In recent years I have had occasion to speak with more family law attorneys than I would wish on anyone. They haven’t helped my overall opinion of lawyers. I don’t like them.
There are a few exceptions, however. Adam Moore is one. He didn’t represent me, but we had a few very helpful conversations. He seemed like an honest man and understands what men sometimes face in divorce and custody disputes. If you are a man in the Denver area and in need of family law advice, give him a call.
“Please, please, please, give me the privilege to surrender my freedoms to the state!”
Isn’t that what gays are actually saying when they clamour for gay marriage?
Check out today’s Non Sequitur.
Genesis 33:13-14
…as the children be able to endure… It is important for a man to remember not to drive his family harder than they are able to withstand. Sometimes change is necessary, especially when you are leading your family out of worldliness, but be gentle. You want to lead them forward, not to drive them away altogether.
Judges 5:1-31
The Song of Deborah is a very difficult passage for translators. The sentence construction is unusual, and some Hebrew words are found nowhere else in Scripture. For example, consider some of the ways in which the first clause of verse 5 has been translated:
• King James Version: “They that are delivered from the noise of archers in the places of drawing water…”
• English Standard Version: “To the sound of musicians at the watering places…”
• Brenton English Septuagint: “Ye that are delivered from the noise of disturbers among the drawers of water…”
• Jewish Publication Society: “Louder than the voice of archers, by the watering-troughs!”
• Douay-Rheims Bible: “Where the chariots were dashed together, and the army of the enemies was choked…”
• Young’s Literal Translation: “By the voice of shouters between the places of drawing water…”
I have tried not to base my interpretations on any particular translation that fits my preconceptions, but to examine the passage as a whole. I wanted to learn what Deborah was actually trying to say and to apply her meaning to marriage and the family without imposing my own preconceptions onto her words. If I have failed, I should not wonder, but I take some solace in the trouble this passage has given translators throughout modern history.
Judges 5:2-5
Praise ye the LORD for the avenging of Israel… Deborah and Barak did not liberate Israel, but God alone did it. Although he could have defeated Israel’s enemies whenever he chose, he did it only when Israel voluntarily took up the role that God had set for them. Many people find success in their endeavours for various reasons, but all of them are more successful if they live according to God’s design. Where men conduct military affairs, armies tend to prevail. Where women teach their children and feed their households, families tend to grow strong and numerous. God’s Providence empowers them, whether they acknowledge him or not. Within the family, God has designed men and women for different roles. It is possible for a single mother or a single father to bring up healthy, well adjusted children, but it is more difficult than if they were a complete family. It is possible for a woman to run her own affairs effectively, but she would be happier and more effective as a woman if she shared the responsibility with a good man. The same is true for a man without a good woman. God designed us to live according to certain roles and patterns. We can survive outside of them, but we can only be at our best if we conform to his design.
Judges 5:6-7
…until that I Deborah arose, that I arose a mother in Israel. The word here translated as “The inhabitants of the villages,” perazon, should have been translated “Inhabitants of the countryside.” Men in Israel had forsaken their rightful role as lawgivers and protectors, and a criminal element of foreign brigands had taken control of the countryside. The main roads were no longer safe to travel, and the rural farmers all fled to the walled towns. Nature and government both abhor a vacuum, and where no man will lead, a woman will. There is no sin in a woman leading her country or her family when that role is abandoned by patriarchs. However, if the men are doing their jobs, a woman taking charge is a usurper. No matter how good her intentions, she can only cause harm in the end.
Judges 5:8-10
…then was war in the gates. The war in the gates of Israel’s towns was not with foreign invaders, but between the men of Israel. From the previous verses, we know that the countryside was unsafe. The people fled to the cities and walled towns. This war in the gates was caused by idolatry and was fought with rhetoric. Men of action had nearly disappeared (“Was there a shield or spear seen among forty thousand in Israel?”), leaving only theologians, philosophers, and lawyers to fight amongst themselves instead of against Jabin and Sisera. When men become cowards or sluggards or “too heavenly minded to be any earthly good,” great women such as Deborah rightly take over leadership. I would rather serve a righteous Deborah than an unrighteous Ahab or Omri.
My heart is toward the governors of Israel… Deborah rejoiced in those few men who remained to judge righteously and did not fear the incriminations of idolaters.
Speak, ye that ride on white asses… “Speak” here means to speculate or debate. Deborah was calling on the proud and wealthy philosophers who had taken over the gates to emulate those men who were still capable of acting on behalf of their people, who could still command troops in real war instead of only words in verbal sparring.
Judges 5:12
…utter a song…and lead thy captivity captive… God’s direction to Deborah was to galvanize the nation to war through her prophetic singing, while God’s direction to Barak was to lead the armies of Israel to liberation. Deborah judged Israel, but she did so only because there was no one else. When a masculine leader arose, Deborah sought to step out of the limelight, but even then, Barak did not fully accept his place. Deborah’s extraordinary character shines through this entire story. Throughout, she continues to praise Barak and the other reluctant deliverers of Israel even as they hid behind her proverbial skirts.
Judges 5:13
…dominion over the mighty. God rewarded those men who stood for Israel by giving them glory and authority over the pacifist philosophers who occupied the places of honor in the gates. He rewarded Deborah’s courage and strength by placing her in authority even over those warriors.
Judges 5:24-26
Blessed above women… Jael was alone in her tent when she killed Sisera. While Barak needed Deborah to give him courage, Jael needed neither woman nor man. She lured Sisera with charm and comfort and killed him when the greatest warriors of Israel could not.
Judges 5:27
At her feet he bowed… Here and in other places in Scripture, the feet are a euphemism for genitalia. Deborah was emphasizing Jael’s use of feminine wiles to conquer a great general. He did not fall beneath her sword, but beneath her promises of succor. This is one example of the differing strengths of men and women. Men are superior at feats of arms, while women excel at feats of charm.
I will probably never have perfect faith in this life, but mine has radically improved in recent years. I have commanded healing for people who were then healed (though I have difficulty calling on that same power for myself). I have prayed against people who then suffered. I have seen words spoken into the air influence decisions and circumstances. I have asked and received.
More than a month ago I asked some friends for prayer about something I wanted. I wasn’t sure if it was the right thing, and I didn’t want to make a major mistake. I wisely did not trust my own judgment on this matter. One friend replied about a week later saying that God wanted me to get out of the burbs and become an integral part of a real community of believers who are involved in each other’s lives and committed to one another’s well being. The exact community was my choice, but I had to move soon.
That fit with what I wanted for myself, but it’s a big step, especially when my ex and I share custody of our son. I couldn’t legally move with my son without her consent, and I knew that going to court would almost certainly be a disaster for everyone. Before plunging into such a risky venture, I needed to be sure that this was truly a word from God. I asked several other people for prayer, and I began fasting. After nearly two weeks agonizing over this, my mother gave me some excellent advice: Quit praying so hard and just listen. I continued to seek God, but relaxed somewhat, trying to keep my eyes and ears open for whatever God might have to say.
11/6
My son told me that maybe God is just waiting for me to step out in faith. “Why not take a leap of faith?” he asked.
11/7
On Friday, my pastor told me that he didn’t have a word from God, but (for a reason I won’t divulge at this time) moving sounded like the right thing to do.
11/8
At about the time I had started down this road, I had been asked to read the Torah portion to the congregation on November 8th. I was already familiar with the parsha, so I didn’t review it ahead of time. On Saturday, I stepped up to the podium and was still quite surprised to read in the very first verse, “Now Yahweh said to Abram, ‘Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you.’”
Later that same day I was speaking to one of the older men in the congregation. I told him about the word I had received and wondered out loud if this Torah reading was the confirmation. He replied, “You should have asked me before. I knew months ago that you were going to leave.” That’s when I decided it was definitely time to go.
A few minutes later, my ex called to tell me she was expecting a baby. I knew it was something she had been wanting for years. I also knew it meant she would be OK if my son and I moved further away.
On Monday, I learned that my real estate agent had received a bid on my house for the full asking price. The bid actually came in on Saturday, but he knew I kept a seventh day sabbath, so he didn’t call me then. He keeps a first day sabbath, so he told me on Monday.
That was six confirmations in three days, but there remained one big hurdle. I knew that my ex wasn’t happy about me considering leaving the state. We had come to an uneasy agreement earlier in the year, but I hadn’t acted on it, and there were dramatic changes in circumstances between then and now. I prayed for softened hearts and peace between us and then called her on 11/12. She held to that same agreement with no anger and no fighting. My son and I will move to Texas, and he will spend a substantial part of each year with his mother. It’s not an ideal situation, but it allows both of us to follow our hearts without resorting to lawyers and expensive legal maneuvers.
God is good, “and we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.” I’m headed south for the Winter.
I don’t have a job in my new location, yet. I have some promising leads, but I am committed to moving regardless of my employment situation. God doesn’t give direction without also giving the means to follow through. This is yet another opportunity to develop greater faith. “Lord, I believe. Help my unbelief.”
Senator Convicted on Corruption Charges
Verdict Casts Doubt on Reelection Prospects for Alaska Republican Ted StevensBy JASON RYAN, PIERRE THOMAS and THERESA COOK
Oct. 27, 2008—A jury in Washington, D.C., has convicted Alaska Republican Sen. Ted Stevens on federal corruption charges, casting doubt on the future of his 40-year political career.
A federal grand jury indicted Stevens, 84, in July on seven counts of making false statements, for allegedly lying on U.S. Senate financial disclosure forms for the years 1999 to 2006…..
Apparently being convicted of corruption charges isn’t necessarily a bar to being elected to the Senate.
The jury of eight women and four men deliberated for five hours Monday before returning guilty verdicts on all seven counts.
How exactly is a jury of 8 women and 4 men a “jury of one’s peers?” Something about that smells wrong.
Genesis 6:18
…thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons’ wives with thee. Genesis does not describe Noah’s family as especially righteous, although it is reasonable to believe that they were. (With the possible exception of Ham, of course. See Genesis 9:22-27.) The families of righteous men tend to be more righteous than the families of unrighteous men. The most convincing evidence of the character of Noah’s family, however, is that they went along with his plan to build a giant boat contrary to common sense. They trusted Noah’s judgment enough to stick by his side through one hundred years of ridicule and alienation. Most women today would leave their husband if he so much as quit his job to start a prison ministry or a homeless shelter. It would be almost unthinkable to stay with him while he gave up everything to pursue an unprecedented project with no conceivable benefit. How many women would even believe their husbands had heard from God, let alone support him in carrying out God’s instructions? I do not mean to blame women. How many men could inspire their wives and children to such devotion? What kind of man must Noah have been to inspire such loyalty in his wife and to have brought up such children?
I should also mention that Noah is the second verifiably monogamous man mentioned in Scripture. The first monogamist introduced death into the world, while the second presided over death’s ultimate implementation. Both men were righteous overall, but their monogamy seems to be more of a practical consideration than anything else. Adam could not have two wives because polygamy was not to be the standard pattern for all families. Noah could not have two wives for two reasons: there were too few good women in the world, and he only took with him on the ark what was necessary for regeneration.
Check out A Commentary on Marriage in the Bible!
No, that’s not a fancy new name for chipped beef on toast. It’s Spengler’s review of Natan Sharansky’s book Defending Identity. I haven’t read the book and probably won’t, but I thought this was worth repeating:
Eliminating all passionate attachments, Sharansky might have said, is a fool’s errand. A rabbinic tale of antiquity reports what happened when God decided to eliminate the ”evil impulse”, by which the rabbis meant the competitive and sexual instinct among men. The next day not a single egg was laid in the land of Israel, and God was obliged to restore the impulse. Europe may have succeeded in eliminating nationalism, or rather, nationalism burnt itself out in two hideously destructive World Wars. As a result children no longer are born to the Europeans. The problem is self-liquidating.
On the other hand, the two countries considered most suspect for their nationalism by the supposedly enlightened Europeans, the United States and Israel, are the only ones in the entire industrial world to reproduce at above replacement level.
There’s more good stuff, too, but it wouldn’t be polite to reproduce the entire thing here.
Genesis 2:18, part 2
I will make him an help meet for him. According to Adam Clarke, the Hebrew for “help meet for him,” ezer kenegdo, “implies that the woman was to be a perfect resemblance of the man, possessing neither inferiority nor superiority, but being in all things like and equal to himself.”1 He was right to a certain extent. Eve was like Adam in that she was of mankind, and not animal kind, and in that she possessed both body and spirit while the animals have only body, but was not quite “a perfect resemblance of the man.” The physical differences between men and women are obvious. The spiritual differences are not so obvious, but they are evident in the Creation story, in many other scriptural references to the differently ordained roles of men and women, and in the practical roles into which men and women have almost universally organized their activities.2
Ezer implies more of an ally than a servant. In fact, David used that word several times to refer to God. In Psalm 33, he wrote, “Our soul waiteth for the LORD: he is our help and our shield.” And in Psalm 70, he wrote, “O God: thou art my help and my deliverer.” The term implies an ally, an indispensable supporter, a rescuer, and a man’s wife is certainly all of these things. There is nothing in the word to imply inferiority, but there is really nothing in the word that implies any kind of relationship at all except one of crucial support. The fact that she was made specifically for Adam’s purposes, and not for her own, however, demonstrates God’s intended purpose for her, to actively serve Adam, just as man’s purpose is to actively serve God. Stephen B. Clark wrote, “The description of the woman as a ‘helper fit for him’ implies that the woman was not simply to be, but to do. Her role is to be an active one in the support of her husband.”3 Eve was not created just to keep Adam company, and both men and women will live happier lives if they focus on their God ordained tasks. Women will be happier if they focus their lives on serving their husbands and rearing their children.
There is also no reason to suppose that women have no other purpose but to serve their husbands and bear their children. God has often used women as prophetesses to convey his words to mankind, and he has also given women the ability to take over leadership roles when men fail either through inability or abdication. Women might have their own missions assigned directly by God, but the vast majority of women will be happier and more fulfilled as wives and mothers, just as the majority of men will be happier as husbands and fathers. And a part of being a godly wife and mother involves willingly submitting to her husband in her role as his subordinate ally.4
1 Clarke, Adam. Commentary on the Bible. e-Sword v7.0.5. Copyright 2000-2003, Rick Meyers. .
2 Goldberg, Stephen. The Inevitability of Patriarchy. New York: William Morrow & Company, Inc., 1974. 228. “…the central fact is that men and women are different from each other from the gene to the thought to the act and that emotions that underpin masculinity and femininity, that make reality as experienced by the male eternally different from that experienced by the female, flow from the biological natures of man and woman…the women of every society have taken the paths they have not because they were forced by men but because they have followed their own imperatives.”
3 Clark, Stephen B. Man and Woman in Christ. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Servant Press, 1980. 20.
4 “Genesis 2:18 describes the man’s problem as being his aloneness, but it describes the solution as being ‘a helper fit for him’. Genesis does not describe woman as a companion to man but as a helper. As Von Rad points out, the phrase is not a romantic evaluation of woman. Rather it presents woman as ‘useful’ to man. A man’s wife is supposed to ‘do something’ for him, just as he is supposed to ‘do something’ for her. If she does not do what she is supposed to do for him (and if he does not do what he is supposed to do for her) deep interpersonal sharing will not make the marriage a good marriage.” Clark. Man and Woman. 22.
Strength or weakness can be expressed in one’s decision making process. The greater one’s authority, the greater one’s responsibility in making decisions. A leader may ask his followers for their opinions, but he may not ask his followers to make his decisions for him. He has the final say, and his is the ultimate responsibility for the consequences.
For example, if a man is faced with a major decision that will effect his entire family–such as buying or selling a house, changing jobs, or relocating–he should not tell his wife, “We will move if you are willing to quit your job.” That would put the final decision-making authority and responsibility onto his wife. However, he can legitimately ask God to tell him what to do: “If you want us to move, then tell me by providing employment in the new location or taking away employment here.”
He who wears the pants bears the burden. This was a hard lesson for me to learn, and I still need reminders now and then.
Technorati Tags: patriarchy, authority, responsibility, character
You are currently browsing the archives for the Men’s Rights category.