5 Comments
User's avatar
Linda Bartlett's avatar

Thank you, Rev. Fisk. Some time ago, I stepped down from the presidency of Lutherans For Life because there seemed to be a void among Lutherans concerning biblical manhood and womanhood. After being encouraged by my "Helper" (John 15:26) and some 25 or more friends, relatives, and acquaintances who shared the sorrow of their abortions with me, I started Titus 2 for Life. During retreats across the country for women of all ages, both laity and pastors' wives, Genesis 2:18 and Genesis 3 were discussed. Body language revealed that some women were grateful and at peace in knowing the truth of Genesis 2:18 and 3:16. Others were agitated by the idea of being a "helper fit for him" and learning that "desire . . . your husband" doesn't mean what they thought it did. From where had they gotten the wrong understanding of "desire" in Genesis 3:16? One Sunday morning while away from our LCMS congregation, my husband and I gathered for Bible study in a sister congregation where the pastor (with his wife's support) informed a large group of mature Lutherans that Genesis 3:16 is about a wife's romantic desire. The "missionary position," was mentioned. There were some chuckles. Smiles. A giggle or two. Looks around the room. When we spoke up to say that "desire" in Genesis 3:16 is not romantic but, rather, a craving for authority and conflict between husband and wife, the room was silent for a few seconds before the pastor moved on. So... thank you, Jonathan Fisk, for not resisting the "Spirit of truth" when inspired to pen "The Battle Beneath the Smile." You are a great blessing to the Body of Christ in this present age, To God be the glory!

Expand full comment
Belle's avatar

I have not heard this comment in real life but I did notice it in The Lutheran Study Bible. In the notes for Genesis 3:16, it reads, "desire. Despite the pain associated with pregnancy, women will not cease to desire marital relations." I was so surprised that it was actually being explained this way by a pastor. I was taught like this article does and was surprised that note had been published in there.

Also, by the way, I really liked your book, "The Failure of Sex Education in the Church". God bless.

Expand full comment
Linda Bartlett's avatar

Belle, your response to Rev. Fisk motivated me to also respond. Thank you. What he has written here is seemingly harsh to many women (and men). Yet, after the Fall, such godly order is for the protection and well-being of the family and, ultimately, society. As for the Lutheran Study Bible commentary on Genesis 3:16, a dear pastor friend once reminded me that commentaries written by men require faithful Berean laity. :-)

P.S. Thank you, Belle, for your kind words of encouragement. It was truly the book I didn't want to write.

Expand full comment
Belle's avatar

I'm a woman and I absolutely agree. I thank God for my husband's immovablility and steadfast nature. I can be a whirlwind. Much of what we have as a family would have never been, were it not for my husband being a man who can stand against his woman's emotions. Sometimes in my sin it drives me nuts. But I absolutely pray that my sons grow up to be like him and I pray for their future spouses.

Thank you for sharing and putting this into words.

Expand full comment
Jeff Graham's avatar

All glory be to God. God's peace be with you. Amen.

Expand full comment