A word to the wives

[Mojo]

Following on that, when the pastor says, "Submission must be voluntary. You can't force her to do anything. You need to convince her to want to follow you. Scripture doesn't allow you to tell her she must obey you." he is arguing you have no authority over her, your authority to act only comes from her. He's arguing she is your head. Which is why these types usually find abhorrent the thought of a husband enacting consequences for disobedience.

It sounds true, since we can't physically force her to obey; she still has free will. But the statements are predicated upon the fact of her headship over you. Free will to act contrary to authority doesn't mean authority doesn't exist. If it did, we wouldn't have a word for rebellion.

So much of this conversation is predicated in modern, western culture. Our jobs are harder. We wouldn't be having to hone our leadership skills at home, only on the battlefield, if we lived 1000 years ago, or even less. It was assumed that the father and husband were the absolute authority at home and the wife tried to figure out ways to circumvent that, not the other way around.

In other words, I mostly agree with you, brother.

 

[yoderfamily]

Paul made an interesting comment on the subject at Eph 5:21-33. Its not always easy for a wife to be submissive to her husband, thus the words of Paul were written to assist us in making the relationship work. verse 22 says " Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord." then he says the husband is head as Christ is head of the church. But then he said in verse 25 "Husbands love your wives , as Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her." Then in verse 31 he quotes Jesus comments at Mat 19:5. But the next comments are interesting in verse 33, he says , "However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband."
So a man is instructed to "love" his wife and she is instructed to "respect" him.
If a man truly loves his wife and if she knows and understands it, even knowing that he would lay down his life to protect her, then it is much easier to respect such a man! If on the other hand he attempts to wield his authority like a hammer and attempt to "punish" her for not not "obeying" him, then her assignment to respect him just got a lot harder.
As a husband, if we had someone with authority placed over us and he was kind loving and always worked for our best interest, then to both submit and follow such a person would be much easier, but if he just demanded obedience and saw us as nothing more than cannon fodder, could we respect and follow such a man? So to is the situation for a wife and her husband!
It is good to remember that both the husband and the wife have roles to play in this matter and when the husband acts in harmony with his assignment then it is much easier for the wife to act in harmony with hers, and visa versa. A husbands headship over his wife is not total nor absolute as his headship is dependent on his submission to Christ. If he plays his part as required then she too can play hers, as in reality both are under Christ and neither have the right to be independent of Christ or his authority.
Like most things its not just one sided.

So where does this parable about Christ and the church fit into this "word to the wives"?

15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey. note (Compare)

16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.

17 And likewise he that had receivedtwo, he also gained other two.

18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.

19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.

20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.

21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

22 He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.

23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

24 Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:

25 And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.

26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:

27 Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.

28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.

29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

 

[steve]

What, if any, spiritual authority does a husband have over his wife?

 

[Jim an Apostle]

Since authority comes with responsibility, responsibility comes with accountability. The spiritual authority has to be tied to the accountability factor. Just as a parent bears accountability for a child. I believe a man will give an account for how he did or did not use his authority in the case of his wife and children. If my instruction is good I am not accountable for your disobedience. That being said, There is a proper balance for those under authority to obey but also a time the obey the higher Power. Understanding plays a role. Faith plays a role. Ultimately God is the final judge. God will honor my Authority to a point even when I am wrong. there is a point where my authority does not give me the right to be wrong. Proper fear of the Lord goes a long way to keeping proper balance for all.

 

[Jim an Apostle]

So where does this parable about Christ and the church fit into this "word to the wives"?

15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability;

several ability;
As the Leader of the Home distribution of reward and duty should be with ability of the wife and child taken into consideration. Consequences of reward or punishment should also be properly proportioned.

 

[Aussies]

Just having a read of 1 Corinthians 11:1-15.
This is showing the entwined nature of both the husband and his wife, as verse 12 says "For just as the woman is from the man, so also the man is through the woman; but all things are from God."
This headship arrangement is not a power grab or even a dispute over ability, for many of our wives are both wise and capable and in some instances, maybe even more than ourselves. Rather the last four words in verse 10 puts it nicely , "because of the angles". Both a mans submission to Christ and a wife's submission to her husband is simply due to the fact that it is Gods arrangement and just as the faithful angles hold their position so indeed do we, be that as a husband or a wife.

 

[Keith Martin]

What, if any, spiritual authority does a husband have over his wife?

Probably about as much as he is capable of and willing to demonstrate.

 

[steve]

Probably about as much as he is capable of and willing to demonstrate.

That is definitely a strong part of the answer, but it is not the whole answer.

Consider the story of the damsel in Act 16 who Paul cast the spirit of divination out of.
1) Paul obviously had the authority to do that.
2) We have no indication that she was willing to have the spirit cast out.
3) Her masters, who would have been her spiritual authority, were obviously unwilling that the spirit be cast out of her.
4) I would posit that his spiritual authority outranked theirs.

In the past I have seen spiritual authority as a yes or no thing. Paul had it, I don’t.
But Yah has been showing me that it is more complicated than that. That the first level of a man’s spiritual authority would be in his own house.
Men came to Yeshua to request healing for those of their own household because they themselves did not have the authority to call it forth.
Where do we put ourselves in those stories, who do we identify with?
The seeker, with zero spiritual authority?
Yeshua, with incredible spiritual authority?
Or somewhere in between?
Too often we just wimp out and identify with the powerless because we feel powerless. But what then do we do with Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. ?

So yes, @Keith, we need to be capable and willing to speak into the spiritual in our homes, but does it end there? If we had the virtue that Paul and the other disciples had, that’s probably all that would be necessary.
But we don’t, and this is where my statement about the authority that a husband has is based. I am coming to see that a husbands spiritual authority is much affected by his wife’s (wive’s) position.

This is still exploratory for me, so please bear with me if it comes off clumsily.

 

[Jeff Ray]

If my instruction is good I am not accountable for your disobedience.

I'm not sure I agree with this.

It satisfies our sense of fairness, sure, or maybe our sense of order, but with an extraordinary degree of authority comes a similar degree of accountability. If a large-account salesman does everything right, but still fails to win the account, he is held accountable and may be fired. If a general loses a battle or even the war, he is still accountable, even if he did everything right. He lost, and history will rightly judge him the loser in the conflict. These are high-stake situations, and "fair" is not a consideration.

So too, if a husband does everything right, and his wife leaves him anyway, she may be at fault, but he may be as well. I hardly ever see a failed relationship in which there isn't enough fault to supply both sides.

My point is, if what you are doing isn't working, find another way. Merely being right isn't good enough.

To believe that merely following the rules is enough is the mistake the Pharisees made.

 

[steve]

Rather the last four words in verse 10 puts it nicely , "because of the angles". Both a mans submission to Christ and a wife's submission to her husband is simply due to the fact that it is Gods arrangement and just as the faithful angles hold their position so indeed do we, be that as a husband or a wife.

I think that there is a bit more in the spiritual realm than just the position of the angels, but this isn’t the place to parse it.

 

[rockfox]

So much of this conversation is predicated in modern, western culture. Our jobs are harder. We wouldn't be having to hone our leadership skills at home, only on the battlefield, if we lived 1000 years ago, or even less. It was assumed that the father and husband were the absolute authority at home and the wife tried to figure out ways to circumvent that, not the other way around.

Yep.

The average man is taught by parents, society and church to be submissive to his wife; even those churches which supposedly teach male headship. So the average man, when he discovers he is not doing is God ordained duty to lead his house finds himself the servant trying to figure out how to overthrow the king (and all his army). Even the wife who wants him to lead, will resist his efforts because she subconsciously has lost respect for him and doesn't believe this change is real.

We are bought with a price, we are not our own. So we have no innate authority. But we still choose whether to yield our members to sin or to righteousness, denying the Creator’s authority over us.
We don’t have the authority to deny His authority, but we, all too often, do it anyway.
So it is in marriage.

As ever, the marital relationship is a picture of the heavenly one.

Which is why it should come as no surprise most Christian wives are rebellious seeing as most Christians give little thought to obedience to God beyond whatever their tradition requires of them to stay in good social graces.

What, if any, spiritual authority does a husband have over his wife?

So far as I can tell, all spiritual authority, or at least as much as any human can have. Eph 5. His spiritual authority over her is akin to Christ's over us. The husband is her priest, teacher, spiritual leader, elder, shephard. He is responsible for overseeing her spiritual grown (sanctification) that she may be presented holy, spotless and blameless in all her glory. To nourish, as to spiritually raise her up and care for her. 1 Cor 11 reflects this....the woman is the glory of man.

. I am coming to see that a husbands spiritual authority is much affected by his wife’s (wive’s) position.

What do you mean by that?

Men came to Yeshua to request healing for those of their own household because they themselves did not have the authority to call it forth.

That reminds me of the injunction to go to the elders for prayer and anointing of oil for healing. So maybe that's an indication of a limit to a man's authority? Or maybe just a reality of differing spiritual gifts. I recall reading a testimony once of a man successfully praying for healing over his wife.

 

[Pacman]

What, if any, spiritual authority does a husband have over his wife?

Absolute authority. With the only exception being he does not have authority over her acceptance of the Messiah for salvation.

 

[rockfox]

as his headship is dependent on his submission to Christ

No. 1 Peter 3 commands wives to be in subjection to unbelieving husbands.

And who exactly is to judge whether or not he is in submission to Christ? Usually when people say that sort of thing, they mean the wife (or maybe her pastor, who we all know will pander to her desires); that she doesn't have to obey an unrighteous husband or if she thinks his commands are wrong. That is just another way of making the wife the head of the relationship. To make her feelings his god.

As Jim points out, we will all have to give an account to God for our actions. The man for how well he ruled, the wife for how well she obeyed. And God is well able and willing to bring consequences in the here and now if necessary. But that is the role of Christ, not woman.

If on the other hand he attempts to wield his authority like a hammer and attempt to "punish" her for not not "obeying" him, then her assignment to respect him just got a lot harder.

Why do you put punish and obey in scare quotes?

Think about leadership in other contexts. If a business or military leader directs his followers to do something, and they disregard him, and he does nothing in response, he will loose the respect of his followers and they will become rebellious and out of control. If one is not willing to enforce ones authority, one will soon not have it. And in this example, such an officer/businessman would be soon replaced by higher authorities with someone who would enforce the chain of command.

So too it is with wives and men who are not man enough to stand up to a rebellious woman. Such men will soon be regarded with contempt as a mere man-child and disobeyed with impunity. In other words, the husband will only have as much authority as he is willing to enforce (or only be able to exercise as much authority as he's willing to enforce). To imply it is wrong to enforce ones authority is to say that authority is illegitimate, to make the husband subject to the wife.

Love and enforcement of authority are not opposites. That is only true if we confuse love with niceness. Heb 12 makes it clear love requires discipline. It is not niceness that makes obedience easier for a women, to the contrary they usually regard it as weakness, but sacrificial Christ-likeness will. This would be easier to see if you used a more accurate translation of Eph 5:33. It's not respect but reverence (def. to regard with fear mingled with respect and affection) which wives are commanded to act out.

 

[Keith Martin]

That is definitely a strong part of the answer, but it is not the whole answer.

Consider the story of the damsel in Act 16 who Paul cast the spirit of divination out of.
1) Paul obviously had the authority to do that.
2) We have no indication that she was willing to have the spirit cast out.
3) Her masters, who would have been her spiritual authority, were obviously unwilling that the spirit be cast out of her.
4) I would posit that his spiritual authority outranked theirs.

In the past I have seen spiritual authority as a yes or no thing. Paul had it, I don’t.
But Yah has been showing me that it is more complicated than that. That the first level of a man’s spiritual authority would be in his own house.
Men came to Yeshua to request healing for those of their own household because they themselves did not have the authority to call it forth.
Where do we put ourselves in those stories, who do we identify with?
The seeker, with zero spiritual authority?
Yeshua, with incredible spiritual authority?
Or somewhere in between?
Too often we just wimp out and identify with the powerless because we feel powerless. But what then do we do with Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. ?

So yes, @Keith, we need to be capable and willing to speak into the spiritual in our homes, but does it end there? If we had the virtue that Paul and the other disciples had, that’s probably all that would be necessary.
But we don’t, and this is where my statement about the authority that a husband has is based. I am coming to see that a husbands spiritual authority is much affected by his wife’s (wive’s) position.

This is still exploratory for me, so please bear with me if it comes off clumsily.

What you're saying does not come across as clumsy; it sounds like you're exploring, which, of course, you just stated. I don't see anything you've stated above that conflicts with my assertion,

Probably about as much as he is capable of and willing to demonstrate.

What I was clumsily saying is that a husband's spiritual authority is only limited by his capability and his willingness to demonstrate it. It appears to me that Scripture is consistent in asserting that we have been delegated spiritual authority over our wives. That we are imperfect beings limits its actualization. That limitation comes in the forms of:

a. Varying levels of capability to carry out implementation of that authority; and

b. The degree to which we're willing to implement it.

When you say, "I am coming to see that a husbands spiritual authority is much affected by his wife’s (wive’s) position," to which positions of his wife exactly are you referring? If you're referencing her willingness to submit, then we're talking about the interaction between the husband's capability/willingness and her level of rebellion. This goes back, too, to what I've written about before about men needing to demonstrate true leadership if they're expecting their wives to follow. Yes, our postmodern feminist/progressive culture has encouraged women to rebel against the spiritual authority of men, but husbands are also responsible for the degree to which they actually demonstrate leadership. It makes no sense for a woman to submit to a man who fails to lead and only demands fealty.

In other words, spiritual authority of husbands over their wives is a given, but husbands cannot just take it for granted. They have to properly execute it. School principals have authority over their students, but we all know situations in which hapless principals end up being responsible for environments that go way out of control. Did they have authority? Yes. Did they properly execute it? No.

 

[Aussies]

OK lets play with that for a moment. You are obviously very passionate about your "authority, so I will try not to offend.

that she doesn't have to obey an unrighteous husband or if she thinks his commands are wrong.

Exodus 20:3 says "you must not have any other gods besides me."
When Israel came out of Egypt and Aaron made the golden calf, what happened to all who worshiped that calf? Be they male or female, married or single?
So if a "husband" directed his wife to worship that calf, was she exempt from punishment due to his command, or was she still accountable for her actions regardless?
If a husband was to direct his wife to worship Baal (even today), should she obey him or not?
Acts 5:29 "Peter and the other apostles said "We must obey God as ruler rather than men." Does that apply the same to a wife or does a husbands "authority" mean that under his command she should disobey God and obey her husband in all matters?

That is just another way of making the wife the head of the relationship. To make her feelings his god.

That also depends on the man. I know a friend that is married, and a lot of the time the wife can have a lot to say, and I must admit in that setting, in my own thoughts I started to question his headship. However when she crossed the line on a serious matter there was no question who the head of that house was, and it wasn't her!
Sometimes we can take a hard line but we also need to remember that balance is also required.

As we follow the example of Christ, can you please point out some texts that refer to Jesus 'punishing' his disciples. To be clear I am not talking about correcting their thinking but actually punishing them?

Think about leadership in other contexts. If a business or military leader directs his followers to do something, and they disregard him, and he does nothing in response, he will loose the respect of his followers and they will become rebellious and out of control. If one is not willing to enforce ones authority, one will soon not have it. And in this example, such an officer/businessman would be soon replaced by higher authorities with someone who would enforce the chain of command.

Hitler was a leader, so when he gave the command to exterminate the Jews and others in the concentration camps, regardless of the consequences, and regardless of one's nationality, should he have been obeyed?

Proverbs 13 : 24 makes the clear point that a father should discipline his children (not abuse, but discipline). Can you please direct me to the scriptures that directs a man to do the same with his wife. Or are our wives just to be treated as children? Remember though that our wives are also heirs along with us, Galatians 3:26-29

To my thinking if you have to beat a dog to get it to do what you want, then perhaps you either have the wrong dog, or you need to be taught how to better handle that dog in the first place.

I am without question the head of my house! And yet I have never had to resort to "punishment" in any form. I have given counsel, and I have very clearly set standards for our household, but I have never had to"discipline" my wife.
But I have only been married to the same lady for over forty years so what would I know!

 

[Aussies]

I've been trying to think what it is that is not sitting right with me in this thread, I have no problem with the husband being the head of the family or the fact that a wife should follow his lead. I was reading back over the material and when I read this quote

It sounds true, since we can't physically force her to obey; she still has free will.

It came to me what it is that concerns me. Some have made the comment (seems to now be deleted, and rightly so) that a wife in an attempt to exert her own will, could withhold her company from her husband until she gets what she wants. Thus by this means attempting to usurp his position as head of the house. Such conduct is both unscriptural and uncalled for on the part of the wife. To attempt to use physical means to manipulate a husband is unacceptable. But then if a man attempted to do the same thing, it would be a greater issue to him than her, so that form of physical manipulation does not work, so what can a man do? He can "discipline" his wife, thus exerting physical manipulation in a different form.
I don't believe that either is healthy for the marriage nor scripturaly sound. Physical manipulation by either party has no part in a healthy marriage!
I would rather my wife submit to my lead and thus my headship out of love and respect rather than fear of reprisal.

 

[Pacman]

To attempt to use physical means to manipulate a husband is unacceptable.

I agree with you on this point but would take it further and say "To attempt to use ANY means to manipulate a husband is unacceptable."

what can a man do? He can "discipline" his wife, thus exerting physical manipulation in a different form.
I don't believe that either is healthy for the marriage nor scripturaly sound. Physical manipulation by either party has no part in a healthy marriage!

I disagree with your premise here. Discipline is not manipulation (assuming it's done properly)

I would rather my wife submit to my lead and thus my headship out of love and respect rather than fear of reprisal.

Of course. And the LORD would rather his assembly submit to him out of love and respect rather than fear of reprisal; but it didn't work out that way throughout the entire Bible did it?

It's not a one or the other thing. Both elements are at play in our relationship with God they are not opposed to one another. The relationship between a man and his woman is supposed to image that relationship.

 

[steve]

a. Varying levels of capability to carry out implementation of that authority; and

b. The degree to which we're willing to implement it.

c. How much she is actually “one” with him.

Stay tuned, I will keep developing this.

 

[steve]

That reminds me of the injunction to go to the elders for prayer and anointing of oil for healing. So maybe that's an indication of a limit to a man's authority? Or maybe just a reality of differing spiritual gifts. I recall reading a testimony once of a man successfully praying for healing over his wife.

Thank you for that reminder!
When I have read it in the past I have always seen genderlessness. That it was any member of the family that needed healing who was to come and get anointed.
As I read it now, I realized that if the husband has spiritual authority in the home, he would be the first to call forth healing in his wife and children. Only when his authority falls short (for whatever reason) would he bring them to the elders.
But who would call forth healing in the husband, should he require it? Neither his wife/wives nor his children have the spiritual authority over him to do it. All that they can do is beg Yah for his healing. Which, sadly, is most of what prayers for healing is today.
So the husband/father would need to present himself to the elders as the only ones who have greater authority than himself when he has needs beyond his authority.

 

[The Revolting Man]

So where does this parable about Christ and the church fit into this "word to the wives"?

15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey. note (Compare)

16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.

17 And likewise he that had receivedtwo, he also gained other two.

18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.

19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.

20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.

21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

22 He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.

23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

24 Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:

25 And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.

26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:

27 Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.

28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.

29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

I’ve always thought this parable was speaking directly to family size. Draw the conclusions you want from that; did the unfaithful servant simply not reproduce at all or did he only offer God one additional life ? That part is up for debate. What is not up for debate is that we know that what God values is souls and we can you have to reproduce one way or the other.