of domestic violence and sexual abuse. In spousal rape, sex is forced on one spouse by the other. While the Bible does not specifically deal with spousal rape, it has plenty to say about the husband-wife relationship and its representation of Christ and the church (Ephesians 5:32)…
and God never condones rape.”
I want to quickly address the terminology I am using here. I am using the phrase “forced sex” and gotquestions.org is using “marital rape” or just “rape”. The reason I am using the term “forced sex” instead of “rape” is because the term rape in our language and culture not only denotes an action taken, but it also implies a moral condemnation of that action. Calling “forced sex” rape in our language and culture would be like referring to every instance of killing as murder. I am going to speak more to the term “rape” later on in this article.
Biblically speaking all instances of forced sex are not considered rape any more than all instances of killing are considered murder. It is the context which determines if a particular instance of forced sex is rape just as it is the context which determines if a particular killing is murder. The only forced sex the Bible ever condemns is forced sex OUTSIDE of marriage. The Bible actually addresses forced marriage and as a result of marriage forced sex in the book of Deuteronomy.
God granted the right of men to take women as one of the many spoils of war as long as they were not one of seven forbidden nations in which everyone was to be killed:
“But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the Lord thy God hath given thee.”
Deuteronomy 20:14 (KJV)
In the next chapter God details the process by which men could take women as spoils of war:
“10 When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the Lord thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, 11 And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife;
12 Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails;
13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.
14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her.”
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 (KJV)
So in summary God allowed men to take by force women as captives of war. However, unlike the nations around them – they were not allowed to have forced sex right there on the battlefield with their captive women. Instead God had a higher standard. God made the Israelite men wait one month to allow the woman to mourn the death of her loved ones.
Even after the month – the man had to take her as his wife, not simply his sex slave as other nations also did. God commands them “thou shalt go in unto her” which is a euphemism for sex in the Bible. Now some might say “Well that does not say forced sex, it just says sex” and that is absolutely true. A man “going in unto a woman” does not denote whether it was forced or not. However there is a key phrase at the end of this passage that DOES indicate forced sex: “because thou hast humbled her”.
There are many euphemisms for sex in the Bible. Men “knew” their wives, they “lay” with their wives and as we can see here they “went in unto” their wives. However there is another euphemism for sex in the Bible that specifically denotes “forced sex” and that is the “humbling” of a woman by a man.
This same phrase is used when speaking of actions the Bible actually considers to be rape (as opposed to our modern understanding that all forced sex is rape):
“23 If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; 24 Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour’s wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you. 25 But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die.
26 But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:
27 For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her. 28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.”
Deuteronomy 22:23-29 (KJV)
In the above passage from Deuteronomy chapter 22 we find God’s definition of rape as opposed to our modern definition of rape. What does God call rape? Does he say it is simply when a man humbles (has forced sex) with a woman? The answer is NO. Instead we find that rape in God’s eyes is when a man has forced sex with a woman who is he not married to. The Bible covers both a betrothed (or married) woman and also virgin woman. In a follow-up article to this one I will be specifically addressing God’s command that a rapist had to marry the woman he raped.
My point in showing Deuteronomy 22:23-29 is twofold. First it gives God’s definition of rape which is the when a man has forced sex with a woman who is not his wife. Secondly in the context of the rape discussion God uses the term “humbled” to denote forced sex.
This English word “humbled” in these passages is a translation of the Hebrew word “anah” which means to “afflict”, “humble” or “force” in most instances.
Anah is used in reference to two famous rape stories in the Bible. The first is regarding the rape of Dinah, the daughter of Leah and wife of Jacob:
“1 And Dinah the daughter of Leah, which she bare unto Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land. 2 And when Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite, prince of the country, saw her, he took her, and lay with her, and defiled [anah] her.”
The second is the rape of Tamar by her half-brother Amnon:
“Howbeit he would not hearken unto her voice: but, being stronger than she, forced [anah] her, and lay with her.”
2 Samuel 13:14 (KJV)
And again why was the ‘anah’ or humbling and forced sex of these women considered to be true rape and thus immoral? Because they broke God’s law in Deuteronomy 22:23-29 that condemned a man having forced sex with a woman that was not his wife.
And a final note on Deuteronomy 21:10-14 and the humbling of the captive woman who was taken by the divine allowance of God. Some have tried to say this humbling had to do strictly with the woman shaving her head. What these same people do not realize is that it was common in ancient Middle Eastern cultures for both men and women to either pull out their hair or shave their heads when horrible tragedies struck. I believe the loss of one’s entire family would qualify in this case.
Also saying that the humbling of the woman by the man does not refer to forced sex takes a very naïve approach to the situation. Can anyone with a straight face say they think most captive women after only one month would want to willingly and consensually have sex with the man who may have killed their family or at least was part of the army that did? The reality is we all know in this situation that in the vast majority of cases even after one month the man would be having forced sex with his new bride. That is just reality.
So we can as Bible believing Christians rightly say based on Deuteronomy 22:23-29 that God never condones rape which HE defines as a man having forced sex with a woman he is not married to. But we can equally say that God does in fact condone forced sex in marriage based on Deuteronomy 21:10-14.
In their article entitled “What does the Bible say about spousal/marital rape?” GotQuestions.org states:
“Some people believe that a wife must be agreeable to sexual relations with her husband at any time and that she has no say in the matter. They often misuse 1 Corinthians 7:3–5 to support the erroneous view that a wife can never tell her husband that she would like to defer having sex for a time. Some men believe that the husband has a God-given right to just “take it,” in spite of his wife’s objections…
It is clear from the Bible that mutuality reigns in the bedroom. According to 1 Corinthians 7:1–5, a husband should provide sexual satisfaction to his wife, and a wife should provide sexual satisfaction to her husband. A wife does not have authority over her own body, and a husband does not have authority over his own body. They belong to each other. Does this mean that a husband can force himself on his wife anytime he so desires? Definitely not. What the passage teaches is that each spouse is to willingly, freely, lovingly submit to the other. The passage is about giving satisfaction, not demanding it. The focus is on pleasing one’s spouse. There is no selfishness involved. Forcibly taking what has not been offered is wrong and plainly against the Bible’s commands on love and marriage.”
I would not call GotQuestions.org a raging feminist site as they do speak on submission in marriage, even if at times they water it down quite a bit. However the term “mutuality” they use in this article is a favorite of Christian feminists. In fact some Christian feminists use this passage in 1 Corinthians 7:1–5 to try to cancel out all the Bible’s teachings on male headship in marriage and they say marriage is a “mutual partnership”.
I am not denying that there is not any mutuality taught in this passage as there clearly is. But it is a limited mutuality, not an all-inclusive mutuality.
The first part of this passage from I Corinthians shows that a husband and wife have a right to sexual access to one another’s bodies:
“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.”
I Corinthians 7:3-5 (KJV)
The English word “power” here is a translation of the Greek word Exousiazo and can refer to authority or the right to do something. If we try and say here that God is saying a wife has literal authority over her husband’s body then this contradicts with the Scriptural teaching that the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church and the wife is to submit to her husband in everything as the Church is to submit to Christ in everything (Ephesians 5:23-24).
In the programming world in which I work we would call this an infinite loop. If a husband can command compel his wife to give her body to him yet she can command him not to give his body to her we can see where this ends up.
So when we take the whole of the Scriptures and especially Ephesians 5:23-24 into account we understand that the “power” of I Corinthians 7:3-5 actually refers to “the right”. A husband has the right to sexual access to this wife’s body and the wife has the right to sexual access to her husband’s body.
GotQuestions.org claims “The passage is about giving satisfaction, not demanding it. The focus is on pleasing one’s spouse” and I don’t deny that this passage does reference giving one’s self to one’s spouse. When it uses the word “render” that is our duty as spouses to GIVE our bodies to our spouses for their sexual satisfaction. However it also talks about the “power” or “right” of the spouse toward their spouse’s body – this is clearly the power to TAKE or seek sexual satisfaction in one’s spouse’s body. GotQuestions.org does not like “take” to be anywhere in the conversation of sex but in this passage the giving AND taking aspects of sex as God designed it are clearly on display.
Finally as far as “demanding” sex is it is true that the wife can no more demand anything of her husband than the Church can demand something of Christ. Can she request sex from her husband as the Church can request various things of Christ? Yes. But she cannot demand anything of her husband. However, can and does Christ demand obedience from his Church in “everything” as Ephesians 5:23-24 shows? The answer is yes. Therefore since a husband is the head of his wife as Christ is the head of his Church he can demand obedience from his wife (including in the sexual arena) just as Christ demands obedience from his Church.
GotQuestions.org claims that some Christians have an “erroneous view” that “that a wife must be agreeable to sexual relations with her husband at any time and that she has no say in the matter”. I would agree that I Corinthians 7:2-5 never specifically mentions sex on demand “at any time” from a wife. But there is another passage of Scripture dealing with sex in marriage that DOES:
“15 Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well. 16 Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad, and rivers of waters in the streets. 17 Let them be only thine own, and not strangers’ with thee. 18 Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.19 Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee AT ALL TIMES; and be thou ravished always with her love.”
Proverbs 5:15-19 (KJV)
The Scriptures command husbands to “drink” or take pleasure from the sexual well that is their wife’s body. They are command let her breasts (symbolic of her whole body) satisfy them AT ALL TIMES or in the words of GotQuestions.org “at any time”.
Besides Proverbs 5:15-19 there is any even more powerful principle of Scripture that dictates what a wife’s response is to be to her husband in all matters:
“Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.”
Ephesians 5:24 (KJV)
So as we can see, the Bible commands that a wife should be “agreeable…at any time” to anything her husband asks her to do whether it is cleaning, cooking, paying the bills, putting children to bed and yes having sex with him. The only Biblical caveat to this would be if he asked her to do something sinful against God and then she has to obey God rather than her husband (Acts 5:29). It really is that simple.
Some will take the relationship of Christ and his Church and claim “we never see Christ forcing his Church and therefore husbands may not force their wives”. Others will conflate salvation with marriage and say “God does not force us to come to him salvation, therefore a husband cannot force his wife to have sex with him.”
Let me address the latter claim first and then I will address the former. Two of the primary ways that God pictures our relationship to him is as a father and then as husband. Our relationship as individuals to God is pictured as that of a child to their father. Our relationship to God as a group, as the people of God, is pictured as that of a wife to her husband.
When God invites us to become his children this is presented as a choice:
“While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light. These things spake Jesus, and departed, and did hide himself from them.”
John 12:36 (KJV)
Now of course we understand there is a consequence of that choice. If we do not choose to obey the Gospel of Christ this is what awaits those who disobey his Gospel:
“7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power”
2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 (KJV)
But in the context of God’s relationship to his people as a whole he sometimes compels obedience by force. In the Old Testament the relationship of God to the nation of Israel was pictured as a marriage with God as the husband and Israel as his wife. When Israel rebelled against God just after making their marriage covenant with him the Bible tells us he humbled Israel:
“2 And thou shalt remember all the way which the LORD thy God led thee these forty years in the wilderness, to humble[anah] thee, and to prove thee, to know what was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no. 3 And he humbled[anah] thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.”
Deuteronomy 8:2-3 (KJV)
Remember that in the context of the relationship of a man and woman when he humbles her this is the man forcing himself upon the woman. God forced Israel to yield to him and to learn that concept that “that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live”.
Some will say – “Well God’s relationship with Israel was different than his Church and Christ never forces his Church to do anything”.
Earlier I said the reason I don’t use the term rape in the context of marriage is because it is like using murder to refer to all killing. Only unlawful killing (unlawful by God’s law) is considered murder. Killing in self-defense or to save others is not wrong. Even in the case of wrongful forced sex in marriage like the Markland Letter case, such action is not rape but rather physical abuse.
But now I want us to look at the definition of rape. Here is the Webster’s 1828 dictionary definition of rape:
“In a general sense, a seizing by violence; also, a seizing and carrying away by force, as females.
In law, the carnal knowledge of a woman forcibly and against her will.
Privation; the act of seizing or taking away.”
Now someone reading this might say “See right there even in the old definition of rape it talks about a man taking a woman against her will!”. And that is very true. However as I explained earlier it is God who defines what rape is – not us. But I want you to zero in on the first definition where it says “a seizing and carrying away by force”.
Now let us turn to the New Testament. Before I give the next Scripture I want to set the stage a bit. In the Old Testament the marriage of God to Israel is pictured as a full consummated marriage after which Israel commits adultery with false gods and God divorces her for this.
In the New Testament the Church is pictured as a betrothed bride to Christ whose marriage has not yet been consummated:
“For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.”
2 Corinthians 11:2 (KJV)
The “consummation” of the Church and Christ’s marriage is described in the passage below:
“16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.”
1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 (KJV)
The event described in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 is what is known as the “rapture” of the Church.
Bible.org gives a brief background of the word “rapture”:
“Regarding the term rapture and its use in theology the following should answer your questions. It is taken from Ryrie’s Basic Theology, Electronic Media from Parsons Technology.
Our modern understanding of rapture appears to have little or no connection with the eschatological event. However, the word is properly used of that event. Rapture is a state or experience of being carried away. The English word comes from a Latin word, rapio, which means to seize or snatch in relation to an ecstasy of spirit or the actual removal from one place to another. In other words, it means to be carried away in spirit or in body. The Rapture of the church means the carrying away of the church from earth to heaven.
The Greek word from this term “rapture” is derived appears in 1 Thessalonians 4:17, translated “caught up.” The Latin translation of this verse used the word rapturo. The Greek word it translates is harpazo, which means to snatch or take away. Elsewhere it is used to describe how the Spirit caught up Philip near Gaza and brought him to Caesarea (Acts 8:39) and to describe Paul’s experience of being caught up into the third heaven (2 Cor. 12:2-4). Thus there can be no doubt that the word is used in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 to indicate the actual removal of people from earth to heaven.”
Ryrie’s definition of harpazo actually leaves out a very important part of the definition. It is not simply to snatch, seize or take away – it is do these things “by force”
“Strong’s #726: harpazo (pronounced har-pad’-zo)
from a derivative of 138; to seize (in various applications):–catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).
And if we look at the word origin of our English word “rape” we read:
“early 14c., “booty, prey;” mid-14c., “forceful seizure; plundering, robbery, extortion,” from Anglo-French rap, rape, and directly from Latin rapere “seize” (see rape (v.)). Meaning “act of abducting a woman or sexually violating her or both” is from early 15c., but perhaps late 13c. in Anglo-Latin.”
So now I will pull this all together for you. The Greek word which describes how Jesus Christ will take his church is harpazo which means to seize or take something or someone by force. When the Bible was translated into Latin (which Jerome finished in 405 AD) the word rapturo which was derived from the Latin word rapio (meaning to seize or snatch) was used to translate the Greek harpazo. Then in the 14th century the English word “rape” was created from the Latin to describe a man forcing a woman to have sex with him.
While English common law as well as previous laws held it was not wrong for a man to force his wife to have sex, over time the word rape came to be a derogatory term used not just of men forcing women they were not married to into sex, but also of husbands forcing their wives to have sex.
So the irony is that same word we rejoice of over – the “rapture” or seizure by force of the bride of Christ which his Church is the same word we use to condemn a husband for forcing his wife to have sex with him. Think about that. Let that settle in your brain a bit.
Now that I have proven from the Old Testament that God “humbled” or “forced” Israel to bend to his will and that Christ will actually rapture (take by force) his Bride which is the Church I want to come back to the address the following assertion from GotQuestions.org on this subject of forced sex in marriage:
“The truth is that sexual expression was designed by God to be an act of love within a marriage, and violence or coercion should never be a part of it. Forced sex is not love”
When God humbled Israel would we call this anything less than an act of love on his part? The answer is we would indeed call it an act of love. Did God use violence on Israel when they disobeyed him in the dessert? You better believe he did. Did he use coercion to compel his wife to yield to his demands? You better believe he did. It is right there in the story of the marriage of God to Israel all throughout the Old Testament.
Even Christ when rebuking his Churches states:
“As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.”
Revelation 3:19 (KJV)
Therefore we can conclude based on the example of God himself as a husband that forced sex in marriage is NOT an Oxymoron.
Now I want to give some scenarios with force to try and help you understand this concept better.
Forced Sex Scenario #1
Let’ say a husband comes home from a long trip, his wife has no idea when he will arrive. He comes in through the door as she is working in the kitchen, he picks her up in his arms and takes her to their bedroom. He tears through her clothes as fast as possible and has sex with her.
Now this was definitely a matter of force – he did not ask her permission or even say a word to her. But if she complies willing with his forceful gesture most people would say there was nothing wrong in that scenario. In fact some women would even find it romantic. In fact the picture I have just painted would be similar to what the Scriptures paint as the rapture of the Church by Christ who is her husband.
However, if during his attempt at forced sex his wife resisted in anyway now our modern society is up in arms. “He has violated her consent!” we are told. But from a Biblical perspective as we have shown in this article – if the wife resists her husband in the above scenario and he continues to force her to his will who has sinned? The husband, the wife or both? Biblically speaking it is the wife who has sinned and the husband is not sinning by forcing her to yield to his lawful demand.
Now if the wife resisted the husband in this scenario – if he loves her – is that what he wanted from her? Of course not. He wanted to be able to pick up his wife in his arms and for her to willingly give herself to him no questions asked. Just as Christ wants his Church to willing embrace him at the rapture. But make no mistake – Christ is not going to take “I am not in the mood today” from his Church when he comes. He is taking his Bride by force!
Forced Sex Scenario #2
Let’s say a man takes a woman as his wife who clearly did not want to be his wife. In the Bible this could be a scenario where a father gives his daughter to a man she does not want marry or it could be a man captures a woman as a captive during war. So on their wedding day he goes to have sex with her and she resists him. So he holds her down and forces her. In Biblical terms he has justly “humbled” his wife.
Again who is the one sinning in this scenario? Is the wife who sinning by resisting or is the husband sinning by forcing himself on his wife? Or is it both? We know the Biblical answer is that it is the wife who is sin and the husband is right and just in forcing his wife to have sex with him.
And once again – do men who truly love and have affection for their wives want it to be this way? No. We as men want what God wants from his wife – willing obedience, but if obedience is not given willfully we follow God’s example with Israel and humble our wives and take it by force.
Forced Sex Scenario #3
I was asked in a recent comment on my blog what I thought of the scenario of a “husband shoving his member down his wife’s throat”. In other words a husband forcing his wife to perform oral sex on him – is that a sin?
So a husband and wife are having sex and he decides to take his member up to his wife’s head for her to perform oral sex on him. She resists and turns her head away so he takes her head and forces her to perform oral sex on him.
We have given several principles in this article that answer this question.
The I Corinthians 7:2-4 principle teaches that a wife has a duty to render her body to her husband and it also gives him the right of sexual access to her body.
The Proverbs 5:18-19 Principle says a husband is to satisfy himself (literally drink his fill) of his wife’s body AT ALL TIMES.
The Ephesians 5:24 Principle says that a wife is to submit to her husband in EVERYTHING.
The Deuteronomy 8:2-3 Principle shows us that God humbled his wife Israel and forced her learn obedience to his will.
Therefore we can conclude based on the witness of the Scriptures that it is NOT a sin for a man to force his wife to perform oral sex on him as she has a duty to render her entire body to him to fulfill God’s command to him to satisfy himself with her body at all times. She is to submit to him in everything, not just the things she feels like doing or is comfortable with.
Ladies – I know for some of you this is a hard one to swallow (pun intended) but scripturally speaking the Bible does not condemn such actions by a husband toward his wife.
The selfishness card is often used to dismiss not only a man forcing himself on his wife but also a man allowing his wife to consent to sex when she really is not in the mood. The reasoning goes – “if you see your wife is not in the mood for any reason, then if you were being selfless you would give up your desire or need.” Others have even tried to argue that if sex is ever desired in anyway other than to give pleasure to the other person it is by definition selfishness.
However the Biblical definition of selfishness is not simply doing things for one’s own benefit or desire. But instead it is when a person ONLY does things for their benefit or desire and never considers the needs of others.
“Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.”
Philippians 2:4 (KJV)
The key phrase there in that verse which is also in the Greek is the word “also”. This verse is not saying it is wrong to look to our own needs or desire, but that we must ALSO look to the needs and desires of others well.
And I would remind anyone who says it is selfish for a man to have sex with his wife when she is not in the mood or to force her to have sex that this is selfishness to look to Proverbs 5:15-19 which commands a man to satisfy himself with his wife’s body “at all times”.
It is absolutely true that Ephesians 5:28-29 teaches men as husbands that they are to care for their needs if their wife’s body. That is why what the husband did in the Markland Letter case was wrong because he violated this principle in causing severe damage to his wife’s body after surgery by forcing himself on her.
But outside of extreme conditions where a wife has not just had surgery we have to ask ourselves does forced sex in marriage by the husband toward his wife violate the Ephesians 5:28-29 principle? The answer I think in most cases is NO.
In most cases forced sex in marriage will hurt the woman’s pride, or in Biblical terms “humble her” more than anything else.
Some might ask “What about the risk of tissue tearing, bruising or rashes and other discomforts caused by forced sex?” Is there a risk of these things occurring? Yes. But who is it that is causing this risk? Is it the husband by exercising his lawful right to compel his wife to have sex or is it the woman who is causing this risk to herself by resisting her husband’s lawful demand?
Let me give some examples to illustrate what I am saying.
If a police officer pulls you over and asks you to produce your license and registration and you refuse and you refuse to get out of the car – can he use force to make you obey his lawful order? You better believe he can. And if you resist the officer in the course of his lawful actions and in the process you smack your head on the ground or get scrapes and cuts who was it that put you at risk? Was it him or was it you by your resisting his lawful actions?
If a parent goes to spank their child and in the process of resisting the child gets bumps, bruises and tears who was it that put themselves at risk and brought these injuries on themselves?
If a police officer has a warrant to enter your home and you resist and as he enters the home by force you or your home are damaged whose fault was that?
The answer is No. But you might be thinking – “Wait you just said spent this entire article telling us it was not a sin for a man to force himself on his wife!”
As you catch your breath let me explain a simple principle regarding Biblical rights. Just because we have the right to do something, does not mean it is always wise to do something.
Paul said that he had the right to take a wife yet he chose not to exercise that right:
“5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?…15 But I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me: for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.”
1 Corinthians 9:5 & 15 (KJV)
He goes into more detail as to why he did not exercise his right to take a wife in the passage below:
“I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, I say, that it is good for a man so to be.”
1 Corinthians 7:26 (KJV)
So, Paul was saying because of “the present distress”, the horrible persecution of the church, he felt it was better for a man not to exercise his God given right to take a wife.
In the same way because of the present distress of feminism and the utter hostility toward Biblical marriage I personally do not think it is always wise for a husband to force himself on his wife even though it is his right as her husband, her head and her master to force her compliance to God’s commands in this area of sexuality.
Christ admonished us to be “wise” in a world which hates the God of the Bible:
“16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. 17 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues; 18 And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.”
Matthew 10:16-19 (KJV)
Gentlemen there is more than one way to skin a cat. If you use force against your wife, it may be right and just before God – but because of the wicked society we live in you run a very high risk of going to jail for violations of domestic abuse laws or the remove of the marital rape exemption in all 50 states. All your wife has to do is make a phone call.
Instead you need to be wise as serpents as Christ admonished us to be and use other means to discipline your wife. See my article “8 steps to confront your wife’s sexual refusal” for ideas on non-physical ways in which you can discipline your wife. These are all non-physical methods of discipline that you can never be prosecuted for (despite feminist fantasies to the contrary).
For instance, no police officer anywhere is going to arrest a husband for spending less time with his wife because she refuses to submit to him sexually. No prosecutor is going to prosecute a case where a husband refused to pay for kitchen upgrades because his wife refused to sexually submit. No jury will convict a husband of marital rape because he refused to buy his wife some jewelry she wanted because she would not sexually submit to him.
If a woman complains about these non-physical things her husband is doing to a law enforcement officer they are going to tell her “If you don’t like it get a divorce”. I have had multiple police officers and others write me since I wrote that article (“8 steps to confront your wife’s sexual refusal”) confirming this for me.
Using non-physical methods of discipline are ways that you can communicate your displeasure with your wife’s sinful attitudes but at the same time you can shield yourself from a world that is hostile to Biblical male headship.
Christian wife this all goes back to how you view yourself in God’s design of marriage.
“13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
14 Do all things without murmurings and disputings”
Philippians 2:13-14 (KJV)
Imagine if you actually followed Ephesians 5:22-24’s admonition to submit to your husband “as unto the Lord… in everything”. Imagine if you submitted to your husband working in your body both to will and do of his good pleasure without grumbling or resisting him?
If you were to follow this pattern with your husband then the issue of forced sex in marriage would really be a non-issue.
Should we stop teaching Biblical commandments regarding gender roles? Is the teaching of Biblical gender roles a distraction to spreading the Gospel and bringing people to Christ?
This is what a lot of Christians today believe. In fact I personally know many preachers today who say they stand on the Word of God yet they take this approach that “teaching what the Bible says on gender roles distracts from reaching people for Christ”.
Some of these men are firm believers in Biblical inerrancy. They would even be considered “conservative” in many aspects of their life and ministry. They will preach on many subjects including the church, giving and general holy living topics. They don’t believe that preaching “thou shalt not bear false witness” or “thou shalt not covet” are distractions to the Gospel. But to them teaching women that God says “Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing” is a distraction from the Gospel.
Recently I received an email from a man calling himself Mike. I believe his email is a very good representation of what I have actually heard from Christian ministers today even if he is not a minister. This issue needs to be addressed as we challenge our culture (sadly even our Christian culture) with the truth of God’s Word.
With that said below is Mike’s email.
“We have so many people that we Christians need to help simply cross the line into believing in God first and foremost that this is where our number one priority should be. Your site and others like it simply muddies the waters.
If you can’t even understand “Judge not lest ye be judged”, how in the world do you come to the conclusion that your interpretations are correct and everyone who doesn’t believe as you do is wrong?
Are you not seeing just how flawed as a human you are when you make statements concerning interpretations? I certainly know the sinner I am and would never presume to make the statements you do about scripture. Knowing the mind of God is beyond all our capabilities. When we get people to believe, HE will take care of the rest. People must make up their own minds WITH the gifts God gives them. That is between HIM and them. No one on this planet has the right to judge them on those beliefs except God.
I’m actually curious if you really believe that those who don’t share your interpretations are not going to be saved?
My above statement about helping people to make that commitment to believe becomes so much more important when I see these types of arguments on your site being batted back and forth. They become terrible distractions to the main mission! “Faith alone”, not works or anything else for that matter. We MUST focus on that. I have a brother I can’t even help understand Gods existence. Believe me when I say I understand my flaws. You should be helping your readers to understand yours.
Gender roles are simply not an important subject as long as men and women treat each other with respect. We can’t even get that done right! It just becomes another pointless distraction in the bigger picture of faith. Time passing alone changes things as they become more fully understood. I certainly don’t follow food instructions from the Bible, do you? This is precisely why we must get people believing FIRST, then LET God do his work within them. Remember that the “Judge not” statement literally covers all of scripture. I’m curious as to how or even if you will respond. I won’t hold my breath, but MY belief in God told me this needed to be said.
Respectfully Yours. Mike”
What follows is my response to several key statements Mike makes on this issue. I think this will truly help to clarify these assertions that are so commonly made today by many Christians in our culture regarding the teaching of Biblical gender roles.
“We have so many people that we Christians need to help simply cross the line into believing in God first and foremost that this is where our number one priority should be.”
I very much believe that as believers in Christ our first priority should be reaching people with the Gospel of Christ.
Christ said this before his ascension:
“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” – Matthew 28:19 (KJV)
If I teach someone about Biblical gender roles and they implement that in their marriage but they have not placed their faith and trust in Christ as their Lord and Savior their following of Biblical gender roles won’t benefit them in the eternal sense. They will die and go to hell as all those who do not take Christ as their savior will do.
It is only when they place their faith and trust in Christ that their following of Biblical gender roles will have value not only in this world, but also in the world to come when they receive their reward for the race they have run in this life.
“I’m actually curious if you really believe that those who don’t share your interpretations are not going to be saved?”
Being baptized does not save us. Being part of a particular Christian denomination like Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran or Methodist does not save us and believing in and practicing Biblical gender roles does not save us.
This is what the Bible says saves us:
“But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name” – John 1:11 (KJV)
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” – John 3:16 (KJV)
“9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” – Romans 10:9-10 (KJV)
“1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures” – 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 (KJV)
It is believing in our heart that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior, that he died for our sins, was buried and rose again the third day for our redemption that saves us. If we receive Christ as our Lord and Savior we become children of God and have passed from death to life.
“If you can’t even understand “Judge not lest ye be judged“, how in the world do you come to the conclusion that your interpretations are correct and everyone who doesn’t believe as you do is wrong?”
Mike is displaying the common misinterpretation of the principle of not judging people. Let’s see what Christ actually said about judging.
“1 Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. 3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? 4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” – Matthew 7:1-5 (KJV)
When Christ made his famous statement of “Judge not, that ye be not judged” he explained in the verses that follow the type of judging he was talking about. He was talking about hypocritical judging. That means if you are doing the same thing or worse you have no business telling someone they are wrong. Fix your own house before your try to fix other’s houses.
Christ later actually COMMANDS us to judge in the passage below.
“Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.” – John 7:24 (KJV)
Paul later tells us not judge one another on disputable matters:
“1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. 2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs. 3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. 4 Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.” – Romans 14:1-4 (KJV)
The Apostle Paul says we as Christians should not judge one another when it comes to disputable matters. This has to do with personal applications of the Scriptures to our daily lives. For instance one person may feel they have the freedom to drink alcohol and another person may not because they were raised by alcoholics or have a fear they may succumb to alcoholism. The one who drinks should not judge the one who does not believe they can drink and the one who does not drink should not judge the person who takes advantage of his freedom to drink.
There may even be some differences with how one husband applies the Biblical principles of male headship with his wife and how another applies it with his. For instance one man may allow his wife to writing out the checks for the bills and another man may never allow his wife to see the bank account or check book. This is an example of a personal application the principle of male headship in marriage.
The point is on the subject of judging – we are actually commanded to judge by Jesus Christ himself. We are simply commanded to do it in a righteous way. It is not hypocritical judging or even judging on disputable matters to preach what God clearly says in his word about the distinct roles for which he made men and women and what he says about marriage. If we compare God’s Word to what Christians and non-Christians alike say that directly contradicts with clear statements of the Scriptures that is not wrong judging, that is in fact righteous judging.
“Are you not seeing just how flawed as a human you are when you make statements concerning interpretations? I certainly know the sinner I am and would never presume to make the statements you do about scripture. Knowing the mind of God is beyond all our capabilities.”
I am well aware of my own person flaws and my sin nature. I encourage people here regularly to follow the psalmist’s words:
“23 Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts: 24 And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.” – Psalm 139:23-24 (KJV)
And yes we as human beings can never fully understand the mind of God as the Scriptures say:
“15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.” – I Corinthians 2:15-16 (KJV)
We can never fully understand God’s mind or his thoughts. However we can understand through Christ and the Holy Spirit what God has revealed about himself through his Word. And we are not responsible for what God has not revealed but only what he has shown us in his Word.
Christ called on us as flawed human beings to “judge righteous judgment” (John 7:24) as I pointed out to you earlier. God calls on us to submit to flawed human beings in government (I Peter 2:13-14). And God even calls on women to submit to flawed husbands (Ephesians 5:22-24, I Peter 3:1-6).
The men who gave us God’s word were flawed as well as the men who preached it after them. The difference was that Paul and the other Apostles and Prophets who gave us the Scriptures while being flawed sinners received perfect revelation from God. He was one of the few men in the history of the world that God chose for this great privilege. This is why the Apostle Paul wrote:
“For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.” – 1 Thessalonians 2:13 (KJV)
But God actually has given the gifts and offices of Pastor and Teacher to help people interpret the Word of God:
“11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:”- Ephesians 4:11-13 (KJV)
What we see here is God talking about gifts he has given for the edifying of the body of Christ. God has personally given me the gift of being a teacher and I have tried in my own imperfect way as he has given me grace to exercise that gift over the years. Whether it was when I taught Sunday school classes or other groups I was exercising my spiritual gift “for the edifying of the body of Christ”.
In fact Paul warns the young Pastor Timothy not to neglect his spiritual gift:
“14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.” – 1 Timothy 4:14 (KJV)
God does not want me to stop preaching his Word or teaching the interpretation of the Scriptures. He placed this gift in me for the edification of the body of Christ as he has done with many imperfect and sinful men for thousands of years. Do I claim that all my interpretations and applications of the Scriptures are infallible? Of course not. Only Christ and his Prophets and Apostles were infallible as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
But God wants me in my own imperfect way to exercise the gift he has given me and other men with similar gifts to do the same until we all reach heaven where we will be perfectly unified in our understanding as we are in the presence of God himself.
“When we get people to believe, HE will take care of the rest. People must make up their own minds WITH the gifts God gives them. That is between HIM and them. No one on this planet has the right to judge them on those beliefs except God.”
Did Paul say this to a young Pastor named Timothy – “Timothy you are a flawed and sinful man and unlike me you have not received the authority and inspiration from God to write his Scriptures. Therefore, you cannot preach any interpretation of the Bible or correct or rebuke anyone else’s interpretations of the Bible. Let everyone decide for themselves what God’s Word teaches.”
The answer is NO. The Apostle Paul told this young Pastor just the opposite!
“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. 5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.” – 2 Timothy 4:2-5 (KJV)
“My above statement about helping people to make that commitment to believe becomes so much more important when I see these types of arguments on your site being batted back and forth. They become terrible distractions to the main mission! “Faith alone”, not works or anything else for that matter.”
It is absolutely true that faith alone saves as the Scriptures state:
“8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.” – Ephesians 2:8-9 (KJV)
But as Martin Luther famously said “We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone.” The Scriptures tell us this regarding the life changing power of true faith:
“Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.” – 2 Corinthians 5:17 (KJV)
So as we can see Martin Luther’s statement that the faith that saves is never alone perfectly aligns with the Scriptural view of salvation.
But what you are contending when you said “Faith alone” is that the only doctrine we should teach is that of the Gospel. This is false. Let me take you back to the great commission Christ gave and this time I will add his follow up statement:
“19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” – Matthew 28:19-20 (KJV)
Christ told us to preach the Gospel as well as well as teach people everything he commanded.
And what was one of his commands?
“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” – Matthew 4:4 (KJV)
Every word of the Bible sir comes from the mouth of God. We are to live by every word – not just those words concerning the Gospel and God gives us preachers and teachers of the Word to help us to understand all of God’s Word, not just the Gospel.
“Time passing alone changes things as they become more fully understood. I certainly don’t follow food instructions from the Bible, do you?”
This is a classic argument that liberal Christians and even non-Christians make to write off parts of or even the entire Bible. Sadly I have even seen some Christians who claim to believe in Biblical inerrancy write off the entire Old Testament based on this false argument.
No I don’t follow the food instructions that God gave to Israel as a theocracy. Here are the reasons why:
“9 On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray about the sixth hour: 10 And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance, 11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. 13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. 15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.” – Acts 10:9-15 (KJV)
“1 Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary… 10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.” – Hebrews 9:1 & 10 (KJV)
The Old Testament contains three types of laws – Moral, Ceremonial and Civil. The Ceremonial laws were for Israel as theocracy to worship God and make sacrifices – it also included dietary and other cleanliness laws. The Civil laws dealt with the punishment or restitution that was to be made for breaking God’s moral law under the theocracy of Israel.
When Christ ushered in the New Covenant with his death, burial and resurrection he did away with the first covenant including the ceremonial and civil laws of Israel. Now only the moral law of the Old Testament and all of the laws in the New Testament are binding on us as Christians. Therefore as a Christian living under the New Covenant, I do not have to follow the dietary laws anymore.
But Biblical gender roles WERE part of the moral law of God in the Old Testament and they were even strengthen and further explained in the New Testament as I will show in the final section of this article. So yes it is completely consistent for me to preach and teach that Christians must follow God’s gender rules and design for man and woman yet we no longer have to follow the dietary rules or other ceremonial rules and we are no longer under the civil penalties and restitutions mandated in the Old Testament.
“Gender roles are simply not an important subject as long as men and women treat each other with respect. We can’t even get that done right! It just becomes another pointless distraction in the bigger picture of faith.”
Contrary to your assertion the teaching of Biblical gender roles is even MORE important when men and women are not treating each other as God has commanded them treat one another. The Biblical doctrines of gender roles are critical to us living the lives God has called us to live.
Christ did not just die to save us from hell but rather he died so that we would live for him:
“And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.”
2 Corinthians 5:15 (KJV)
While we are not saved by works, Christ calls us to live for him. How can we say we are trying to live for him when refuse to follow the purpose for which he designed each gender?
God says he made man to image him and doing so bring him glory and he made woman for man to help him in his duty to image God:
“7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”
I Corinthians 11:7-9 (KJV)
God says that he made marriage to be a model of the relationship between God and his people:
“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.
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
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 5:22-29 (KJV)
To Mike and all those Christian teachers and preachers that refuse to teach the doctrines of Biblical gender roles to your people – you are in direct disobedience to the Word of God. You are not preaching the whole counsel of God when you preach only the Gospel.
I have never said here or elsewhere that if people reject the doctrines of Biblical gender roles that they are unsaved or not going to heaven. We are saved by faith alone in Christ alone apart from works and not by following Biblical gender roles. But Christ did not save us so we could just live for ourselves anyway we want – he saved us so we could live for him in this life.
While we will not lose our salvation for refusing to follow the doctrines of Biblical gender roles and other doctrines concerning holy living we will in fact lose our reward for doing so. If we do not run the race of this Christian life lawfully we will lose our reward in heaven as the Scriptures tell us:
“And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully.” – 2 Timothy 2:5 (KJV)
“24 Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain.” – 1 Corinthians 9:24 (KJV)
“11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; 13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.
14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15 If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.” – 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 (KJV)
Finally, even besides the consequences in the next life(loss of rewards) we will and are seeing the consequences of not following Biblical gender roles both as individuals and as a society in general in this life. Since Second Wave Feminism arose in the 1960’s divorce rates have skyrocketed in our country. While they leveled off at around 50% which is still a horrible number, the only reason they did so was because more couples just decided to live together outside a covenant of marriage.
The point is the idea of a man and woman living together for life in the covenant of marriage is becoming less and less common in our society since we as a culture left the practice of Biblical gender roles. Marriages today are now “feelings centered” and specifically “woman centered”. “Happy Wife Happy Life” is just another way of saying “Your wife is the boss just do whatever she says”. And what has been the result of men allowing their wives to take over for decades – the destruction of the family unit.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
“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:
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).
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.
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.
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:
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.
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:
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”.