Dear Heidi Bayly,

Dear Heidi,

No offense to your husband and the long line of Bayly men, but I like “Heidi” so much better than “Mrs. Joseph Tate Bayly VI” I was reading your father-in-law’s follow up post on your poem “I think you want a wife” revisited… and discovered your name is Heidi, and found your blog about the process of adopting. How exciting! I also disovered that you are 26 (or not much older since you started the blog in February).  My oldest daughter is 24.  Here is a picture of our children:

I am reminded by the photo that all of us home for Christmas is not as likely anymore since my oldest son married in May and moved to Maine, my thirdborn- a daughter- is engaged, and my oldest daughter is in an intense year round academic program in a rather distant state (she’s  in medical school in KY)

Since I read your poem, I’ve prayed for you.

“works of the flesh”

Galations 5:19- 21 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like

As I read the Strong’s definitions for each of the 17 words ( 3 pages of description in MSWord), I see that EVERY human has “flesh”.

The list of “works of the flesh” covers addictions such as sex (4), drink and drugs (3); religious issues (eg. idolatry, heresies, witchcraft); anger and pride issues; and issues of division in relationships.

The category of “flesh” which stand out to me- as a clean living, long term, church goer… are the latter two in the above paragraph. These are the ones which are not so much about those behaviors we Christians love to hate and judge. These are the fleshly divisive ATTITUDES which we have a tendency to keep right on nursing (and justifying as “righteous”).

Some of the Strong’s definitions for these are-

<2189>- hatred, enmity
<2054>- variance, strife, debate, wrangling
<2205>- emulations, zeal, fierceness of indignation, fervent mind, ardor in embracing pursuing or defending anything
<2372>- wrath, passion, heat, boiling anger
<2052>- strife, contention, putting oneself forward, being selfish
<1370>- division, dissension
<5355>- envy
<139>- heresy- a body of men following their own tenets, dissensions arising from diversity of opinions and aims

Do you see that? Debate, wrangling, division, ZEAL!, passion, contention, dissensions arising from diversity of opinions and aims. Sounds like what passes for the “Christian church” doesn’t it? YIKES!

Sadly, we Christians (myself included) are sometimes guilty of such “zeal” about some pet issue of our particular branch of Christianity… that we succumb to the “works of the flesh” in defending the “rightness” of our position. I looked up cross references for some of the “works of the flesh”. I found this:

1Co 11:19 For there must be also heresies <139> among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

WOW! There must be heresies among you!
WHY?
“that they which are approved may be made manifest among you”
What does it mean to be “approved”?
That takes me right back to Galations 5:

14For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
15But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.
16This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
… [snip "works of the flesh"]
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

How to “love life and see good days”

Did you know 1 Peter says you can “love life and see good days”?

Its a promise from God’s Word,
but it is conditional.
It is NOT conditional upon anything my husband does or does not do,
It is completely conditional upon my following Jesus role model.

I used to be very bitter and resentful. Once I became aware of these deeply rooted sins, I really stuggled with them and battled them for a couple years… but the Lord helped me dig out from their snares.

That whole book of 1 Peter is very deep and provided much wisdom and guidance for me… Indeed Jesus is given as the role model (to both husbands and wives)…. Look at the calling and the promises

21For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:

23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:

…

1 ¶ Likewise, ye wives, …

7 Likewise, ye husbands, …

8 ¶ Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous:

9 Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.

10 For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile:

11 Let him eschew evil, and do good; let him seek peace, and ensue it.

I noticed the instructions for responding to verbal abuse (no insulting back, but blessing). And I noticed a “no guile” sandwich (2:22; 3:10) around the renowned Sarah role model of submission . For me- timid, wimpy, weak, doormat type that I was- it meant I had to start speaking up. God would not allow me to continue to be conflict avoidant and brush things under the rug in denial. It was scary and I was absolutely horrible at it at first… Takes practice.

In reflecting upon this passage and upon the role model of Sarah, I have come to identify with Sarah.  She goes through a maturing process and comes to the place of having a great deal of influence and authority in her household. When Abram and Sarai are called, they don’t know God deeply at first. The covenants progress, and the accounts of them hearing God’s voice and seeing His miraculous interventions increase as they mature.

God’s miraculous interventions. HE is the same God. I’ve am more aware of His miraculous interventions now having experienced them so vividly on occasion And I think its probably far far more often than I am aware but I was not tuned in to give Him the credit for that. In fact I think that- like Joseph in the Bible- even things that were meant for evil and hurt me very deeply, even those things God has turned around for good.

A “chavil” wife is a crowning joy to her husband

A “chavil” wife is a crowning joy to her husband,
but she who makes him ashamed is as rottenness in his bones
Proverbs 12:4

Virtuous

by Sandra F. Cobble

Usually when we think of the word “virtuous” we tend to think of moral purity. We may even remember overhearing someone speak of some girl having “lost her virtue” — meaning, “having lost her virginity.” After having read in the New Testament of a woman’s place in the church, we then read of the “virtuous woman” in Proverbs 31. Somehow, it just does not all seem to fit together. Just what is a “virtuous woman”? Perhaps some of our confusion results from an incomplete understanding of the term “virtuous.”

“Virtuous” is a translation of the Hebrew “chavil” (or “havil”). According to the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament “chavil” is used to denote “strength, power, or might” in a variety of ways. It may refer to the strength of God (Ps. 59:11), the physical strength of man (Eccl. 10:10), or even the strength of a plant (Joel 2:22). And, according to Young’s Analytical Concordance, “chavil” is translated “valor” 37 times and translated “army” 54 times.

“When used of a woman (Ruth 3:11; Prov. 12:4; 31:10) it is translated ‘virtuous’, but it may well be that a woman of this caliber had all the attributes of her male counterpart” (TWOT). The masculine attributes described seem to indicate an individual not only with physical strength, but also strength of character, and possibly one of some wealth and social standing. And the attributes of the “virtuous” woman as shown in Proverbs 31 seem to fit that pattern.

The Septuagint translates the Hebrew “chavil” of Ruth 3:11 into the Greek “dunamis”, which means “power.” Proverbs 12:4 and 31:10 are translated “andreia”, which means “manly.”

From this we see that though “virtuous” would INCLUDE the moral purity which evidences strength of character, it would not be LIMITED to moral purity. A VIRTUOUS WOMAN WOULD BE A WOMAN STRONG IN ALL FACETS OF HER LIFE!

It is also interesting to note that our English “virtuous” originates from the Latin root “vir”, which means “man”!

Sandra F. Cobble

Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

Dear Mrs. Joseph Tate Bayly VI,

I read your poem on your father-in-law’s blog. Based on his apparent age from the photos, I surmise that you are a younger woman than I, perhaps contemporary (or slightly older) than my adult children and my own daughter in law (who are in their 20’s). As an older woman, God’s CALL to me in Titus 2 is to teach the younger women HOW to love their husbands and children. That CALL is what motivates this letter.

This part of your poem resonated with me intensely:

A wife – who worships you.
sleeps dreams wakes lives for you.
Who demands no loss of self no submission no obedience.
Who is your god?

Can you see the idolatry? I lived that paradigm for 22 years and died inside as you describe in this part of your poem:

Will you be a wife? Lay you in the casket.
To be one man’s Help Mate. To follow respect submit obey
Will you stand behind a man? Purge you of dignity you of self-determination.
Will you be weak so He will be strong?
Will you be a wife? … Rid you of ambition
He is you now
u disappear

If you are sincerely thinking that the above is God’s calling for you as a wife, I am very concerned for you and your children beloved sister! I want to hold out my hand to you and proclaim to you-in Jesus name- “ARISE MY BELOVED”!

“Will you be a wife? Lay you in the casket”

Are you aware that Ephesians 5 has differing instructions for the male and female of the marriage? Eph 5 is quite clear that the husband is called to lay down his life for his wife. Eph 5: 25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it ” Can you see how your words usurp the husband’s call and “put the pants on the wife” by suggesting that it is she whom God has called to “Lay you in the casket” within the marriage? Your job as help MEET is to HELP him be Christlike! Taking over his calling in the marriage robs him of the opportunity to do what God instructs and lay down his life for you.

(Please don’t misunderstand me as saying women and wives do not have a more general “christian” call to die to self and lay down life, but I think it is more natural for women to do so especially once she is married and bearing children. It comes with pregnancy and mothering and the built in feminine “maternal instinct”. Laying down life “happens” with pregnancy, labor, and 2am feedings. Thus the instruction -within marriage- is directed uniquely to husbands)

To be one man’s Help Mate.

The biblical word describing GOD’s assignment for you as your husband’s wife does not translate “help MATE“. That is a corruption of the King James translation “help MEET“. For more on this see Help MEET

To follow respect submit obey

The Bible teaches us to be respectful toward one another and “wives submit to your husbands”. You are to follow and obey the Lord Jesus Christ. My gravest and most destructive error was confusing the concepts of “submission” and “obedience”. More about that here: Obey?

Will you stand behind a man? Purge you of dignity you of self-determination.
Will you be weak so He will be strong?

Mrs Tate, I ask you, WHO wants to ROB your husband of his Proverbs 31 wife and you of your High and Holy CALLING to be help MEET and KEEPER of the home?
Please, please, please don’t listen to the devil’s whispers!

“She is clothed with strength and dignity…”
Proverbs 31:25

I exhort you, my sister, to renounce your indignity and weakness in the name and by the blood of Jesus, and take up DIGNITY and STRENGTH so that you may be the wife God is CALLING you to be!

EMBRACE YOUR CALL TO DIGNITY and STRENGTH!

Indeed, “purge you of SELF-determination” and obey GOD’s CALL upon your life! I speak from experience that your husband’s will and God’s will do not always match. You will need to be deeply in touch with God and cultivate ears to hear HIS still small voice. Everything HE has CALLED you to, HE is responsible to equip you to accomplish. REST in HIS care. If your beloved husband is anything like his daddy (Tim Bayly), you have a very challenging calling indeed! The Baylys strike me as strong, stubborn, powerful, unbridled stallions! To be assigned by GOD as HELP MEET for a Bayly man requires an incredibly strong and gifted woman!

I must confess to you that I- likewise married a strong, stubborn, powerful, unbridled stallion- was weak and undignified and I was crushed by him,
And that is not the worst of it Mrs Bayly
I allowed our children to be crushed by him
I failed in my CALLING to be KEEPER of the home
May you rise up from your coffin. LIVE beloved sister! Fulfill YOUR CALLING to be KEEPER and EZER (Help MEET) with dignity and strength

Will you be a wife? … Rid you of ambition

In the words of a song I have heard
“give me one pure and holy passion
give me one magnificent obsession
give me one glorious ambition for my life
to know and follow hard after YOU, LORD!”

He is you now
u disappear

I hope the “He” there is HE, as in CHRIST?
I assume that is the ONE you meant
Indeed, Beloved sister in Christ, “it is no longer I who lives but Christ who lives in me”. That is how I become who God has made “me” to be. I wouldn’t say that “I” disappear, but GOD scoops the dross off that this treasure in an earthen vessel may better reflect HIM. Mrs Bayly, I remembered you in prayer today, that you will be a chavil wife!

Fulfilling God’s CALL to be “keeper” and “ezer”

Titus 2:4-5

I would call the home a “sphere of authority” of the wife/mother.
This CALL upon her life is not about domestic servitude,
but authority to pray spiritual warfare, guard, watch, protect the children and husband, and preserve chastity in the marriage. As she is discipled by elder women, she will be healed and delivered from the effects of woundedness in her life and develop a mind which can think straight and for herself, a sober mind (discreet, self-controlled)

I would add that a wife is CALLED to be her husband’s ezer/help MEET.
Whatever God CALLS her to do HE is ready willing and able to EQUIP her to do.
ezer is a term used for God’s lifesaving help

A wife is uniquely qualified to help a husband overcome sowing to the flesh via sinful, destructive, death producing habits, addictions, attitudes, sins. As she submits to the LORD and seeks HIS divine aid to fulfill her “ezer” and “keeper” calling, HE will enable her to come alongside her husband to hold him accountable for his sins against her and the children humbly, gently, with dignity and strength.

Mortal Danger

A sister in Christ was reading through my material here and asked, “What if a wife is in mortal danger?” so I want to answer that here.

I believe that God does not approve of abuse toward His beloved children. If a wife believes that she or the children are in mortal danger then I believe that marital separation (with the intention of eventual reconciliation) is an entirely permissable Biblical option for her.

Here are the biblical guidelines for separation:

1 Cor 7:10-11 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

Do you see the red words in there? I do not hear condemnation. I hear permission. I would urge a wife to make everything a matter of earnest prayer as much as she is able. I spent many hours crying out to the Lord, weeping, seeking His will, and “pounding on His chest” so to speak. I was prepared and had peace with God and freedom in my Spirit to leave if it became necessary to protect myself and my children (despite the lack of support for my inclinations among church people- they did not live in my house nor in my shoes). At many junctures, I would seek the Lord and hear His still small voice in the midst of the storms telling me “this is the way, walk ye in it”. The single most important thing for a wife to do is press deeply into the Lord, learn to hear and follow God’s voice. Other voices often conflicted, contradicted, confused. God’s voice gives conviction, encouragement, comfort, strength, wisdom, guidance, reassurance and peace in the midst of the storms.

Here are some related links which were helpful to me:

• Retrouvaille Marriage Help
• The Silent Killer of Christian Marriages
• The Wounds of Spouse Abuse
• Cloud and Townsend Articles
• quotes from “Sacred Influence”
• Mending the Soul Ministries

Sarai becomes Sarah

I like this sermon about Abram and Sarai from the Ray Stedman library:

The Circumcised Life

Sarai goes from being Sarai=”contentious wife” to being Sarah= God’s princess.

“Keeper”

 I see a connection, a thread going to Titus 2.. Seems to me that ouros and horao are Greek relatives but the Strong’s doesn’t catch that (and a quick google search turned up empty).  There is no Strong number for “ouros” which appears in several compound greek words and is defined- a guard, be “ware”, a watcher, a warden.  Compare with 5432 phroureo- which describes God and means the ”oureo” “before; above” 
Note: the following links go to the blue letter bible- verse/concordance page

Titus 2:5- “keeper at home”
3626 oikouros from 3624 and ouros (a guard, be “ware”)

1 Peter 1:5 – kept/guarded/protected
5432 phroureo {froo-reh’-o} AV – keep
from a compound of 4253 and 3708 horao {hor-ah’-o}

John 10:3- of a door-keeper
2377 thuroros
from 2374 and ouros (a watcher);; n m

John 20:15- “a keeper of the garden”
2780 kepouros {kay-poo-ros’}
from 2779 and ouros (a warden);; n m

Gen 2:15 (adam’s assignment)- 08104 shamar {shaw-mar’}
AV – keep 283, observe 46, heed 35, keeper 28, preserve 21, beware 9,
mark 8, watchman 8, wait 7, watch 7, regard 5, save 2,

“Keeper”- man, woman, God

“authenteo”, anger, malice, clamour

In 1 Tim 2:11-15 the word translated “usurp authority over” is “authenteo”

It is unique- occurring only once in the Bible- and implies very forceful behavior carrying the meaning: absolute master; murderous; autocratic.

One can pontificate endlessly about the meaning of the word… but I suspect the behavior Paul is describing is not limited to a window of time 2000 years ago when he wrote the letter to Timothy.

As a matter of fact, as I was thinking about it, I got to wondering if I have been guilty of it. I know I have been guilty of malice, rage, and clamour. I was very angry for quite a spell. Anger itself is not a sin (see Eph 4:26 “Be ye angry, and sin not”). But my anger regularly slid into sin and I felt very out of control over myself. I would yell, scream, cry, and- on a handful of occasions- I went so far as to bite, kick, and hit my husband. And I would quite regularly wish he was dead and daydream about that. I would accuse him of being a pharisee and lecture him about his need to go get help with his issues. Those of us who are over 40 may recall a sensational news story some time ago about Lorena Bobbit, who took a big carving knife and chopped off her husband’s eh hem…. “member”. Wouldn’t these be modern day examples of malice, rage, and maybe “authenteo”?

I spent many hours in self flagellation, prayer, repentance, and seeking divine aid to overcome my intense anger. I spent many hours meditating upon Ephesians 4:15-32

I did an in depth word study of each word in Eph 4:31 “Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice:”

“bitterness”- bitter gall, extreme wickedness, a bitter root, and so producing a bitter fruit

“wrath”- passion, angry, heat, anger forthwith boiling up and soon subsiding again, glow, ardour, the wine of passion, inflaming wine (which either drives the drinker mad or kills him with its strength)

“anger”-anger, the natural disposition, temper, character, movement or agitation of the soul, impulse, desire, any violent emotion, but esp. anger, anger, wrath, indignation, anger exhibited in punishment, hence used for punishment itself, of punishments inflicted by magistrates

“clamour”- a crying, outcry, clamour

“evil speaking”- slander, detraction, speech injurious, to another’s good name, impious and reproachful speech injurious to divine majesty

“malice”- malignity, malice, ill-will, desire to injure, wickedness, depravity, wickedness that is not ashamed to break laws, evil, trouble

Matthew 5:21-22 ¶ Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Here are some related links which were helpful to me:

• Retrouvaille Marriage Help
• The Silent Killer of Christian Marriages
• The Wounds of Spouse Abuse
• Cloud and Townsend Articles
• quotes from “Sacred Influence”
• Mending the Soul Ministries

1 Tim 2 notes

1Tim 2:11-12 Let the woman (gune) learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman (gune) to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man (aner), but to be in silence.

The instructions of the passage reflect God’s loving and protective heart for HIS daughters.

The word for “usurp authority” is unique and implies very forceful behavior carrying the meaning: absolute master; murderous; autocratic.

The reason God says it is not because a woman/wife is inferior, deceived, can’t teach.
It is for her own protection!!!

I seriously considered whether 1 Tim 2:11-15 is instructions on how to run a MARRIAGE.

In greek there are not separate words for “husband” and “man” nor for “wife” and “woman”. The greek “aner” is translated husband or man and the greek “gune” is translated wife or woman. The discretion/interpretation of the translator comes to bear on HOW it is translated in each case.

Could this be a parallel passage?
1Cor 14:35 where the translators chose “husbands” in this case:
“And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women(WIVES) to speak in the church.”

And I think 1 Pet 3:1-6 (though written by Peter) could be a parellel instruction on how to handle a (difficult) marriage.
A husband will simply not listen nor hear a wife who is finger wagging didactic nor attempting to forcefully exercise authority over him. It is counterproductive for a wife to deal with a husband in a manner which comes across as “parental”. It won’t “fix him”. To the contrary; he will- at least- dig in his heels if he doesn’t get downright abusive. God knows that!

The instructions of the passage reflect God’s loving and protective heart for HIS daughters.

This is from the Interlinear Bible (which directly translates the greek text into English):

1Tim 2:14-15 interlinear

Adam not was-deceived the but woman being-deceived in transgression has-become;
She-will-be-saved but through the childbearing if they-remain in faith and love and holiness with sensibleness

Here’s the KJV translation at Blue Letter Bible. One can click C in the right column and look at the strong’s definition of each word. I did that.

1Tim 2:15 interlinear
She-will-be-saved but through the childbearing if they-remain

I don’t think the detail here is trivial nor accidental.

she- singular
THE child bearing- definite article
THEY- plural

Who is “she”?
Who is “the child” being born or begotten?
Who are “they”?

and what does “she shall be saved” mean?

BLB- she shall be saved

It can’t be salvation through Jesus because it is conditional upon the actions of whoever “they” are. “IF THEY continue in ….”

some of the meanings of saved are – made well, healed, restored

she shall be saved(made well, healed, restored) if they continue in fidelity, holiness, love

“she” could be the wife, Eve, woman, ?????
“they” could be the husband and wife, the children, women, ?????

“the child bearing” could be
-the formation of Christ within her, or
-physical bearing of offspring.

The salvation cannot be Christian salvation because it is conditional upon the behavior of “they”.

I think “she” refers to Eve.

I think “they” refers to women (all women who continue in faith, love, holiness whether single, married, childless, etc.)

So, this is the rendering which I think reflects the meaning of the verse:

She (Eve) will be saved (restored) through bearing the child if they (women) continue in…

will be saved/restored” is in the future.
Restored HOW?
I think it refers to the verse before*

I think in any woman who allows Jesus to be formed in her and “continues in…” is restored to the garden state of intimacy with the LORD (as Eve enjoyed before the transgression).

 

Quote:

1Tim 2:14-15 interlinear Adam not was-deceived the but woman being-deceived in transgression has-become*; She-will-be-saved but through the childbearing if they-remain in faith and love and holiness with sensibleness

I take it as a message of hope, healing, restoration for women.
It is not meant to demean, disrespect, muzzle, or put down women!!!
My GOD is NOT LIKE THAT!
And nothing in HIS WORD will do that!
That is my starting premise for reading scripture.

I think this is some parallel preaching by Paul:

 

Quote:

quote: Gal 4: 19 ¶ My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you, 20 I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice; for I stand in doubt of you. 21 ¶ Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? 22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. 24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. 25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. 26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. 27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. 28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. 29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. 30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. 31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. 1 ¶ Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

As far as personal application goes…
I have seen the section of 1 tim 2 as applicable to the porn problem facing the church today; 2 tim 3:1ff is also striking in its relevance.
Whatever contemporary situation Paul was addressing must have had much overlap with the modern church, AND I believe God’s Word to be “living and active” in a very deep and mysterious sense those words were NOT just written to and for a church 2000 years ago, but for us today.

‘men lift up HOLY hands in every place…”
“women dress MODESTLY…”
the fall/ the deception of Eve
“but she shall be saved(RESTORED) through the childbearing if they continue faith, love and holiness with propriety”

Do you see how all that can speak into the modern porn problem?

The porn problem is extremely disruptive to the intimacy in a marriage.
1 Tim 2 speaks to that:
-for the wife to LEARN- steep herself in GOD and HIS WORD,
-not to treat her husband in an “authentein” way, attempts to armtwist him are futile and counterproductive,
-to dress modestly,
-to continue being a help MEET to her husband with “faith, love and holiness with propriety”.
-Christ will be formed in her- “the childbirth” and her garden intimacy with the Lord will be restored- in that sense- REVERSING EVE.

It is a promise, a passage of HOPE, HEALING, DELIVERANCE, and RESTORATION!
It isn’t intended to club women into silence.
Using it that way is misuse- and in the extreme, can even descend to spiritual abuse.
…which is not a good representation of our LORD, Jesus Christ whom we serve.

to continue from my previous post…
I see parallels with the 1 Peter 3 instructions for wives of disobedient husbands. “without a word” “he may be won”.
In both passages, she is to press deeply into the LORD and learn from HIM. 1 Peter 3 talks about “the hidden person of her heart”
and what a precious treasure that is to her LORD.

Thus, she will grow so that her behavior, her demeanor- in Christ- is above reproach. And she will be a good example, a light, a help MEET for her husband. It is a high and holy CALLING.

and 1 Tim 2 is not JUST for “in church”. It is for every where (see 1 Tim 2:8)

Once one grasps that it is for “every where”, one will need to throw out the traditional understanding as a restriction upon every christian woman having any authority over any man. To do otherwise, and function in a free society, would be hypocrisy.

I used to try to live consistently with the traditional understanding of the passage and avoid any authority over any man in any context. Even then, I know I fell short of perfect practice of my understanding of the passage. How? Well, I voted and women voting is an exercise of authority over men. SO, to practice no authority over any man EVERY WHERE would mean women cannot vote, nor could they work outside the home in very many contexts, nor could they teach high school nor college

1 Tim 2:11-15 (Revelations)

this is from 8/9/07

Oswald Chambers – “What was true of the Virgin Mary in the historic introduction of God’s son into this earth is true in every saint. The son of God is born into me by the direct act of God.”

After reading Oswald Chambers, I asked God to show me what it means that “she shall be saved in childbearing”

1Tim 2:14-15 interlinear

Adam not was-deceived the but woman being-deceived in transgression has-become;

She-will-be-saved but through the childbearing if they-remain in

Faith and love and holiness with sensibleness

1Tim 2: KJV

11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

My paraphrase

Let the wife learn in quietness with all subjection.

I don’t permit a wife to continuously teach nor usurp authority over the husband, but to be in quietness.

For Adam was formed first, then Eve

And Adam was not deceived, but the wife being deceived has made/birthed a breach/transgression. She will be saved/made whole/restored now by means of begetting/birthing the child if THEY (h&w) continue in fidelity and love and holiness with sobriety.

THEY- the husband and wife? Descendants?

The begetting could be Jesus born within her or born within her husband or- mysteriously- in their One Flesh. Thus childless wives would also be “begetting” Christ within their husbands and/or themselves. The being “saved/made whole” appears to happen in the context of marriage only; single women don’t do this ministry.

Or maybe they do! (see Gal 4 below- the barren woman, the single woman with many children)

1Co 7:34 There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.

Since it is “she” who is made whole (not “they”) perhaps saved/made whole refers to a restoration of a womanly character, reputation, role. No longer held in contempt as “deceived” but “discerning”. Her pre-transgression and pre-curse dominion/authority and position in marriage restored. Like a reversal of the curse upon Eve

Perhaps “begetting/birthing the child” is a MINISTRY that Christian wives do for their husbands. I know in my marriage that it was a great deal of labor and suffering for me to go through the processing of years of junk. He didn’t seem to suffer much. It is almost like I carried the weight of birthing a new marriage.

This is another possibility… The Syriac and Ethiopic versions render the words, “she shall be saved by her children, if they continue,,,” Just as church supported slavery was for a time. So-perhaps- church supported invalidation of women is for a time and the female descendants of Eve will see a new day dawn within the church, where the ministry of women is accepted and respected.

Perhaps the child-bearing is the child of promise rather than the child of the bondwoman. It is the woman moving from life under the law, in the Old Covenant to life under the promise, to freedom under the New Covenant.. She moves from “one born after the flesh” to “one born after the spirit”. That would mean the possibility is there for ALL women, married, single, childless

Other scriptures:

Paul as midwife in Gal 4:19

“ My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,”

19 ¶ My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

20 I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice; for I stand in doubt of you.

21 ¶ Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

Gal 2: 26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

29 And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

6 Who gave himself a ransom for all < to liberate many from misery and the penalty of their sins>, to be testified in due time.

7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.

9 ¶ In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved<4982>. in the childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Mt 9:21 For she said within herself, If I may but touch his garment, I shall be whole <4982>.

Mt 9:22 But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made <4982> thee whole <4982>. And the woman was made whole <4982> from that hour.

3083 lutron {loo’-tron}

from 3089; TDNT – 4:328 & 4:340,543; n n

AV – ransom 2; 2

1) the price for redeeming, ransom

1a) paid for slaves, captives

1b) for the ransom of life

2) to liberate many from misery and the penalty of their sins

Ac 27:31 Paul said to the centurion and to the soldiers, Except these abide in the ship, ye cannot be saved <4982>.

Circumcision of the Heart

 

Circumcision of the Heart

If I want the “renewed mind” of Rom 12:1-2; if I want to really be able to love God with ALL heart, soul, mind, strength, then I believe I must submit to circumcision of the heart. I must invite GOD to remove the band of flesh, all the bitter roots, to tear them out. Only then can the Holy Spirit flow freely.

I must cleanse the clay vessel that is me, if I am to be used for anything noble: 2Ti 2:21 If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work. It is extremely painful, but constructive pain.

CS Lewis wrote a great word picture. Book 3 in the Chronicles of Narnia “The Voyage of the Dawn Treader” tells of Eustace a tiresome, unpleasant boy, “perfectly beastly”. He turned into a dragon and was stuck in that condition for some time. Then he met Aslan and followed him to a well. The lion said he must undress to enter. Eustace peeled off three dragon skins but found himself yet a dragon. Quote from the book:

quote:

---

“Then the lion said- but I don’t know if it spoke- You will have to let me undress you. I was afraid of his claws, I can tell you, but I was pretty nearly desperate now. So I just lay flat on my back to let him do it. The very first tear he made was so deep that I thought it had gone right into my heart. And when he began pulling the skin off, it hurt worse than anything I’ve ever felt… Well, he peeled the beastly stuff right off- just as I thought I’d done it myself the other three times, only they hadn’t hurt- and there it was lying on the grass: only ever so much thicker, and darker, and more knobbly looking than the others had been.”

---

Implications of “unequally yoked” teaching for marriage?

2 Cor 6:12 You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted by your own affections. 13 Now in return for the same (I speak as to children), you also be open. 14 Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? 15 And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? 16 And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you[1. b] are the temple of the living God. As God has said:
“ I will dwell in them
And walk among them.
I will be their God,
And they shall be My people.”[c]
17 Therefore

“ Come out from among them
And be separate<873>, says the Lord.
Do not touch what is unclean,
And I will receive you.”[d]
18 “ I will be a Father to you,
And you shall be My sons and daughters,
Says the LORD Almighty.”[e]

Two oxen pulling together for their master…
Who is the “leader”?
What are the implication of the “unequally yoked” concept
on issues of power and control in marriage?

“you are restricted by your own affections”

What does “restricted” mean?

 

Quote:

4729 stenochoreo {sten-okh-o-reh’-o} 1) to be in a narrow place 2) to straiten, compress, cramp, reduce to straits 2a) to be sorely straitened in spirit

It means TO BE IN A NARROW PLACE, CRAMPED!

What does “separate” mean?

 

Quote:

873 aphorizo {af-or-id’-zo} 1) to mark off from others by boundaries, to limit, to separate

I don’t think it means to separate physically or divorce.
I think it means (in part) having good boundaries, being emotionally “separate”.
I did not have good boundaries; I let my affections RESTRICT me!
Being separate brought me out of the cramped place into the BROAD PLACE.

The evil, the darkness, the LIES…

“what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?” 2Cor 6

“COMMUNION” also translates as “INTIMACY”.

I have erred in passively settling
for many things
which were NOT excellent

I pray THIS for myself:
Phil 1:9 ¶ And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment<144>;
10 That ye may approve<1381> things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ;
11 Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God.

Quote:

144 aisthesis {ah’-ee-sthay-sis}
1) perception, not only by the senses but by the intellect
2) cognition, discernment
2a) of moral discernment in ethical matters

1381 dokimazo {dok-im-ad’-zo}
AV – prove 10, try 4, approve 3, discern 2, allow 2, like 1,
examine 1; 23
1) to test, examine, prove, scrutinise (to see whether a thing is genuine or not), as metals
2) to recognise as genuine after examination, to approve, deem worthy

Kindred Spirit

This entry is in honor of the occasion of my 48th birthday.

The Lord has blessed me richly and given me a gift which is truly priceless and meaningful to me. I have realized that I have a kindred spirit, a woman who thought deeply about the same passages and books which have drawn me. She is Katharine Bushnell

Today, I ordered two copies of her book “God’s Word to Women”,
one for me, and one to share with my women’s Bible Study group.

and I browsed her other books which are published online.
The Vashti-Esther Story
Heaven on Earth
She could see some of the same things in Scriptures which the Lord has shown to me…

I am deeply touched. How precious and kind of the Lord, to show me this on my Birthday.
Thank you, Lord!

“To offer to domineer over the conscience is to assault the citadel of heaven.”

quoted from The Vashti-Esther Story

God placed before Esther the duty of ruling Ahasuerus for the good of his realm and for the saving of the Jews from annihilation. Her conscience bade her to obey God alone, which she did it at the risk of her life. Esther found her first step in obedience to God was a transgression of two laws of the kingdom in which her husband ruled. The most recent law required the resigning of her conscience to his will, which Esther did not do. The other law bore a death penalty for disobedience unless the king offered his golden scepter for a pledge of good faith. She passed successfully through both ordeals.

The next step was to interfere between the king and his dearest friend, Haman. The tie was broken and Haman was hanged shortly after by the king’s order. The king would have stopped here with the death of Haman, but Esther did not allow it. The king must undo a law of the Medes and Persians, “which is unchangeable” (8: 8), and the law to slaughter the Jews was of that order (3:10,12).

The sixth chapter of Daniel tells us how King Darius became entrapped in his own law of the Medes and Persians, “which altereth not,” and was obliged to allow Daniel to be cast into the den lion’s den. He labored all day to save Daniel, spent a sleepless night while Daniel was in the den, and “very early” in the morning with weeping and lamentation. By a miracle of God, King Darius found Daniel unharmed after a night with the lions. Esther had to break through this kind of law to deliver her people from annihilation. Her tears, pleading and pressure (Esther 8:3-6) on the king found a way. Another law was proclaimed as extensively as the law of destruction. The Jews were to be armed in order to defend themselves. Government officials in all places were instructed to assist the Jews to be ready for the attack on the appointed day for their slaughter, and they gave much help. (Esther 9:3)

Ahasuerus had the reputation with historians of being self-indulgent; indolent and careless. Certainly he showed these qualities in allowing Haman to proclaim such a law in the king’s name. Esther rendered great service to her king besides saving her people in getting this ill-considered law reversed.

His realm was formed out of all kinds of petty nations tribes and clans—many of them fierce and lawless, living by depredations upon others. Alexander the Great, who conquered Medo-Persia in B.C. 333, neglected the country and allowed it to fall to pieces because he did not prize it.

To be sure, the despots of those early times did not exercise any scruples when occasionally killing off a tribe of a few hundred. Doubtless, Ahasuerus got this troublesome idea from Haman.

Because the Jews existed in vast numbers throughout the realm, the king was amazed and thrown into a passion. He saw that his whole country would be thrown into confusion. With the legalization of killing of prey, quickly no life would be safe, Jew or Gentile after the slaughtering got under way. But he seems to have thought all was stopped when the mischief-maker Haman was hanged.

Esther’s second risk to go unto the king unbidden secured an antidote law against Haman’s, and yet 800 men in Shushan alone, knowing well the proclamation that the Jews were armed; fell upon the Jews presented swords and spears, hoping to overthrow them for the sake of booty. Because they were after Jewish prey, 75,000 men throughout the provinces perished for their folly in attacking the Jews. Thus, the country was ridded of ten thousands of brigands, who fell through their own rashness.

The law of defense provided for the Jews to take the prey of those they killed, but it is recorded three times that the Jews “laid not their hands to the prey.” They merely defended themselves.

It does not require a very lively imagination to understand that a situation not unlike civil war had been brought about by Haman’s foolhardy meddling with government, when nearly 76,000 were left dead on the battlefield, not to number the wounded; and the conflict extended all over the realm. This was not an affair confine to the Jews. It was non-Jews who suffered death—but the lawless and not the better elements of the population.

All had passed through the real peril of violence from the bandit mob, which was brought into activity by Haman’s law and refused to be assuaged by the antidote law. Therefore, all rejoiced when order was restored and not the Jews alone but certainly the most. Their nation has been rescued, and the Feast of Purim was established as a memorial for all time.

But what about that decree that was the result of Vashti’s disobedience, instructing all wives to give honor to their lords, both great and small, lest Vashti’s conduct should, by example, encourage women to despise their lords (“husbands”), and there would arise “too much contempt and wrath?” (1:18)

It was forgotten when it became known throughout the provinces that their king had such a wonderful, as well as most beautiful, queen. The king was so devoted to her. Esther had great influence over him for the good of their country. She influenced him to find a way to combat a vicious law that had been proclaimed to kill and plunder all the Jews. This mischievous law would have run into indiscriminate plundering.

The women forgot to copy Vashti, alas, even in her modesty and also in her disobedience. They didn’t heed her case as a warning. However, we believe they copied everything they could learn about Esther, her style of dress and all that. Sometimes they said to their husbands, “It’s a wise plan to sometimes listen to and act upon a wife’s opinions as the king does.” Probably, husbands said, “I do wish women wasted less time in gossip and on their hair and fingernails, and took an interest in the welfare of the nation, like the queen.”

Many people of the land became Jews, “for the fear of the Jews fell upon them.” (8:17). We suppose they said, “Our queen looks well to the interests of her people, and she has great influence over the king. One might almost think he is a Jew, too. It won’t do to mistreat a Jew. I think I will join the Jews and keep myself in their favor—that is the safe side.”

The whole atmosphere of women’s life in Persia must have altered considerably after Jehovah inaugurated His attack through Esther upon that law which placed Jehovah in a position secondary to her husband. The first part of the Ten Commandments should be first in every wife’s life, “Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.” Vashti and Esther both put conscience, God, first.

When God sent Moses to Pharoah, He armed him with the demand: “Let My people go, that they may serve Me.” The teaching is “they cannot serve me when service is regulated by any other master than Myself.” No more can a wife render service to a husband lawfully except as god, not the husband, regulates the service. Otherwise, she serves man and not God and is an idolater to that extent.

Let us repeat: The second and only other appearance of God as the “I AM” after His revelation of that name to Moses when He came as an Emancipator (Exodus 3:14), is here in Esther 7:5 in the sentence, “Who is he, and where is he”—and it is Jehovah who interrupts, as it were, to give answer, “It is the Emancipator, the I Am: I am here.”

The story of Vashti and Esther does not end with the Jews’ deliverance from death, though that was soon experienced. It did not begin with, nor does it end, with Esther. It began with Vashti, and it ends with a broader purpose than Esther’s nation, which it includes—a purpose that includes Gentiles like Vashti.

“Jehovah” was first revealed to Moses (Exodus 6:3), Covenant-Keeper, the One who made the covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. He included in the Great Covenant Eve whose Seed should bruise the Serpent’s head. (Genesis 3:15). Although that covenant was spoken to the Serpent, Jehovah has “come down” this time to interrupt the king’s question to say, “I am here to deliver all the seed of the ‘mother of all living,’ out from the bondage and slavery of Satan into ‘the glorious liberty of the children of God.’”

" man should be ruler over his own household." <—-> Esther’s authority

I was reading Esther 4:11 ff, where Esther disobeys her husband, King Xerxes law and comes before him without being summoned. I was looking at her interactions with Mordecai. I’ve heard- on several occasions- the claim that Esther was “under the authority of a man”- Mordecai. Upon my recent reading and reflection, I don’t see that in the passage at ALL!!!.

It appears to me that Esther is under NO human authority.
It appears to me that she operates completely under God’s authority

Her interactions with (her uncle, who was her childhood guardian) Mordecai, while very loving, respectful, and concerned, are NOT of an inferiorly ranked person toward one “in authority over her”. To the contrary, Esther 4 portrays Esther as behaving with queenly authority toward Mordecai. Mordecai nowhere instructs her what to do, while she instructs him what to do at least once.

Quote:

Esther 1 (excerpts)
“According to law, what must be done to Queen Vashti?” he asked. “She has not obeyed the command of King Xerxes …
the queen’s conduct will become known to all the women, and so they will despise their husbands and say, `King Xerxes commanded Queen Vashti to be brought before him, but she would not come.’ [18] This very day the Persian and Median women of the nobility who have heard about the queen’s conduct will respond to all the king’s nobles in the same way. There will be no end of disrespect and discord.
…
Then when the king’s edict is proclaimed throughout all his vast realm, all the women will respect their husbands, from the least to the greatest.”
The king … sent dispatches to all parts of the kingdom, to each province in its own script and to each people in its own language, proclaiming in each people’s tongue that every man should be ruler over his own household.”

To my mind, the statement
“every man should be ruler over his own household”
seems to parallel
“your desire shall be for your husband and he shall rule over you”

The latter was spoken by GOD
The former by a pagan King

IMHO, God was speaking “prophetically”
It was not a command, nor even a judgment.
The judgement of eating the forbidden fruit was Death.
“he shall rule over you” is a manifestation of the “death”

Xerxes was speaking as a fallen male
providing us with a vivid object lesson of the truth of God’s prophecy

While Esther,
under God’s authority,
provides a vivid role model of a woman who lives
with GOD given QUEENLY authority
and dignity
and strength
and influence
even in the most oppressive of worldly environments.

Esther disobeyed her husband, King Xerxes
while never violating wifely submission
Godly submission- understood properly- is a privilege and a blessing.

Think of Esther.
Here she was treated like not much more than a piece of meat, chattel.
Absolutely NO freedom in the world’s sense of the word.
But look what she accomplished as GOD enabled and empowered her to demonstrate godly submission toward her difficult husband (even as she disobeyed the law)!
She was a help MEET for the king.
Esther had the privilege of having a key role in GOD’s great redemptive plan.

She lived so far ABOVE the restrictions which mankind would place upon her!
She lived in humble, obedient, submission to GOD!

Eve was cheated out of her inheritance
by believing lies.
Adam traded his inheritance
to satisfy his appetites.

Who says times have changed?

Inheritance: Restored in Christ

Eve was cheated out of her inheritance by believing lies.
Adam traded his inheritance to satisfy his appetites.”I pray also that
the eyes of your heart may be enlightened
in order that you may know
the hope to which he has called you,
the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints,
and his incomparably great power for us who believe.”
Eph 1:18-19

Authority

Paradox-
a statement or proposition that seems self-contradictory or absurd but in reality expresses a possible truth.Examples of Biblical paradox:
to live, you must die John 12:24
to be wise, you must be foolish 1 Cor 4:10
to be strong, you must be weak 2 Cor 12:9-10

I think that spiritual authority is another example of paradox
to have spiritual authority, you must………..

Matt 20:[25] Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. [26] Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, [27] and whoever wants to be first must be your slave– [28] just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
__________________

Are Christians who focus incessently upon “authority over” or “lordship over” other Christians accurately representing Christ and the Bible?

Are they living in proper submission and obedience to the instructions of our Lord Jesus Christ quoted above?

__________________

I think spiritual authority is more accurately understood in terms of “authority to” rather than “authority over”.

IOW, I have spiritual authority to overcome sin in my life and walk in a manner worthy of HIS calling. Whatever God has instructed me to do, HE will empower me to do.

So, in marriage
the husband has the authority to protect, nurture, nourish, cherish, love, understand, value, esteem, and respect his wife (see also Eph 5 and 1Peter 3 instructions for husbands).
And
the wife has the authority to help, support, nourish, love, humbly cooperate with (aka submit to), and reverence her husband (see also Eph 5 and 1Peter 3 instructions for wives)
__________________Whatsoever God has instructed us to do,
HE will empower us to do
IF we are submissive (humbly cooperative) toward HIM

“subjection”in the following verse is NOT the submission/hupotasso/humble cooperation word.
It is a different word doulagōgeō
which means SLAVERY.
I have authority to do THIS:1Cr 9:27 But I keep under my body, and bring [it] into subjection:
lest that by any means, when I have preached to others,
I myself should be a castaway.

As a young Christian, I memorized the above in RSV so I am partial to this rendition:

“But I POMMEL my body and SUBDUE IT!
lest after preaching to others
I myself should be disqualified”

__________________

Scripturally,-if one is faithful over little, one will be given much Mt 25:21ff
-”to whom much is given, much shall be required”.
-spiritual authority in the church is restricted- by several passages- to those who have demonstrated Christlikeness in their own homes

__________________

Sometimes
it seems that
“the church”

is really no reflection upon Christ

__________________

Shouldn’t Christians resemble Christ?
Isn’t THAT the point?
Isn’t THAT the Good News?
That HE has given us power and authority to resemble Christ?
Not in our own strength, NO!
That is another paradox: “when I am weak then I am strong”
I have authority to:

Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit,
but in humility
consider others better than yourselves.
Each of you should look not only to your own interests,
but also to the interests of others.Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient
Phil 2

__________________

Are we competing for power and control?
WHO is SOVEREIGN to the Christian?

At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying,
Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?
Mt 18:1

“And now I will show you the most excellent way.”
1 Corinthians 13

__________________

“by this shall all men know that you are my disciples,
that you have love one for another”
John 13:35I have authority to love!

__________________

"I will make him an help meet for him"

I  dislike the demeaning interpretation of “help meet” which has historically been bandied about. For example look at this description:

John Gill (1697-1771) Bible Commentary: I will made him an help meet for him; one to help him in all the affairs of life, not only for the propagation of his species , but to provide things useful and comfortable for him ; to dress his food , and take care of the affairs of the family ; one “like himself” {c}, in nature, temper, and disposition, in form and shape; or one “as before him” {d}, that would be pleasing to his sight, and with whom he might delightfully converse, and be in all respects agreeable to him , and entirely answerable to his case and circumstances, his wants and wishes.

She sounds very much like a “household appliance”.
Slightly more useful than a plain doormat.

Here is a description which really ministered to me. I found it very edifying and empowering in a way which is constructive to both myself, my husband, and our marriage:

From Captivating by John and Stasi Eldredge

When God creates Eve, he calls her an ezer kenegdo. “It is not good for the man to be alone, I shall make him [an ezer kenegdo]” (Gen 2:18 Alter). Hebrew scholar Robert Alter, who has spent years translating the book of Genesis, says that this phrase is “notoriously difficult to translate”. The various attempts we have in English are “helper” or “companion” or the notorious “help meet”. Why are these translations so incredibly wimpy, boring, flat… disappointing? What is a help meet, anyway? What little girl dances through the house singing “One day I shall be a help meet?” Companion? A dog can be a companion. Helper? Sounds like Hamburger Helper. Alter is getting close when he translates it “sustainer beside him.”

The word ezer is used only twenty other places in the entire Old Testament. And in every other instance the person being described is God himself, when you need him to come through for you desperately.

Most of the contexts are life and death, by the way, and God is your only hope. Your ezer. If he were not there beside you… you are dead. A better translation of ezer would be “lifesaver”. Kenegdo means alongside, or opposite to, a counterpart.

 

Gen 1:26-28 God gave both male and female dominion: they are the King and the Queen
I do see them given different roles

Gen 2:15¶ And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

Clicking on the word “keep” will take one to the Strong’s definition of the Hebrew Word “shamar” (which is not just gardening). It is to protect, guard, watchman, preserve, etc which implies there is an enemy, a danger and Adam is responsible to guard and protect.

Eve’s intended (by GOD) role is stated here:
Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

By clicking on the word “help meet” one can see that it carries the meaning of aid, succour, one who helps. But please notice the other occurances of the Word by scrolling down the page at that link. The same word translated “help meet” of women is used of God.

So the husband has the authority to protect, nurture, nourish, cherish, love, understand, value, esteem, and respect his wife (see also Eph 5 and 1Peter 3 instructions for husbands). And the wife has the authority to help, nourish, love, humbly cooperate with (aka submit to), and reverence her husband (see also Eph 5 and 1Peter 3 instructions for wives)

The Slave Who Fans the King

So, in the dream I am the slave who is fanning the king.

I was talking to Chris and Lisa, telling them some things that happened over the weekend.
Lisa starts doing a “slave fanning the king” motion.
I get it!
He does his “control freak” routine.
I lose my temper, I’m outta control
I feel guilty
So I cave and ‘fan the king’.

She said that I am the queen, not the slave.
I don’t have to lose my temper.
I just need to explain
in a dignified manner
my reasons for not complying.

I am the queen.
I like this Greek Word Study
oikosdespotes – oikos = house/home despotes is where we get the word despot so it means master, ruler, or somewhat weak manager.
Used of the young women admonished to marry and be masters of their homes, in 1 Tim. 5:14.
I think God intends me to have authority over household matters
And I need to ASSERT my authority, (not USURP his, but ASSERT mine)

Biblically, Does Submission Equal Obedience?

I once took a class in Christian Ethics. We looked at Case Studies to help us think through how to apply Scriptures in modern life. I would like to do that in this post with respect to the false doctrine of “Submission” equals “Obedience”.

For a very VERY long time, I interpreted “obedience” as “submission” and it was a fatal misunderstanding on my part. It is very spiritually, emotionally, relationally destructive and violates human dignity and free will.

Case Study 1: Submission to husband by wife
“Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.” Eph 5:24

This is Case Study about a modern American Christian couple who sits next to you in church on Sunday.

The wife has been sick, throwing up all day. The baby is sick too and was up a lot last night, so she is also exhausted. She hasn’t had water in the house for two days because something went wrong with the well. This is a hardship. She is not used to figuring out how to clean the baby’s bottom and take care of throwup messes with no water

She is not allowed to call up and get a repair man in to fix the water because her husband believes the doctrine that he is the master and Lord of the household and he will not permit her to do so. He is in no rush to take care of it. It just doesn’t bother him much.

She tells him about her day, but he ignores her; he is playing with himself. He says “I want sex”. She protests that she does not feel well. He says “1 Cor 7:4 says your body belongs to me. Spread your legs now or I am going to tell the pastor and the 7 male elders and bring you before the church because you are in SIN by defrauding me sexually (1 Cor 7:5)” (In case you are wondering, not a week has gone by in their entire marriage without sex a couple times, except for medical issues: post childbirth and miscarriage, mainly. He doesn’t believe in birth control and she has been pregnant 11 times.)

What does “submission” look like?

(this case study is based on actual events)
Case Study 2: Submission to the Church
“Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls” Heb 13:17

The wife from Case Study #1 goes to her pastor. She has trouble expressing the pain and difficulty of the marriage. She is very upset and angry toward her husband and she tells the pastor that her marriage is intolerable and she is seriously considering leaving her husband.

The pastor chastises her for her anger and tells her that her attitude is sinful and the problems are her fault. He points her to 1 Cor 13 and tells her she needs to love her husband and she must not leave him because “God hates divorce” and Titus 2:4-5 says she will be blaspheming GOD unless she can behave herself better. And she must not talk about her husband to anyone because that is malicious gossip which is forbidden in Titus 2:3.

Shamed into silence, she repents of her many failures and tries harder to be a good Christian wife. She is very stressed, she feels like her home is a prison, a concentration camp. She has symptoms of PTSD and mood swings. Although the doctor suggested that her medical care is confidential, she does not want to disobey her husband. A couple years ago, her doctor had suggested antidepressants, because she was so sad and lifeless. But when she had mentioned that to her husband he said that psych drugs are from the pit of hell, GOD is the answer to all our problems, and he had called up the doctor and lectured her that his wife was not to have these drugs.

Desperate for somewhere to vent, she goes online and finds a Christian forum which is strict enough so that she thinks will be safe from the evil influences of worldliness. She posts about some of the difficulties . From one camp, she hears that women are too emotional, weak, easily deceived sinners, and must obey their husbands. From another camp, she hears that divorce is the solution.

Note: My pastor and church did NOT handle it this destructive spiritually abusive way (although I did read a book which had exactly such teaching) Again, the details about the woman is based on actual events.

What does “submission” look like?

Here are some related links which were helpful to me:

• Retrouvaille Marriage Help
• The Silent Killer of Christian Marriages
• The Wounds of Spouse Abuse
• Cloud and Townsend Articles
• quotes from “Sacred Influence”
• Mending the Soul Ministries

Jesus, can You be my husband?

“your desire shall be for your husband and he shall rule over you” Gen 3:16

I had a dream.

You know how slaves would carry kings in a whatchamacallit attached to poles which rested on their shoulders? Sarah was a slave on foot fanning the king in the whatchamacallit. I know that my children in dreams are ususally me (or my husband in the case of the male children) And I think this dream is about “your desire shall be for your husband and he shall rule over you”

I posted a question on a Theology Forum asking what Gen 3:16 means?

Exegetist replied:

Fr. Dictionary of O.T. Theology and Exegesis, Vol. 4, pgs 342-342
Tesuqa, nom. desire, request, longing, appetite

ANE – This word is attested in
Sam. and in Mish. Heb. with the meaning urge, craving, impulse.

OT – this nom. is used 3x in the OT, 2x in Gen. and 1x in S of Songs. The term has generated much controversy (cf Foh, 376-77), but most agree that the word emphasizes craving, desire, or urge. In S of Song 7:10[11] the term “has a decidedly romantic and positive nuance, describing the feeling of a mutual attraction between two lovers” (Hamilton, 201). In Gen 4:7 the term has a decidedly negative nuance, describing the desire of sin that lies poised, ready to leap and dominate Cain. It is a reference to conquering, the desire to defeat a foe.

teshuqua has a root meaning of “turning”.

First, notice that the word itself does not describe the urge, craving or desire. That description must come from the context. The problem with the context in Genesis 3:16 is that it is NOT clear.

Gen. 3:16
16 He said to the woman:
I will intensify your labor pains;
you will bear children in anguish.
Your desire (teshuqua) will be for your husband,
yet he will dominate you.

Here it is unclear what kind of desire is happening. But we can rule out the type of desire in Gen. 4:7 because the woman is not sin, nor representative of sin. It is likely that it is some sort of imperfect amorous desire because God states this right after talking about the woman’s pregnancies, but precisely it simply isn’t certain. My leaning is to consider that since the woman turned from honoring God to a sort of honoring the serpent by giving heed to his advice contradicting God, that now God is informing her that He knows she will be “turning” toward her husband desiring her husbands guidance, affection (???) and that it will not work out for her instead her husband will seek to dominate her. the Hebrew word for rule is one for a harsh rule, a different word than in Ge. 1:26. This is not in any way a command for all time, rather a warning to Eve of the natural result of the sin they participated in. But humanity has a history of learning things the hard way. We all need to learn to trust God first and formost because only God is worthy of absolute trust. When we trust wrongly or inordinately it tends to bring calamity upon us. And no human is worthy of absolute trust. Godly women must learn to honor and respect without inordinately giving to their husbands the honor that belongs to God.

It isn’t a “curse”, so one cannot “break it” by spiritual warfare.
It isn’t a sin, so one cannot “repent”.
Jesus, can You be
my husband
Who rules over me?

“For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy:
for I have espoused you to

one husband,
that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.”
2 Cor 11:2

Respect in Marriage (Greek Word Study)

Scripture says to WIVES:

Eph 5:33 however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
This is the only occurrence I could find of an instruction for the wife to “respect” the husband. I found it interesting that the GREEK word for respect is phobeo (fear?!) Hmmmm….

5399 phobeo {fob-eh’-o}
from 5401; TDNT – 9:189,1272; v
AV – fear 62, be afraid 23, be afraid of 5, reverence 1, misc 2; 93
1) to put to flight by terrifying (to scare away)
1a) to put to flight, to flee
1b) to fear, be afraid
1b1) to be struck with fear, to be seized with alarm
1b1a) of those startled by strange sights or occurrences
1b1b) of those struck with amazement
1b2) to fear, be afraid of one
1b3) to fear (i.e. hesitate) to do something (for fear of harm)
1c) to reverence, venerate, to treat with deference or reverential obedience

The “fear” idea in the husband/wife relationship is repeated in noun form here:
1Pe 3:2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.

5401 phobos {fob’-os}
from a primary phebomai (to be put in fear); TDNT – 9:189,1272; n m
AV – fear 41, terror 3, misc 3; 47
1) fear, dread, terror
1a) that which strikes terror
2) reverence for one’s husband

Scripture says to HUSBANDS:

1PE 3:7 “Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.”

Here the greek word for respect is “time” (value, esteem)

5092 time {tee-may’}
from 5099; TDNT – 8:169,1181; n f
AV – honour 35, price 8, sum 1, precious 1; 43

1) a valuing by which the price is fixed
1a) of the price itself
1b) of the price paid or received for a person or thing bought or sold
2) honour which belongs or is shown to one
2a) of the honour which one has by reason of rank and state of office which he holds
2b) deference, reverence

Note: The Greek “time” respect is commanded of all believers one to another:
Rom 12:10 Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour (Greek- “time”) preferring one another

Grammar Details (of Respect in Marriage Words)

WIVES:
Eph 5:33 however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

from Blue Letter Bible the “respect”/phobeo/fear in the above verse is in the Subjunctive Mood

5792 Mood – Subjunctive
The subjunctive mood is the mood of possibility and potentiality.
The action described may or may not occur,
depending upon circumstances.

HUSBANDS:
…and the command for husbands to give honor/respect/”timay”

1Pet 3:7Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with [them] according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

Respect is a noun, but the the “giving” is in the present tense: From the Blue Letter Bible
5774 Tense – PresentThe present tense represents a simple statement of fact or reality viewed as occurring in actual time. In most cases this corresponds directly with the English present tense.

Contrast IMPERATIVE:

All Christians:

1Pet 2:17 Honour all [men]. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.

The mood of the verb “phobeo” here when we are instructed to “Fear God” is IMPERATIVE Its a COMMAND. In fact all the verbs in 1Pet 2:17 are in the IMPERATIVE.

Note: The COMMAND to “Honour all” includes Honour WOmen too.

My Personal Reflections:

So, phobeo (fear, reverence) is in the subjunctive mood which “is the mood of possibility and potentiality. The action described may or may not occur, depending upon circumstances” I have the utmost phobeo for God. That DID depend upon me, upon my heart, and exclusively upon my heart..

A marriage is a “one flesh” union. Two are joined. There is an intertwining of spirits. Each one of the Christian couple has an “old man” and a “new man”. I think God puts a LOT of grace and mercy into this “phobeo” instruction for wives (Eph 5:33) because HE knows about the one flesh, the “old men”, and how extremely difficult, even impossible, it will be in some situations for a wife to “reverence” her husband. Her phobeo toward GOD is dependent exclusively upon HER heart. GOD’s character makes phobeo for HIM (relatively) easy. Her phobeo toward her human husband is NOT dependent exclusively upon HER heart. Again, that “subjunctive mood” expresses it well: “The action described may or may not occur, depending upon circumstances.”

phobeo
reverence
awe
fear

It sure sounds like a FEELING to me.
The “timay”- honor, esteem, value, respect sort of thing (which is commanded of all Christians), sounds like an ACTION, a BEHAVIOR.

How about “phobeo” is not an act of the will; it is a FEELING???

I don’t have a lot of control over how I feel. I can go through the motions of “respect”, do the behavior. But I cannot, for the life of me, muster up feelings. I’ve heard people say “love is not a feeling”. I think LOVE OR RESPECT without feelings is a pretty hollow empty and unfulfilling thing.