I dedicate this post to Mrs. Ruby Hurley. She was a very influential and pioneering woman.
“So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man.Then the man said,
‘This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.’
Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.”
-Genesis 2:21-24 [ESV]
I do stonework right now. I have to take foot square concrete blocks out of the ground, re-level the ground, and then tamp the blocks back in, flush and decently level. I love it. One thing I hate about it though, is the finishing up part. It always takes way longer to complete the stonework, because you get about 80% done, and then you look up and start seeing every little detail. These stones are crooked, I gotta hoe up the 6 over here, I gotta go get ANOTHER load of dirt…they ran out of dirt? HELL NO I ain’t usin’ clay again…screw that! Loose ends, man…
Not that I hate tying up THESE loose ends…I just used that to get you hooked in, so now we can get serious. We just came out of a 3 part series looking at Feminism, how men should respond, and Genesis. I forgot 2 things in there, and my fingers got tired after the last one of those posts…thing was a monster, I do tell you. So, I decided to just devote a separate post to cover the last loose ends.
First off, I made a seeming bait-and-switch through all 3 of those posts. It leaves a hole in the overall arguments, so before I get creamed on it by the haters, I will patch the wall myself. I posited that men (and women) should act a certain way towards each other. However, I based it on scripture passages that speak of marriage. This seems dishonest at first glance, but it is really not. Not so long ago, though, I myself would have written those 3 posts off for that reason (I’m a single guy, WTF do I need this for…this is just for married folks!), so before someone else makes that error, this is a fairly straightforward argument for why verses on marriage can be used to dictate behavior of unmarried folks too.
One: God’s original intent for relationships between men and women was and is matrimony. Our current culture makes relationships between men and women uber complicated, but the Bible straightens this out. Look at the scripture above. The last 2 sentences (Genesis 2:24-25) are the first ever wedding. God made the bride from the groom’s body, brought her to him, the man spoke a few words of poetic love (note that that speech in verse 23 is actually the first recorded speech by a human being, ever), and forthwith, they were married. No waiting around six months, no sleeping around (since there were only two humans there), no “trying it out”, none of that nonsense. Just creation, speech, and marriage. The way these verses read, it may have all been over in under an hour. Imagine that…the first woman was single for like maybe 30 minutes, then married for the next couple hundred years, until she died. Notice the lack of “Strong Independence”.
Note also verse 24: “Therefore a man”. For what reason? What is the “Therefore” there for? Well, the Bible interprets itself perfectly, so upon seeing a “Therefore”, it means look at the preceding verses: God made a woman, brought her to the man, and the the man gives his love-speech. What this is roughly saying is that this is how God means for it to work: Men and women are to join up and marry. This is strongly reinforced if you look at Genesis 1:27-28, where God creates the male and the female and blesses them. Temporally, Genesis 2 is a story which occurred within Genesis 1. Genesis 1 tells the action of God creating the world, and Genesis 2 takes a closer look at Him creating humanity. By reading how the Scripture flows, we can confidently say that Genesis 2:4-25 occurred somewhere between Genesis 1:26 and 1:31. We would also place God’s blessing of them in chapter 1 after His union of them in chapter 2. In other words, like with everything else God made that week, he consummated and then blessed marriage, in that order.
As for the last part of Genesis 2:24, that is actually applied to all men, because a man is not married until he cleaves to his wife with whom he becomes one flesh. God is here in these verses telling everyone that He made men and women such that men are supposed to leave their families, pursue ONE woman (no polygamy or harems, even though men did do them later…God does not bless that mess), and marry that woman, and cleave to her like the white on rice until they both drop dead. Marriage is given from God, and God alone defines it. And divorce? Don’t make me laugh. God Himself says, “‘For I hate divorce!’ says the LORD, the God of Israel.” (Malachi 2:16a, NLT) I agree. Divorce is bullsh*t (funny how in a so-called Christian nation, divorce can be a $50 BILLION industry. Maybe young men don’t marry as much ’cause we’re SMART).
At any rate, God designed men and women to get married. Obviously this refers (as I do in those posts) to single men and women who are unrelated, as family stems from marriage, since marriage is God’s way for people to reproduce, and be fruitful and multiply. That being established, the larger second premise which flows from that is that there is a lot of truth about the natures of men and women in the passages about wives and husbands. For one thing, since marriage is God’s optimal Modus Operandi for a good chunk of relationships between men and women, it would follow that He would help men and women understand each other so that marriages aren’t so stained and strained by those curses He gave Adam and Eve (and all men and women thereafter). If you read the passages about husbands and wives in 1 Peter and 1 Timothy, and 1 Corinthians and even Song of Solomon (that is an X-rated book in the Bible right there, lemme tell ya!), you will notice that they say very similar things. You will also notice that a few directly cite or sound VERY similar to Genesis 2. Genesis 2 is like the OG of marriage and relationship Bible passages; it is the granddaddy of all the rest. In other words, all of this scripture is profitable (2 Timothy 3:16), even to unmarried folks like me. Therefore, it should be at least looked at. You can actually learn a lot of “game” by studying Scripture. Some of the secular blogs of the “manosphere” even note this from time to time. This is because the Maker of humanity knows better than ANYONE ELSE just how we were made to work, and just how our sinful selves actually do work.
Finally, and this one is a bit more brief, the second point I forgot: Love is firm. We always hear about this mushy, gushy love of God all the time in the church pews. What we hear much less of, is that more steely-eyed, tougher love. That “Ima beat yo @$$ if you ain’t inside when the streetlights come on” love (which has kept many a youth out of trouble). Did you know that God has that kind of love too? He will judge everyone when He comes back again (Revelation 20:11-15), and if they are not found in the Book of Life, they will go straight to Eternal Hellfire and Brimstone Lake, with Satan and all his demons. God also disciplines us (Proverbs 3:12, Hebrews 12:6-11, Revelation 3:19) because He loves us. Yeah, I hate that too, but then again, if my folks hadn’t beat the mess out of me sometimes when I was growing up, I’d be either in jail or in a graveyard, and certainly not writing these posts. So, whadyagunado, eh?
My point on that last bit is that men sometimes have to show women tough love (taboo, right?). Sometimes, women can go into emotionally charged fits of crazy (I have been on the receiving end of a few of these), and they need men to act as a sort of regulating valve. There is a saying somewhere in one of the blogs I follow that men should be the strong, firmly rooted oak tree that withstands their wives’ emotional storms. I have even seen my father be that man, and I respect the heck out of him for it. A thing that used to bug me in particular about Black women was that they staunchly tend (and even moreso now) to demand that the men they were with be fairly muscular/big/athletic. Then it hit me…because of their more aggressive nature, that is actually a must. Within Black American culture, you simply must be strong as a man in order to lead a woman. I am learning this the hard way (I was a nerd in high school, ok? It takes a while to switch from books to barbells…). Amy Winehouse even said it: “You should be stronger than me.” This does mean, however, that men must, once again, reject passivity, and get in the gym and lift those damn weights. Now whether our Eves are worth all that, there’s another thing…but that’s for another post.
Hollywood used to pump out movies about strong, morally upright men. Go back and watch some of those old black-and-white films. They are inspiring these days, what with our TV shows about gay families, dumb@$$ men, and weak limp-wristed Liberals. But back then, men had some backbone, and from time to time, they had to handle their women. There is a scene in Alfred Hitchcock’s “The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956)” that really shows this. I could not find a clip of it, but basically the main male protagonist (James Stewart) has just found out that his child has been kidnapped. He goes back to their hotel room and has to break this news to his wife (the lovely Doris Day), who is already worried. She is understandably distraught, and basically goes through the 5 stages of grieving in about 3 minutes. He has to physically grab her and restrain her, then get her to take some sleeping pills to calm her down. They end in a long hug, as they resolve to find the kidnappers and get their son back. There is a strong, masculine man who knows how to comfort his wife, even if he has to be a bit rough with her. Of course nowadays they’d call that abuse, but your eyes can put the lie to that (seriously, you should see that movie if you have not, they call Hitchcock the Master of Suspense for a reason). THAT is how it should be done; physical restraint, but no hitting. As they say, he kept his pimp hand strong. And she loved him for it. That is most certainly what we need more of now; men who aren’t afraid to deal with their women’s emotional episodes (properly, of course…no I ain’t advocating ACTUAL abuse, so don’t get salty on me now).
So now that that’s all done, I gotta get back to movin’ them stones, and that dirt. Ima kill the supervisor for this…