Is it Ok if men stay home with children while women work

You are making a false assertion base on the discussoin from another thread. I suggest you return to that thread and see my response to your claims regarding this issue. The my posts are on page four of that thread.

 

Main Entry: 2nurture
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): nur·tured; nur·tur·ing /'n&rch-ri[ng], 'n&r-ch&-/
1 : to supply with nourishment
2 : [SIZE=-1]EDUCATE[/SIZE]
3 : to further the development of : [SIZE=-1]FOSTER[/SIZE]


Of course men are just as capable as women. I know some wonderful fathers.

You don't believe so?

 

I couldn't tell you what your husband or family should do. That's between y'all and God.

 

It depends on the situtation. Can a man breast-feed his infants??:BangHead:

 

No that's what bottles are for.... lol

Someone has to take care of the children, and if the woman has a job, and man doesn't... instead of paying a babysitter, the man should do it...

 

You see it a lot in modern society----man stays home and assumes the role of hoiusewife---woman works outside home assuming the role of husband.

Scenerio that is painted slams against the grain of holy Scripture

 

I've always felt that raising one's kids and spreading God's Word were the two most important tasks a human could ever face. It has always irritated me that as a male, I am required by the majority of western society and the vast majority of Christians, to abandon any ideas of being a full time parent, and, instead, bow to the enslavement of earning the almighty buck, to the expense of time parenting and time serving God with my talents. Yes, I know one can serve God wherever one is, but I'm referring to a full time vocation. Parenting ultimately is more important, fulfilling, and blessed in every way than any 9-5 job (which usually turn out to be more like 8-6 or 7-until-whenever-the-job-is-done jobs).

 

Man is to provide for the home...

"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." - 1 Timothy 5:8​

Woman is to be the keeper at home...

"The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed." - Titus 2:3-5​

 

I have no interest in talking about your parents. This board is too emotional to begin with, without bringing our kin into the debates.

What I'm saying is, if you want to know God's model for the family He has graciously provided instructions for it in the Holy Bible. That instruction is that the husband should provide for the home and the woman should be a keeper at home.

If you want a different model, one where the husband stays home and the woman provides for the home...study feminism.

 

I guess part of this issue is what "keeper of the home" means. In another thread Prov. 31 was mentioned. Now that is one multidimensional woman and she's out selling her wares while she is tending to her household (and the dozen other things listed - like buying fields, planting vineyards, volunteering with the needy, etc).

 

Do you mean that part of the issue is what "keepers at home" means?

 

You are right, I misquoted.

NASB & ESV both say workers/working at home.

It's my understanding that the Titus passage -- workers at home -- is in contrast to women who are idle (and all the things that go with that - like 1 Tim 5:13). Obviously much needs to be done outside the home too as is indicated in Proverbs 31.

 

I am a stay-at-home dad and business owner that is blessed to be able to work from home, so it works for us. And I LOVE the opportunity that I have to spend so much time with my kids!

 

NAS gives it: "to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be dishonored." Titus 2:5

I'm not sure the point is to say that these things, and only these things should be done by all young women. I say this for two reasons, primarily. First, the instruction seems targeted at older women and what they should be teaching the younger at hand, not to all younger women as a standing rule. Second, the purpose of the instruction is given: "that the word of God be not blasphemed." The NAS gives "so that the word of God will not be dishonored." Blasphemy is a strong word and connotations may have changed. But if avoiding "blasphemy" is the purpose, then if we as a society decided that it is ok for wives to work outside the home, then "blasphemy" against the word will not happen because of it. In fact, the word is being criticized in our society because some claim it teaches these gender roles, rather than the word being criticized for teaching women that they can do whatever they want, or nothing, as Paul seems concerned with.

I'm not trying to put words in Paul's mouth here. If anyone can shed more light, I'd appreciate it. Also, I am not one of those that try to interpret all Scripture through the eyes culture; sometimes I think instructions are for everyone in all cultures and should be followed whether the rest of society likes it or not.