Can Christian Man Marry A Woman Intending to Tame Her?

Can a Christian man marry a feminist Christian woman with the intent of taming her like Petruchio did with Katherine in Shakespeare’s “The Taming of the Shrew”? Or must a Christian husband always seek a woman who is submissive and believes in and follows Biblical gender roles?

Shakespeare’s “The Taming of the Shrew”

Here are some excerpts from synopsis of Taming of the Shrew by www.sparknotes.com:

“In the Italian city of Padua, a rich young man named Lucentio arrives with his servants, Tranio and Biondello, to attend the local university. Lucentio is excited to begin his studies, but his priorities change when he sees Bianca, a beautiful, mild young woman with whom Lucentio instantly falls in love. There are two problems: first, Bianca already has two suitors, Gremio and Hortensio; second, Bianca’s father, a wealthy old man named Baptista Minola, has declared that no one may court Bianca until first her older sister, the vicious, ill-tempered Katherine, is married…

The Katherine problem is solved for Bianca’s suitors when Hortensio’s friend Petruchio, a brash young man from Verona, arrives in Padua to find a wife. He intends to marry a rich woman, and does not care what she is like as long as she will bring him a fortune. He agrees to marry Katherine sight unseen. The next day, he goes to Baptista’s house to meet her, and they have a tremendous duel of words. As Katherine insults Petruchio repeatedly, Petruchio tells her that he will marry her whether she agrees or not. He tells Baptista, falsely, that Katherine has consented to marry him on Sunday. Hearing this claim, Katherine is strangely silent, and the wedding is set.

On Sunday, Petruchio is late to his own wedding, leaving Katherine to fear she will become an old maid. When Petruchio arrives, he is dressed in a ridiculous outfit and rides on a broken-down horse. After the wedding, Petruchio forces Katherine to leave for his country house before the feast, telling all in earshot that she is now his property and that he may do with her as he pleases. Once they reach his country house, Petruchio continues the process of “taming” Katherine by keeping her from eating or sleeping for several days—he pretends that he loves her so much he cannot allow her to eat his inferior food or to sleep in his poorly made bed

Katherine and Petruchio soon return to Padua to visit Baptista. On the way, Petruchio forces Katherine to say that the sun is the moon and that an old man is really a beautiful young maiden. Since Katherine’s willfulness is dissipating, she agrees that all is as her husband says

At the banquet following Hortensio’s wedding to the widow, the other characters are shocked to see that Katherine seems to have been “tamed”—she obeys everything that Petruchio says and gives a long speech advocating the loyalty of wives to their husbands. When the three new husbands stage a contest to see which of their wives will obey first when summoned, everyone expects Lucentio to win. Bianca, however, sends a message back refusing to obey, while Katherine comes immediately. The others acknowledge that Petruchio has won an astonishing victory, and the happy Katherine and Petruchio leave the banquet to go to bed.”

A lot of Christians who are ignorant of history and even the Bible would say a person is wrong for marrying for economic reasons. If you believe that, I would invite you to read the story of Ruth in the Bible.  She married Boaz to redeem her mother-in-law’s husband’s family land.  We falsely have been taught today that a person must marry because they first “fall in love with a person” – that command is found nowhere in the Bible. It is wishful thinking, mostly on the part of women.   Some will say – what about Jacob? He loved Rachel so much he served seven years for her.  But again, this is not a command, it is an example. And why did he love her? Check the story – it was because of how beautiful she was.

And let’s not forget Jacob’s mother and father. What a whirlwind romance they had right? They just met each other and went into his mother’s tent had sex and became man and wife.  No long courtship, no discussion.   Isaac followed his father’s advice for him in finding a wife and Rebekah followed her father’s command for her to go back and marry Isaac.  It was that simple.

But the most important question the Taming of the Shrew presents us with is whether or not it is sinful or immoral for a Christian man to marry a rebellious woman with the intention of taming her into submission?

However, before we can answer this question, we must first answer another very important question for Christians.

Can a Christian Marry an Unbeliever?

In 2 Corinthians 6:14-17 the Apostle Paul gives the following command regarding Christians entering into relationships with non-believers:

“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. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.”

As we can see from the above Scriptures, it is clear that believers are not to be unequally yoked together with unbelievers.

This is why a Christian church has no business having an inter-faith conference with the Muslim church down the street. And it is also why a Christian man or woman can never enter into the most intimate of human relationships God ever designed which is marriage, with a non-believer.

Some Christians have falsely used 1 Corinthians 7:13-16 to say that the Apostle Paul was ok with Christians marrying non-Christians:

“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.

16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?”

However, such an interpretation betrays the entire context of the passage which Paul states in verse 20 of this same chapter:

“Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.”

Paul is saying that if you become a believer and your spouses does not come to the faith as you have that you are to remain with them if they want to stay.  He is not saying it is ok for a Christian to purposefully marry a non-believer which would then conflict with what he said in 2 Corinthians 6:14-17.

Now that we have established this important principle of the Scriptures, we can go on to answer the question at the center of this article.

Can a Christian Man Marry a Christian Feminist Woman with the Intent to Tame Her?

Throughout the Bible God’s relationship with humanity is pictured in two different ways.  As individuals our relationship with God is pictured as a father and child relationship.  But God’s relationship with his people in the collective sense is always pictured as that of a husband to his wife.

We can see this concept shown where God pictures the nation of Israel as a treacherous wife in Jeremiah 3:20:

“Surely as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband, so have ye dealt treacherously with me, O house of Israel, saith the Lord.”

Notice how he refers to his wife – “O house of Israel”.

Now let’s look further in this book to Jeremiah 18:1-6:

“The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying, 2 Arise, and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words.

3 Then I went down to the potter’s house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the wheels. 4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it.

5 Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying,

6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.”

What do we see here? God presents the picture of a potter who had a marred, meaning it had defects.  So, he reshaped it against as a whole new vessel.  God tells Israel, his wife, that she is like that clay.  He saw defects in her and wanted to reshape her in another vessel but she would not allow him to do so.

Now let’s look to the New Testament in Ephesians 5:25-27:

“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.”

There is an important parallel here between God as a husband to Israel and Christ as a husband to the Church.  How does a potter shape his clay into the form he wishes it to be? He uses water.  In the same way we as Christian husbands are told to love our wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her so he could wash her with “water by the word”, so she would not have “spot, or wrinkle”, so he could present her to “himself a glorious church”.

Why did God want to reshape Israel as his wife? Because she was “marred” which parallels the “spot or wrinkle” shown to us here with Christ and his wife, the Church, in the New Testament.

The point is that God is a consistent husband.  Christ is not a different kind of husband to the Church than God was to Israel.  We as Christian husbands can learn just a much from God’s example as a husband to Israel as we can learn from Christ’s example as a husband to the Church.  This is a fundamental truth that all Christian husbands must embrace.

With that being said can a Christian man marry a Christian woman whom he perceives is marred by feminist tendencies with the intention that he is going to attempt to wash her of those tendencies?

The answer based on God’s own example with both Israel and the Church is a resounding YES!

Am I recommending Men Marry Feminist Women with the Intent to Tame Them?

I have proven the case from the Scriptures that nothing in the Scriptures stops a man from marrying a woman whom he genuinely believes to be a Christian but is marred by feminism.

I made the following statement about my second wife in a post I wrote a few years ago that include my story about how I met my second wife and married her:

“While we were dating, I detected feminist tendencies in her that she had from her upbringing (her mom was a career woman as well).  Her mom even told me on one occasion that she taught her daughters to “be independent and not need a man”.  So even though my wife had become a Christian a few years before she met me, the feminism ran deep in her.  I also detected that her job as a manager might cause some friction in her commitment to our marriage and our home.

But she was so different from my first wife, and such a good Christian woman with great character that I chose to overlook some of these areas that would later come back to haunt me, naively thinking I could help her to see what God says a Christian woman’s priorities should be in regard to her husband, her children and her home.

I mentioned in that same post that my wife displayed many marks of a true believer in Christ.  She was so dedicated to seeing people saved.  She witnessed to her friends at work and relatives and she was concerned for her lost loved ones.  She went on missions’ trips with her church.  I spoke with her Pastor and some deacons at her church and saw in her a woman that had many great character traits and a passion for God.  But she was a new Christian, saved only few years before I met her.

So, I believed when I saw the feminist tendencies in her that I could just teach her and help her to learn those ways were not right.  She told me she believed the passages about submission that I showed her. But she also believed that men and women were equal and she was trying to square that with what the Bible said about submission.

I thought I could wash this feminism from her, but alas after almost 9 years of marriage much of it remains.  There has been some progress and some change but not nearly as much as I had hoped.

The question though is this – does my failure to be able to wash away my wife’s feminism with the Word of God mean that no man could do this with another woman?

The answer is no.  It is in fact possible.

In the three years since I wrote about my story with my failure to completely wash away my wife’s feminism, I have had many men write me telling they had success with their wives in this.  I have actually even had many young women write me telling me that my writings helped to convince them that feminism was wrong and they came out of it on their own before marriage.

So, what is the variable that makes for success in the taming of a feminist Christian wife?  The answer is it comes down to whether the woman will recognize this sinful thought process in her own life and then allow her husband in conjunction with the Holy Spirit to wash it from her.

In James 1:23-24 the Bible tells us about a man looking in a glass seeing his reflection:

“23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass: 24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.”

Now let’s apply what James is saying to a feminist Christian wife.  A man can take his wife to the spiritual mirror which is the Word of God.  He can show her the reflection of herself.  He can show her the sin of feminism all over her face.  But she must choose to humble herself before God and accept what she sees right there in the mirror.  She must then submit herself to her husband’s washing and see him as a God given instrument for sanctification in her life.

Some may argue “Well I am fine with trying to tame her before marriage, but you should not marry her until she is completely tamed of feminism”.  And I understand where that thinking comes from.   But just because something presents a lot more risk does not make it wrong.  Marriage itself is a risk.  Even marriage to a woman who seems to be a good Christian and one who fully embraces Biblical gender roles. It is simply a matter of how much risk is involved.

Is This a Change in My Position on Christian Men Marrying Feminist Women?

The answer is Yes. Throughout this ministry over the last four years I have made changes on several positions.  Really – over my entire Christian life I have made changes in my beliefs as the Lord has led me to do so.  We must never be so rigid or get to the point where God cannot change our position on something and teach us new things.

Up until now I have taught people on this blog as well as my own sons that I made a grave mistake in marrying their step mother with the intent to help her understand the errors of her feminist thinking.  I have taught young men on this blog and elsewhere that they should avoid interactions with feminist Christian women and at the first sign of feminist tendencies when dating or courting they should abandon such a woman.

If you or my sons want to follow the advice I have previously given there is no sin in following it still.  If you decide that the potential costs in this spiritual warfare to attempt to tame a feminist Christian wife is too much I completely understand and there is no sin in avoiding feminist women like the plague.

So here is my change. 

I have thought back to when I met my second wife and after I talked to all the people that knew her from her church as well as her family.  My intentions were noble.  I saw the potential in her for change.  I went into this marriage fully intent on washing her feminism away and believing she would allow me over time to do it. I believed her passion to see souls saved would result in a similar passion to conform herself as a wife to the will of God for her life. The problem was not in my intent, but in her continued unwillingness to fully yield to the Holy Spirit on this issue, so in turn she could not fully yield to me either.

If you find a woman who has the markings of a true believer in Christ as my second wife had, but this appears to be a blind spot in her life and you are intent on doing spiritual battle, even if takes the rest of your life married to her, to wash the spiritual wrinkles and spots of feminism from her then this is a noble cause. But be forewarned, this is not for the faint of heart. It could greatly affect your future children and in some cases the battle could even lead to divorce.

However, if you are marrying a feminist Christian woman with the intent that you are going to tolerate her feminism and will just give up your headship role over her then you are wrong.  As a Christian God does not allow you to surrender your position as head to your wife. So, if you know you are not willing to do battle to attempt to wash the feminism from a woman then you should not marry her.  You should only marry a woman who fully embraces Biblical gender roles before you marry her.

So here is the conclusion of the matter.  Is it a sin before God for a man to marry a Christian woman with the intent of taming her of her feminist tendencies and beliefs? The answer is no it is not a sin.

But I would leave any Christian man who intends to go into such a spiritual battle with this admonition from Christ found in Luke 14:31:

“Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand?” 

Be sure before you go to war, that you count the costs that may be incurred on you in the process of that war.

New Studies Show Even Feminist Women Still Prefer Sexist Men

Women in general and even women who consider themselves strong feminists showed the same preference for sexist men over egalitarian men according to five studies carried out by scientists from the University of Kent and Iowa State University.  It turns out that no matter what political or philosophical background they come from, women prefer the muscular guy with money who opens doors for them to the weak and skinny egalitarian dude that will treat them just like one of the guys.

And in other breaking news a new study confirms that water is wet.  Ok that second study was fake.  But you get my point. Anyone who lives around women, works around women or has sisters knows what these studies concluded is just common sense.  Yes, there are those rare women, feminist or otherwise, that actually prefer the weak and skinny egalitarian dude that treats them like one of the guys but most women don’t operate that way.

Below are some conclusions the study found according to an article from the dailymail.co.uk:

“Benevolent means well-meaning or kind, and experts define the sexism as men who, for example, think women are more delicate or should be cherished or looked after by a man.

This is different to hostile sexism in which women are degraded, such as saying a woman’s place is in the kitchen.

Sexist attitudes were the norm for decades, particularly after the Second World War, and saw men as breadwinners and women as homemakers.

But this has shifted in recent years as gender attitudes change, more women focus on their careers, and couples increasingly share their parenting duties…

Women are more attracted to men who are sexist because they think they are more willing to protect them, provide for them and commit to a relationship, scientists say. Men who are considered to be sexist in a well-meaning way – for example if they are chivalrous or think women need a man to protect them – may be more attractive.

Even though women find these men patronising and can feel undermined by them, they are more likely to want to couple up with them than with men who don’t give them special treatment. Researchers say women may be hard-wired to think the benefits of being with a kind but sexist man outweigh the downsides.

The scientists maintain that, despite romantic and flattering elements of the relationship, even well-meaning sexism reinforces the idea women are inferior. And even women who consider themselves strong feminists showed the same preferences in the study by British and US researchers

In the study, women’s attraction to this willingness to invest is traced to a more basic hard-wired survival instinct, in which females choose mates in order to improve their children’s chance of survival.

A male who is more likely to be protective or provide food for the family would improve the chance of offspring surviving, the study explains.

This may have in turn shaped women’s psychology to make them subconsciously prefer men who are a bit sexist.”

The Great Lie of “Sexism”

In our American as well as other western cultures today, we are taught a great lie.  We are taught that if a person believes that someone’s gender determines what roles they should or should not perform in society that this person is holding an immoral belief.  The term “sexist” was coined in the late 1960’s by feminists and was employed as a scarlet letter of sorts to shame and ostracize anyone who held to such “unequal”, “outdated” and “unfair” beliefs about gender.

In fact, another word “misogynist” was used to ratchet up the heat on those who held to such “ancient” beliefs.  If you were a sexist, then you were also a misogynist or hater of women.  This same tactic was used in all kinds of social movements to paint anyone who believed in any different rights or privileges for anyone of any kind as being a “hater” of that group.

For instance, in 2018, we are told that if you believe both illegal and legal immigrants who are not United States citizens should not have the same rights and privileges as US citizens then you are a called a hater of immigrants.

But God’s Word shines a light on this great lie that believing men and women should have different rights and responsibilities somehow is hatred of women or immoral.  The belief that women should be “Barefoot and pregnant” or in other words get married, bear children and be homemakers is clearly backed up by the Bible:

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

1 Timothy 5:14 (KJV)

Were Sexist Attitudes the Norm Only After World War II?

“Sexist attitudes were the norm for decades, particularly after the Second World War, and saw men as breadwinners and women as homemakers.” Really? Every time I see statements like this it makes me laugh.  The reason it makes me laugh is because of this myth that people teach today that somehow these “sexist” views of men and women were somehow new after World War II.

For the entire history of mankind these were the roles that societies across the world cast men and women into.  Were there exceptions to this rule? Yes.  Did some women have higher educations and careers throughout history? Yes.  In other cases, did many women help their husbands out on their family farms or other such family businesses? Certainly.  Were there families that were so destitute that the woman was forced to go and work away from the home while the children were cared for by another family member? Absolutely.

But the point is that this was not seen by society as the ideal to strive for.  Societies across the world prior to the Second Wave feminism of the 1960s very much held what we call today a “sexist” belief that men are to be providers and women are to be homemakers.

Three Different Kinds of Sexists

These studies came up with two categories of sexist men.  One they labeled as a “Hostile Sexist” and the other as a “Benevolent Sexist”.  I actually agree with them that there are multiple categories of sexist men but I would expand it to three categories of sexist men as opposed to just the two.

The Hostile Sexist Man

This study says that a man has hostile sexist views toward women if he believes “a woman’s place is in the kitchen”. The truth of the matter is that God’s Word reveals that the “kitchen”, or in other words the caring for the food needs of the home, does in fact belong to the woman as we see in the passage below:

“She riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion to her maidens.”

Proverbs 31:15 (KJV)

So, if believing in different roles for men and women is not the Biblical definition of being a hostile sexist what is? We can find the answer by looking the follow passages for the answer:

“Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.:

I Peter 3:1 (KJV)

“Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them.”

Colossians 3:19 (KJV)

As we can see according to the Bible, a hostile sexist man is one who dishonors and has bitterness toward women. 

Now Christian feminists would seize upon those two words “dishonors” and “bitterness” to fill in their own definitions.  I have been accused by countless readers of showing dishonor toward women and being bitter at women.  But it is not dishonoring to women to teach what God teaches about women.  It is not dishonoring to women to teach that God did not give men and women equal rights and equal responsibilities.

It is not showing bitterness toward women to share of the hurts that I have suffered at the hands of my first wife when she committed adultery or my second wife when she has sexually denied me or disrespected me based on her feminist background.  It is no more bitterness toward women to share of these hurtful things women do toward their husbands than it is for a woman’s site to share stories of emotional or physically abusive husbands.

I have actually warned men on this site many times not to allow their hurt or even righteous anger toward sinful behavior on the part of their wives to turn into bitterness.  I have had men come through this site throughout the years and display actual hatred toward the female sex and I have condemned such hatred.

The truth is that all these false accusations of me hating women is just a cop out on the part of my detractors.  These false accusations are what is called “ad hominem attacks”.  This is when someone attacks the person presenting a belief or an argument rather than the belief or argument itself.  These kinds of false attacks actually display the weakness of those who oppose the beliefs I espouse based on the Bible.

Believing in gender roles and hating feminism does not equate to being hostile toward or hating women.  This is part of the great lie we are told today and as Bible believing Christians we must combat this lie with the Word of God.

The Benevolent Sexist Man

The studies we are discussing defined the benevolent sexist man as one who is “well-meaning or kind, and experts define the sexism as men who, for example, think women are more delicate or should be cherished or looked after by a man.

This Benevolent Sexist man displays no hatred toward women but on the contrary he practically worships women.

But is this behavior what the Bible calls for on the part of men toward women? The answer is no. Some might respond with the question “Doesn’t the Bible tell men to cherish their wives?” Yes, it does.  It is absolutely true that the Bible commands husbands to cherish their wives as we see from the Scripture passage below:

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

Ephesians 5:28-29 (KJV)

In the minds of most women today to cherish means to worship.  That really is the whole idea of romance.  Romance is about a man making a woman’s happiness the central focus of his life.  How many songs do we hear where men say things like “you’re the meaning in my life, you’re the inspiration”.

It is absolutely intoxicating for most women to hear men tell them that they can think of nothing but her.  They only have eyes for her.  Women love it, they just eat it up when a man tells them that their happiness is his most important goal in this world.

But the truth is that this is NOT what the Bible is saying when it tells men to cherish their wives. 

When the Bible tells men to cherish their wives it is telling them to protect their wives.  When it tells them to nourish their wives it is telling them to provide for their wives’ physical needs.  So yes, the Bible tells men to be providers and protectors of their wives but it never tells them to worship their wives or make their wives happiness the central focus of their lives.

This study reveals that women are attracted to these benevolent sexist men and why wouldn’t most women be attracted to men like this?  If a woman were to find a man who wants to provide for her, protect her and worship the very ground she walks on why would she not be attracted to this from a human perspective? Having someone who wants to be our servant, do whatever makes us happy and provide us with a house, food, clothes, money and also protect us from those who would do us harm would be attractive to many women and men for that matter.

A lot of Christian husbands today are actually benevolent sexists in how they date and in how they conduct themselves as husbands once they marry.  It is not wrong that they feel a duty to provide for and protect their wives.  It is not wrong that they want to display kindness toward women in general or their wives in particular.  Those traits are good traits that we as Christians should honor in men. But where these benevolent sexist Christian men fail is in worshiping their wives and making their wife’s happiness the central focus of their lives.

A Word on Fake Benevolent Sexist Men

Before I continue to the third type of sexist man we need to recognize the reality of men who fake being benevolent sexists. The truth is that many men while dating will play the part of the benevolent sexist only to reveal later on that they are actually a hostile sexist.  A lot of men know that worshiping a woman is the key to getting sex from her.  They have their mission, so they size her up and they do what it takes to get to their goal.  Some of these men go for the one-night stand where they worship a woman all night long acting like they want a long-term relationship only to disappear in the morning.  Others will see the relationship through until marriage and then after marriage their true hostile sexist mentality is revealed.  And just as a side note – there are men that fake being egalitarians too just to get in the ladies’ pants.  There are myriads of these men in Hollywood and across America.

The Biblical Sexist Man

The Biblical sexist man believes very much like the genuine benevolent sexist man that God wants him as a man to provide for, protect and commit to a woman in marriage.  He also believes God calls him to be kind and compassionate toward women in general and especially his wife in particular. 

This Biblical Sexist man does not act in hateful ways toward women as the Hostile sexist man neither does he engage in woman worship as the Benevolent sexist man does.

The Biblical sexist man worships God alone and at the same time shows proper love and honor toward his woman not only by providing for her and protecting her by also by leading her as Christ does his Church and  teaching her and correcting her by washing her spiritual spots and wrinkles with the Word of God.

He knows that to worship his woman or make her the central focus of his life would betray the purpose for which God made him, women and intimate relationships between men and women.

The Scriptures tell us God’s purpose in making male human beings in the Genesis account:

“26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. “

Genesis 1:26-27 (KJV)

The Apostle Paul gives us divine commentary from God further elaborating on the Genesis creation account:

“3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God…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 11:3 & 7-9 (KJV)

Paul points out to us that God created man to be his image bearer and he created woman to help man in playing out his image bearer role. Man could only fully image God by being a husband and a father.  This is why God created woman and marriage to help man fulfill this task.   God shows us this purpose in marriage the same chapter that tells men to cherish(protect) their wives:

“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 5:22-28 (KJV)

God created marriage so that man and woman could model the relationship of God to his people and thus this would help man to fulfill his purpose to image God.  God wants husbands to love their wives as he loves his people.  He wants men to sacrificially love their wives, he wants them to teach and correct their wives and so wash their spiritual spots and blemishes with the Word of God.  He wants men to care for their wives as they do their own bodies by protecting them and providing for them as they would their own bodies.

God also wants women to submit to and serve their husbands as mankind is to submit to and serve God.  A wife’s mission is her husband, her children and her home.  In regard to her husband, her mission is to help him fulfill the mission God has given to him.

The Biblical sexist man knows that to make his wife’s happiness the central focus of his relationship with her would be to betray his purpose to image God as a husband to his wife. He knows that he must lead her, teach her and correct her and this will not always make her happy.  He also realizes that as part of his leadership of his wife he must teach her to live out the truth that God made him to serve God by imaging him and he made her for him to help him in his mission.

In other words, one of the greatest duties a Biblical sexist man has in his marriage is to teach his wife that their marriage does not revolve her desires and her happiness.  Instead every Biblical sexist husband must teach his wife that he is to focus on his mission to image God and she is to focus on her mission to serve him and help him in his mission.

The Biblical sexist man also knows though that while his relationships with his wife and children are vital parts of his overall mission to image God they are not all God has for him to do.  God is not just a husband to his people or a father to his children but he is also an inventor, a builder, a teacher, a worker, an artist, a writer, a warrior and a ruler.  So too God calls men to be in these different roles and in doing so they image him.  The Scriptures tell us the following concerning men and their work:

“And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.”

Genesis 3:15 (KJV)

“Man goeth forth unto his work and to his labour until the evening.”

Psalm 104:23 (KJV)

“Wherefore I perceive that there is nothing better, than that a man should rejoice in his own works; for that is his portion…”

Ecclesiastes 3:22 (KJV)

“And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;”

Colossians 3:23 (KJV)

“And let the beauty of the Lord our God be upon us: and establish thou the work of our hands upon us; yea, the work of our hands establish thou it.”

Psalm 90:17 (KJV)

Reclaiming Sexism For Christ

To often we as conservatives and Christians allow liberal Christians and non-Christians to define the language of our discussions.  Leftist and secularists are masters of taking words and twisting them for their perverted purposes.  Take the word “gay” which at one time simply meant “happy”.  This word was hijacked to represent homosexual men.

Some may be shocked at the title of this section “Reclaiming Sexism For Christ” because in our culture we associate Sexism with bad behavior.  But we as Christians serve a God who is in the business of reclaiming things for his purposes.  The cross was once a symbol of shame yet Christ took it and made it a symbol of hope and salvation.  Even the term “Christian” was once used as a derogatory term in labeling followers of Christ.  But again Christians took what was meant as badge of shame and made it a badge of honor.

In the same way we as Christians can redeem the Sexism and specifically the word “sexist” for Christ.  When people say they can’t stand “sexists” that is our opportunity as Bible believing Christians to share with them the truth of God.  I have actually done this on many occasions.  I have told people in these conversations that I am a sexist but when I explain to them what kind of sexist I am and why believe what I believe from the Bible often times they have never heard the Scriptures I present.

In fact I was just at a dinner recently with family where I shared why I was a sexist and one woman was astonished at the Scriptures I presented.  I explained to her that in no way do I hate women or ever want to see women as a gender demeaned or dishonored.  I explained to her that we as men should honor our mothers and our wives as God commands.  But I said I also believe that God created men and women for very different purposes.  I told her that because I believe men and women should do different things based on their gender that makes me a sexist.

She asked “Why have I never heard these Scriptures in Church before?” And I told her because our churches have been infested with feminism and the vast majority of Pastors have simply bowed to our culture.

I told her that God calls us as Christians to live counter to the culture.  He calls us to not conform to the patterns and thinking of this world but to be transformed by his Word.  In this way I was actually able to use the term “sexist” as a way to teach the truth of God’s Word.

Conclusion

The fact that women are attracted to sexist men who are strong and can provide for them is not simply some hardwiring left over by evolution.   As Christians we know this is by the design of almighty God.

The Bible tells us in I Corinthians 11:9 that “Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man”.  Every part of a woman’s being was made for man and his benefit.  Woman was perfectly created for her task by God.  In doing this God created woman as “the weaker vessel” (I Peter 3:7) because God wanted her to need man’s strength as mankind needs God’s strength. God created woman to be beautiful and he created her to desire to be beautiful because God desires the beauty of his people (Psalm 45:11). He created her to be a companion and the bearer of his children.

God created every desire a woman has to help man fulfill his primary mission to image God.  God planted in the female human nature her desire for the strength, protection and provision of man.  He did this so that man could be the strong protector and provider to woman as God is the strong provider and protector to mankind. The man would desire to protect and provide for a woman and a woman would desire to be protected and provided for by a man.  It was a beautiful and glorious picture that God meant to be painted.  He setup the pieces perfectly.

But sin corrupted God’s plan for man and woman.  Sin warped and twisted a woman’s desire for the strength, protection and provision of man into a desire to make men their servants, rather than their masters as God intended it to be.  Instead of desiring to serve her husband and follow his leadership, her sin nature causes her to desire to control her husband (Genesis 3:16).

Application for Christian Men

  1.  Will you as a Christian man repent of any dishonorable behavior or bitterness that you have toward women as a gender or even particular women in your life?
  2. Will you as a Christian man accept that your desire to protect and provide for a woman is not wrong but is in fact right in God’s eyes?
  3.  Will you as a Christian man accept that your desire to lead a woman and your family is not wrong but is in fact right in God’s eyes?
  4.  Will you as a Christian man stop being ashamed of your masculine nature and accept that this is in fact the image of God in you?
  5.  Will you as a Christian man accept that worshiping women is just as much a sin in the eyes of God’s as being hostile toward women?

Application for Christian Woman

  1. Will you as a Christian woman accept all God’s design for you as a woman and not just the parts you like as in your attraction to strong men who are able to provide?
  2.  Will you as a Christian woman reject your sinful inclination to be worshiped by men?
  3.  Will you as a Christian woman reject your sinful inclination to be the center of your husband’s life?
  4.  Will you as a Christian woman accept that you were created for man and that he was not created for you?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Moses Harman And the Invention of Marital Rape

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ephesians 5:28-29 (KJV)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Biblical View of Sex Vs the Sexual Consent Ideology

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

Marriage is in Agreement to Sexual Activity

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

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

I Corinthians 7:3 (KJV)

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

Exodus 21:10 (KJV)

Before You Can Be Sexual With Someone You Must Marry Them

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

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

Hebrews 13:4 (KJV)

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

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

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

I Corinthians 7:5 (KJV)

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

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

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

Proverbs 5:18-19 (KJV)

Sex in Marriage is a Duty, NOT a Choice

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

Wives are to Sexually Submit to Their Husbands in Everything

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

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

Ephesians 5:24 (KJV)

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

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

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

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

Romans 7:2 (KJV)

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

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

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

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

1 Corinthians 6:19 (KJV)

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

I Corinthians 7:4 (KJV)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Galatians 5:13 (KJV)

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

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

Psalm 119:45 (KJV)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I Corinthians 7:20-24 (NASB)

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

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

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

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

The Giving and Taking of Women in Marriage

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

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

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

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

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

Jeremiah 29:6 (KJV)

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

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

Matthew 22:30 (KJV)

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

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

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

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

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

Deuteronomy 22:22 (KJV)

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

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

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

A Biblical Case Study in Sexual Consent

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

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

Exodus 22:16-17 (KJV)

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

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

God Condemns the Scheming Ways of Casanovas and Players

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

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

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

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

God Also Condemns Forbidden Love

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

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

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

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

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

Men Can Make Women’s Virginity Precious Again

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

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

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

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

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

That’s just the Old Testament!

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Genesis 29:20 (KJV)

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

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

Genesis 29:17 (KJV)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Feminism – The Return to the Sin of Eden

The first sin woman ever committed in the Garden of Eden was not accepting the limits God had placed upon her.  She wanted equality.  The first sin man committed was in knowingly abdicating his authority over his wife and following her in her sinful desire rather than rebuking her sin.

The scriptures show us that woman was deceived by her sinful desire for equality:

“1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.”

Genesis 3:1-6 (KJV)

Later in divine commentary given to him by God, the Apostle Paul gives us further detail on the Genesis account:

“And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.”

1 Timothy 2:14 (KJV)

So what Paul is telling us is that Eve was deceived by her desire for equality while Adam went into the sin fully knowing what he was doing.  His sin was not a desire for equality with God, but rather a failure to live out his role by leading his wife and rebuking her sinful request to him.  God tells us man’s first sin when he states:

And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;”

Genesis 3:17 (KJV)

Many years later the righteous man Job would do with his wife what Adam should have done with Eve when Job’s wife enticed him to sin against God as Eve enticed Adam to sin to against God:

“9 Then said his wife unto him, Dost thou still retain thine integrity? curse God, and die. 10 But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.”

Job 2:9-10 (KJV)

Job did not follow his wife’s sinful request – but instead he rebuked his wife as God would later rebuke his wife Israel (Hosea 2:2-23) and Christ would later rebuke his wife the Church (Revelation chapters 2 & 3).

God warns Adam just as he would later warn Cain

In Genesis 4 we read of God’s warning to Cain regarding his sin nature:

“If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Genesis 4:7 (KJV)

When God speaks of “his desire” he is speaking of Cain’s sinful nature.  His sin nature wanted to control his actions and make him sin against God.  But God told him instead of letting his sin nature rule over him, he must rule over his sin nature.

This exact same phrase is used by God regarding a woman and her relationship to her husband:

“16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

Genesis 3:16 (KJV)

In this case sin’s desire is replaced by the woman’s desire toward her husband.  What we find in Genesis chapters 3 and 4 is that man must fight against two powerful forces that desire to control him and would have him sin against God.  He must rule both over his own sinful nature as well as the sinful nature of his wife.

“But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”

1 Timothy 2:12 (KJV)

A woman’s sinful desire causes her not only to seek equality with man – but also to usurp authority over man thus reversing the created design of God in regard to the two genders.

After 6000 years woman and man return to their original sins

Men and women have sinned against God in many ways since that fateful day in the Garden of Eden around 6000 years ago. And women have rebelled against their authority in man for all that time in many different ways.

But while man sinned against God in many ways since that day in the Garden there was one command that for the most part man followed:

“thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” Genesis 3:16 (KJV)

Men for all of human history up until the mid-19th century followed God’s command for them to rule over women. Sometimes they did so in harsh and imperfect ways, but for the most part they did not fail to exercise this mandate. Men were fully cognizant of a woman’s sinful desire for equality with man as she sinfully desired equality with God in Eden. Men, for the most part, were cognizant of a woman’s sinful desire to control man and men kept women in their place even when they sought to rebel.

But around the mid-19th century an equality cult was born. It was this equality cult, or egalitarianism as it is now called, which gave rise to the birth of feminism.  The equality movement taught that if one person did not have the same rights and privileges as another then this was treating that person in an inhumane and unjust manner.  Feminism seized on this principle applying it specifically to women calling the inequality of women to men an injustice.  The Bible was even twisted and mangled to support this false notion of injustice.

Just as Eve reached for that forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden women were once against reaching for the forbidden fruit of equality. But men having stood their ground against this sinful inclination in women for 6000 years relented and they once again did what God condemn Adam for.  They abdicated their mandate to rule over women and “hearkened unto the voice” of women.

This movement cast aside the patriarchal family structure that had served mankind since creation itself. This feminist movement eventually infected the Church and attacked the very foundations of God’s design of the genders and of his divine institution of marriage.

The result of the equality cult and his spawn of feminism has been the downfall marriage and the family over the last century.  God’s institution of marriage is routinely mocked by couples engaging in casual sex. Divorce is rampant and couples living sin together is the norm. Children having two moms and dads is now the way of life.

But as Christian Churches and as Christian men and women we can return to God and his will and design for our genders if we so choose and he will heal our land if we do so.

If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”

2 Chronicles 7:14 (KJV)

Returning to Biblical Gender Roles

In order to return to living by Biblical gender roles we must return to “the book” as a young Israelite King did.

“10 And Shaphan the scribe shewed the king, saying, Hilkiah the priest hath delivered me a book. And Shaphan read it before the king. 11 And it came to pass, when the king had heard the words of the book of the law, that he rent his clothes. 12 And the king commanded Hilkiah the priest, and Ahikam the son of Shaphan, and Achbor the son of Michaiah, and Shaphan the scribe, and Asahiah a servant of the king’s, saying, 13 Go ye, enquire of the Lord for me, and for the people, and for all Judah, concerning the words of this book that is found: for great is the wrath of the Lord that is kindled against us, because our fathers have not hearkened unto the words of this book, to do according unto all that which is written concerning us.”

2 Kings 22:10-13 (KJV)

The “book” alluded to in the story above is the Word of God.  Like young Josiah said of his ancestors, our American “fathers have not hearkened unto the words of this book, to do according unto all that which is written concerning us.” Our Ancestors starting in the mid-19th century began to lose their way when they followed the false teachings of egalitarianism and feminism.

Now we must return to the teachings of “this book” if God is to heal our land, our churches, our families and our marriages. This is the primary mission of this site – BiblicalGenderRoles.com.

With that being said we will start with the divine commentary on the Genesis account as given by the Apostle Paul:

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

7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. 10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. 11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. ”

I Corinthians 11:3 & 7-11 (KJV)

This passage teaches four critical Biblical principles if we are to understand God’s design of man and woman in this world.

Biblical Gender Principle #1 – Man was made to image God

Man is “the image and glory of God” meaning he is God’s direct image bearer and he was made to bring glory to God by playing out the image of God.

So what does this mean? It means the masculine traits given to men before the fall and those masculine traits which are honored by God are things that men should freely and abundantly exercise to the best of their ability.  Man’s desire to lead, provide and protect.  His competitive nature, his desire to build, his desire for respect and his desire for beauty and pleasure all come from God. Man’s desire for all these things is not simply for himself, but ultimately it is so that he will fulfill the purpose of his design which was to be God’s direct image bearer.

Women today complain that men just don’t act like men anymore and you know what – they are right! But it is men, not women that must decide for themselves that they will act like men.

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

1 Corinthians 16:13 (NASB)

It is men who must decide to take back their mantle of responsibility. Will they work hard and provide for their families or will they be deadbeats? Will they love their wives and children by leading them, correcting them, teaching them, providing for them and protecting them as God does for his people or will they abuse their families and abdicate their responsibilities? Will men follow the mandate to rule over their wives or will they let their wives rule over them? Will they image God or not? These are the choices men must make for themselves.

Biblical Gender Principle #2 – Woman was made to help man image God

There are many Christians on both sides of the aisle that teach that men need women to help them be what God intended them to be.   But most of these Christians do so from the false premise that woman by nature is spiritually and morally stronger than man and they in essence teach that men need their wives to act as a mother figure to them to help them to fully image God as a husband and father.

Christian Feminists and Egalitarians on the left make no secret of their belief that men need women to keep them in line. They have no problem with women usurping authority over their husbands wherever a woman feels her husband is wrong.

But there are many Christian groups which on the surface seem to oppose women usurping authority over men but then they encourage feminine usurping through the back door.  Focus on the Family is a good example of this.  In one statement they will say they believe in male headship and that women should submit to their husbands.   But then they completely undermine Biblical patriarchy by teaching women they may usurp authority over their husbands by “placing boundaries” on their husbands.  Women placing boundaries on their husbands is just another way of saying women can correct and discipline their husbands as a mother would correct and discipline her son.

In a way the teachings of groups like Focus on the Family, that supposedly support Biblical male headship yet subtly undermine it, are more dangerous than that of Christian feminist groups because they are mixing their heresy with some truths from God’s Word.

So how should a woman help her husband?

From a Biblical perspective a woman helps a man image God not by being his mother and teacher but instead by giving her husband the respect she gave her own father and seeing her husband as her teacher. Only when a woman rids herself of all pride realizing that every part of her God given physical and mental design was meant to serve and bless her husband can she help him image God.

It is when a woman expresses her respect for her husband, her need for his leadership and guidance and when she fully submits her mind and body to his will making herself one with him in this way that she fully helps him to image God.

Woman was made in man’s image to bring him glory and by doing so she brings God glory. God made woman the “weaker vessel” (I Peter 3:7) so that she would need man as mankind needs God. Woman was made from man (I Corinthians 11:8) so that she would share in common with man a human nature.  In their common human traits men and women both reflect the nature of God but woman’s nature deviates from God’s nature in her distinctively feminine traits. Every attribute of a woman’s feminine nature was given to her not as a reflection of God’s image, but rather as a way to help man fully reflect God’s image by being an object upon which man can fully play out his role as the image bearer of God.

Biblical Gender Principle #3 – Only through marriage can man and woman fully live out their design

Men and Women are given a natural pull and complementary needs toward one another so that they will play out the roles given them by God.  This is why I Corinthians 11:11 tells us “Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.” – meaning that God made men and women interdependent on one another. Many liberal Christians and those who reject Biblical principles will not have a problem with this third principle.  They like that men and women need each other.  It sounds nice.  But what they don’t like is WHY the Bible teaches here that men and women need each other.

“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:

30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.

31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. 32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.” – Ephesians 5:22-33 (KJV)

It is “for this cause” (vs 31), the cause of fully playing out the roles that God has given to men and women that we enter into marriage.  Ephesians 5 shows us that God made man the image bearer and woman for man to play out his role as the image bearer in marriage. In God’s divine institution of marriage man plays the role of God and woman plays the role of mankind.

Men “need” women as objects upon which to play out their God given image traits. On the other hand – every need of the God given feminine nature (before the corruption of Eden) is given to a woman to help man play out his God given attributes.

In other words the reason God gave women a desire to be beautiful was not for themselves but it was because men desire beauty.  Women were not given sexual desire for themselves, or the ability to derive sexual pleasure for themselves.  They were given sexual desire and the ability to experience sexual pleasure to please their husbands for whom they were made. A woman was not given the desire to bear and nurture children for herself, but rather she was given these desires to please her husband and help him fully play out his God given image as both husband and father.

In summary regarding this third principle – there are some things God has given us to do that we cannot do without cooperation with someone else. It is only through God’s divine institution of marriage that men and women can fully play out the design for their genders.  Man cannot fully image God without becoming a husband and father and woman cannot fully live out her role as the being created specifically for man without finding a man to serve as his wife and mother to his children.

Biblical Gender Principle #4 – Celibacy is God’s exception to his design for two genders

In the rare case of celibacy, God allows in his sovereignty for some men and women not to fully play out the roles he designed for each gender.

God’s rule – “Be fruitful, and multiply” (Genesis 1:28) is that man plays out his image and that woman is the object upon which man plays out his image.  His exception to this rule is that he has given some the “gift” of celibacy (I Corinthians 7:7) so he does not put in them the independency upon the opposite sex referenced in I Corinthians 11:11. This gift is given for service to God.  But we must remember this is the exception to God’s design and not the norm of his design for man and woman.

Conclusion

Unfortunately our American ancestors have returned us to the original sins committed by Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Eve sought an equality that was not hers to have and Adam abdicated his responsibility to rule over his wife and followed her sinful request. But like young King Josiah – we too can return to God’s ways if we return to the teachings of “the book” – the Word of God.  It starts with us as men and women as individuals returning to God’s Word and then with husbands teaching their wives and fathers teaching their children.  When our families are rebuilt on the Word of God then we can take back our Churches for God and eventually our nation for God.

Update 6/10/2017:

I made a minor change in my text to reflect the earth is 6000 years old by Biblical chronology, not 7000 as I originally put.

See this excellent article on the subject of the age of the earth:

https://answersingenesis.org/age-of-the-earth/how-old-is-the-earth/

Young ladies – If you pursue a career you may fail the Christian race

The Bible often compares the Christian life to an Olympic race. In fact many of the Greek terms that Paul uses in talking about our Christian life as a race refer to the Greek Olympics (words like stadium, athlete and gym all are used by Paul).

Just like we separate our Olympic events by gender, God also has separate races for each gender to run and different rules depending on gender. The Bible also says we must compete (live our lives) according to God’s rules. If we compete but cheat or deviate from the rules we will not receive the rewards for running the race:

“Also if anyone competes as an athlete, he does not win the prize unless he competes according to the rules.” – II Timothy 2:5 (NASB)

A Tale of Two Runners

So now imagine this if you will. There are two races with different obstacles to overcome, but they use the same course. On that course you would see male and female signs on different obstacles.   This is a timed event it is run by one person at a time.

So a man runs the course and as he comes to each obstacle if it is marked “male” he overcomes the obstacle, if it is marked “female” he goes around it and continues with the race till he finally finishes the race where the judge awards him with his prize.

Now a woman comes to the same course. She has decided before she ran this race that she will run the male obstacles instead of the female obstacles. She has decided she does not like the female obstacles and prefers the male obstacles.

So she runs the race just as good as that man who ran just before her. Every time she comes to a male obstacle she overcomes it but then she skips the female obstacles as the man did.   In fact she matches his time as she runs toward the finish line. She crosses over feeling triumphant and she turns to the judge to receive her prize as the man before her did but he tells her she has failed the race.

“But I did everything the man who ran before me did and I even did it in the same time!” the woman says.

The judge replies “But you are not a man, you are a woman. You did not meet the challenges that were assigned to you as a woman, but instead chose to do the male obstacles that were not assigned to you. All your hard work was a waste because you did not overcome the obstacles that were assigned to you”

Over the last century feminism has taught women “you can have it all”. You can have a career, a husband and kids. You can balance your career and your obligations to your family in the same way men do. In fact you and your husband can just split the responsibilities of caring for the kids and your home.

But this is lie.

God never meant for women to have to balance a career and family obligations as men are meant to do. A woman’s complete focus was meant to be on serving the needs of her husband, her children and her home. She would only go outside her home to the extent that it did not affect her performing her duties to her home.

But because we live in a sin cursed world sometimes a woman has no choice but to work to support herself and her family and do what God did not intend for her to have to do and balance work and family obligations. If her husband becomes disabled, abandons her or dies a woman may have no choice but to work. Some women have husbands who in their sinful greed force their wives to work when they should not be.

Another reason a woman may have to pursue a career is because by no fault of her own she has not been able to find a husband and she eventually has to work to support herself.

The push to get women out of the home and into careers

Sadly today many women are actually encouraged and taught from a young age in their schools, homes and even churches that planning to be a stay at home mom is a “waste of their full potential”. My 13 year old daughter recently experienced this in the junior high she is attending.

They had a project to do for class which had them writing out their life goals and a big part of that was what they wanted to do for a career. It was simply assumed that everyone in that class, both the young men and young women should have career ambitions.

The young teens were all comparing what they wanted to be when they grew up and some of the girls said they wanted to be a doctor, or a nurse and one said a scientist. Then it came around to my daughter and she said “stay at home mom”. She told me after she said that you could have heard a pin drop. Then one of her girlfriends asked her “don’t you want more than that?” I was so proud of her response. She said “this is what I believe God wants me to do”.

She told me they were actually offended by that and by her choice to dedicate her life fully to her future husband, her future children and her future home.

But make no mistake – the distain for the Biblical role of a wife (which is what my daughter was espousing) did not happen overnight. It took decades to accomplish.

“In the 1950s, only 19 percent of mothers with small children worked outside the home, said Stephanie Coontz, a historian at The Evergreen State College in Washington and author of “A Strange Stirring: The Feminine Mystique and American Women at the Dawn of the 1960s” (Basic Books, 2011). As of 2008, more than 60 percent of moms with kids under age 6 were in the work force, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Working moms of older kids are even more common. As of 2008, close to 80 percent of mothers with children between ages 6 and 17 worked outside the home. That is a rise of about 10 percent since 1984.

Attitudes haven’t kept up with reality, however: According to the Pew Research Center, only 16 percent of Americans think a mom who works full time is ideal for young kids. A third favor moms staying at home full time, and 42 percent think part-time work would be ideal.”

http://www.livescience.com/29521-5-ways-motherhood-has-changed.html

The two sources of the cultural shift from stay at home moms to career women

What brought about this change from only 19% of moms with young children working outside the home to it now skyrocketing to 60%? The answer is two words – Feminism and Materialism.

Feminism encouraged women to be selfishly ambitious and some men became greedy and materialistic when they realized by allowing their wives to work they could double their household income. Some women today would much rather stay home and care for their home and children but their greedy husbands force them to work outside the home.

Speaking of husbands – while this post is primarily written toward women – let me just say Biblically speaking a man has no business getting married if he is not ready to provide for his wife. I realize a lot of men today do that, but this breaks the model of marriage God has designed.

“Prepare your work outside and make it ready for yourself in the field; Afterwards, then, build your house.” – Proverbs 24:27 (NASB)

This verse from Proverbs has been widely interpreted to be referring to a young man working and preparing to have a family. Preparation and provision come before having your own household.

Now we will return to women and selfish ambition.

The selfish ambition fueled by feminist propaganda also caused divorce to become common place where it peeked at around 50% in the 1980’s before having a slight decline.   But the dirty little secret about why divorce has leveled off is because marriage itself is down. Single parenting and cohabitation rates have sharply risen since the 1980s.

There is nothing wrong with a man or woman being ambitious. But we are selfishly ambitious when we are ambitious for things God never meant us to have. The Proverbs 31 wife is a very ambitious wife, but her entire life’s focus was her husband, her children and her home. Even when she temporarily went outside the home her focus was always turned back toward her home so her husband had no worries in his home. She had everything under control.

Rush Limbaugh is certainly not a very religious man and I don’t endorse everything he says when compared with the Scriptures. But back in 2012 when he was commenting on our cultural shifts and the negative views toward stay home moms he had this to say:

“Instead of having the government, stay-at-home moms have a husband to support them — and you don’t think that irritates some of these leftist women? Remember the early days of feminism…

A relationship, a man were shackles.

That was holding you back. It was denying you your full potential. Being a mother, staying at home? You’re letting the sisterhood down, but you’re letting yourself down, too. It was a full-court press to throw away as many traditions in male-female relationships, both at home and at work, as possible…

See, the women are not supposed to depend on that. It was okay if the government ended up providing for you — that was cool — but not a husband, not a man. You’re supposed to do that yourself. And if you couldn’t do it yourself, then you turn to government programs.”

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/04/16/why_stay_at_home_moms_threaten_the_left

Many Christian women today have drank the feminist Kool-Aid. Even some good conservative Bible preaching churches have drank the feminist Kool-Aid. I can’t tell you how many Christians I have spoken to that have said our young women must have college degrees and careers and you know what the most common reason was? In case they ever have to support themselves.

We have taught now over decades and are continuing to teach women to be independent of men – to not need a man. My own mother-in-law told me this several years back that she taught her daughters to “never be dependent on a man”. This feminism was ingrained in her daughters and the Lord has had to bring a lot of things into my wife’s life and her sister’s life to get some of this thinking out (sometimes it comes back and rears its ugly head though).

God shows in his Word that the husband/wife relationship is to be a model of the relationship of Christ to his Church. In the same way that the Church looks to Christ for their provision and protection a woman was designed to look to her husband for her provision and protection.

Instead our wicked culture has replaced the husband as the provider with the government as the provider. Truly the only way feminism thrives is in a socialistic system that makes women less dependent on men by having the government provide for their needs or pushing them to provide for their own.

Feminism can only survive in an artificial environment.

Nature opposes feminism. In the absence of a social welfare state feminism would rapidly collapse as women came to see their natural dependence on men for their provision and protection.

How women fail the race God has set before them

The Bible says:

“Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us” – Hebrews 12:1 (KJV)

Young Christian ladies please hear what the Word of God says about the race God has set before you. There are two courses God sets before you and ONLY two courses and you must choose one or the other. The course of marriage or the course of celibacy. If you run the course of celibacy then rules for the female marriage course do not apply.

These are the obstacles or goals you are to meet to win this race.

The 7 Rules of God’s race for married women

Rule #1 Submit to and obey your husband. (Ephesians 5:22 & 24, Colossians 3:18, Titus 2:5, I Peter 3:1 & 5-6)

Rule #2 Reverence your husband. (Ephesians 5:33 & I Peter 3:5-6)

Rule #3 Love your husband. (Titus 2:4)

Rule #4 Ravish your husband with your body. (Proverbs 5:19, I Corinthians 7:3-5)

Rule #5 Always speak to your husband with a kind, gentle and quiet spirit. (Proverbs 31:26, I Peter 3:4)

Rule #6 Bear and care for your children if God opens your womb to do so. (Genesis 1:28, I Timothy 5:14)

Rule #7 Manage all the domestic affairs of your home (cooking, cleaning, laundry, shopping) so your husband has no worries about his home while he is away working. (Titus 2:5, Proverbs 31:10-31)

There is a different race that God has set before you as a woman, then the one he has set before men. You must run the race according to the rules God has set for YOU, not those that he has set for men.

Someone might say “What about loving God and obeying God?” My answer to that is the very foundation for these 7 rules is love for God and obedience to God.

“By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.” – I John 5:2-3 (KJV)

You can’t enter the race unless you register as a runner

This is the Christian woman’s race. You can’t run in the Christian woman’s race unless you first become a Christian. Then your race performance will be judged by how you followed the course rules.

“For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

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.

If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.” – I Corinthians 3:11-15 (KJV)

At the Bema seat of Christ every Christian will stand and his or her life’s work will be judged.

“For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.” – II Corinthians 5:10 (KJV)

The Bema seat (which is what this in the Greek) was a place of reward after a competition. Our salvation is not a reward for how we run the Christian race, but it is the gift of God.

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God” – Ephesians 2:8 (KJV)

However our rewards from God are indeed earned by how we ran the race while we lived her in these bodies. Did we accept the rules of his race or did we make up our own rules as we ran?

But I can follow all those 7 rules and have a career!

Christian women listen to me. You cannot run the race God has set before you as a woman and have the same kind of career a man can. You might be able to work part time and you may be able to work while your kids are in school.

But if you try to have a career in the same way that your husband does you will drop something else.

You cannot be in be in two places at once.

Either you will be gone from home 50 hours a week or more chasing a career or you will be home.

When you have those young infants and small children – either you will be caring for them or someone else will be while you are gone 50 hours a week.

If you are working and gone 50 hours a week pursuing your career you will not have the same energy to give or focus that is needed toward you husband, your children and your home. Something will slip and what will slip is what is supposed to be the primary focus of your life.

Don’t believe the lie

Don’t be like Eve who was deceived by the serpents lie.

“Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” – Genesis 3:1 (KJV)

The Devil told Eve she should could have it all and she fell for the lie.

Don’t believe the lies of feminism. Believe what God says in his Word.

Run the race that he set before you as a woman, not the race that he set before your husband as a man.

But you can’t survive on one income these days!

While it is true that some women have to work because of economic necessity (no husband or husband is disabled) often times it is because of wants that they work, not needs.

Just look back at the average homes that were built in the 1950’s and earlier and look at the homes that are built now. The home back then were smaller and simpler – kids used bunk beds and crammed into rooms. Now every child has to have their own room.

Families often survived on one car. Now every family must have two cars, and not just two cars but two NEW cars.

We have to go on expensive vacations each year and we have to eat the best foods.

We have forgotten as a society how to live simpler. Feminism and Materialism have grown up together in our country.

But you can choose to live simpler, you can choose to live God’s way. You can choose to sacrifice the vacations or drive two used cars instead of new ones. You can choose to do what is right and run the race that God has set before you.

Ladies – don’t let having a career cost you your reward

Let me be blunt ladies. When God judges what you did with your life – yes your career will matter. But not in the way you think. Your career will matter in how much it detracted from your ability to serve your husband, your children and your home.

When God reviews the tapes on your life and sees that you purposefully planned from the time you were young to have children and ship them off to a day care center six weeks after they were born so you could return to your more “fulfilling” career you will be held to account for this. You will lose the reward for being a wife and mother that you could have had. You will be ashamed.

“Watch yourselves, that you do not lose what we have accomplished, but that you may receive a full reward.” II John 1:8 (NASB)

Do we need to cut the Pauline Epistles from the Bible?

It is no secret that Christian feminists are no fan of the Apostle Paul. But often they try and make more subtle attacks on his authority to write God’s Word. Some like Skip Moen won’t outright deny Paul’s authority in general, but they will simply try to explain away anything he writes that condemns their false doctrine of Christian feminism.

But every once in a while a Christian feminist will come right out and make a full frontal assault on the Apostle Paul. It is refreshing to hear such honesty. A Christian feminist defender named Rosie posted this on my BiblicalGenderRoles Facebook page:

“Paul had NO authority to give commands, and he said it himself. He was a self appointed apostle NOT a prophet”

This statement alone shows the utter lengths those who wish to rebel against God’s Word will go to feed their selfish ambitions. Wow what a bold statement to make.

Paul was not a “self appointed apostle” – Jesus Christ himself appointed him on the road to Damascus:

“14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.

16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;” – Acts 26:14-16 (KJV)

In Paul’s first letter to the church at Thessalonica he 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.” – I Thessalonians 2:13 (KJV)

Paul was clear that what he wrote was the very Word of God, and only in a few instances did he give his opinion apart from the Word of God(for instance he thought celibacy was good, but he knew it was not meant most people). But in NO way did he ever say he did not have authority from God – he made it clear everywhere he went that he was an Apostle of God with the authority to speak and write the very Word of God.

In fact Peter affirms the authority of the Pauline Epistles when he writes:

“And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved BROTHER PAUL also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also THE OTHER SCRIPTURES, unto their own destruction.” – II Peter 3:15-16 (KJV)

Notice he compares Paul’s epistles to “the other Scriptures” placing them on equal footing with all Scripture.

So in order for Rose and many other Christian feminists to have their heretical view of Christianity, to basically make up their own Bible – they have to tear out Paul’s 13 Epistles of the New Testament as well as Peters two epistles because he affirmed Paul’s writings as the Word of God. They have to tear out 15 of 27 books, more than half the New Testament in order to follow the selfish ambition and heresy of Christian feminism.

This is why I have said it time and time again. Can you be a Christian and believe in Christian feminism? Sure. If you believe that Jesus Christ was the perfect sinless Son of God, God in the flesh who died for the sins of mankind and specifically for your sin then you can be saved regardless of what other false doctrines you believe.

However you cannot be a Bible believing Christian, a believer in the inerrancy and perfection of Scripture, and be a Christian feminist. The two positions are mutually exclusive.

So as we can see based on her own statement Rose and other Christian feminists have made their choice to reject the Bible consisting of all 66 books as the Word of God. Instead they want their shortened version, the one where they get to take scissors and cut out whatever parts they want.

In their version of Christianity – this beautiful passage of Scripture is not in fact the Word of God, because it was written by a “self appointed Apostle” and a man that had “no authority to give commands”.

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:” – Ephesians 2:8 (KJV)

So which version of Christianity do you believe in? The modern Christian feminist version which is based on a shortened version of the Bible or the historic Christian faith which is based on ALL 66 books of the Bible?

The Heresy of Skip Moen and his book Guardian Angel

Skip Moen is pretty close to what I would call a “Christian feminist cult leader”. He certainly is not the only major teacher of Christian Feminism, but he definitely has his unique brand of it. Skip Moen might be a loving husband and loving father to his children. I don’t know him personally but I don’t have to know him personally to show that his teachings are not just minor differences of interpretation but they are the very definition of heresy.

So what is this heresy that Skip Moen teaches?

I am not the first Christian to take on Skip Moen’s heresy and I hope I won’t be the last. But one of the best critical reviews of Skip Moen’s work is by Daniel Botkin and he gives a great synopsis of Skip Moen’s false teachings when he writes:

“According to Moen, the wife’s God-ordained role in the marriage, both before and after the Fall, is to be the following things to her husband: his priest and spiritual guide, his spiritual director, his boundary-setter, his confronter and corrector, his chastiser, his protector and guardian, his rescuer, his owner and manager, his shield, his sustainer, his nourisher”

http://restoredcov.org/resources/articles/guardianangel/

Skip Moen in his response to Daniel Botkin’s critical review confirms that Botkin correctly captured the essence of his teaching so we can be assured this is an accurate representation of Skip Moen’s beliefs:

“According to Botkin, “All of Moen’s descriptions of the woman’s role as the husband’s priest and spiritual guide, provider, protector, etc., etc. are derived from his misunderstanding of the ‘ezer kenegdo.” What does Botkin offer in place of my analysis?”

http://skipmoen.com/2014/02/01/a-response-to-daniel-botkins-criticism-of-guardian-angel/

So the heresy of Skip Moen is that he teaches a complete role reversal for men and women than what the Scriptures teach. His entire doctrinal position rests on one passage of Scripture:

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

The English phrase “help meet” is a translation of two Hebrew Words “ezer kenegdo”.   I previously wrote an entire post on this entitled “What did God mean when he called woman a help meet for man?” where I dive into the meaning “ezer kenegdo” and I showed that this Hebrew phrase literally means “a helper who is man’s opposite”.  Check out my post for more on “ezer kenegdo” as well as Daniel Botkin’s excellent rebuttal on the meaning of this Hebrew phrase at http://restoredcov.org/resources/articles/guardianangel/

How Skip Moen wrongly interprets Scripture

The Bible tells us that we need to rightly divide, or discern the Word of God, otherwise we may run the danger of teaching heresy.

“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” – II Timothy 2:15 (KJV)

I love word studies in the Bible. I love studying the Hebrew and Greek languages which are the languages the Bible was originally written in. I love studying the cultural backgrounds of the Scriptures. I love the Old Testament and I think it is just as important as the New.  But there is a point where we can take a word by itself and get caught up in what we think it means to the point where we ignore the context of how it used in Scripture.

So here is Skip Moen’s error. He takes what he believes “help meet” or “ezer kenegdo” means and then instead of letting the Scriptures themselves define what God meant by “help meet” he defines it himself.   He then takes his warped definition and attempts to twist the entirety of Scripture to fit what he thinks it means.

God defines what “help meet” means for us in the Scriptures

Skip Moen makes the mistake of not realizing that God interprets his own Word. You don’t need a Hebrew lexicon or a degree in Bible doctrine to see that God clearly defines what he meant by calling woman a “help meet” for man.

A help meet is one that realizes she was made to serve her husband, rather than him being made to serve her

“Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.” – I Corinthians 11:9 (KJV)

This first principle is where all the preceding commands regarding help meets come from. If a woman rejects this principle, then it is more than likely she will reject many other Biblical commands regarding God’s will and design of woman as a help meet to man.

A help meet is one who regards her husband as her lord and master

“Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands… 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: 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 & 5-6 (KJV)

Because women were made for men as their help meets, they are to regard their husbands as their lords and masters. Sarah, a godly wife, modeled this by calling her husband her lord.

A help meet is one who submits to her husband as the Church submits to Christ

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

A woman who wants to be the help meet God intended her to be recognizes that God wants her to model her relationship after the relationship of Christ and his Church(with her representing the Church, and her husband representing Christ).

A help meet is one who freely submits not only her will, but also her body to her husband for his pleasure

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

“Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.” – Proverbs 5:19 (KJV)

A woman when reflecting on the first principle that God made her for her husband – will freely give her body to her husband for his pleasure and comfort.

A help meet keeps herself beautiful for her husband in the same way the Church adorns herself for Christ

“And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.” – Revelation 21:2 (KJV)

A woman’s beauty is symbolic of the beauty of the Church. In the same way that the Church adorns herself for her husband, so too Christian wives ought to adorn themselves for their husbands.

A help meet keeps her husband’s home and bears his children

“That they may teach the young women… To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.” – Titus 2:4-5 (KJV)

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

“She looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread of idleness.” – Proverbs 31:27 (KJV)

Two of her primary duties as a help meet to man is for a woman to bear children and manage the domestic affairs of the home.

A help meet will not bring shame to her husband

“A virtuous woman is a crown to her husband: but she that maketh ashamed is as rottenness in his bones.” – Proverbs 12:4 (KJV).

When a woman speaks disrespectfully to her husband or acts in ways that make her husband ashamed it is as rottenness in his bones. Instead a woman that praises her husband and respects her husband is his crown.

A help meet will not constantly contend or be angry with her husband

“It is better to dwell in the wilderness, than with a contentious and an angry woman.” – Proverbs 21:19

When a woman is contentious and is constantly arguing with her husband and bucking his every decision or holding grudges against him and being angry with him this is the opposite of God’s intent for her as his help meet. A woman who is surrendered to the Spirit of God and his design for her as a help meet will not be a nag to her husband.

A help meet is one who has a meek and quiet spirit toward her husband

“Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands… Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; 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.” – I Peter 1 & 3-4 (KJV)

While a help meet should keep herself beautiful for her husband, her greatest beauty is that of her inner self, her meek and quiet spirit toward her husband.

A help meet is one who is affectionate toward her husband

“That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands…” – Titus 2:4(KJV)

A woman in her role as a help meet to her husband will not only submit to and obey him, but she will also be affectionate towards him.

A help meet is one who has her husband’s trust

“Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies. The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil. She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life.” – Proverbs 31:10-12 (KJV)

A godly wife, a wife who is fulfilling her duty as a help meet to her husband will always have his back. He can trust that she will never betray him. A wife in her duty as a help meet should be her husband’s greatest cheerleader.

A help meet is one who offers her husband godly counsel

“Every wise woman buildeth her house: but the foolish plucketh it down with her hands.” – Proverbs 14:1 (KJV)

She openeth her mouth with wisdom; and in her tongue is the law of kindness.” – Proverbs 31:26 (KJV)

“As a jewel of gold in a swine’s snout, so is a fair woman which is without discretion.” – Proverbs 11:22 (KJV)

A wife who is exercising her role as the help meet God intended her to be will speak wise and godly counsel to her husband, but she we also practice discretion in knowing when to speak and when to hold her tongue.

A help meet is one who listens to her husband’s Godly counsel

“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.” – I Corinthians 14:35 (KJV)

While women should learn from their Pastors and other godly women as well, the first person they should look to for spiritual guidance is their husband if he is a believer. A woman who is constantly going behind her husband’s back seeking counsel that will contradict her husband’s spiritual teaching is going against God’s design for her as a help meet to her husband.

A help meet is one who submits to and receives her husband’s chastisement and correction

“But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.” – Job 2:10 (KJV)

And Jacob’s anger was kindled against Rachel: and he said, Am I in God’s stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb?” – Genesis 30:2 (KJV)

“21 And David said unto Michal, It was before the Lord, which chose me before thy father, and before all his house, to appoint me ruler over the people of the Lord, over Israel: therefore will I play before the Lord. 22 And I will yet be more vile than thus, and will be base in mine own sight: and of the maidservants which thou hast spoken of, of them shall I be had in honour. 23 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death.” – II Samuel 6:21-23 (KJV)

A women in her role as help meet will humbly accept the rebuke or correction of her husband when he sees sinful behavior in her life.

A help meet is one who looks to her husband for nourishment and protection

“So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:” – Ephesians 5:28-29 (KJV)

While the modern meaning of the English word “cherish” has romantic connotations, the Greek that this word is translated from has the idea of protection. A wife in her role as help meet will depend on her husband and will look to him for nourishment and protection as the Church depends on Christ for its nourishment and protection.

Conclusion

As we can see from God’s Word – Skip Moen’s teaching that “the wife’s God-ordained role in the marriage, both before and after the Fall, is to be the following things to her husband: his priest and spiritual guide, his spiritual director, his boundary-setter, his confronter and corrector, his chastiser, his protector and guardian, his rescuer, his owner and manager, his shield, his sustainer, his nourisher” is heresy plain and simple.

In fact it would be correct to say that it is the complete OPPOSITE of what God’s Word teaches about the roles of men and women as God designed them to be.

If you read all the Scripture passages I have cited above – this what the truth of God’s Word actually is:

The husband’s God-ordained role in the marriage, both before and after the Fall, is to be the following things to his wife: HER spiritual guide, HER spiritual director, HER boundary-setter, HER confronter and corrector, HER chastiser, HER protector and guardian, HER rescuer, HER owner and manager, HER shield, HER sustainer, HER nourisher

Pray that God will raise up strong men to combat this wickedness that is creeping into our homes. God speaks of men like Skip Moen who are “Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.”

“For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. “ – II Timothy 3:6-7 (KJV)

How many “silly women” have been led astray by Skip Moen’s teachings? The answer is far too many. God gives us our battle plan against such false teachers when he tells us to:

“Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. 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; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” – II Timothy 4:2-4 (KJV)

“Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.” – I Corinthians 16:13 (NASB)

Pray that God will raise up a new generation of Godly preachers and husbands who will take back our homes and Churches for God and rid this poisonous Christian feminist teaching from our midst.