Wives Forget Your Father’s House

While the Bible tells men to “leave” their father and mother when they enter marriage it uses a different word for women when they enter marriage.  In Psalm 45:10-11 we read “Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear; forget also thine own people, and thy father’s house; so shall the king greatly desire thy beauty: for he is thy Lord; and worship thou him”.

Psalm 45:10-11 is widely recognized as a prophecy concerning Christ and his church.  But it is also very practical and applicable to marriage between men and women.  Ephesians 5:23 tells us “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.

I can’t tell you how many times I have had haters of the Bible’s teachings on gender roles say “You think men are gods and that is wrong!”.   Each time I hear a variation of that statement I chuckle a bit to myself and remember 1 Corinthians 2:14 which states “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned”.

The Bible does not teach that men are gods.  There is only one God.  Men are not God, but God did create men to represent him in this world.  This is the clear teaching of the Bible found in passages like Ephesians 5:22-33 and 1 Corinthians 11:1-16. So, when we understand this concept as Christians, we understand that women are not to worship their husbands or regard their husbands as their savior.  We have one God and one savior whose name is Jesus Christ.

But after we set aside the last part from Psalm 45:10-11 concerning worship, what comes before that is very applicable to women in marriage.

The call to the young woman to regard her new husband as her lord is mirrored in 1 Peter 3:5-6 where the Bible states “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”.

Now we can zero on what is different in the call to women when they enter marriage.  While men, in multiple Bible passages like Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:5, Mark 10:7 and Ephesians 5:31, are commanded to “leave” their father and mother when they enter marriage women are told in Psalm 45:10-11 to “forget” their people and their father’s house.

A woman’s forgetting of her father’s house is a critical part of the process of her becoming one with her husband.  Her father may have taught her differently and conducted his home differently than the way her husband will conduct his home.  And if she clings to the way her father conducted his home and constantly compares that to her how her husband leads his home there will be problems in the marriage.

How many women today refuse to follow this Scriptural admonition to forget their father’s house? How many women today even refuse to give up their father’s last name or hyphenate their last name? How many women respect their fathers more than their husbands?  A woman who refuses to forget her father’s house, to clear the slate and let her husband redefine for her how their home will be conducted will never have the kind of unity in marriage that God calls for.

A final note to fathers.  As Christian fathers, we should want our daughters to marry godly men and it is our God given right according to Exodus 22:17, to “utterly refuse to give” our daughters in marriage to men whom we do not approve of.   But our culture no longer respects the rights of fathers and has given young women freedom to ignore the spiritual authority of their fathers in this regard.   This is why it is so important for us as Christian fathers in this post-feminist culture to cultivate close spiritual relationships with our daughters to the point that they would never want to disappoint us.

My daughter is within 2 years of the time we have agreed she will begin courting, not long after she graduates high school.  I am excited to see what God will do in her life.  She is not perfect and has her flaws like we all do, but I am happy that God has blessed her with a meek and submissive spirit when it comes to the men in her life whether it be me or her grandfathers.  But when it comes to other women, she is a warrior for God and stands on the front lines fighting against abortion and feminism.

I would never bless her marriage to a man who was not a Christian, a Biblicist and a firm believer in Biblical gender roles. However, I realize the man she marries may have many differences with me outside of these areas.  And I have told her as much throughout the years.  I have told her when she marries, she needs to forget my interpretations and applications of the Bible and how I conducted our house and instead fully embrace her husband’s leading in these areas.

Is the Red Pill Concept of Game Biblical?

In this concluding post to our series, “Is Red Pill Biblical”, we will discuss the Red Pill concept of Game and summarize what we have learned about Red Pill in comparing it to the Bible.

In the context of an LTR or Marriage what does Red Pill Game look like? For this I will refer to one of  Rollo Tomassi’s articles entitled “Dread Games” where he gives the following practical examples of game:

“Dread, for lack of a better term, is a female condition.

Although I’ve suggested casually returning flirtations with other women as a means to amplifying desire and illustrating social proof, this is hardly the only, or best, means of fostering competition anxiety. Overt flirtations are a blunt means of stoking this anxiety, but often all it takes is a nuanced shift in a predictable routine to trigger that imagination. The idea isn’t to instill terror from fear of loss, but rather to demonstrate higher value; particularly when a woman’s attention is straying into comfortable, routine familiarity and she begins seeking indignation from other sources.

Sometimes all that’s necessary to provoke that imagination is to get to the gym, dress better, get a raise, travel for work, change your routine, adopt a Game mentality, hang out with a new (or old) friend, be cocky & funny with her – risk to offend her sensibilities. Most women believe that their pussies are sufficient to hold their men in thrall for a lifetime, but as a woman’s SMV declines and a Man’s appreciates their confidence in this form of leverage falls off, thus forcing them to adopt new schemas for controlling the fear of loss. When you head off to Las Vegas for that trade show and your wife fucks the ever-lovin’ shit out of you the night before you go, you’re experiencing one of those new schemas. It doesn’t take much, most times the lightest touch will do. Good dread game doesn’t even have to be initiated by you. Often enough, women will do it themselves.”

A man demonstrating his higher value, specifically his higher sexual market value (SMV) is central to the Red Pill concept of game.  In the initial attraction phase, it is all about a man showing he has higher SMV than the other guys around him thus attracting the woman to himself.  But then in an LTR or marriage situation, game switches into “dread” mode in order to stoke anxiety in the woman regarding the possible loss of her man.

This is one of those areas where I just have to flat out say that Red Pill contradicts itself.   Tomassi says regarding game that “The idea isn’t to instill terror from fear of loss, but rather to demonstrate higher value”.     But what is a man flirting with other women, changing his routine, hanging out more with friends and thus less with his wife in order to foster “competition anxiety” doing?  The answer is it is in fact instilling terror in her in the form of anxiety over possibly losing her man.

And just for those unfamiliar with this concept, SMV, or sexual market value, is the Red Pill concept that when women are in their late teens to mid-20’s (18-25) they really hold all the cards when it comes to relationships with men in the same age group.  However, as men progress past the mid-20s their SMV goes up and for women their SMV goes down.  This is why you will more often see older men with younger women and it is much rarer to see older women with younger men.

Red Pill Game Was Born Out of a Reaction to Blue Pill Game

Red Pill game was a reaction to Blue Pill game or what it sometimes refers to as “Beta Game”.  In his article “Our Sister’s Keeper”, Tomassi  explains what Beta Game is:

“Just to illustrate, for about 25 years or so, popular culture strongly pointed men towards a sexual strategy that could be defined as Beta Game. Play nice, respect a woman by default, be supportive of her self-image and ambitions to the sacrifice of your own, don’t judge her and do your utmost to identify with the feminine, was the call to action that, deductively, should make a man more attractive to a woman.”

So basically, for several decades’ men have been taught if they are more sensitive (more feminine), put a woman’s ambitions ahead of their own, never correct her or judge her and basically live to make her happy this will evoke the emotional response of her desiring to have sex with them.  Red Pill is correct that this entire paradigm is absolutely flawed.  In most cases this kind of behavior will cause a woman to see a man as more of a friend, than a potential lover.

The vast majority of men today employ Beta Game which leaves women with little choice but to marry one of these men because of their need for emotional security and a man to provide for them and their future children.  They then manipulate the Beta Game for their own purpose to control the relationship with their men, using sex as a reward mechanism to reinforce their control.

So along comes Red Pill game as an alternative to Blue Pill game.  It shows the flaws in Blue Pill game by demonstrating women are not attracted to men that act in more feminine ways, but rather they are attracted to men with the Alpha mindset and Alpha physical qualities.

Why Red Pill Game Is an Unbiblical Concept

Is it wrong for a man to “get to the gym, dress better, get a raise, travel for work…hang out with a new (or old) friend, be cocky & funny”? No.  These things can all be good and healthy for a man to do.  But then we must ask is it wrong for a married man to flirt with women other than his wife?

Unless he is in the courtship process pursing a second wife following the practice of Biblical polygamy then yes, it is absolutely wrong.   Flirtation outside the context and protection of courtship makes “provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof” which Romans 13:14 warns against.

I have read in Red Pill forums and comment areas of men who purposefully push their wife’s emotional buttons to start a fight with her so they can have great make up sex afterwards.  Whether it be flirting with other women in front of their wife or purposefully starting a fight these methods are what the Bible would classify as “craftiness”.  And the Bible says Christians are to have no part in such things:

“But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.”

2 Corinthians 4:2 (KJV)

But the biggest problem with Red Pill game from a Biblical perspective is that it is simply the flip side of a corrupt coin. And that coin is game itself. 

What is game? It is simply the attempt of a man to evoke a desired emotional response from a woman, and that response is for her to want to have sex with him.

The focus of a Christian’s man’s life should not be on evoking emotional responses from women in his life so he can get more sex.  But rather his life focus is to be on his mission, his call to image God with his life as 1 Corinthians 11:7 states “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”.

A man images God in his life’s work outside the home in addition to being the kind of husband and father that God is within his home.  Taking a wife is certainly a big part of a man’s mission. A man’s love for his wife should be pictured in the same way God shows his love his people through his leadership, provision and protection.

And in taking a wife, a man’s primary goal with his wife should not be to evoke the desired emotional responses from her, but rather to sanctify her as the Scriptures below state:

“25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.”

Ephesians 5:25-27 (KJV)

In the passage above husbands are called to love their wives “as Christ also loved the church” and in Revelation 3:10 Christ tells us how he loves his churches when he states “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent”.

God has chosen husbands as human instruments of sanctification in the lives of their wives.  A man is called to sanctify his wife by rebuking his wife and chastening his wife as Christ does his churches.

This entire concept of a man sanctifying his wife by rebuking and chastening her is utterly rejected in the secular philosophy of Red Pill as well as the Beta teachings in both our secular world and sadly in most churches today.

So How Should Christian Husbands Deal with Sexual Denial from Their Wives?

So, if game is off the table for Christian husbands, how do Christian husbands deal with things like sexual denial from their wives?  The answer is that a Christian man should throw out the corrupt coin of game (both blue pill and red pill) and replace that with the coin of sanctification.

When you as a Christian husband realize that your sexual problems with your wife are part of a much larger issue of her sanctification things become much clearer.

The sanctification of your wife requires you to wash her in the Word just as Christ washes his Church.  That washing requires you to clearly instruct her in what God expects from her as a wife.  That instruction then goes further into your specific expectations of your wife as her husband.  Don’t worry about the fact that your expectations of your wife will be different than other men.  That is ok.  As long as you are applying the principles of God’s Word then it is right.

Most women today do not submit to their husband in any area of their marriage or family.   Some women will submit to their husband in specific areas like where they go to church, finances and rules and discipline for the children and often these women will pat themselves on the back for this kind of submission.  But it is the rare woman today who is completely submitted to her husband in the sexual arena.  The overwhelming majority of Christian women, even those who think they are submissive wives, still retain ownership and control over their bodies and their sex lives with their husbands.

And this is why you as a Christian husband cannot leave the area of sexual submission alone and simply be satisfied with these other areas of submission if they are already present.  The sanctification of a wife must start in the sexual arena because this will form the foundation for submission in all other areas of the marriage.  In most cases, a woman who submits to her “in every thing” (Ephesians 5:24) regarding her body will more easily submit to her husband “in everything” in other areas of her marriage as well.

Conclusion

Rollo Tomassi, in his article “Christian Dread” stated “I know a common refrain of more traditionalist Christians is that Christianity was already Red Pill before there was a Red Pill…” which led to the question that we asked at the beginning of this series.

Do the doctrines of the Bible, upon which Christianity was founded, agree with any part of Red Pill theory?

And the answer we have proven in this 7-part series on Red Pill is yes!

There are indeed some Red Pill teachings regarding the nature of men and women that are also found in Bible. But there are also some Red Pill teachings that conflict with the teachings of the Bible.  And even when Red Pill correctly identifies HOW the masculine and feminine human natures are different, it can never truly answer the reason of WHY they are different.  Only the Bible can do that.

Red Pill is right that Male authority over woman is indeed the birthright of every man (Genesis 3:16, Ephesians 5:23-24, 1 Corinthians 11:1-16).

Red Pill is right that sex is a greater need for men than for women. The Bible compares a man’s need for sex to that of his need for water (Proverbs 5:15). But Red Pill is wrong in seeing man’s life imperative as simply to sow his seed with as many women as possible.  A man’s strong sexual nature is only a part of his larger God given nature.  His imperative is so much more than to have sex, it is to image God with his life (1 Corinthians 11:7).

Red Pill is right that men naturally have a polygynous nature and the Bible reveals this nature is blessed and allowed by God (Genesis 30:18, Exodus 21:10-11, Deuteronomy 21:15-17, Deuteronomy 25:5-7, II Samuel 12:8).   But God meant for man’s polygynous nature only to be exercised within the covenant and protection of marriage and not in the way that Red Pill Pick Up Artists exercise it as whoremongers.

Red Pill is right that women do indeed have a hypergamous nature always seeking the next best man to be with.  But Red Pill is wrong in seeing this as an amoral trait in women and simply a product of evolution for women to get the strongest and best seed from men.  God directly condemns feminine hypergamy in the 7th commandment when he said in Exodus 20:14 “Thou shalt not commit adultery”. Feminine hypergamy was seen as so dangerous to society that God prescribed the death penalty for it in Deuteronomy 22:22.

Red Pill is right that a woman should never be a man’s mental point of origin.  But Red Pill is wrong in saying that a man should make himself and his desires the focal point of his life. The Bible tells men that Christ and the life mission God has given them to image him should be the focal point of their life and not a woman (Genesis 3:17, Ecclesiastes 7:26, 1 Corinthians 11:7, 2 Corinthians 10:5).

Red Pill is right that men need to establish frame, or their worldview, in a relationship with a woman from the very beginning.  And they need to hold that frame.  In any courtship it is crucial that a man establish his frame with a potential wife and if he cannot establish that frame with her during their courtship, he most certainly should not marry her.

However Red Pill’s objection to overt methods of men holding frame opting only for covert and subtle influence does not match the Biblical call of men to rebuke and discipline their wives as Christ does his Church (Revelation 3:19).  A man should set the frame not through subtle or crafty means, but rather through direct and plain instruction to his wife based upon the Word of God and when she seeks to control the frame he rebukes and disciplines her until she returns to his frame.

The Red Pill concept of Game has no place in Biblical Christianity.   As we said earlier, it is not wrong for a man to do things like “get to the gym, dress better, get a raise, travel for work…hang out with a new (or old) friend, be cocky & funny”.   But it is wrong to state that he must earn sex with his wife by doing these things to increase his SMV status with her.

The  only “status” that matters in God’s perspective is that he is her husband and she has a duty to lovingly have sex with him whenever he so desires it.

Game is wrong because it is completely based on an appeal to a woman’s emotions in order to get her to have sex.  In this way game, whether it is Red Pill or Blue Pill, makes a woman’s feelings the central focus of sex between a man and woman.  The Biblical view of sex is that it is not based on feelings, but rather on duty (1 Corinthians 7:3-5).  Sex is referred to as something that is rendered, that is due and a right in marriage.

The Red Pill concept that husbands should only seek sex when their wives genuinely desire it goes against the Scriptural command for husbands to drink from the well that is their wife’s body whenever they are thirsty and to satisfy themselves at all times with it (Proverbs 5:15-19).

And finally, I want to leave with a note about the Christian version of Red Pill. I was aware of the existence of the Christian variation of Red Pill before I started this series.  And I will admit I learned some new things about them while writing this series like the fact that some of them teach the need for husbands to take overt action by rebuking and correcting their wives.

But even among Christian Red Pill folks there is still much acceptance of game and appeal to a woman’s emotions and natural desire as the basis of sex in marriage.  A woman having sex with her husband when she does not genuinely desire it and just because it is her duty is still seen as wrong by some Christian Red Pill folks who still hold to this part of the secular Red Pill philosophy.

But the truth is that Red Pill started off as a secular philosophy and MGTOW and Christian Red Pill were later off-shoots of the original secular Red Pill.  This is why I have based this series on the secular version of Red Pill.

The Christian version of Red Pill may be much closer to the Bible and I don’t deny that there may be some additional truths in it.  But I simply maintain like other “traditionalist Christians” where Red Pill is right “that Christianity was already Red Pill before there was a Red Pill”.  And I prefer to use the Bible as a basis and framework from which I discuss intersexual dynamics rather than Red Pill.  I see knowledge of Red Pill being good in the sense of being able to help non-Christians by showing them Red Pill truths that are found in the Bible.  But we as Christians must also be cognizant of many unbiblical teachings in Red Pill as we have shown in this series.

Is the Red Pill Concept of Frame Biblical?

In the first part of this series, “Is Red Pill Biblical”, we have covered the Red Pill concepts of the male and female imperatives as well as the alpha/beta paradigm and the alpha mindset. In this 6th part of our series we will now discuss the Red Pill concept of frame.

In one his earliest blog posts on his blog “The Rational Male”, Rollo Tomassi writes the following in his article entitled “Frame”:

“In psych terms, frame is an often subconscious, mutually acknowledged personal narrative under which auspices people will be influenced. One’s capacity for personal decisions, choices for well-being, emotional investments, religious beliefs and political persuasions (amongst many others) are all influenced and biased by the psychological narrative ‘framework’ under which we are most apt to accept as normalcy…

One important fact to consider, before I launch into too much detail, is to understand that frame is NOT power. The act of controlling the frame may be an exercise in power for some, but let me be clear from the start that the concept of frame is who’s ‘reality’ in which you choose to operate in relation to a woman. Both gender’s internalized concept of  frame is influenced by our individual acculturation, socialization, psychological conditioning, upbringing, education, etc., but be clear on this, you are either operating in your own frame or you’re operating in hers

As we can see from Tomassi’s quote above, frame in the Red Pill world is the concept that in every relationship either the man is operating in the woman’s world view or she is operating in his.

Later in the same post he states Her genuine (unnegotiated) desire for you hinges upon you covertly establishing this narrative for her.   Basically, he is saying the man should bring the woman into his frame without her knowing he is trying to bring her into his frame.  Essentially Tomassi is calling on men to perform the Red Pill equivalent of Jedi mind tricks on women.   We will get more into this in the next post on the Red Pill concept of game.

According to Red Pill, if a man attempts to bring a woman into his frame (i.e. worldview) by overt or coercive measures he defeats the central focus of Red Pill ideology – to get a woman to have “genuine (unnegotiated)” sexual desire toward him.

Tomassi writes further in this post about the way most modern marriages go when he states the following:

“In most contemporary marriages and LTR arrangements, women tend to be the de facto authority. Men seek their wive’s “permission” to attempt even the most mundane activities they’d do without an afterthought while single. I have married friends tell me how ‘fortunate’ they are to be married to such an understanding wife that she’d “allow” him to watch hockey on their guest bedroom TV,…occasionally

What these men failed to realize is that frame, like power, abhors a vacuum.  In the absence of the frame security a woman naturally seeks from a masculine male, this security need forces her to provide that security for herself.”

And near the end of the post he states:

It is vital to the health of any LTR that a man establish his frame as the basis of their living together before any formal commitment is recognized. As I stated in the beginning, frame will be fluid and conditions will influence the balance, but the overall theme of your relationship needs to be led and molded by you.”

Where Red Pill is Right in its Teachings About Frame

Red Pill is spot on that power hates a vacuum and so does a couple’s worldview.  If the man does not set the worldview in the relationship, then the woman will.  But the couple will either operate in the woman’s worldview or the man’s.  Anything illusions of a melded worldview are just that, illusions.

Red Pill is right that a man must establish his frame from the very beginning of any relationship.

The Bible would absolutely agree with Tomassi’s statement to men that “the overall theme of your relationship needs to be led and molded by you”.  God actually speaks of trying to mold his wife Israel in the Old Testament:

“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.”

Jeremiah 18:6 (KJV)

Where Red Pill is Wrong in its Teachings About Frame

Red Pill is absolutely wrong in its insistence on men using covert measures to bring women into their frame.  What Red Pill asks men to do with both frame and game is to engage in what the Bible calls “craftiness”.  I will talk more about the Biblical view of craftiness in my next article on the Red Pill concept of game.

The Bible tells men in Ephesians 5:25 that they are to love their wives “even as Christ also loved the church” and in Revelation 3:19 we see how Christ loved his churches when he states “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent”.

Red Pill rejects the overt measures of rebuking and disciplining a woman that the Bible calls all husbands to. A Christian man should always speak plainly to any woman he is with about his worldview and what he expects of her before he will consider courting her for marriage.

I have a friend of mine whose son recently married. But before he married his wife, they had kind of a rocky dating relationship.  They actually broke up twice before getting back together a third time and then getting engaged and eventually married.

The reason they broke up is because his son was establishing his frame during the dating relationship, his Christian world view, including his belief in Biblical gender roles and the man being the head of the woman in all things.  If she would rebel against his leadership on any issue, he would send her away and wait for her to come back and repent.  Each time she attempted to take control of the frame or really the worldview under which their relationship would operate, he would remind her that as a couple they would operate in his worldview or they would not be a couple at all.

Red Pill is right that women deep down want men to establish the frame of their relationship. Some women will of course test the man’s resolve but eventually submit to his worldview.  But where Red Pill is wrong is that this is not true for all women. There are some women who will constantly battle to control the frame of their relationship with a man.  And some will not reveal their true intent to control the frame until after marriage.

From a Christian perspective we can explain this behavior in women as greater and lesser degrees of the corruption of their God given feminine natures.  Remember that God’s original design of woman was for her to submit to and serve man. In the context of this discussion of frame, God meant for women to operate within the frame of a man, first her father and then finally her husband.  But sin corrupted a woman’s nature (as it did man’s) and it still does today.

Going back to the young man who recently married.  He established his frame in a very overt way.  He made it plain to her what his expectations were of her.  She tested him several times and each time he sent her away.  Eventually she came back after learning that she could move his resolve on these things and she loved and respected him for standing his ground.  Now there are other women who would have left him and never returned.  Again, it all comes down to the level of corruption of the woman’s nature.

We have already mentioned this previously in this series but we must mention it again here.  Red Pill makes the entire point of a man’s life to covertly cause women to genuinely desire and want sex with him.  But that is not the point of a man’s life from a Biblical perspective.

God created man to image him and thereby bring him glory (1 Corinthians 11:7). A man’s powerful driving sexual desire is certainly a part of his God given nature and man displays certain aspects of God’s nature in his sexual desire for woman.  But man was created to image God in far more ways than just his sexual desire toward woman.

God created the woman for the man (1 Corinthians 11:9) so that man could image God as a husband in marriage and father to his children.  God says in 1 Timothy 3:4 that a man must be “One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity”.

Conclusion

The Red Pill concept of frame, that a man must establish his worldview as the one he and any potential woman he marries will live in is a Biblical concept.  God says that the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church and that women are to be subject to their husbands in everything (Ephesians 5:23-24).  He tells men that they are to love their wives as Christ loves his church and an essential part of Christ’s love for his church is his rebuking and disciplining of his church (Revelation 3:19).   The scriptures tell us of wives in 1 Corinthians 14:35 “if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home”.  The man is to set the worldview for the woman.  That is the plain teaching of the Bible.

However, the Bible and Red Pill part ways when it comes to the method for a man to establish frame in a relationship with a woman and the reason for his establishing frame in the first place.

Red Pill encourages men to use covert and subtle means to bring women into their frame while the Bible discourages craftiness for Christians (2 Corinthians 4:2).  The Bible tells us in Proverbs 27:5 “Open rebuke is better than secret love”.   Men should speak plainly and establish the parameters of their relationship early with potential wives.  And after marriage they should use instruction, rebuke and discipline to keep their wives within their frame (worldview).

Red Pill sees the entire reason for men trying to get women into their frame is to invoke “genuine (unnegotiated)” sexual desire toward them.  But as Christian men the only “LTR” we are authorized to enter into with a woman is marriage.  And our purpose for entering into marriage is more than getting a woman to genuinely desire us sexually.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with a man wanting a woman to genuinely sexually desire him.  God wants his people to genuinely desire him.  But a man who understands his purpose in God’s creation understands that his establishing of frame with a woman is not simply to get laid.

Marriage is about imaging or displaying the relationship between God and his people, between Christ and his Church. It is about a man demonstrating all the attributes of God with his life including his love for his people.  Some of those attributes include teaching, rebuking and disciplining one’s wife and children.  Other attributes include showing them grace, mercy and compassion as well as providing for them, sacrificing for them and protecting them.

So, should you as a man establish frame in a relationship with a woman you are looking at as a potential spouse? Certainly.   Should you continue to keep her in that frame when you are married? Absolutely.  Is it possible your woman will appreciate and even find your more sexually desirable for establishing frame with her? Yes.  But there are some women who will not respect you as a man trying to establish frame with them.  They will resist at every turn.  Others will pretend to be in your frame and only when you are married, they will attempt to take control of the frame of your relationship.

And as you set about to establish frame with a woman, you should do it using God’s methods, not Red Pill’s methods.  And you should never forget the overarching reason you are called by God to establish frame in your woman’s life in the first place.

In the last part of this series we will cover the topic of “Is The Red Pill Concept of Game Biblical?”

Does the Bible Allow for Premarital Sex and Prostitution?

There are a lot of discussions in various online Christian forums, articles and blogs where some Christians are proposing that the traditional Christian view that sexual relations are strictly reserved for a man and woman in the covenant of marriage is not supported by the Bible.

Specifically, these people assert that the Bible only condemns adultery and engaging in sex with cult prostitutes.  They propose that this means that all other forms of consensual sex between a man and woman whether they are married or not is not a sin before God.  They even state that sex with prostitutes is acceptable before God as long as those prostitutes are not cult prostitutes.

What follows are some excerpts from a few emails I have recently received from a man who takes this position.

The Bible Only Condemns Adultery and Cult Prostitution?

 “Regarding premarital sex.  I have probably searched this the most because I feel there are just so many different arguments concerning it and it can leave many confused.  I still do not see, even a yearly animal sacrifice for people engaging in sex before marriage.  Now before I continue, I strongly believe God wants sex in marriage because that’s His ideal, and it avoids complications, like a child not having a father one day, since marriage ensures that child will have a father for instance.

And also, I do not promote the idea of casual sex at all, because that leads to addiction, possible abortion and health risks, not to mention spiritual degradation because of those things too, such as addiction.

But nowhere do I see that premarital sex is a sin. 

I suppose that Hebrews 13:4 could also be used when it says the marriage bed is to be kept pure.  And I see you used the word “whoremonger” to refer to premarital sex in one of your topics.  However, the original word for whoremonger meant “male prostitute”, not premarital sex.  It just seems that these verses are discussing marriage related issues concerning adultery, not premarital sex.

Yes, if a man steals a father’s right, then it’s wrong, but only if he doesn’t pay the dowry – that is theft.  And the consequence to me it seems is that the two must marry.  And in most of the cases, I see that God commands marriage after premarital sex has taken place, again, because it is the ideal, and it guards against many problems.  But say you have a widow or a woman who is no longer a virgin, who supports herself etc and she consents to sex with a man.  I do not see any punishment attached here but only to stern warnings against it because it leads to sin possibly (addiction, abortion, defrauding).  And in this case, I’m talking about the two people who are in love and are progressing to marriage, in other words, they are not casually having sex, but they don’t yet have the means to get married (finances, work contracts, etc that hold them back a bit).  I do not find this being wrong, it’s just not ideal.

On the subject of prostitution, I do genuinely believe that there is a big difference between cult prostitution and normal prostitution, and that Paul and many others guard against only the former, because the former is regarded as sin because of the idolatry and possible adultery that is attached.

And normal prostitution with a married woman is also strictly a sin, because of adultery.  But, if the woman is living alone, she is single, she supports herself, and men have sex with her, I do not see this being condemned as sin.  And Solomon also did not sentence the two prostitutes to death who went to him with the issue of the child.  I don’t remember any instances where Sampson was punished, even I don’t remember any sacrifice made for sleeping with a prostitute.  And Tamar was called righteous for disguising herself as a prostitute to bear a child, be it out of wedlock.  Now again, I’m not advocating for prostitution, especially not in this day and age where women can support themselves healthily.  And there is too much risk in visiting a prostitute.

But what I am concerned with, is calling something a sin when it is not, and vice-versa.  Under this, I do want to also ask concerning casual sex: say for instance, two people who are single, they are supporting themselves, meet to have consensual sex as a means of release and they separate or rarely see each other… Thus, they are not addicted, they practice it safely and they know they are not getting any diseases.  Is this then a sin, even though very very unwise?  The same can be asked of a man who uses a prostitute every now and then.  And said prostitute may be desolate, putting bread on the table because she can’t otherwise.

Another note on the cult prostitution.  I have not just looked at the usual facts such as Strabo’s claims, and I have not just looked at word translations, but historical context as well, as context often defines a word.  What is interesting to note is that in Corinth, though there were no longer official Aphrodite prostitutes in Paul’s time, the prostitutes there were still considered “unofficial temple prostitutes to Aphrodite”.  Rome was also known for its own versions of idolatrous prostitutes and also taxed those institutions (they were regulated).

If you can show me from the Scriptures where I am wrong on this, I am open to it.  I just don’t see where I am wrong based on my studies both of the Bible, the words of the original language and the historical context in which they were written.

Ben”

A Faulty Interpretation of Hebrews 13:4

In Hebrews 13:4 the Bible states “Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge”.  The word “whoremongers” in the KJV is a translation of the Greek word Pornos.

This is Strong’s Lexicon Definition of Pornos:

1) a man who prostitutes his body to another’ s lust for hire

2) a male prostitute

3) a man who indulges in unlawful sexual intercourse, a fornicator

Part of Speech: noun masculine

Relation: from pernemi (to sell)

In the KJV this word is translated as ‘whoremonger’ five times and then as ‘fornicator’ another five times.

Those Christians online and elsewhere that take Ben’s position emphasize the first two parts of the definition referring to male prostitutes and also the root of the word which comes from pernemi which means “to sell”.

They use this to make their case that Pornos strictly refers to male prostitutes and has nothing to do with people having sex outside of marriage.  Some will even explain the third part of Strong’s definition as referring strictly to adultery. They go further in stating that pornos during the time the Bible was written referred more specifically to temple prostitutes and not prostitutes in general.

And there we have their case made from Hebrews 13:4 – that God was only condemning people having sex with cult prostitutes and married persons committing adultery.

The Case Against the “Cult Prostitutes Only” Interpretation of Hebrews 13:4

But there is a flaw, a single thread that can be pulled from their interpretation that causes their interpretation to fall completely apart.  While it is important for us to understand the historical context of words as they were used in the Greek language when the New Testament was written, we must also understand that the New Testament expands upon Greek words and uses them in spiritual ways that they had not been used before.

The Greek Word Ekklesia in its common usage referred to a called-out assembly of citizens of a local town. But Christ and his Apostles greatly expanded the meaning of Ekklesia and used it to refer to the Church collectively as well as to local bodies of believers.

The Greek word Moichao in its common usage referred to having unlawful sex with another man’s wife.  However, in Mark 10:11 Christ used Moichao not to refer a man having unlawful sex with another man’s wife, but rather he used it to a refer to man divorcing his wife for unjust reasons.  The people who heard him say this would have been astounded at his expanded definition of Moichao.

In the same way Greek word Pornos in its common usage may have referred to male prostitutes but the Bible uses this word to refer to a person engaging in any form of sexual immorality and not strictly male prostitution or cult prostitution.

In I Corinthians 5:1 the Bible states:

“It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife”.

The situation being described is most likely referring to a man having sex not with his actual mother, but rather with another of his father’s wives similar to what Reuben did with his father’s wife Bilhah who was not his biological mother in Genesis 35:22.

Now I will need you to “follow the bouncing ball” so to speak. The English word “fornication” in 1 Corinthians 5:1 is a translation of the Greek word Porneia.

Below is the Strong’s Lexicon Definition of Porneia:

1) illicit sexual intercourse

1a) adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.

1b) sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18

1c) sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mark 10:11,Mark 10:12

2) metaphorically the worship of idols

2a) of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idols

The root of Porneia comes from Porneuo,

Below is the Strong’s Lexicon Definition of Porneuo:

1) to prostitute one’ s body to the lust of another

2) to give one’ s self to unlawful sexual intercourse

2a) to commit fornication

3) metaphorically to be given to idolatry, to worship idols

3a) to permit one’ s self to be drawn away by another into idolatry

Part of Speech: verb

And the root of Porneuo is Porne.

Below is the Strong’s Lexicon Definition of Porne:

1) a woman who sells her body for sexual uses

1a) a prostitute, a harlot, one who yields herself to defilement for the sake of gain

1b) any woman indulging in unlawful sexual intercourse, whether for gain or for lust

2) metaphorically an idolatress

2a) of “Babylon,” i.e. Rome, the chief seat of idolatry

Part of Speech: noun feminine

Porne is the feminine equivalent of the masculine noun Pornos.

Porneia and Porneuo all have at their root acts related to female prostitution and yet even Strong’s Lexicon is forced to give a much more expanded definition of Porne (female prostitutes) than it did for Pornos (male prostitutes).

So, what have we shown so far? The Bible uses a word that at its root refers to female prostitution to refer to a man having sex with his father’s wife which has nothing to whatsoever to do with prostitution.  The only thing incest and prostitution have in common is that they are both forms of sexual immorality.

But then later in this same passage condemning the incestuous actions of this man with his father’s wife Paul writes the following in verses 9-13:

“9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:

10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. 11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?

13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.”

Guess what Greek Word the Apostle Paul connects to the incestuous actions of this man with his father’s wife? It is Pornos.  So, in one passage Paul connects Porneia which at its root is Porne, a reference to female prostitutes, with Pornos which at its root referred to Male prostitutes to a man having sex with his father’s wife, an action that has nothing to do with prostitution.

This means we can rightly say that the Bible uses Porneia to refer to all forms of sexual immorality, and it also uses pornos to refer to people who commit sexual immorality, not just male prostitutes.

This pulls the thread on the entire argument of those who say the Bible is only condemning cult prostitution.

So, when the Bible uses the words pornos and porne it is far more inclusive than just male and female prostitutes.   It uses pornos to refer to all people who commit sexually immoral acts and it uses porne to refer to women who commit sexually immoral acts.  Only in the most specific of contexts does porne refer only to a female prostitute as it is used to refer to Rahab the harlot in James 2:25 where it states “Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot [Greek Porne] justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?”.

This means it is possible that 1 Corinthians 6:15-18 refers not just to prostitutes (harlots) but also to loose and whorish women who have sex outside of marriage from a position of lust rather than just for money:

“15 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. 16 What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.

18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.“

But having said all that, the Bible’s condemnation of porneia would absolutely include a condemnation of all forms of prostitution, not just cult prostitution which is asserted by Ben and other Christians online and elsewhere.

Marriage is the Answer to Avoiding Fornication

If sex outside of marriage is not a sin, and if porneia only referred to engaging in sex with cult prostitutes the following passage of the Bible would make no sense:

“Nevertheless, to avoid fornication [Greek Porneia], let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.”

1 Corinthians 7:2 (KJV)

If having sex with one’s girl friend or with prostitutes is ok as long as those prostitutes are not temple prostitutes for false gods then marriage would not be the only answer to avoiding fornication. But this is the answer the Bible gives us.

A Woman’s Body is Not Hers to Give

Ben’s Statement

“Yes, if a man steals a father’s right, then it’s wrong, but only if he doesn’t pay the dowry – that is theft.  And the consequence to me it seems is that the two must marry.  And in most of the cases, I see that God commands marriage after premarital sex has taken place, again, because it is the ideal, and it guards against many problems.”

Let’s look at the Scripture passage Ben alludes to:

“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)

So yes, it is clear that that a man enticing another man’s daughter into having sex was indeed a property crime and restitution had to be made to the father.  The restitution was that the man had to marry the virgin he seduced into having sex and also pay her father the bride price which was about half a year’s wages for the average man.

However, there is a big detail in this that is being overlooked.  The father could refuse to give his daughter to the man who seduced his daughter while still collecting the bride price as a penalty.  Why did God not require the father to give his daughter in marriage to the man that seduced her? Because she was his to give.

Both the daughter and the man who seduced her engaged in an act of theft against the father.  She gave something that was not hers to give and he took something that was not his to take.  And theft is a violation of the 8th commandment found in Exodus 20:15 which states “Thou shalt not steal”.  Therefore, a man enticing a man’s virgin daughter into having premarital sex is a sin against God based on the fact that is an act of theft against her father.

Even so, the father is only God’s steward of his daughter to prepare for her future her husband.

God Does Not Allow A Man to Take a Woman Except as Her Rightful Husband

Ben’s Statement:

“But say you have a widow or a woman who is no longer a virgin, who supports herself etc and she consents to sex with a man.”

God does not allow a woman, even one without a father, to have sex with a man that has not become her husband.  Even in the extreme case of a man taking a woman as a prisoner of war, he had to become her husband to have sex with her (Deuteronomy 21:13).

Tamar Was Not Righteous for Playing the Harlot

Ben’s Statement:

“Tamar was called righteous for disguising herself as a prostitute to bear a child, be it out of wedlock.”

In Genesis chapter 38, Tamar was not called righteous for prostituting herself with her father-in-law, but rather she was called “more righteous” than Judah because his sin of not giving her his son as husband put her in a position to be tempted to act sinfully in order to produce an heir.  Both Judah and Tamar sinned and this is shown in Genesis 38:26 when it states of Judah “And he knew her again no more” a clear reference to an act of repentance on his part.

Conclusion

Not every action of Biblical characters was right before God.  Samson’s laying with prostitutes was sinful as was Judah’s seeking of a prostitute and his daughter-in-law playing the prostitute.   Some like Ben argue that if a they don’t see a condemnation right alongside a Biblical character’s action that this means their actions were righteous before God.

But this is not the case at all. God told men to seek sex within the covenant of marriage and not to go after strange women in Proverbs 5.  In Proverbs 5:22 God calls men having sex with strange women who are not their wives’ a sin that can destroy a man’s life. Hebrews 13:4 tells us that that only sexual relations that God considers honorable and pure is that which occurs in the marriage bed.  And Christ told us in Matthew 19:4-6 that God “made them male and female” and he made the male and female to come together as “one flesh” in marriage.

The whoremongering that God says he will judge in Hebrews 13:4 refers to all sexually immoral behavior, not just male prostitution.  This is proven beyond doubt when the Apostle Paul uses the same word to refer the incestuous actions of a man with his father’s wife in 1 Corinthians 5.

Sexual purity is not simply “God’s ideal” while he accepts that people will have sex before marriage or with prostitutes.   Sexual purity is God’s rule for which he makes absolutely NO exceptions.  And the reason our sexual purity is so important to God is because it represents the faithfulness of God’s people to himself.

“For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.”

2 Corinthians 11:2 (KJV)

 

 

A Christian Young Woman’s Guide to Life and Finding A Husband in a Post-Feminist World

“I really enjoyed your post “A Christian Young Man’s Guide to Life and Finding A Wife in a Post-Feminist World” and I was wondering if you could write up something similar for me as a 16 year old Christian woman.  –  Emily”

Well Emily I am happy to help.  And like the first guide I did for the young men, I kept this under 1000 words.

Step 1 – Know Your Purpose in Life

The first and most important realization you must come to as a young Christian woman is that you were created for man, or in other words, your future husband.  In 1 Corinthians 11:9 the Bible says “Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man“.  The Bible gives young women their prime directive in life in 1 Timothy 5:14 where it states “I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house…”.

Companionship, sex and having children are all benefits of marriage and commanded by God in marriage but they are not the reason for marriage.

God created you as a woman to paint the picture of the church’s love, submission and service to Christ (Ephesians 5:22-24) when you do these same things toward your future husband.

Step 2 – Learn The Bible From Christian Men In Your Life

Women are to seek the spiritual guidance and teaching of the men.  Before marriage  this would be your father if he is a Christian.  But if you don’t have a Christian father it might be your grandfather or an uncle or perhaps the Pastor at your church.  After marriage you are to be a student of your husband’s Biblical teachings. (Ephesians 6:4,1 Corinthians 14:35)

Step 3 – Keep Sexual Relations for Marriage

The only sexual relations that God calls “honorable” (Hebrews 13:4) is that which occurs within marriage between a man and woman. When you have sex with a man before entering into a covenant of marriage with him you pervert God’s design for man, woman, marriage and sex.

Step 4 – Prepare for Your Future Life as a Homemaker

The greatest lie that Feminism teaches young women is “You can have it all”.    In Matthew 6:24 the Bible tells us “No man can serve two masters…”.  This truth directly applies to the fact that you as a woman cannot serve in a career outside your home and be the keeper at home that God calls women to be in Titus 2:3-5.

In Proverbs 31:27 we read She looketh well to the ways of her household….  You cannot look well to the ways of your future household without preparing for this years in advance as a young woman.   Look to aged and godly women in your life whether it be your mother, grandmother or others who can help you.

Step 5 – Look for A Man Who Knows His Purpose

Just as you must know your purpose in God’s creation as a woman, so too you should seek out a man who fully embraces his purpose in God’s creation as well. Find a man who believes he was not created for you, but that you were created for him and that he was created for God.  Look for a man who believes the purpose of marriage is to model the relationship of Christ to his Church. And find a man who has wants to correct and teach you. (1 Corinthians 11:7-9, 1 Corinthians 14:35, Ephesians 5:22-33, Revelation 3:19).

Step 6 – Avoid Sexual Temptation While Waiting on Marriage

It is completely normal for you as a young woman to desire sex and think about sex.

But how does God want you to handle your unmet, yet God given sexual desires during this waiting phase of your life?  The answer is one word and it is an uncomfortable word for some while others have been taught it is a sin.  And that word is masturbation.

The scriptures condemn lust, not masturbation.  And then we must understand how the Bible defines lust verses how we define it today.  Romans 7:7 teaches us that lust is not mere sexual arousal or sexual fantasy, but it is in fact covetousness as defined in the 10th commandment. It is not a sin for you as a young woman to be sexually aroused by or even have sexual fantasies about men.  It is not even a sin for you to masturbate to such thoughts or images.

Lust, in the Biblical sense, is when you think about or desire to entice a man into having sex with you outside of marriage.  So, you don’t have to suppress your sexual nature until you are married, but rather you must exercise it within the bounds of God’s law.  And a big part of avoiding sexual temptation before marriage is to set a boundary for yourself that you will never be alone with a man that is not your husband or your blood relative.

Step 7 – Seek a Husband Under The Guidance of Male Headship

The Scriptures tell us in Exodus 22:17 that fathers have the right of refusal when it comes to their daughter’s marrying a man.  This follows the general principle of creation found in 1 Corinthians 11:3 that “the head of the woman is the man“.   If a Christian woman does not have a Christian father to guide her,  then she should look toward a Christian grandfather or Christian uncle or her pastor.

Work with your male spiritual head to help you setup profiles on Christian dating sites and also help you with the vetting process when men contact you. 40 percent of couples who married in 2017 met online so make sure you make the most of online resources for meeting potential husbands.   And make sure that you participate in church activities not just in your church, but other churches in your area as well under the guidance of your male spiritual head.   Find ways to serve in Christian ministries in your area as you never know where you may meet your future husband.

Step 8 – Do not Date but Instead Court

Dating leads to relationships based on emotion rather than compatibility.  The Courtship process helps protect a couple from the temptation to have premarital sex while at the same time allowing parents the ability to offer an objective analysis of the compatibility of the couple.

 

 

A Christian Young Man’s Guide to Life and Finding A Wife in a Post-Feminist World

Recently I received the following email from a young Christian man which ended in a challenge from him to me.

“Dear BGR, I am a 17-year-old male who will be graduating high school in this next year.  I have attended a Bible preaching Baptist church for all of my life. I was taught both at my church and in the public schools I have attended that women being given equal rights with men was and still continues to be a good thing for society.   My parents are conservatives and I have considered myself a conservative for a long as I can remember.  Like many conservatives, I believed that equal rights for women was good thing.  But this is no longer the case for me.

Because of your blog I have had my “cultural blinders” as you call them removed.   

I did not make the connection between the rise of feminism in the mid-1800s and the rampant sexual immorality, divorce, abortion and problems with LGBTQ that we face today until I read your blog.  I cannot believe how blind I was and how blind the adults around me still are to this connection.

I love how deep you dive into the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures and how you base everything you believe on the Bible, the whole Bible and not just the parts people like.  I also love how you dissect and tear apart liberal, socialist and secularist arguments against the Bible.   With that said I have a favor to ask you or maybe more of a challenge for you.

Can you write a simple list, like a step by step list, of how young Christian men like me who have had our eyes opened to the evils that feminism has brought on our society can navigate this Post-Feminist world and live in a way that honors God and his design of gender roles?  And here will be the hardest part for you – can you do it in 1000 words or less? I just know that a lot people my age don’t have the attention span that I do and I think if you made it short, they might just listen.

Jonathan”

Jonathan – challenge excepted.

Step 1 – Know Your Purpose in Life

God created you to be “the image and glory of God” and he created woman to be “the glory of man” (I Corinthians 11:7).  This means you were created as a man to display or live out God’s attributes in your life’s work outside the home and as a husband and father in your home.

Companionship, sex and having children are all benefits of marriage and commanded by God in marriage but they are not the reason for marriage.

Ephesians 5:23-24 tell us “the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church” and “as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing”. It also tells us in Ephesians 5:25 that husbands are to love their wives “even as Christ also loved the church”.  It is “for this cause” (Ephesians 5:31), the cause of picturing the relationship between God and his people, that we are to seek and enter into marriage.

Step 2 – Read Your Bible from Genesis to Revelation

You cannot be the kind of spiritual leader and teacher to your future home that God has called you to be without becoming a student of his Word (2 Timothy 2:15, 1 Corinthians 14:35, Ephesians 6:4).

Step 3 – Keep Sexual Relations for Marriage

The only sexual relations that God calls “honorable” (Hebrews 13:4) is that which occurs within marriage between a man and woman. When you have sex with a woman before entering into a covenant of marriage with her you pervert God’s design for man, woman, marriage and sex.

Step 4 – Build Your Career First, Then Seek A Wife

In Proverbs 24:27 we read “Prepare thy work without, and make it fit for thyself in the field; and afterwards build thine house”.  Build your career first, then get build a home and family.  In Ephesians 5:29 we read that husbands have a responsibility to nourish or provide for the physical needs of their wives “even as the Lord the church”.  A man’s ability to provide for his future wife and children is a critical aspect of him picturing the relationship of God to his people in marriage. No man should ever even begin to seek marriage until he is fully prepared to be a provider for his future wife and children.

Step 5 – Look for A Woman Who Knows Her Purpose

Just as you must know your purpose in God’s creation as a man, so too you should seek out a woman who fully embraces her purpose in God’s creation as well.

“4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

Titus 2:4-5 (KJV)

The women you seek should fully embrace the teaching found in the passage above.  No part of it should be uncomfortable for them.

Step 6 – Avoid Sexual Temptation While Waiting on Marriage

Some men may be able to provide for a family and therefore can marry in their late teens or early twenties because they enter a lucrative skilled trade or family business.  Others may have to wait till their late twenties or early thirties after they finish college and then spend several years in their career before making enough to be the provider God has called them to be.  A good example of those who would have to wait much longer are doctors and lawyers as it takes them almost a full decade to be firmly established in their careers.

So how does God want you to handle your unmet, yet God given sexual desires during this waiting phase of your life?  The answer is one word and it is an uncomfortable word for some while others have been taught it is a sin.  And that word is masturbation.

The scriptures condemn lust, not masturbation.  And then we must understand how the Bible defines lust verses how we define it today.  Romans 7:7 teaches us that lust is not mere sexual arousal or sexual fantasy, but it is in fact covetousness as defined in the 10th commandment. It is not a sin for you as a young man to be sexually aroused by or even have sexual fantasies about women.  It is not even a sin for you to masturbate to such thoughts or images.

Lust, in the Biblical sense, is when you think about or desire to entice a woman into having sex with you outside of marriage.  So, you don’t have to suppress your sexual nature until you are married, but rather you must exercise it within the bounds of God’s law.  And a big part of avoiding sexual temptation before marriage is to set a boundary for yourself that you will never be alone with a woman that is not your wife or your blood relative.

Step 7 – Be Diligent in Your Search for A Wife

Jesus said in Matthew 7:7 “seek, and ye shall find”.  You cannot hope to find a wife by simply sitting around and waiting for one to fall from the sky.  40 percent of couples who married in 2017 met online.  Use all resources at your disposal and do not limit your search to only your local area, but look nationally and globally. And yes, if you look outside your local area it will require a lot more money for travel. So, start saving.  Concentrate your efforts on rural areas as urban areas are often filled with women who don’t follow God’s purpose for their lives.

Step 8 – Do not Date but Instead Court

Dating leads to relationships based on emotion rather than compatibility.  The Courtship process helps protect a couple from the temptation to have premarital sex while at the same time allowing parents the ability to offer an objective analysis of the compatibility of the couple.

Is Marriage Worth Bothering With?

“Is marriage worth bothering with? I’m surrounded by mediocre marriages; I don’t see anyone or at best very few who have a marriage that I would want to have. My sister has been married a short time and she tells me how hard it is and it seems like so much difficulty with so little reward.”

The preceding statement comes from a comment I recently received from a man calling himself AngloSaxon.

And to be honest a great majority of men in our modern western countries find themselves asking this same question for the same reasons that AngloSaxon has.

Men sought out marriage throughout the history of world to be able to have a companion with which they could share their lives.  But the companionship that men sought with women was not the same as the companionship they sought with other men.   They did not seek out women as equal partners, but rather they sought out women for things male companionship could not offer them.

They sought out things in women they could not find in men.  They sought out women so that they could be looked up to, respected and needed for their ability to provide and protect.

They sought out female companionship for the visual and physical pleasure women could give them and the fact that women could bear and care for their children and thus help them continue their family lines.  They sought female companionship to have someone to care for the domestic needs of their homes to free them to go out into the world and make their mark on it knowing their female companion had everything in order back at their home.

But this entire dynamic of marriage with women desiring men for their provision and protection was totally upended by feminist movements in America and other western nations which began in the 19th century.

Many women in our post-feminist culture do not seek out men in marriage for their provision and their protection.  Rather they seek out men simply for “friendship” and to have someone to “that makes me laugh”.

And many women today do not enter marriage in order to give their husbands sexual pleasure or bear their children or to serve the needs of their husband’s home.  But rather they come into marriage to be served by men.

So the modern state of male/female relationships is that many men have been robbed of their purpose and their desires in marriage and they have come under what one of America’s founding fathers, John Adams, warned of if women were ever given equal rights with men and that is the “despotism of the petticoat” or in other words the “despotism of women”.

And since women came to dominate male/female relationships with the abandonment of courtship and the embrace of the new concept of “dating” in late 19th and early 20th centuries marriage as an institution has been severely decimated.

Before the political feminist movements of the mid 19th century divorce rates were three percent.  As men gave more and more control to women over dating and marriage divorce rates began to skyrocket and eventually peak at over fifty percent by the mid 1980s (with women being the initiators in seventy percent of divorces).

Everything I have just stated may seem like a dark and dreary outlook of marriage and male/female relationships in our Postfeminist culture.  But we as Christians do not have the option of loosing hope in God’s institution of marriage.  God does not give us the right to give up on the very first human relationship he ever established which was marriage.

Why Marriage is Worth Bothering With

Marriage is absolutely “worth bothering with” because God has commanded it. And why has he commanded it? He has commanded it as part of his larger reason for making man and woman in the Garden of Eden.

1 Corinthians 11:7-9 in its divine commentary on the creation account states:

“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.”

Men and women were given life and given their shared human traits for different reasons. God gave man his human traits along with additional masculine traits so that man bring glory to God by imaging him with his life. Literally man was created to live out God’s attributes. That is why men are called to be leaders, providers and protectors to their wives and children and to image God as husband to their wives and image God as a father to their children.

Women were not given their common human traits with men for this same purpose. They were given their humanity in order to be a helper and companion to man they were purposefully made as “the weaker vessel” as 1 Peter 3:7 states so that they would need man’s leadership, provision and protection as all mankind needs God’s leadership, provision and protection.

So it is for this reason that marriage is SO MUCH MORE than about our personal happiness or having fun. Marriage was designed by God as an extension of his purpose for creating male human beings so that they could full image him in all his attributes – and to do this they need someone to lovingly lead, provide for and protect and thus he made woman.

So its not about what you or I want or what sounds like fun or if it sounds difficult. It is about obeying God’s first command to mankind:

“And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”
Genesis 1:28 (KJV)

God has never rescinded his first command and even in the New Testament the Bible states Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled (Hebrews 13:4). Marriage is God’s rule for our lives and celibacy is his exception to that rule that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction (1 Corinthians 7:35). In other words, if your reason for not marrying is to serve God in an undivided fashion than your reason for celibacy is honorable and holy before God. If however your reason for celibacy is based in fear or selfishness that you want to just have more money or not risk being hurt by a spouse in marriage than your reason for celibacy is not honored before God.

Another indicator that celibacy is not for most people is that the vast majority of people have God given desire for intimate companion ship that only marriage can fulfill(whether it be for sex or having children or other reasons) and therefore we can rightly say based upon the Scriptures that it is better to marry than to burn (1 Corinthians 7:9).

The Facts Don’t Lie – Marriage is Better for Men and Society

Occasionally I will check out various atheist blogs and YouTube channels that critique this blog.  What I often find interesting is that they admit something many Christian feminist bloggers will not admit.  Some atheist bloggers admit that feminism and women’s equality has been a major blow to this historic institution of marriage.  But you know what their response is? We don’t need marriage anymore.  Sure, it is fine if you want to, they say, but marriage is no longer needed for a strong and stable society in their view.

But multiple studies call into question the contention of some atheists that marriage is an outdated societal institution that is no longer needed.

Bradford Wilcox and Nicholas H. Wolfinger in their article for National Review entitled “Hey Guys, Put a Ring on It”  demonstrate through the results of many studies the positive impact marriage has on men and thus society at large:

“First, let’s consider money. Marriage has a transformative effect on men’s finances. After marrying, men typically work harder, smarter, and more successfully. They are less likely to be fired. And they make about $16,000 more than their single peers with otherwise similar backgrounds. In general, marriage seems to increase the earning power of men on the order of 10 to 24 percent…

Men don’t just enjoy a better sex life when married; they are also more likely to enjoy better health. Research suggests that men who get and stay married live almost ten years longer than their unmarried peers. And a recent Harvard study found that even among men diagnosed with cancer, the married ones live longer…

We’ve seen that for the average guy, when it comes to money, sex, and health, marriage offers significant returns on the sacrifices it requires. It’s all of a piece with what one major research project, the Harvard Study of Adult Development, found about what makes men healthy and happy over the course of their lives, including their retirement years. Indeed, elderly men who enjoyed good marriages reported significantly less depression, better moods, and more satisfaction with life.”

Robert Rector wrote an article for the Heritage.org entitled “Marriage: America’s Greatest Weapon Against Child Poverty” where he made the following conclusion from looking at government statistics on the demographics of those most likely to fall into poverty:

“Child poverty is an ongoing national concern, but few are aware of its principal cause: the absence of married fathers in the home. According to the U.S. Census, the poverty rate for single parents with children in the United States in 2008 was 36.5 percent. The rate for married couples with children was 6.4 percent. Being raised in a married family reduced a child’s probability of living in poverty by about 80 percent

The effect of married fathers on child outcomes can be quite pronounced. For example, examination of families with the same race and same parental education shows that, when compared to intact married families, children from single-parent homes are:

More than twice as likely to be arrested for a juvenile crime;[20]

Twice as likely to be treated for emotional and behavioral problems;[21]

Roughly twice as likely to be suspended or expelled from school;[22] and

A third more likely to drop out before completing high school.[23]”

The facts above clearly show that married men make more money and are more successful in their careers.  They lead healthier and more fulfilled lives.  Children raised by fathers married to their mothers do better in their education and are less likely to fall into poverty or get involved with crime.

So, both the Christian feminists and atheists are wrong.  Christian feminists are wrong in denying that feminism has decimated the institution of marriage and atheists are wrong in saying it is OK for marriage to go away and that society no longer needs it.

Conclusion

Marriage is definitely “worth bothering with” because God commands it and it is part of the very reason, we as both men and women were created.

Now does this mean young men must take the first woman that expresses interest in them as a potential husband? Absolutely not!  And far too many young men who are insecure with themselves marry the first woman who expresses interest in them.  A lot of Christian men marry because they are desperate to have sex and they fail to look closely at the character of the woman they are marrying.

Christian men can and should approach women and dating (really it should be courting) with a great deal of Scriptural knowledge of what marriage is about and also prayer as well as discretion.  They also should lean on their parents and other wise counsel to know if a woman is of good character and one who would make a good wife to them and a good mother to their children.

But the main point is Christian men cannot give up on marriage even it takes many years to find the right woman.  The search should be continual even if it means a man saving money for many years and seeking a wife overseas from a less westernized country or more conservative (mostly rural areas) of western countries.

Related Articles:

For What Reasons Does God Allow Celibacy?

Why MGTOW Is an Unbiblical Philosphy

What is the Difference Between Courting and Dating

Are Men Becoming Obsolete?

“The male body is becoming outdated tech” – this is the assertion of Mark Manson in his article entitled “What’s the Problem with Masculinity?”   In this article Mr. Manson uses Pablo Escobar and his own “pilgrimage” to the former Escobar estate in Columbia to try and tell us that traditional norms of masculinity are now “outdated”.

Just a forewarning to my readers – Mr. Manson really likes to use the F-word a lot.  It is even the title of one his books and it appears often in his relationship articles on his blog.

Mr. Manson states this about the origins of masculine behavior:

“Masculinity has historically been all about the three P’s: protector, provider, procreation. The more you protect, the more you provide, the more you fuck, the more of a man you are…

But this version of masculinity evolved for a particularly socially-beneficial reason — to protect us from invaders and protect the town and kill bears and stuff. We needed men to fuck a lot because something like half of your kids didn’t survive into puberty. We needed them to provide because you never knew when the next horrible winter was around the corner.”

Manson then goes on to tell us what has changed.  He states that we now live in “a cushy first world where security is more or less guaranteed” where “Violence has largely been automated or outsourced or just plain eliminated”  and “Service economies mean that women are just as capable (and perhaps even more capable) to work and earn a living than men are at most professions”.  He also says “We have like, women’s rights and equality and stuff. Fact is, we’re much more conscious and moral than we used to be. Therefore, the drawbacks of masculine aggression and dominance present not just economic liabilities, but ethical ones as well”.

Manson goes on in the article to totally denigrate historic masculinity and asks the question “Why are men such dicks? Even the word itself, “dick,” the male sex organ, refers to someone who is being rude and offensive”.  He goes on to denigrate men for being “less likely to report any injury suffered at work”, more likely to “work far longer hours, take fewer vacations and sick days” and even for being more likely to die on job.  He castigates the average man for seeing himself as nothing more than a “walking paycheck”.

He talks about men having five times the suicide rate of women (which is true).  And he further derides men for being “so emotionally incompetent without women, that getting married may statistically be the best thing a man can do to improve his longevity and mental health”.

But then Manson tells us that even when men get married, they are “woefully equipped” to handle it and he tells us why:

Women initiate more than 70% of divorces and separations with the most common cause cited as “emotional neglect” from their husbands. Those divorces also hit men the hardest: recently divorced men are more likely to suffer depression, alcoholism, mental illness, and suicide than women are.”

Now we will move on to Manson’s summary of the problem and his answer to it.

Manson’s Answer to the Problem of the Obsolescence of Historic Masculinity

Manson summarizes the problem of the obsolescence of traditional masculinity when he writes:

“The problem with the traditional masculine formula – protection, providing, procreating – is that they require men to measure their self-worth via some external, arbitrary metric. They require men to mortgage their emotional health for the sake of their physical safety. But in a cushy first world where security is more or less guaranteed, those interest payments start adding up.

Men don’t just do this to themselves though. They do it to each other. Hell, women do it as well. Educated women will complain that men are superficial and only want to date women who look like a Victoria’s Secret model. Yet ladies, how many of you are running out the door to date a janitor?

We unfairly objectify women in society for their beauty and sex appeal. Similarly, we unfairly objectify men for their professional success and aggression.”

And then Manson gives us his answer to the problem of the obsolescence of traditional masculinity:

“In the 21st century, we need to evolve our definition of masculinity. Yes, we’re still protectors and providers. And you’re damn right we want to keep pro-creating. But there need to be new internal metrics for a man’s worth as well — his honesty, his integrity, his emotional openness and ability to remain strong in the face of vulnerability.”

Let me boil this down for you, Manson is saying that men need to stop being stoic which means they need to complain when they get hurt at work, work less hours and stop seeing their value in their ability to be providers, protectors and procreators.  Sure, they can still keep doing these things, but they should not be the basis for a man’s worth.

Instead a man’s worth should be found in his emotional openness and his vulnerability. In other words, men should just learn to deal with the fact we are moving to a service economy and it is taking away their ability to be providers.  They should deal with it by having a good cry and then accepting it and moving on.

Men should learn not to be “so emotionally incompetent” that they need marriage to a woman to be mentally healthy and more successful in their jobs.  Men should be successful and emotionally secure without being married or for that matter even having a good paying job.

And if men get more in touch with their emotions and their wife’s emotions, they might be able to make the new modern gynocentric version of marriage last.  And if they happen to be one of the unlucky men who get divorce papers from their wives, they need to again open their emotions up, be vulnerable have a good cry and move on to the next woman hoping she won’t divorce them either.

A Biblical View of the Obsolescence of Traditional Masculinity

The Bible tells us in Proverbs 19:1 “Better is the poor that walketh in his integrity, than he that is perverse in his lips, and is a fool”.  So yes, as Christians we absolutely believe that a man should place great value on his integrity.  But Mark Manson presents us with a false dichotomy that we as men can place our value in our integrity (as well as emotional openness and vulnerability) or we can place our value in being providers, protector and procreators.

Biblically speaking this is not an either-or proposition – it is both.

The Bible tells us that a man should absolutely find a great part of his value in being a procreator when it states:

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

Psalm 127:3-5 (KJV)

The Bible also tells us that men should find their value in being providers and protectors for their wives and children:

“For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:

Ephesians 5:29 (KJV)

“A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children’s children: and the wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just.”

Proverbs 13:22 (KJV)

“Blessed be the Lord my strength which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight.”

Psalm 144:1 (KJV)

It is God who created in man the burning desire to take a wife in marriage, have children and then lead, provide for and protect them.  It is God who put in man the strong desire to be a hard worker and to make his mark on the world outside his home.

It is absolutely true that our modern world is trying very hard to make God’s design of masculinity obsolete in every way they can.  As Bible believing Christians though we need to realize this is part of a much larger insidious plan.  The secular humanists have been using scientific and technological advancements as well as cultural changes to try and make God obsolete.

The attack on what we call “traditional masculinity” which really is just God’s design of masculinity is an attack on God himself.  The Scriptures tell us in I Corinthians 11:7 “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.  Man, the male human being, was created by God to image him and thereby bring God glory.  The Scriptures tell us that woman was created by God for man (I Corinthians 11:9) to bring glory to man.

Men are not “emotionally incompetent” for strongly desiring and needing marriage nor for placing their value in being providers and protectors.  Men cannot fulfill the purpose for which God designed them without being husbands, fathers, providers and protectors.  So, it makes perfect sense that some men would feel suicidal and without a sense of purpose if they cannot do these things.

Our modern world hates this truth.  And that is why we are seeing a cultural war over the gender roles God created in the form of transgenderism and homosexuality being forced into cultural acceptance.  Secular humanists are literally trying to annihilate the distinction between men and women as God created it.

How Christians Can Fight Secularist Attempts to Make Traditional Masculinity Obsolete

The world tells us as Bible believing Christians that we just need to conform to how things are now and get with the program. “Stop living in the past and living by the words of a 3000-year-old book” we are often told.  But if we do this and conform to our world’s eradication of masculinity and femininity as God designed it then we are betraying our Christian faith.

The Scriptures tell us in Romans 12:2 “And be not conformed to this world” and in James 4:4 that “whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God”.

The answer then for us as Christians is to fight back by refusing to conform to this wicked agenda which seeks to make God’s design of masculinity (and femininity for that matter) obsolete.

But how do we fight this cultural war? The simple answer is that we need to reverse the cultural decisions that have brought us to the point we now find ourselves at where we are actually debating if traditional masculinity should be tossed to the dustbin of history.

The two major items that have brought traditional masculinity to brink of obsolescence are feminism and automation

Work supplies man with a great amount of his purpose.  And a service economy does not provide the vast majority of men with an income that can support a family.  Only a production economy can supply men with jobs that can support a family.  Some say people just need to be educated more for the future.  That is false for two reasons.

First it assumes all men have the intelligence and aptitude for high tech jobs and learning.  That is untrue. Second as things become more and more automated, we will need even less and less techs because the machines will fix themselves.

Even the atheist Steven Hawking saw AI as threat to humanity.

So, Christians need to raise their voices about the threat of continued automation and AI advances.  We need to pass laws that outlaw further AI advances and also outlaw robotic automation in all manufacturing.  We also need to outlaw driverless cars as this will put truck drivers and man others out of work.

But we must also work to undo feminism.  We must take away the rights America has granted to women since the mid-1800s.   This means taking away women’s right to own property and limiting the ability of women to work and earn money.  It means placing restrictions on how many women may enter higher education.   In other words, it means making women completely dependent on men for their economic provision.

And it absolutely means taking away women’s right to vote.

It also means removing no fault divorce laws and restricting the allowance for divorce to only the gravest of circumstances such as physical abuse, adultery or abandonment.

When we once again secure the institution of marriage and protect the ability of all men to be able to work and earn a living and we restrict women from being independent from men then true masculinity can be restored to its rightful honored position it once held.

But then the question comes – how do we do all the things I just mentioned? They seem impossible in our current culture and political climate.  The answer is it starts with Christian fathers and mothers sitting their young people down and showing them what God’s Word says about the different reasons he designed men and women. It means teaching our sons to seek out only Christian women who want to be keepers of their homes and depend on their husbands for their provision as the church depends on Christ for its provision.

It means raising our daughters to be women whose goal in life is not education and career, but instead bringing glory to God by bringing glory to their future husbands.  It means raising daughters who want to fully dedicate their lives to serving their husbands, their children and their homes.

Here is another way to look at this.  Godly young men need to shut out feminist women.  Even if a feminist woman wants to stay at home, she will still bring great sorrow to her future husband with her daily contentions.  That means staying away from women who want college and university educations and or careers.

Godly Christian women need to work with their fathers to find a man who fully accepts his God given duty to lead them, provide for them and protect them.  A man who is not fully prepared to provide for a wife has no business even approaching a woman’s father to court her.

And yes, we need to get rid of dating and return to courtship.  We need to guard against premarital sex by re-instituting the cultural norm of a woman never being alone with a man not her blood relative or her husband.

This also means Christians need to return to having larger families.  Conservative Christians (both Protestant and Catholic) already have more children than liberal Christian or secular families do.  And this is actually what lead to a conservative resurgence in the 1980s and 1990s.  While the liberals were out partying and living it up having no kids or just one or two kids the conservatives were having 3 or 4 or 5 kids.  So, if we build on this and increase this, we can literally outbreed liberals and win at the voting box with sheer numbers.

But just having more children is not enough.  We must teach our children the Word of God and prepare them for all the false philosophies they will hear in the secular world.  We need to point out to them all the problems with a system built on individualism and how it is destructive to the family and therefore society as a whole.

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.

A Teenage Girl’s Courtship Covenant

Today I make the following covenant before God.

I will only seek to court a man when my father gives his permission to court that man and I will honor his rules for courting . (Genesis 29:15-20, Exodus 22:16-17)

I will not make provision for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof by allowing myself to be alone with any man that I am not married to unless he is my close blood relative. (Romans 13:14)

I will guard my heart and save not only physical intimacy, but emotional intimacy as well for marriage and I will not awaken the type of love God meant only for marriage until I am married. (Proverbs 4:23, Song of Solomon 2:7)

I will not follow my heart or feelings in seeking my future husband as it may deceive me.  Instead I will seek the Holy Spirit’s guidance  as well as the guidance of my parents and other Christian elders as they follow Christ. (Proverbs 1:8,Proverbs 11:14,John 16:13)

I will not date because dating is led by the heart, not the spirit, it can often awaken the kind of love only meant for marriage and it makes provision for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof.