|
gengwall -> RE: Why do men want to provide? or be leaders? (5/7/2008 5:25:57 PM)
|
Just a point of clarification. Although I agree in general with what everyone is saying, I believe the 1 Timothy verse is being promoted out of context. This section of scripture is not in any way directed at only husbands/fathers (they, as a group of providers, are not even mentioned). Moreover, the passage relates to the taking care of widows and other needy members of the extended family, not wives and children. The instruction is for everyone who has the means to aid those less fortunate or indigent in the family as opposed to placing the burden for their care on the church. For example, verse 4 instructs children to take care of their older parents and grandparents. Verse 16 is directed at women to take care of widows in the family. The verse in question, verse 8, although it contains male pronouns is really not gender specific and is certainly not husband/father specific. Below is the entire section from the NIV.
quote:
1 Tim 5:3 Give proper recognition to those widows who are really in need. 4 But if a widow has children or grandchildren, these should learn first of all to put their religion into practice by caring for their own family and so repaying their parents and grandparents, for this is pleasing to God. 5 The widow who is really in need and left all alone puts her hope in God and continues night and day to pray and to ask God for help. 6 But the widow who lives for pleasure is dead even while she lives. 7 Give the people these instructions, too, so that no one may be open to blame. 8 If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. 9 No widow may be put on the list of widows unless she is over sixty, has been faithful to her husband, 10 and is well known for her good deeds, such as bringing up children, showing hospitality, washing the feet of the saints, helping those in trouble and devoting herself to all kinds of good deeds. 11 As for younger widows, do not put them on such a list. For when their sensual desires overcome their dedication to Christ, they want to marry. 12 Thus they bring judgment on themselves, because they have broken their first pledge. 13 Besides, they get into the habit of being idle and going about from house to house. And not only do they become idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to. 14 So I counsel younger widows to marry, to have children, to manage their homes and to give the enemy no opportunity for slander. 15 Some have in fact already turned away to follow Satan. 16 If any woman who is a believer has widows in her family, she should help them and not let the church be burdened with them, so that the church can help those widows who are really in need.
This is an important distinction. I have known people who have used this verse to shame and chastise men who are not the major financial provider for their family. The bible never says that the man must be the major provider and certainly doesn't command he be the sole provider any more than it commands the woman be the sole nurturer. Despite our fallen state, marriage is still a partnership which requires the participation of both spouses to one degree or another in all aspects of running the family.
It is certainly clear that in historic times, where providing primarily consisted of pursuits that were geered toward the unique giftedness of males (mainly physical, spacial, and mathematical), that the expectation and reality was that men were almost always the major providers for the family and often were the sole providers. But even in biblical times this was not a "rule" or the law, as is evidenced by another portion of Proverbs 31, which was selectively quoted above. The "perfect" woman described in Proverbs 31 certainly is the primary nurturer in the family but she also provides (see vs. 15-18 and 24) and protects (v. 21).
In the pre-fall garden, the distribution of labor was even more equal. Although the man was placed in the garden to work it, the woman was given to him as a side-by-side helper. Of course, prior to the fall, the work was not hard and subduing the earth and populating it was a joint effort (the charge is to both equally). The fundimental division in labor within the family comes only after the fall, and the gross misapplication of that division through unhealthy patriarchy is a cultural phenomenon inspired not by God but by our enemy, who will destroy families and the individuals in them in any way he can.
We live in very different times now. Many jobs which are well suited to providing are not well suited to male giftedness, particularly in the post-modern west. God, in His omniscience, knows this and therefore did not set up narrowly defined and unalterable "roles" for males and females within the family. The day to day operations of the family can be deligated to that spouse who is most experienced or gifted, and if that means the wife makes the majority of the money and the husband stays home with the kids, and that is what works for that family the best, God certainly has not indicated He has a problem with that.
None of this changes the core message in the responses here. Men still feel deep in their soul the need to provide, and it is the wise woman who recognizes that and praises that desire in her mate regardless of who makes the most. Men are still far better suited to physically protect, as we have not progressed to the point in society where the threat of physical harm has been eradicated. And men are still designated as "head" of the family, the one point that God has chosen to be crystal clear about. But headship is a position of responsibility, not priviledge. It is realized through service to the family, not servitude of the family. Providing and protecting are all part of this responsibility and service, but only part. And the model of headship and submission between husband and wife can tolerate a wide variety of actual configurations in the practical activities of daily living.
|
|
|
|