Wives do not need to be happy or loved

[Cran]

No, indeed not! It is even better if you're not, because it will draw you to your father in heaven, who truly loves you, even if your husband lusts after and loves another woman.

rinaperu.com/2012/04/17/when-youre-a-leah/

She talks about Leah, who wasn't loved by her husband Jacob, who favoured his second wife Rachel. But never mind...

When you feel like you are a Leah, unloved and hurt, know that there is One who loves you with an everlasting love. Everlasting means He has loved you even before the foundation of the world, and will always love you. You cannot make someone love you, just like Leah didn’t succeed in making Jacob love her, even if she gave him children. But there is One who loves you just the way you are, and you don’t have to do anything to make Him love you or love you even more. His love is constant.

I do not know this blog, I stumbled over it via a link from lessonsfromivy.com - the blog with the ramblings on modesty discussed in another topic, and was rather shocked by this post. Of course, it goes against common sense and human feelings to write such stuff at all, but that wouldn't surprise me, we're in fundiedom after all, but it is also contrary to what's usually written by them on the wife-husband-relationship. Always stressing that men need to feel respected, and women need to feel loved - but if they're not loved, they have to suffer in silence anyway and have no recourse to get their deepest need fulfilled.

Jacob is not criticized in the least for not loving Leah or treating her well in this post, although the bible commands husbands to love their wife (this is NT, Eph 5,31, of course, but God's law is unchanging, isn't it?), and I think the poster grants him more leniency than the bible does, to me, the description of Jacob's marriages has very negative undertones, while the children Leah has are meant to console her for not being loved, the lack of children from Rachel is, in my opinion, biblically seen as a punishment for both, Rachel (who is not really at fault for what her husband does, is she) and Jacob.

Genesis 29:30-34 30 And he went in also unto Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years. 31 And when the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren. 32 And Leah conceived, and bare a son, and she called his name Reuben: for she said, Surely the LORD hath looked upon my affliction; now therefore my husband will love me. 33 And she conceived again, and bare a son; and said, Because the LORD hath heard that I was hated, he hath therefore given me this son also: and she called his name Simeon. 34 And she conceived again, and bare a son; and said, Now this time will my husband be joined unto me, because I have born him three sons: therefore was his name called Levi.

Women can't win in patriarchy.

[FlorenceHamilton]

And yet, the Bible thumpers carry on that marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman and that is says so in the Bible. Don't they read it?

[Childless]

Sorry. If my husband fell in love with another woman, he would be gone. I would file for divorce immediately. I deserve to have a husband that loves me. Remaining in that situation would just make both of us miserable. I would feel unloved and he would be pining for someone else. Who would want to live like that? Life is to short to be miserable.

I guess that's one of the many advantages to being non-religious. I don't feel the need to spend my life in misery just to follow some stupid set of rules.

[debrand]

I've rarely heard Jacob criticized for his behavior. Fundies believe that the people in the bible really existed and yet they never really look at the characters as real people.

Jacob slept with his first wife even though he hated her. What does that say about him or the patriarchal system? I can't imagine having sex with someone that I knew disliked me. What a sad existence that women faced. And were their handmaids given a choice about having sex with Jacob? Neither Leah nor her sister were happy. Both women were taken from their homes and apparently didn't like one another. Leah's children apparently hated Joseph enough to sell him as a slave. Jacob's favoritism hurt his wives and children.What a screwed up family.

The women in the Old Testament who were happy seem to be the ones who took control of their situations: Abigail, Esther, Deborah. How do fundies miss the lesson that allowing another person to control your life won't bring you happiness?

[FundiesInMyFamily]

So 'husbands should love their wives like christ loves the church', but if he doesn't, it's okay because god still loves you? Sure thing. Love that fundie logic hard at work.

[Guest Anonymous]

If I remember it correctly, it was not Jacob's fault that he wasn't in love with Leah. He had always intended to marry Rachel but was tricked into marrying Leah by the women's father.

Edited to change girls' for women's.

[AuntCloud]

My impression is that there's a competition among fundie wives who can put up with the largest amount of crap to prove her godliness (Because, you know, there's a medal and a trophy at then end if you do). It's also a competition for who stifles her sense of self and self-preservation the best. Sort of like the black knight in Monty Python, "it's just a flesh wound!".

[Elle]

God has munchausen by proxy. Hurt those you claim to love so they'll love you more for making them feel better.

[Glass Cowcatcher]

If I remember it correctly, it was not Jacob's fault that he wasn't in love with Leah. He had always intended to marry Rachel but was tricked into marrying Leah by the women's father.

Edited to change girls' for women's.

IIRC he slaved away to the girls's father for 7 years to earn Rachel's hand, got tricked into marrying Leah, then worked another 7 years to marry Rachel, for real this time.

The two women are literally treated as a commodity, no beating around the bush ( :D ) on that one. Leah could have, presumably, married someone she might have gotten on better with during that time, and poor Leah hs to wait 14 years before she marries the man she loves.

If that came straight out of God's mouth I don't want to follow that god.

[Elle]

Cowcatcher, you recall correctly.

[Glass Cowcatcher]

Cowcatcher, you recall correctly.

I was hoping I didn't.

[dairyfreelife]

IIRC he slaved away to the girls's father for 7 years to earn Rachel's hand, got tricked into marrying Leah, then worked another 7 years to marry Rachel, for real this time.

The two women are literally treated as a commodity, no beating around the bush ( :D ) on that one. Leah could have, presumably, married someone she might have gotten on better with during that time, and poor Leah hs to wait 14 years before she marries the man she loves.

If that came straight out of God's mouth I don't want to follow that god.

Yes, Jacob had fallen for Rachel and vice versa so Jacob asked for Rachel's hand in marriage. Rachel's father made Jacob work for seven years for him before he'd let Rachel be Jacob's wife. He loved Rachel, so he did just that and got tricked by being given Leah instead and forced to work more to "earn" Rachel. It was not fair to anyone involved really. Shows the problem with daughters as property. Today, Jacob and Rachel would have just married and Leah could have found someone she loved and things would have been fine. Not even getting into Rachel and Leah forcing Jacob and their slaves to have children for them and claiming the babies as theirs. And that churches today never mention the slaves. I corrected my Sunday Youth teacher at eighteen when he said Jacob had two wives and twelve sons between them to say that he had four wives and thirteen known children. He had a known daughter as well.

It was one mess of a family though. Not the model one in any way. Jacob himself came from a manipulative situation and poor family as well. Isaac and Rebekah had issues with their twins as well.

[doggie]

God has munchausen by proxy. Hurt those you claim to love so they'll love you more for making them feel better.

very well said

[notacleverpony]

After being good friends for years with a happy, committed swinging couple who pursue casual and semi-permanent relationships on the side, both separately and as a pair, this mindset makes even less sense to me. If you aren't completely happy with just one person, either a) re-negotiate the terms of the social contract and discuss the possibility of an open relationship, or b) end the relationship. Continuing together despite fundamental *snerk* differences just seems like a pressure cooker of passive-aggression and unhappiness.

[VooDooChild]

My impression is that there's a competition among fundie wives who can put up with the largest amount of crap to prove her godliness (Because, you know, there's a medal and a trophy at then end if you do). It's also a competition for who stifles her sense of self and self-preservation the best. Sort of like the black knight in Monty Python, "it's just a flesh wound!".

THIS!

I was a member of the Far Above Rubies Yahoo group in my almost-got-sucked-into-the-madness-of-fundie-ism days, and it's rife with this mentality.

[fluttershies]

Yes, Jacob had fallen for Rachel and vice versa so Jacob asked for Rachel's hand in marriage. Rachel's father made Jacob work for seven years for him before he'd let Rachel be Jacob's wife. He loved Rachel, so he did just that and got tricked by being given Leah instead and forced to work more to "earn" Rachel. It was not fair to anyone involved really. Shows the problem with daughters as property. Today, Jacob and Rachel would have just married and Leah could have found someone she loved and things would have been fine. Not even getting into Rachel and Leah forcing Jacob and their slaves to have children for them and claiming the babies as theirs. And that churches today never mention the slaves. I corrected my Sunday Youth teacher at eighteen when he said Jacob had two wives and twelve sons between them to say that he had four wives and thirteen known children. He had a known daughter as well.

It was one mess of a family though. Not the model one in any way. Jacob himself came from a manipulative situation and poor family as well. Isaac and Rebekah had issues with their twins as well.

Jacob was a total mess. However that just reminds me that God can take messed-up people and achieve great things through them. The whole point is that it's God's power, not human power.

[Swamptribe]

Jacob was a total mess. However that just reminds me that God can take messed-up people and achieve great things through them. The whole point is that it's God's power, not human power.

So, the moral of this is that it doesn't matter what you do with your life. God will use you how he sees fit anyway. So, you don't have to take any personal responsibility because if you don't do great things. That just means that great thing weren't in gods plan for you. If you do crappy things, you know, like murder people, that was just gods will too.

[fluttershies]

So, the moral of this is that it doesn't matter what you do with your life. God will use you how he sees fit anyway. So, you don't have to take any personal responsibility because if you don't do great things. That just means that great thing weren't in gods plan for you. If you do crappy things, you know, like murder people, that was just gods will too.

No, not at all - just that because all people are sinful, all people are equal before God and therefore anyone can be used by God to do great things, not just 'good' or 'nice' people. Jacob still got punished for his sins, as does everyone else in the Bible (David springs to mind) who sins. He messed up and paid the punishment for it, but he was not beyond redemption, because for God no one is beyond redemption.

[Glass Cowcatcher]

No, not at all - just that because all people are sinful, all people are equal before God and therefore anyone can be used by God to do great things, not just 'good' or 'nice' people. Jacob still got punished for his sins, as does everyone else in the Bible (David springs to mind) who sins. He messed up and paid the punishment for it, but he was not beyond redemption, because for God no one is beyond redemption.

I don't get it when Christians display this attitude. You can't square up the idea that everything is a part of God's plan, and it's all laid out in advance, with the idea that prayer can change things or activities like abortion or homosexuality, which God is trying to call the people away from, can damn a nation.

[Elle]

After being good friends for years with a happy, committed swinging couple who pursue casual and semi-permanent relationships on the side, both separately and as a pair, this mindset makes even less sense to me. If you aren't completely happy with just one person, either a) re-negotiate the terms of the social contract and discuss the possibility of an open relationship, or b) end the relationship. Continuing together despite fundamental *snerk* differences just seems like a pressure cooker of passive-aggression and unhappiness.

I agree. I've known multiple couples like this, and it works well for them - BECAUSE they were honest with each other from the get-go. It doesn't mean that there haven't been hard times, but the open communication has made these relationships some of the strongest I've seen. Keeping it all bottled in is a recipe for disaster and misery.

[Elle]

I don't get it when Christians display this attitude. You can't square up the idea that everything is a part of God's plan, and it's all laid out in advance, with the idea that prayer can change things or activities like abortion or homosexuality, which God is trying to call the people away from, can damn a nation.

So you can be a bad guy and be redeemed and good things happen, of you can be as faithful as Job, worshipping god and praising him even while he kills your family, destroys your home and livelihood, and covers you in painful illnesses because god got into a pissing match with the devil and felt the need to prove that his most faithful servant was faithful to a fault.

Moral of the story: If your life being fucked or rewarded is at god's whim and has nothing to do with how good or bad you are, then fuck god, let's just enjoy our lives.

[Glass Cowcatcher]

So you can be a bad guy and be redeemed and good things happen, of you can be as faithful as Job, worshipping god and praising him even while he kills your family, destroys your home and livelihood, and covers you in painful illnesses because god got into a pissing match with the devil and felt the need to prove that his most faithful servant was faithful to a fault.

Moral of the story: If your life being fucked or rewarded is at god's whim and has nothing to do with how good or bad you are, then fuck god, let's just enjoy our lives.

I heard an atheist say once that if God was proven to exist beyond a shadow of a doubt, he would believe in him, but not worship him, because of crap like Job. One of the best defenses of one's set of beliefs I've ever heard.

[Swamptribe]

I've never understood the Christian concept of free will. If an individual can do something that completely takes god by surprise, then god is not all knowing or all powerful. If god is all knowing, then mankind does not have free will. In other words, before you are born, god already knows if you are going to accept god or not. If god has no clue, then you've got a pretty clueless god.

If, god creates mankind and is all knowing, then mankind is very simply, gods plaything. That pretty much makes the Christian concept of god out to be a jackass.

See, it was stuff like this that made me an early skeptic. Try asking nuns these questions when you're in elementary school. Then, when they tell you that you should just have faith and believe your elders, don't ask why.

[samurai_sarah]

I've never understood the Christian concept of free will. If an individual can do something that completely takes god by surprise, then god is not all knowing or all powerful. If god is all knowing, then mankind does not have free will. In other words, before you are born, god already knows if you are going to accept god or not. If god has no clue, then you've got a pretty clueless god.

If, god creates mankind and is all knowing, then mankind is very simply, gods plaything. That pretty much makes the Christian concept of god out to be a jackass.

See, it was stuff like this that made me an early skeptic. Try asking nuns these questions when you're in elementary school. Then, when they tell you that you should just have faith and believe your elders, don't ask why.

One of my first WTF moments as a child, was when my (Catholic) parish priest explained that his deity accommodated atheists. "If you don't want to be with god, he's not going to force you, but make sure you don't have to be with him", were his words. It was a WTF moment, because he made it sound like whatever you do, you get indulged. That's not free will. I was an early skeptic as well... ;)

[treemom]

Jacob was a total mess. However that just reminds me that God can take messed-up people and achieve great things through them. The whole point is that it's God's power, not human power.

to quote other, do you even go to school here?