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

[Scarlett O.]

I thought the bible was very clear on mans roles and womens roles in the home and work place.

I say this to you with respect, sister. :saint: If you thought the bible was very clear that men get to have callings on their lives and women can't leave the confines of house, then why did you bring it up?

If one is clear on something, one does not usually raise questions. Especially when it is can very easily turn into a heated conversation.

I am bowing out of this thread before I cause trouble.....:saint:

Peace, everybody.

 

[TBLADY]

I brought it up because the same men who believe that men are just as nurturing, empathetic and comapassionate as women want to hold what twisted scripture they can to say they are. Are more than likely going to twist scripture to say that God didn't specifically define roles for man and women, especially when it comes to raising children.

God made women more nurturing...and that is a fact!

I know when I am being baited, they have no grounds for their argument and want to gang up on me, which proves what I have said in my posts for months about "Christians" if they really are?

Too bad they wasted all that writing for nothing LOL

 

[Bible-boy]

I brought it up because the same men who believe that men are just as nurturing, empathetic and comapassionate as women want to hold what twisted scripture they can to say they are. Are more than likely going to twist scripture to say that God didn't specifically define roles for man and women, especially when it comes to raising children.

You are making a false accusation against those of us who have simply disagreed with your statements regarding the male ability (or inability) to show compassion. We have used both Scripture and scholarly sources to refute what you have said. However, you have utterly failed to even attempt to refute our assertions using the same manner. You simply keep repeating things you have previously stated that have been demonstrated to be in error. Just because you state something over and over does not somehow negate the fact that your original statement has been soundly refuted.

God made women more nurturing...and that is a fact!

No one has disputed this fact. However, now you are equivocating the terms "nurturing" and "compassion." They are not one and the same and can not be used interchangeably.

I know when I am being baited, they have no grounds for their argument and want to gang up on me, which proves what I have said in my posts for months about "Christians" if they really are?

Too bad they wasted all that writing for nothing LOL

I assure you that I am not attempting to bait you. Likewise, I am not attempting to gang up on you. Why would I do something like that? Better yet why would you jump to such conclusions? I simply disagree with what you stated about the male ability (or inability) to show compassion. As far I as I am concerned the whole debate over the current issue could end right here and now if you would simply acknowledge that true compassion flows out the the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23), and that born again male and female Christians have completely equal access to the fruit the Spirit. I am not talking about some exceptional example but absolutely equal access to the fruit of the Spirit due to the the power of the Holy Spirit that indwells every born again believer.

 

[blackbird]

Seems there are some here who think men are just as capable of nurturing and taking care of the children.

The forum moderator will refer the posters back to the original post and topic

"Is it OK if men stay home with children while women work?"

The question has not been answered biblically as if yet

I refer readers back to the book of Genesis Chapter 3

The scene is the judgment of God upon the serpent, the woman, and Adam----in that particular order

Verses 14-19

We want to pay attention to what is said by God in verses 16-19

Notice when He places judgment upon Eve that Scripture doesn't refer to her as "Eve" but as "the woman"----but when He places judgment upon the man in verse 17---the Scripture refers to him(the man) as Adam---Scripture is careful to call him by name!!

But I want to see how Scripture places the heaviest burden upon Adam-----notice what Scripture says

"And unto Adam He said, Because thou hast harkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."

The curse that God placed upon the ground was intended for Adam---not for Eve. The thorns and thistles were never intended for Eve. The sweat of the brow was never intended for Eve. The ground was cursed for Adam's sake----not Eve's

IOW----Eve was getting off "lightly" compared to her husband, Adam

Now----as for the original post and the question----is it OK for men to stay home with children while women work

Think about this----God is giving woman a job that cannot be reproduce by man in Genesis 3:16-----a man simply cannot assume the woman's role placed upon her by God in this verse. Although in our modern society I see personally---of sorts---the twist in verse 16---where it says "he shall rule over thee"----I have personally seen this role "reversed"---if you know what I mean---a twist of Scripture.

The dangerous part of a woman---assuming the role of a man --- as in a woman working in the place of a man(bear down on that fact)----the dangerous part of a woman working in the place of a man---and allowing the man to stay at home with the kids is this----the woman(by working in place of the man) is also assuming the curse placed upon man in verse 17-19----just as it is impossible for the man to assume the role of the woman in verse 16----it is also impossible fior the woman to assume the role of the man in verses 17-19----when the roles are reversed---it leads to a dysfuntional family.

By the woman working in the place of man----she is assuming an unnessary burden---she now places twice the load upon herself---in that she must bear the burden placed upon woman in verse 16 plus because she assumes the role of the man---she takes his burden upon herself also---an impossibliity she cannot bear and she does not realize it because of selfishness and also because the god of this age has blinded her eyes through unbelief--but she is now in bondage to a curse that was never intended for her---its no wonder families are in the shape they're in!!!!

 

[TBLADY]

You are making a false accusation against those of us who have simply disagreed with your statements regarding the male ability (or inability) to show compassion.

Seems a few of you are having trouble with the ENGLISH language. I said over and over as a RULE women tend to be more compassionate and empathetic. What part of AS A RULE do you not understand? You want to focus on the exception.

You guys are the ones twisting things not me.

I am now going to try and find the biblical position of the roles of man and women in the home and work place. I will post my finding.

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Different people have different talents. Sometimes women must work outside the home, and some men are very nuturing. No one should make rules for someone elses family. If yours works for you, great.

 

[TBLADY]

before i start it would seem that women working outside the home has lead to the increase of affairs between women outside the home with men in the work place. Now don't tell me this isn't true LOL

 

[Scarlett O.]

The thorns and thistles were never intended for Eve. The sweat of the brow was never intended for Eve.

My mother and my grandmothers unfortunately never received this revelation.

The manual labor that they did just in the home, let alone the cotton fields, beauty shop, and school cafeteria was enough to constitute the sweat of the entire body, not just the brow! :laugh: :laugh:

IOW----Eve was getting off "lightly" compared to her husband, Adam

I don't know blackbird. You are speaking from a man's perspective. I daresay that you, because you are a man, you will never understand the grievous burden it is to carry Eve's punishment and have a another human being rise up over you and rule over you and be in subjection to him.

Adam's ruling over her was a punishment.

That's a punishment which cannot be stated, as you say, as "lightly" compared to Adam's.

You ask any woman today, who dearly loves her husband, how that makes her feel. I'm not talking about his protective nature or his spiritual leadership. Those are blessings to wives.

I'm talking about the punishment that still is in effect. I'm talking about his ruling over her. Just ask. Or perhaps you'd better not. Women tend to share those burdens privately with other women. A lot. They don't want to hurt their husbands' feelings because they love their husbands.

I would state that both Adam and Eve were both punished greatly. Neither one can claim to have been punished more than the other.

 

[Bible-boy]

before i start it would seem that women working outside the home has lead to the increase of affairs between women outside the home with men in the work place. Now don't tell me this isn't true LOL

Would it be a reasonable request to ask that you stick to one issue at a time instead of raising different issue after different issue? If you keep jumping from issue to issue we will never come to an understanding of the point you are trying make much less come hopefully, as Christians, come to a biblical agreement on the original issue.

 

[Bible-boy]

I don't know blackbird. You are speaking from a man's perspective. I daresay that you, because you are a man, you will never understand the grievous burden it is to carry Eve's punishment and have a another human being rise up over you and rule over you and be in subjection to him.

Adam's ruling over her was a punishment.

That's a punishment which cannot be stated, as you say, as "lightly" compared to Adam's.

You ask any woman today, who dearly loves her husband, how that makes her feel. I'm not talking about his protective nature or his spiritual leadership. Those are blessings to wives.

I'm talking about the punishment that still is in effect. I'm talking about his ruling over her. Just ask. Or perhaps you'd better not. Women tend to share those burdens privately with other women. A lot. They don't want to hurt their husbands' feelings because they love their husbands.

I would state that both Adam and Eve were both punished greatly. Neither one can claim to have been punished more than the other.

I'd have to disagree with you slightly regarding Adam's (man's) ruling over Eve (woman). It was always God's intent and design for the man to have authority over the woman even before the Fall. Man was created first and woman was created out of (God using part of him) the man. This is the created order. God instructed Adam regarding the forbidden fruit. The Bible does not say or imply that God gave the same instruction to Eve. God left it to Adam to teach Eve what God had instructed. Likewise, the curse/punishment is in the fact that God said: "Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" (Gen. 3:16, NKJV). I think the reason behind the feelings that women have (which you referenced) regarding male rule or authority come directly from God's pronounced curse related to their desire.

 

[TBLADY]

Moved below

 

[Scarlett O.]

God instructed Adam regarding the forbidden fruit. The Bible does not say or imply that God gave the same instruction to Eve.

True, there is no direct statement or implication about that in the bible.

God left it to Adam to teach Eve what God had instructed.

:saint: I don't see a direct statement or implication about that in the bible, either.

Likewise, the curse/punishment is in the fact that God said: "Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" (Gen. 3:16, NKJV). I think the reason behind the feelings that women have (which you referenced) regarding male rule or authority come directly from God's pronounced curse related to their desire.

So you are saying that the women feel punished not because of a husband's authority, but because of God's curse on their perspective of that authority? I don't know about that.

Perhaps you misunderstood me. I wasn't saying that husbands were granted authority as a punishment.

I was saying that the authority that they were initially granted before the fall is abused from time to time. Not that husbands abuse their wives per se, but they sometimes abuse their authority. That's the "ruling over you" part that is sometimes hurtful to women. How can you "rule"....a word which heavily implies superiority......a person you are one flesh with?

The husband being the loving head of his wife and his sacrificing himself daily for her sake as Christ sacrificed himself for the church isn't a punishment. It's a blessing. That is not what I am talking about.

 

[Bible-boy]

Seems a few of you are having trouble with the ENGLISH language. I said over and over as a RULE women tend to be more compassionate and empathetic. What part of AS A RULE do you not understand? You want to focus on the exception. You guys are the ones twisting things not me.

There is no part of your humanistic rule that I do not understand. However, the part of your humanistic rule that I have a problem with is where it departs from the clear teaching of the Bible regarding the fruit of the Sipirt (Gal. 5:22-23) with respect to the ability of every born again believer, who is indwelt by the power of the Holy Spirit, to equally show compassion as an out growth of said fruit of the Spirit.

Look, I am not attempting to deny that many men are less compassionate then women; however, I am not addressing the ability of non-Christian men to show compassion I am talking about born again Christian men. You seem to want to come into a Christian discussion forum and focus your argument solely on worldly non-Christian men almost to the exclusion of biblical truth by disregarding the natural out growth of the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23). Then it seems that you are arguing your point based on secular humanistic sources that are focued upon nonChristian men, take a principle from those sources, and apply it to all men in general (including born again Christian men). My point is that you can not do that because it disregards the indewlling power of the Holy Spirit in the born again Christian. Now, since there are millions of born again Christian men in the world the numbers are far to vast to consider them as the exception to the rule you are espousing.

 

[TBLADY]

1 Timothy 5:8
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.

5:9 Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the wife of one man.
5:10 Well reported of for good works; if she have brought up children, if she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the saints' feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work.

2 Thes 3:10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any man would not work, neither should he eat.

Titus 2:4-5 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.Seems like enough scripture to me.

I think it is very important that a women stays home if she has children....and keepers of the home during this time.

For a single person or one who has grown children working outside the home or from within her home to earn extra money or for other benifits is ok. and here is why

1) God commanded it for a reason for the benifit of the family unit and society.

2) There is or shouldn't be nothing stronger than a mothers bond with her child. yes fathers can be very nurturing and just as bonded to their children but not as the norm....even in the animal kingdom nothing like a mothers love and protection.

3) Putting your child in day care no matter how good, isn't as ideal as being home with it's mother, who will give it more one on one time? I have a hard time with stories of child care workers killing children and it is never brought up that the mother should be caring for that child, not some stranger. Especially at an age when the child cannot communicate what may be happening to them. Is it really worth a few more dollars than a dead child...I should say NOT!

4) The excuse that families NEED a bigger house, two to 3 cars and "stuff" therefore mom needs to work in order to keep up, is wrong and people should live within their means and put their children first.

5) As I stated before WOMEN having affairs is close to equal with men in the work place and is a result of women in the work place.

6) Children rasied as latch key children or who's mothers work tend to be more insecure and get in trouble more often then those who's parents show an interest and are active in their daily lives.

I am sure there are more reasons but this is what I came up with so far.

Personally I cannot find any justification for a mother who is married to HAVE to work outside the home at the expense of her children. The bible is clear the MAN should be the sole provider and protector.

 

[Scarlett O.]

Personally I cannot find any justification for a mother who is married to HAVE to work outside the home at the expense of her children.

Sister, you have answered your own question.

Many women have callings on their lives that are in the workforce. Teachers, doctors, judges, nurses and more. The Apostle Paul worked as a tentmaker with Aquila and Priscilla. The Proverbs 31 women worked outside the home and still manage to be the nurture/manager of the household.

Many of these women have callings on their lives have mothers who help with childcare or other family members.....yes, and even husbands who help them.

I would daresay that neither the mother NOR the father should do anything at the expense of their children or their families.

 

[TBLADY]

Thanks Scarlett I really didn't have a question as much as I was trying to prove a point. The woman in Proverbs is still like the mom who stays home, who has to go to the market, taxie her children around and other erronds of the day, nothing more or less. She is still the keeper of her home and as you read her husband is out working.

And to Bible Boy

If anyone has read any of my other posts, you will see I said I and others I have talked to have been treated more compassionately from NON CHRISTIANS than those who claim to be.

You do not have to be born again or even spirit filled to show compassion or empathy...it is a God given emotion which is often genetically inclined or learned (through ones own experenses) trying to say only spirit filled people can have these emotions is simply not true.

Animals show these emotions and they do not have a spirit

 

[Bible-boy]

I said:

God left it to Adam to teach Eve what God had instructed.

To which Scarlett replied:

:saint: I don't see a direct statement or implication about that in the bible, either.

We agree that the Bible makes it clear that God instructed only Adam regarding the forbidden fruit. Likewise, we do not see in the Bible where God gave Eve those same instructions Himself. Thus, the implication is that in order for Eve not to disobey God's command Adam had to have told her what God said. If not how else was she to know and obey God's command?

So you are saying that the women feel punished not because of a husband's authority, but because of God's curse on their perspective of that authority? I don't know about that.

No I am not saying that. I am saying that I disagree with the interpretation of many commentators and preachers regarding what the "desire" in Ge. 3:16 is speaking about. Some maintain that the "desire" has to do with the woman's sexual desire for her husband. However, while I agree that that is within the realm of possibilities it is not solely what the verse is talking about. I think the "desire" also has to do with the curse being that women will desire to rule over men. However, God says that it shall not happen--"And he shall rule over you" (Gen. 3:16, NKJV). I am not attempting disregard what you were expressing about how women feel when men abuse authority. I am saying that I think there is more to those feelings than just that one perspective.

Perhaps you misunderstood me. I wasn't saying that husbands were granted authority as a punishment.

I was saying that the authority that they were initially granted before the fall is abused from time to time. Not that husbands abuse their wives per se, but they sometimes abuse their authority. That's the "ruling over you" part that is sometimes hurtful to women. How can you "rule"....a word which heavily implies superiority......a person you are one flesh with?

The rule/authority of the man in the one flesh union goes directly back to God's created order. Yes, they become one flesh. However, their one flesh union can not have two heads. Two heads equals a monster. Someone has to have final authority and according to God's original created order that final authority rests with the husband.

The husband being the loving head of his wife and his sacrificing himself daily for her sake as Christ sacrificed himself for the church isn't a punishment. It's a blessing. That is not what I am talking about.

I fully agree, and I know that I must seek the Lord's assistance to be that kind of husband to my wife everyday. Lord help me to be more and more like you.raying:

 

[Bible-boy]

Thanks Scarlett I really didn't have a question as much as I was trying to prove a point. The woman in Proverbs is still like the mom who stays home, who has to go to the market, taxie her children around and other erronds of the day, nothing more or less. She is still the keeper of her home and as you read her husband is out working.

And to Bible Boy

If anyone has read any of my other posts, you will see I said I and others I have talked to have been treated more compassionately from NON CHRISTIANS than those who claim to be.

You do not have to be born again or even spirit filled to show compassion or empathy...it is a God given emotion which is often genetically inclined or learned (through ones own experenses) trying to say only spirit filled people can have these emotions is simply not true.

I never said that only born again Christians are capable of showing compassion. I simply pointed out that compassion is a natural out growth of the fruit of the Spirit. As such every born again believer, whether male or female, has equal access to the fruit of the Spirit. How much individual born again believers display the fruit of the Spirit depends solely upon how closely they are living according to God's Word and their personal relationship with Christ.

Please explain to me how the ability to show compassion (an act) is an emotion. The two terms "emotion" and "compassion" do not mean the same thing. You are equivocating the two terms. Likewise, compassion is not solely driven by human emotion it is the natural out growth of the fruit of the Spirit as outlined in Gal. 5:22-23.

 

[donnA]

Originally Posted by blackbird
IOW----Eve was getting off "lightly" compared to her husband, Adam

You've obviously never given birth.

 

[Amy.G]

You've obviously never given birth.

:laugh: Good one Donna!