Woman's Desire

Recently, a dear friend challenged me to look more closely at Genesis 3:16, where the Lord tells Eve, “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." and consider that it might have greater implications than sexual/emotional desire for fulfillment, a concept we had both heard preached many times. “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" is a single statement: cause and effect: because a woman’s desire is for her husband, he will rule over her. Why is that? The Hebrew word tesuqah, translated as desire is used three times in the old testament. In song of Solomon, this desire is undoubtedly sexual (and emotional) longing, but in Genesis 4:7, it means to overcome or defeat another: "[Sin's] desire is for you, but you should rule over it” If sin’s desire is for us and we are to rule over it, and woman’s desire is for her husband and he will rule over her, perhaps the meaning of desire here is not so much sexual, as it is that woman would desire to be the leader of the man. And though woman’s desire will be to lead the man, God is establishing that man will be the leader over the woman.

{{sidenote: a word study of consume and consummate sheds even more light on the word desire.}}

When Eve took the fruit from the serpent, it appears her husband was standing right beside her, silent as a lamb. (Gen. 3:6) Did she ask him what he thought?
Apparently not.
He had already told her they were forbidden to eat of the fruit of this tree. It seems she decided to form her own opinion, and that he decided to let her, even though it contradicted him.

[diatribe] In Genesis 2, it appears that God forbade eating the fruit before Eve was created, and perhaps Adam was the one to convey the message to her. In Genesis 2, God tells Adam not to eat of the fruit, it doesn’t say anything about touching it, but when Eve is socializing with the serpent in the garden, she says God said neither to eat nor to touch. I don’t know, I wasn’t there, God could have spoken later to Eve, but perhaps this is the first ‘fence’ law made by man. (Adam thought – we can’t eat it, so I’ll tell her we can’t even touch it so she won’t be tempted to eat it). If so, it didn’t work, because they both ended up eating it anyway. [end diatribe].

Even though Eve usurped the leadership role, Adam was still held responsible for that leadership role. Romans 5:12 says “ sin came into the world through one man” meaning through Adam, (if I understand it right), not Eve, who ate first, and therefore technically might have sinned first. {{Was the first sin Eve eating the fruit, or Adam letting her???}}
{{Regardless}}This says Adam was given the responsibility of leadership, and just because he let Eve have it, he was still responsible for the consequences of it. (death)

So women desire that leadership position, but men will be held accountable for it because it is God’s divine order. That is certainly something to consider very seriously and soberly. The ramifications are huge. It is difficult to go against these natural tendencies of the flesh. But God gave us a picture of what marriage should look like through the example of Christ and the Church. Wives are to submit rather than contend. Husbands must love rather than dominate.

But we live in a fallen world. The realities are that on one side of the coin: many men dominate and some even abuse; therefore many women will take over for self preservation or the preservation of their children. On the other side of the coin: many women desire to lead (because they don't like the way he does it) and will take over; and many men let them, out of weakness, laziness, or to keep the peace, even when the results create disharmony. (American tv says if a hot babe emasculates a man, he should accept it because she is, well, hot, and the sex is worth it. Wrong!) Explains a lot of what goes wrong in relationships. Explains why women who have yielded to the Lord are so desperate to find a godly man they can follow. Seriously.

I am not ditzing the intelligence of women. I am an intelligent woman. Women can be leaders and teachers in many roles in society. I am speaking of the marriage partnership here. I was in a position where I submitted to the authority of a husband who made a horribly wrong decision, and I suffered the consequences of that decision. And in the past, I was one of those who all too easily would not submit when I thought a man was wrong, and even if in that particular situation I was right, in the long-run, this text suggests I was wrong because I was out of order.

But I also believe God does not intend for us to submit to abuse. I was in an abusive situation, and in order to survive {literally} I left. I had counsel telling me I had to make it work, even if he killed me. I had to remove myself from that counsel and from that situation and get my kids and me safe. I left an already broken covenant - I did not break it. I think people get very legalistic about divorce when they themselves do not have an understanding of the absolute wreckage of adultery and abuse. Sure, God hates divorce – it tears people’s hearts, but I do not think He is in favor of some of the horrible things happening in marriages that are ruining people’s lives either.
There are accounts of women leaders in the community and women opening their homes in the early days of the church. Deborah was a judge and God seemed okay with it. But God was okay with men having several wives and concubines (David and Solomon certainly had God’s favor and had many), and yet it says God intended there to be one man and one woman from the beginning. So does God have a perfect plan for His Creation, but makes concessions for a fallen world because of necessity? (Men wouldn’t need divorce, just add another wife and basically ignore the one you didn’t want – who was the loser here?) Maybe that is why God is gracious to allow divorced people to remarry. I hope so, because I am waiting for a godly man and I think God has promised me one.[Note 2011

Maybe women are only not to be leaders over men in marriage, which does not mean women do not have valuable input or sway in decision making as partners. I am the youth worship team leader. I come under the authority of the youth pastor. He plays with us and even though he lets me make all the decisions, I do so with his blessing, and he can at any time tell me to do something different and I would submit to his authority. Meaning, if we disagreed how to do something with the band, we would discuss it, but in the end, he gets the final say. So far, I have been blessed that he absolutely backs me 100%, even when it is not the way he would have done it because he feels I am called to lead it and he sees God at work in my life. (I think this is a picture of how marriage should work too).

I do believe that each of us is responsible to answer to God, and that whenever He allows us to be subject to an authority, good or evil, we are to submit to that authority except for where that authority asks us to go against God. There are times it seems slaves are told to be subject to masters who did not treat them well. And women are told that through their humble submission their husbands might be brought to Christ; if the unbeliever stayed, so should she.
The disciples obeyed the law except for when they were forbidden to preach Jesus and/or heal people in the Name of Jesus. They only did not submit to authority when it asked them to go against God. When Abigail went to meet king David, she was not submitting to the authority of a husband who was sinning against God and asking her to do the same.

Those who wish to lead must do so by serving.