Drastically different kind of authority from what I'm talking about... I question whether any of those actually should have authority...
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Numbers 30 authority?
- Thread starter Pacman
- Start date
Drastically different kind of authority from what I'm talking about... I question whether any of those actually should have authority...
Authority is situational.
Emperor of Known Universe can usually command doctor, but in case of Emperor's sickness it is doctor who gives commands.
You have to prove from Bible that uncle or older brother has authority. Since you are making that claim, it you job to prove it. Can you check other Bible's verses?
Your claim implies that woman practically always has to have "guardian". Such societal wide ranging idea to requires much stronger proof that single verse.
No it doesn't
No he doesn't he gives recommendations the Dr. Has no authority to compel obedience.
But because it’s silent that means it’s not relevant past that situation that may or may not have happened. It’s not a valid option for believers in general.
I’d be interested in seeing the case made. Once you throw out “husband” and “wife” and insert “man” and “his woman” the possible combinations become more numerous.
I would have to see an explanation of how to make a woman yours that doesn’t involve sex or birth.
Would slavery count? Not sure whether they'd be included under Numbers 30, but that does seem to be a way to have a woman under a man's authority without being either their husband or father.
And now I see that slavery was already mentioned
Just to go right back to the start - this is a very hypothetical situation. Can anyone think of an actual real-life example where this question is or was relevant? Not a theoretical situation, a real one. I can see this being a long debate but I'm unclear whether it has a purpose.
I am currently establishing a relationship like this and I am evaluating how far my authority can legitimately be applied.
I guess the question becomes then becomes how you define authority. Do you have any spiritual authority in that instance? No. Can you void a vow she makes to God? Absolutely not.
Can you be her boss? Sure. There’s no penalty for her though if she breaks the relationship.
I think the closest way of looking at this is the relationship between a chief and the members of his tribe - those who live in his camp / house. The chief can certainly set rules for his tribe / household. While she's there she is under your authority in that she is to follow those rules. She's free to leave as she's not bound by a one-flesh relationship, nor is she a slave, but while choosing to remain in your household she's under your authority in the same way that any member of a tribe is under the authority of the chief.
But I don't see any legitimate reason to extend this to the vow-annulling authority of Numbers 30. It may be possible to interpret "husband / man" broadly enough to read such a relationship into the chapter, but it feels like a stretch. The situation of widows is clearly stated in Numbers 30:9.
If you are choosing not to have a one-flesh relationship, then there is something (presumably entirely legitimate, but something) holding her and you back from that depth of commitment to each other. I think it is questionable to cherrypick parts of marriage that you want to apply to you (e.g. headship) and not other parts (e.g. the requirement not to deprive each other sexually), because your decisions are somewhat arbitrary. Could you pick and choose a different set of rules to apply? If so then you're designing this yourself, not really applying scripture.
Consider the relationship between tribal members and their chief rather than the relationship between wives and husbands.
I’m not sure how that claim can be made if she has chosen to make him her head as in father. Not every headship relationship involved becoming one flesh.
Women went under their uncles headship and even their son’s. Witness Yeshua handing his mother over to Peter, his father presumably having passed.
You know that I would need to see that process laid out in scripture. I don’t see that a woman has an ability to designate an father and imbue that appointed father with spiritual authority.
It’s not a point if fellowship for me though. I would only caution any man I cared about to be very careful for getting in between God and vows.
What about the story of Ruth and Naomi? She literally had zero men in her life and crawled under the skirt of Boaz under the cover of darkness as well. She certainly assumed a whole lot for not having any authority. It was the local authority structure (could be civil) and the near kinsman was found and he gave up his rights and responsibilities to Boaz. So the authority structure could be the local civil much like our local courts and judges that permit the woman to make the choice as in divorce.
Ruth sexually consummated a one flesh relationship. She’s on my side.
Ruth was a widow. She was her own authority, as per Numbers 30.
The elders they spoke to were merely acting as witnesses, not as an authority. They only did so because her case fell under the levirate marriage law.
As I see it:
- Ruth married a man who became her head
- This man died, and left her without a son or a head
- The nearest kinsman was obligated to become her head, but refused
- The second nearest kinsman was then obligated to become her head, and accepted