Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Therefore shall a Man...

Classik

Member
Gen. 2:24
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.


The bible seems to be very specific about this: Ttherefore Shall a Man. It didn't read: ...shall a Woman.


What do you think...a woman searching for a man to marry? Strange? Weird? It seems women are actually the ones doing the searching. A woman tells you, this is what I want in a guy: he must be this, he must be that; he must be educated, he must have this and have that...

Should a woman also make the first move???

10x in ad for your (experienced) input
 
I do not think it is wrong for women to pursue men, although rejection may sting a bit. This is just my observation but I think that some men/women are too picky about choosing their potential mate. My husband has almost all the qualities I want, and though he isn't perfect, he's perfect for me. That's true about any relationship. Instead of expecting your partner to be wealthy, attractive, athletic, good with kids, etc etc find some qualities that you genuinely like and go from there.

I do, however, believe that the man must be the head of the relationship.
 
Gen 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

See we are ready to leave Mom & Dad you guys need a push :)
 
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother,


"Father" is only suppose to be used towards lord the father. Just like the word 'leader', as there is only one leader, so one should never call themselves or others a Father or leader?.

You're talking about Matthew 23:9. "Father" doesn't mean the same thing there as it does in Genesis 2:24. I've copied and pasted a few things to help you understand what Jesus meant.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
And call no man your Father ... - This does not, of course, forbid us to apply the term to our real father. Religion requires all proper honor to be shown to Him, Exodus 20:12; Matthew 15:4; Ephesians 6:1-3. But the word "father" also denotes "authority, eminence, superiority, a right to command, and a claim to particular respect." In this sense it is used here. In this sense it belongs eminently to God, and it is not right to give it to people.

Geneva Study Bible
And call no man your {i} father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
(i) He attacks a custom of the Jews, for they called the rabbis our fathers.

As for women pursuing men, I don't think there's anything wrong with that. As far as Gen. 2:24 saying "Man" and not "Woman" - If you look through Scripture, it's always men who are given the explicit instructions where relationships are concerned. Of course we may assume the same is true for women, but the instructions and commandments are given to men. That is because we are called to be the head of our household, therefore the weight of the relationship is on our shoulders, not our wives.

Proverbs 15:18 "...and may you rejoice in the wife of your youth."
1 Corinthians 7:1-4 "Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.<sup> </sup>Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.<sup> </sup>The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife."

Even when both are explicitly given the instruction, men are called out first. Even verse 4, though it's worded different, tells us the husband has power of his wife's body. The point is not authority, but responsibility. So again, the husband is called out first, because his is the responsibility of the relationship.

I actually did an essay on this topic in the course of my Bachelor's studies. I'll copy and paste a bit below. I know I've already gotten long-winded, so just stop reading here if you're not interested. ;)

But I know some of you are just drooling on the edge of your seats to seat what comes next :lol

So here we go.


<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> In the seventh chapter of 1 Corinthians, Paul says it is good for a man not to touch a woman. We (men) are the first ones to be “called out†in this chapter. We can obviously see that the same is true for women, but men are the first to be mentioned. Then in the second verse, he says, “Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.†Fornication is a sin to be avoided by all men and women, and this is repeated several times throughout the Epistles, but once again, men are the first to be mentioned. Verse three says, “Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.†Once more, men are the first to be “put on the spotâ€.

In the fourth verse, we are told, “The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.†Some may read this passage and see a change in the pattern, because the wife is the first one Paul mentions. I would argue, however, that this is not true. In the first three verses, the man is the first mentioned, the first to be given a responsibility. The man is the first one told not to touch a woman, to have his own wife to avoid fornication, and to render due benevolence unto his wife. These statements are much more than simple Godly advice, they are responsibilities. Verse four specifically uses the word power. In doing some research, I discovered the word in Greek translated “power†in 1 Corinthians 7:4 (exousia) means “authorityâ€. My point being this: the fourth verse isn’t saying that the husband has power over his wife’s body, but he has authority or – more accurately – responsibility of his wife’s body.

There is a reason husbands are “called out†first. There is also a reason why, each time, we are the first ones given a charge. It is because we are meant to be the heads of our wives. This is not a role of power, but one of responsibility. Every time husbands and wives are mentioned together, the husband is the one given the “brunt†of the responsibility, because this is the God-ordained position we are supposed to take. As I said, it is not a position of authority or power in which we are meant to rule our homes. It is a position of responsibility in which we are called to lead our homes, and as such, are held responsible for every aspect of our marriage and our home.

Ephesians 5:22-23 says, “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 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.†True enough, the wife is the first one mentioned, but she is not the one given responsibility. She is told to submit to her husband because he is the head of her, in the manner of Christ being the head of the church. In His death on the cross, Jesus Christ took on the responsibility for our sins. Likewise, the husband is given responsibility of his wife – not to rule, but to provide, protect, and lead – as Christ did.

One passage in particular that really stuck out to me was 1 Peter 3:7. “Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them (your wives) according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered†(emphasis added).

Dictionary.com defines “hindered†this way – 1.) to cause delay, interruption, or difficulty in; hamper, impede: 2.) to prevent from doing, acting, or happening; stop: 3.) to be an obstacle or impediment.

Furthermore, the word “hindered†in Greek is “enkoptesthai†– which literally means “to knock inâ€. Some manuscripts render the word as “ekkopto†– “to cut off or destroyâ€.

So, what this passage basically tells us (husbands), is that if we don’t treat our wives as we should, our prayers are destroyed. They won’t be heard. We may or may not assume the same would be true for the wife. We are not told that for certain, so that part is left open to interpretation. However, what is not left open to interpretation is the fact that the husband is given a responsibility regarding the way he should treat his wife. In fact, we are told very plainly that this is a responsibility the Lord takes so seriously, that our prayers won’t reach Him if we don’t get that part right. This is not a weight or responsibility given to the wife, only to the husband. Again, this is obviously not a position we are to use to rule our wives, but we are explicitly told it is a very humbling position that carries a great responsibility.

The final point I will make is from Ephesians 5:25. “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.†It is very plain here that we should be prepared, and willing, to give our lives for our wife if necessary. Once again, this is not a charge given to women, but to men. Why is that? It’s because we are called to be protector’s of our homes and our wives. Christ offering Himself on the cross was an act of protection for us, because by laying down His life for us, we were granted eternal life which we would not have been able to receive otherwise. Likewise, we are called to do the same for our wives.

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->
 
In our day and age young people leave their parents (move out, often to another town, sometimes even to another country) long before they get married. So I doubt that verses hould be taken too literally for us.

But other than that I think Reba is right. It seems young women are more willing to move out and stand on their own feet, while many young guys I've met are complacent living with their parents as long as they can. I met guys 30+ living with their parents although their parents are still healthy and independent. That's a huge turn off. So yeah, maybe God knew guys would need a push.

And while some people still have the romantic ideal of man pursuing the woman in reality it's probably more variable and often very mutual.
 
Gen 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

See we are ready to leave Mom & Dad you guys need a push :)

:biglol:D
 
...it's probably more variable and often very mutual.
Ta, C

And when the woman boldy makes that move...what should she tell him,

I love you...I want to marry you OR I love you...I want you to marry me? :lol

there are slight differences tho
 
Yeah it sounds like something both do together, rather than putting one in an active and the other in a passive role. Because marriage is teamwork, both have to actively contribute to it.

But if a woman proposes on a man I'd think it's more honest for her to say "I want to marry you" rather than "I want you to marry me" because the latter sound like controlling and pressuring him to do what she wants.
 
Being single myself, I would hope that one day I will find a woman that is both seeking out someone who is faithful to Christ, faithful in courtship etc. If she were to come and seek me out, am I to say no if she is what I been looking for? I don't think I would turn to her and say something like "hey because you approached I can't date you" lol. I'd rather be flattered and honored by her approach.
 
If a woman says it first... good.

A lot of females get tired of waiting for those coawrd to boldly say it. You know something? He may tell himslef, I will boldly do it later. Later never ends. And the woman knows the coward (sorry to say) is suffering.

Then she finally sets him free. She tells him his mind.
 
I would not want a coward..... Way way back in my high school years any guy i could push around was dropped.
 
I would not want a coward..... Way way back in my high school years any guy i could push around was dropped.

Yeah definitely. I dated guys that had no opinion of their own and always gave in to any of my suggestions, or let me hurt and reject them without showing their limits, just for the sake of harmony and uncomplicated sex.
There's nothing wrong with harmony and sex, but those two things work way better if the guy has a personality. People (both women and men) need an opposite, a counterpart to interact with. You gotta know that your partner is a rock you can lean on when times get rough.
Personally for me, a disagreement in which my partner stands his ground would turn me on rather than off. Debating or fun competitions are like the salt in a relationship. ;)
Guys that let me manipulate them or push them around without fighting back are either spineless persons who still have some growing up to do (it's never to late to grow a spine :yes), or they're not taking me seriously enough.
I pray I'll find a guy that thinks the same way about women.

Ugh I think that was off topic, but I'm gonna post it anyway, I made the effort of typing after all.
 
If a woman says it first... good.

A lot of females get tired of waiting for those coawrd to boldly say it. You know something? He may tell himslef, I will boldly do it later. Later never ends. And the woman knows the coward (sorry to say) is suffering.

Then she finally sets him free. She tells him his mind.

I don't know how many times people actually "propose" on their partner in a traditional way. Because in many cases I know the proposal wasn't really a surprise event, but a decision both made together, like: Should we get married next year? Yeah we should. And then the next day they bought engagement rings together and called their families or announced it on facebook.

I'm thinking a marriage is something both should prepare for. And they should actually invest some cognitive and emotional effort into considering whether they are mature and ready for marriage and whether their beloved is the right one. This preparation phase requires honesty and openess and a lot of dialogue between both of them. And only after that sort of preparation they should get engaged to another. So they would actually know for a while that they are possibly headed for an engagement and a proposal wouldn't come as a surprise.

Honestly though when thinking about it, I would really love to be the one to propose on my partner in some awesome, dramatic, romantic and unique way. But a good marriage preparation would propably lead to no romantic proposal, but a decision both make together and that was foreseeable for a while prior to it.

Sorry if I made some weird word choices in this post, I'm trying to teach my self to be confident and rely on my English without clinging to a dictionary.
 
Reba says in her moderating voice sex belongs in marriage.

Yes of course.
bow.gif

I didn't mean to promote anything sinfull.
 
I would not want a coward..... Way way back in my high school years any guy i could push around was dropped.

Yeah definitely. I dated guys that had no opinion of their own and always gave in to any of my suggestions, or let me hurt and reject them without showing their limits, just for the sake of harmony and uncomplicated sex.
There's nothing wrong with harmony and sex, but those two things work way better if the guy has a personality. People (both women and men) need an opposite, a counterpart to interact with. You gotta know that your partner is a rock you can lean on when times get rough.
Personally for me, a disagreement in which my partner stands his ground would turn me on rather than off. Debating or fun competitions are like the salt in a relationship. ;)
Guys that let me manipulate them or push them around without fighting back are either spineless persons who still have some growing up to do (it's never to late to grow a spine :yes), or they're not taking me seriously enough.
I pray I'll find a guy that thinks the same way about women.

Ugh I think that was off topic, but I'm gonna post it anyway, I made the effort of typing after all.

God have mercy. Is that how you threat guys? Believe me God probably will give you the timid and quiet type of husband.:lol
 
Back
Top