|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 8:46:01 AM
|
|
|
KerussoCharis
Posts: 36
Joined: 10/28/2008
Status: offline
|
I have noticed in Scripture that the instruction to "leave your father and mother and cleave to your wife" is directed only to the husband and this is repeated at the creation, by Jesus, and by Paul: Click Here to see the 4 Biblical occurrences
Why only the husband?
(this thread is a spinoff from an interesting discussion of "First Law of Marriage - Female Kinship" on the marriage forum)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 10:25:17 AM
|
|
|
MrFribbles
Posts: 1884
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Hawaii, but I've moved around since then
Status: offline
|
Well, it seems clear that the latter three are all quotations of the Genesis passage - a common occurrence in NT literature. As for why only the husband, I would imagine it's because it was assumed that the daughter would leave their parents' house. When Abraham's servant went to get a wife for Isaac, she certainly left her family and cleaved to Isaac. But at the same time, it was common for the son to still live in the same area (and sometimes an extension of the same house!) as their parent, so perhaps this command is to emphasize the fact that the newly married couple is a new family, and it needs to exist in and of itself, without over-reliance on the parents.
_____________________________
You're a door without a key,
A field without a fence.
You've made a holy fool of me,
And I've thanked you ever since.
- Aaron Weiss
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 11:26:36 AM
|
|
|
DougHorton
Posts: 918
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Georgia
Status: offline
|
The custom then (and now in many parts of the world) was for the new bride to join the husband's household and extended family. She would then be the lowest person in status in the house.
This instruction was for the man to leave his family and establish a new home, where the new bride would then be in control of a new household instead of being under the thumb of her mother-in-law. This has been a striking blow to culture throughout time, even to today's feminist critics, since it is obviously an argument for women's rights.
_____________________________
Doug
You may think it strange, but he never likes any assistance. When he made the world, he did not ask the angel Gabriel so much as to cool the molten matter with his wing, but he did it entirely himself. -- Spurgeon
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 11:28:37 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3610
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DougHorton
The custom then (and now in many parts of the world) was for the new bride to join the husband's household and extended family. She would then be the lowest person in status in the house.
This instruction was for the man to leave his family and establish a new home, where the new bride would then be in control of a new household instead of being under the thumb of her mother-in-law. This has been a striking blow to culture throughout time, even to today's feminist critics, since it is obviously an argument for women's rights.
And the evidence for this interpretation is found where?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 11:32:57 AM
|
|
|
DougHorton
Posts: 918
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Georgia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
And the evidence for this interpretation is found where?
Exactly what kind of evidence would you find acceptable? I have lived in a number of western and eastern cultures and have found that this is just about the universal way this scripture is understood.
If you have a more perfect understanding, please share it.
_____________________________
Doug
You may think it strange, but he never likes any assistance. When he made the world, he did not ask the angel Gabriel so much as to cool the molten matter with his wing, but he did it entirely himself. -- Spurgeon
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 12:25:59 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3610
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DougHorton
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
And the evidence for this interpretation is found where?
Exactly what kind of evidence would you find acceptable?
Historical and/or archeological evidence, examples from scripture, etc...
quote:
I have lived in a number of western and eastern cultures and have found that this is just about the universal way this scripture is understood.
quote:
Subjective experiences are almost never a good source of evidence because our experiences are very limited, and always colored with our personal biases. Oh, and by the way I also have been in both western and eastern cultures.
quote:
If you have a more perfect understanding, please share it.
What we do know from history and archeology is that very seldom did Jewish men in the first century or earlier move away from their families after they were married, although they almost always moved to a new home (or new room of the existing home). We have examples from scripture of both a husband remaining with his parents after marriage, remaining with his wife's parents after marriage, and when circumstances required it leaving both families. We must conclude that they did not understand the command as you have described it i.e. that they must physically leave their parents home, or they just ignored it. Assuming they just didn't ignore this passage, when we look at the practice of those to whom this passage was first addressed, it seems clear that they did not understand this as meaning a husband must move away from his family.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 12:33:17 PM
|
|
|
DougHorton
Posts: 918
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Georgia
Status: offline
|
quote:
We must conclude that they did not understand the command as you have described it
Or were disobedient, which is not surprising.
_____________________________
Doug
You may think it strange, but he never likes any assistance. When he made the world, he did not ask the angel Gabriel so much as to cool the molten matter with his wing, but he did it entirely himself. -- Spurgeon
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 12:48:21 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3610
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DougHorton
quote:
We must conclude that they did not understand the command as you have described it
Or were disobedient, which is not surprising.
I included that possibility in my original statement; however, you have not shown any evidence that they understood it as you do and simply ignored it. Again what evidence do you have that this passage was understood in the first century as you have interpreted it?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 12:55:15 PM
|
|
|
DougHorton
Posts: 918
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Georgia
Status: offline
|
Why do you want to argue over this?
I provided the common interpretation of the verse. If you have another, please share it and be done with it.
_____________________________
Doug
You may think it strange, but he never likes any assistance. When he made the world, he did not ask the angel Gabriel so much as to cool the molten matter with his wing, but he did it entirely himself. -- Spurgeon
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 1:13:18 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3610
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DougHorton
Why do you want to argue over this?
I provided the common interpretation of the verse. If you have another, please share it and be done with it.
The verse makes it clear that a husbands allegiance is first to his wife, but I do not believe it commands a husband a husband to leave the physical vicinity of his (or his wife's) family. Nor do I believe that interpreting this as a command to move away from your family is "The common interpretation" of this verse. It sounds far more like a "Bruce Wilkinson" interpretation than it does a common one, and I have seen Wilkinson's "evidence" and it is entirely and invention of his imagination.
Why do you seem so offended that I have asked for evidence for this interpretation? Shouldn't we expect there to be evidence for a given interpretation before we accept the validity of that interpretation?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 1:46:56 PM
|
|
|
DougHorton
Posts: 918
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Georgia
Status: offline
|
I'm not sure what Wilkinson has to do with this.
The verse has two verbs: Leave and cleave.
The verse has one subject: A man.
The verb 'leave' has one object: His family.
The verb 'cleave' has one object: The wife.
I don't see anything difficult with that. A man is to leave his family and cleave to his wife.
Now the question in the OP was why the man only? Not the wife?
My answer: Because the wife already leaves her family and cleaves to her husband. Men did not leave their families and needed to be commanded to leave them. Men also did not cleave to their wife, and they ended up with polygamy. But that is another topic.
Why did men need the commandment? Because they didn't do it.
Why didn't women need the commandment? Because they did it already.
I really don't have anything more to say about this, and I see no point in arguments on this issue.
_____________________________
Doug
You may think it strange, but he never likes any assistance. When he made the world, he did not ask the angel Gabriel so much as to cool the molten matter with his wing, but he did it entirely himself. -- Spurgeon
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 8:43:09 PM
|
|
|
KerussoCharis
Posts: 36
Joined: 10/28/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
As for why only the husband, I would imagine it's because it was assumed that the daughter would leave their parents' house. When Abraham's servant went to get a wife for Isaac...
quote:
ORIGINAL: DougHorton
Why did men need the commandment? Because they didn't do it.
Why didn't women need the commandment? Because they did it already.
Both of you seem to assume that the instruction is past tense, historical, archaic...
Do you believe "leave and cleave" is God's instruction to husbands to this day?
Someone (here or on the other thread) pointed out that the instruction was given before the fall, and given to the first man and woman who had no flesh and blood "father and mother" to leave.
Adam "leaving" Father God was not a good thing.
I have pondered this and wonder if the instruction refers to more than mere physical "leaving and cleaving". One can live at great distance from parents or even have deceased parents and still be controlled by them. "you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers" 1 Peter 1:18 (which verse applies to women too, but there must be something about the leaving and cleaving which will uniquely fulfill and complete a husband)
As for the "cleaving", perhaps this speaks of emotional intimacy which can be difficult for men.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/30/2008 9:42:54 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3610
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: KerussoCharis
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
As for why only the husband, I would imagine it's because it was assumed that the daughter would leave their parents' house. When Abraham's servant went to get a wife for Isaac...
quote:
ORIGINAL: DougHorton
Why did men need the commandment? Because they didn't do it.
Why didn't women need the commandment? Because they did it already.
Both of you seem to assume that the instruction is past tense, historical, archaic...
Do you believe "leave and cleave" is God's instruction to husbands to this day?
I have not assumed that this is an archaic instruction, and yes I believe it applies today just the same as it first was applied.
quote:
Someone (here or on the other thread) pointed out that the instruction was given before the fall, and given to the first man and woman who had no flesh and blood "father and mother" to leave.
Adam "leaving" Father God was not a good thing.
I have pondered this and wonder if the instruction refers to more than mere physical "leaving and cleaving". One can live at great distance from parents or even have deceased parents and still be controlled by them. "you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers" 1 Peter 1:18 (which verse applies to women too, but there must be something about the leaving and cleaving which will uniquely fulfill and complete a husband)
As for the "cleaving", perhaps this speaks of emotional intimacy which can be difficult for men.
That is really the point I was trying to make when I said that this "verse makes it clear that a husbands allegiance is first to his wife"; from history we know that those in biblical times did not see this verse as a mandate to move away from extended family, and I believe it is a big mistake made by some modern pastors to assume that is what it means today. It is always important to find out what it meant to the original readers before trying to make an application for today.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/31/2008 1:09:05 AM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1666
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
It is a false dichotomy to imply that one can not maintain an inimate relationship with one's parents after one gets married. None of the commandments appears to make this dichotomy. In fact, there are several commandments that require us to hold both relationships in the highest regard.
Therefore, I believe the point is one of priority. For the woman there is a change of authority. A maiden is responsible to her father and he is responsible for her. He is her covering, her protector. When she marries that relationship shifts from her father to her husband. There need be no clarification, for this is explicite in the beginning of genesis.
The shift for the man is implied and, therefore, needs to be clarified. When a man gets married he is taking on a responsibility. He is not relieved of his responsibility to his parent, but he must now accept responsibility for his wife. For the woman the relationship does not change as much, it is merely a shifting of focus. The man must take on a new and different relationship. He must now become a covering, where before he had been covered. This also requires him to accept responsibility for a relationship that effects all parties involved. This is the mother of his children and of his parents grandchildren. So, by shifting his focus from his parents to his wife he is not only looking out for his own best interests, he is also honoring his parents postarity.
The woman goes through a similar process when she gives birth. However, the birthing process is so significant and the helplessness of the child so great it is difficult for her not to accept the responsibility. For the man, the marrage rite and the limited demands of a passive wife could be less than sufficient to impress upon him the necessity of accepting responsibility. In my opinion, these are the reasons why the man is directed to shift his focus and the woman is not.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/31/2008 7:33:46 AM
|
|
|
KerussoCharis
Posts: 36
Joined: 10/28/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
The man must take on a new and different relationship.... This also requires him to accept responsibility for a relationship that effects all parties involved. This is the mother of his children and of his parents grandchildren. So, by shifting his focus from his parents to his wife he is not only looking out for his own best interests, he is also honoring his parents postarity.
The woman goes through a similar process when she gives birth. However, the birthing process is so significant and the helplessness of the child so great it is difficult for her not to accept the responsibility. For the man, the marrage rite and the limited demands of a passive wife could be less than sufficient to impress upon him the necessity of accepting responsibility.
Could we say that she nourishes, cherishes, and lays down her life by nature while he must exercise will to do so? (cf Eph 5)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/31/2008 7:44:52 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3610
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
It is a false dichotomy to imply that one can not maintain an intimate relationship with one's parents after one gets married.
I strongly agree with this statement as long as it is understood that there must be a change in the parental relationship after marriage. And although a choice should never be required, when a man must choose between his parents and his wife, almost always the Godly choice will be to chose his wife, even when it impacts the intimacy of his relationship with his parents.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/31/2008 7:52:47 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3610
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: KerussoCharis
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
The man must take on a new and different relationship.... This also requires him to accept responsibility for a relationship that effects all parties involved. This is the mother of his children and of his parents grandchildren. So, by shifting his focus from his parents to his wife he is not only looking out for his own best interests, he is also honoring his parents postarity.
The woman goes through a similar process when she gives birth. However, the birthing process is so significant and the helplessness of the child so great it is difficult for her not to accept the responsibility. For the man, the marrage rite and the limited demands of a passive wife could be less than sufficient to impress upon him the necessity of accepting responsibility.
Could we say that she nourishes, cherishes, and lays down her life by nature while he must exercise will to do so? (cf Eph 5)
No, I wouldn't say this! I think godly woman choose righteousness by an act of the will just as godly me do, and woman who choose not to submit themselves to God selfishness and self centeredness just as much as men who have not submitted themselves to God.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/31/2008 8:15:30 AM
|
|
|
DaveW
Posts: 4161
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DougHortonquote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
And the evidence for this interpretation is found where? Exactly what kind of evidence would you find acceptable? I have lived in a number of western and eastern cultures and have found that this is just about the universal way this scripture is understood. What have you read of Rabbinic literature from the first and second centuries? (targums, Mishnah) Almost every verse of the Tenach - what is commonly called the Old Testament - is disected and discussed. esp in the targums. Even the Talmuds (based on the Mishnah) from circa 500 ad contains much from the first century understanding of scriptures.
_____________________________
Avatar is Saphira 5 months and Louvena at 23 months!
We are now grandparents TWICE!!
====================================
Our CD is now available here:
http://cdbaby.com/cd/dswaggoner
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/31/2008 3:00:22 PM
|
|
|
KerussoCharis
Posts: 36
Joined: 10/28/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: benelchi
quote:
ORIGINAL: KerussoCharis
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
The man must take on a new and different relationship.... This also requires him to accept responsibility for a relationship that effects all parties involved. This is the mother of his children and of his parents grandchildren. So, by shifting his focus from his parents to his wife he is not only looking out for his own best interests, he is also honoring his parents postarity.
The woman goes through a similar process when she gives birth. However, the birthing process is so significant and the helplessness of the child so great it is difficult for her not to accept the responsibility. For the man, the marrage rite and the limited demands of a passive wife could be less than sufficient to impress upon him the necessity of accepting responsibility.
Could we say that she nourishes, cherishes, and lays down her life by nature while he must exercise will to do so? (cf Eph 5)
No, I wouldn't say this! I think godly woman choose righteousness by an act of the will just as godly me do, and woman who choose not to submit themselves to God selfishness and self centeredness just as much as men who have not submitted themselves to God.
does a mother lay down her life for a child within her womb?
does she nourish and cherish that child as her own body?
do not even the pagans do so?
do not even the beasts of the field do so?
she nourishes, cherishes, and lays down her life by nature; by design
he must die to himself and will to do so
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/31/2008 4:04:14 PM
|
|
|
MrFribbles
Posts: 1884
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Hawaii, but I've moved around since then
Status: offline
|
quote:
does a mother lay down her life for a child within her womb?
does she nourish and cherish that child as her own body?
do not even the pagans do so?
do not even the beasts of the field do so?
Unless they have an abortion...
Women do not all nurture by nature. And not all men have to stretch and strain to be nurturing. Your generalizations do not hold universally.
_____________________________
You're a door without a key,
A field without a fence.
You've made a holy fool of me,
And I've thanked you ever since.
- Aaron Weiss
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 10/31/2008 6:48:16 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 1666
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
quote:
does a mother lay down her life for a child within her womb?
does she nourish and cherish that child as her own body?
do not even the pagans do so?
do not even the beasts of the field do so?
Unless they have an abortion...
Women do not all nurture by nature. And not all men have to stretch and strain to be nurturing. Your generalizations do not hold universally.
I agree with MrFribbles. My observations were based on the natural state of things and not absolute generalizations. As Paul tells us in romans with regard to lesbianism, it is a sign of our decadent culture that even women, going against their natural inclinations, fail to bond with that which comes from their own bodies.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 11/1/2008 7:43:56 AM
|
|
|
KerussoCharis
Posts: 36
Joined: 10/28/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
quote:
does a mother lay down her life for a child within her womb?
does she nourish and cherish that child as her own body?
do not even the pagans do so?
do not even the beasts of the field do so?
Unless they have an abortion...
Women do not all nurture by nature. And not all men have to stretch and strain to be nurturing. Your generalizations do not hold universally.
I agree and disagree. Females (of any species) do all nurture by nature/design.
By design/nature, she nourishes, cherishes, lays down her life sacrificially, and treats the child within as her own body.
Abortion is an example of "women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. " Rom 1:26
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 11/1/2008 10:33:32 AM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3610
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: KerussoCharis
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrFribbles
quote:
does a mother lay down her life for a child within her womb?
does she nourish and cherish that child as her own body?
do not even the pagans do so?
do not even the beasts of the field do so?
Unless they have an abortion...
Women do not all nurture by nature. And not all men have to stretch and strain to be nurturing. Your generalizations do not hold universally.
I agree and disagree. Females (of any species) do all nurture by nature/design.
By design/nature, she nourishes, cherishes, lays down her life sacrificially, and treats the child within as her own body.
Abortion is an example of "women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. " Rom 1:26
quote:
ORIGINAL: KerussoCharis
"a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife,
and the two shall become one flesh"
I used to think- they get married, consummate the marriage and voila, they are "one flesh". Now I see that their becoming "one flesh" is entirely dependent upon the husband's will.
Will he "leave and cleave"?
Statements like these reveal a overly negative view of men, and an overly saintly view of women that is neither biblical, nor evidenced by the realities of this world. Men and woman do express nurture, protection, and self sacrifice differently, but neither expression is inherently more righteous!
A look at divorce statistics (especially those in no-fault divorce states) reveals a very different picture from the one you have painted.
"The National Center for Health Statistics reports that from 1975 to 1988 in the US, in families with children present, wives file for divorce in approximately two-thirds of cases. In 1975, 71.4% of the cases were filed by women, and in 1988, 65% were filed by women.[11]
According to a study published in the American Law and Economics Review, women currently file slightly more than two-thirds of divorce cases in the US.[12] There is some variation among states, and the numbers have also varied over time, with about 60% of filings by women in most of the 19th century, and over 70% by women in some states just after no-fault divorce was introduced, according to the paper. Evidence is given that among college-educated couples, the percentages of divorces initiated by women is approximately 90%.
In their study titled "Child Custody Policies and Divorce Rates in the US," Kuhn and Guidubaldi find it reasonable to conclude that women anticipate advantages to being single, rather than remaining married.[13]
When women anticipate a clear gender bias in the courts regarding custody, they expect to be the primary residential parent for the children and recipient of the resulting financial child support, maintaining the marital residence, receiving half of all marital property, and gaining total freedom to establish new social relationships. In their detailed analysis of divorce rates, Kuhn and Guidubaldi conclude that acceptance of joint physical custody may reduce divorce. States whose family law policies, statutes, or judicial practice encourage joint custody have shown a greater decline in their divorce rates than those that favor sole custody."
Another interesting statistic is that in states where women initiate divorce at the very highest rates, they also engage in adulterous affairs at the highest rates. While affairs used to be a predominately male expression of sin, it is now rapidly approaching equality of expression for both sexes, while at the same time the gap between divorces initiated by men and those initiated by women is growing at an alarming rate.
Yes, if it were not for sin, women would be more nurturing and self-sacrificing as you pointed out when the abortion issue was raised, but when when make such a concession for women it is important to remember that the same concession for men would produce the same result i.e. without sin, they too will be more loving, nurturing, and self-sacrificing. The nature of men and women is equally affected by sin, and the results sin produces are equally as damaging in both sexes! It may be expressed differently by each of the sexes, but sin is equally as deadly in it expression by woman as it is in its expression by men.
While I do believe that biblically it is the husbands responsibility to take the lead in leaving and cleaving, success at leaving and cleaving can never be entirely dependent on him. God gave women the freedom to either follow the lead of their husband or to sinfully and rebelliously push against it, just as he gave men the freedom to lovingly lead his family or to sinful abrogate his responsibility to lead his family. When one spouse is in sinful rebellion (husband or wife) cleaving cannot happen.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Leave and Cleave - 11/1/2008 6:33:21 PM
|
|
|
figmentPez
Posts: 2120
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: KerussoCharis
Why only the husband?
I think the answer is far simpler than anything I've read in the thread. My experience is that when the Bible says something about one gender, very often the corollary with the opposite gender also applies.
_____________________________
I make this challenge to all Christians:
Read Daniel 7:13-14
And tell me: Who do you say that the Son of Man is?
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
