I always assumed this was referring to church elders too (and it may be) but I am going to take this authority at the next opportunity and see what happens.
-
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.
A word to the wives
- Thread starter steve
- Start date
I can't tell from the Greek that the references to man in that James 5 passage are necessarily gendered; my Greek is far too limited. But you may well be onto something powerful there. I hope you develop it further as this is one place where I feel I have completely fallen short in my headship. This feels like next level spiritual authority, so as to make my conception of husband as mere shepherd feel carnal.
You are right, most people simply beg for healing; but that was not the stance of those in the Bible, who called it forth. How little faith we have.
Kudos to @steve and @PeteR, the way this thread opened and developed has led to one of the more refreshing and personally clarifying discussions on this subject. Many new depths of understanding.
Looking at the Greek I think it does refer to church elders. I think what Steve is getting at, and correct me if I'm wrong, is "Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord." is gendered. It says man. So sickness within the family should be first handled by the father as spiritual authority and if that fails, or it is him who is sick, he kicks it up to the elders.
There may be a lot to be dug from studying this passage, given it is not considered often since almost no elders anoint the sick.
Just an aside: authority in practicality vs authority theory.
Let’s say that a multi-billionaire calls his 15 year old son into his office and hands him a checkbook in the son’s name that has a cool million dollars in it.
Dad says: this is yours 100%, I will never take it away from you. You own it. You have complete authority over it. You can show it to all of your friends.
BUT, if you will notice the checks, they require two signatures for any amount written above $100. Yours and mine both.
100% ownership/authority, but in practicality, not so much.
So a husband has the spiritual authority in his family, but sometimes he needs his helpmeet to add her signature to the check. His authority is not always unilateral.
Let’s say that a multi-billionaire calls his 15 year old son into his office and hands him a checkbook in the son’s name that has a cool million dollars in it.
Dad says: this is yours 100%, I will never take it away from you. You own it. You have complete authority over it. You can show it to all of your friends.
BUT, if you will notice the checks, they require two signatures for any amount written above $100. Yours and mine both.
100% ownership/authority, but in practicality, not so much.
So a husband has the spiritual authority in his family, but sometimes he needs his helpmeet to add her signature to the check. His authority is not always unilateral.
Last edited:
You got it.
I think that this was something that was totally understood at the time (and for that reason not spelled out), but that the enemy has stolen from us.
It's hard to take you serious when you snarkily try to make this about my supposed personal hangups and persist in the use of scare quotes.
Christ rebuked Peter and the Pharisees quite harshly, which is chastising, a form of discipline. Then there was the money changers in the temple, whipping people is chastening, another form of discipline. If we have seen Christ we have seen God. As Hebrews 12 makes it very very clear, God chastens those who are His. If He does not painfully chasten you, you are not His. Likewise if you are not willing to enforce your authority over someone, they're not really under your authority, they're just volunteers. None of your pleading to exceptions and extremes and emotion cancel the hard logic and plain truth of that.
Eph 5 makes it clear the marriage is a picture of our relationship with God, and Hebrews 12 makes it clear the nature of that relationship. Feeelbads notwithstanding. If it is wrong for those in authority to chasten those under them, God is wrong. Chastening is Godly. As is undeniably clear by the practice of authority in all other contexts, if not enforced it will not stand. The abuse of authority by the rare Hitlers of the world does not negate its just use by others.
So are our wives to be treated as dogs then? When we have to physically chasten our children, does that mean we have the wrong kids or need to be taught how to better handle them? Your argumentation is self-contradictory because you are fundamentally arguing from emotion. That's why you move the goal posts, run to the extremes, and make illogical arguments rather than deal with theological principles and logic. Discipline will never be ok in your worldview because it is not nice.
If anyone would like to hear my response to the rest of his arguments just ask. I removed them because, quite frankly, there is no point. Aussies is arguing from emotion and niceness, not truth, and that will always lead to untruth.
Sorry if we have come into conflict on this one rockfox.
Please understand that I do believe in the headship of the husband and I do believe that he has the right to correct his family and lead them in the right path. My problem with terms like "discipline" is that I believe that a man should run his household out of love not by means of fear.
In my life I have seen good women that have been (what their husbands called discipline) verbally abused, physically abused and in some cases to the point of being life threatening. When I was a boy I saw a man "disciplining " his wife in the front of their home, and as a lad I don't know if I would have survived what he did to her.
OK I get it, there I go again with what you call the scare tactics. But for many that is their reality! And when you use terms like "discipline" that's the kind of events that come to mind for people that have suffered in their marriages. And they are all to common out there!
On this forum a common desire is to one day see polygamy recognized by the governments so that multiple marriages can be both registered and legally recognized. Am I right?
One of the biggest oppositions to that ever happening is the worlds perception of the abuse of women. Women being treated as second class citizens, women being forced into marriages and a women's rights being diminished. To instruct a wife and lead a wife is totally acceptable to everyone but when you start using terms like "disciplining" a wife, you just alienated the broader community.
OK so now you may be thinking that I am a feminist, But that is not the case by any means.
Is it not true that even in the work place, if a man does something he should not, he is not "disciplined" , rather he is talked to and helped to see the correct way to do things and if he won't listen after many attempts to correct his behavior he is let go. Like it or not that is the world we live in!
In this country, if you raise a hand to a child in public you risk child services removing that child from your care! OK again we can say that, this is not the scriptural position, but it is reality in the world we live in. The fact is that if you even start to sprout such viewpoints in public, child services will be banging on your door.
This forum is open to the public and a visitor may read any of these comments, so when someone starts to see the endorsement of "disciplining" a wife do they immediately think, what a great idea lets promote polygamy and all that is being presented as part of it, or are they repulsed.
So now you may think that I am watering down scripture, but ask yourself, what is the scriptural command for the punishment for the act of adultery? Is it not death to both the guilty parties? Yet today no Christian church would ever attempt such a thing.
I understand that when you speak of discipline you are not speaking about abuse, but to someone who has been abused that is all they here.
The fact is principles are set out in scripture, headship being one of them, but we also have to make it work in the world in which we live!
As I see it we and indeed this site are ambassadors for the rights of those who are in a poly marriage. And as such we should be encouraging others to consider the merits of the poly union, not presenting ideas that repel people.
Again, I am new at this, so not sure that you would welcome any input from a "woman/wife." But regardless of what interpretation of scripture one might embrace, I have personal experience(s) that come to play in my life. I have been seriously ill many many times through the course of our marriage such as bad cases of strep., etc.... My husband often would 'take authority' over the forces that be, anoint and lay hands on me, and I receive healing. Immediate healing. Yes, the miracle kind. Of course we grew up and lived in circles where that was common. But, here is the point I want to make. When he was in ICU and his vital organs were failing, I felt every right and confidence to take authority over the forces that be (if you know what I mean) and spoke to his heart and commanded it to restart from a flatline episode. (Actually did this 3 times) I commanded his blood pressure to return to normal and on and on. After 11 weeks in ICU of this... I felt my Lord tell me to stop. He was wanting to take my husband on home... and I was actually delaying His will being carried out. It was not a rebuke for being out of line. It was not a rebuke for overstepping authority. It was just a gentle word that God had a bigger plan than what I was seeing. I am more than convinced that God gives us gifts with which to help and strengthen each other. Although my husband was the ultimate authority under God, he was wise enough's to utilize my strengths, giftings, and wisdom, not trying to be the boss of everyone and everything just for his own personal glory. That in itself went a loooonnnggg way in being able to give him my submission, even when it crossed my will. BTW... yes, I had to release my husband and let him go. But God in his love and grace has given me blessings beyond belief... and of course, the best of all... the understanding of PM... which brought with it a new husband that is.... well.. let's just say... it don't get no better than this!
Mar_16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mar 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
If I am a believer... I have the spiritual authority for these signs, regardless of gender... and God honored it.
That is an awesome testimony and I have no problem with it. A gift of healing is a beautiful thing.
We walk right into a snare when we attempt to prevent a fallacious argument.
Yes, some women are abused. Yes, some daughters are molested by their fathers. Yes, some marriages end in divorce. But it is beyond faulty logic to assert that the fact that some women being abused in polygamous marriages, or that some daughters are molested by their polygamous fathers, or that some polygamous marriages end in divorce are reasonable indictments of polygamy -- or even that those facts justify insisting that those promoting polygamy must be held to higher standards than are promoters of monogamy-only.
To worry about whether outsiders will misinterpret or take out of context what is being written here is only to further embolden those who would purposefully do so.
@julieb wrote a great article for one of the newsletters about how polygamous marriages are unfairly held to standards that monogamous ones are not. That a reader is uninformed about the distinctions among discipline, punishment and abuse does not indict polygamy. [If anyone is truly concerned about domestic abuse, I encourage hir to do some deep delving; if s/he does, s/he will discover that the highest rates of domestic abuse are between lesbian partners, as well as that monogamous lesbians are more likely to abuse their partners than are promiscuous lesbians. Reasons exist for this that make total sense, but they are generally unlikely to be mentioned out loud by a culture that currently has the agenda of asserting that all men are predators.]
FULL DISCLOSURE: The following is temporarily tangential:
This desire may be common, but it is not shared by me. I would prefer that marriages stop being registered, licensed, whatever. I do not need anyone's legal recognition of my relationships. I desire that everyone stay out of the business of the choices I make with other people along the lines of making covenants. It is my business if I choose to declare those covenants and with whom I choose to share them.
Now back to our regularly-scheduled programming . . .
@steve, I am LOVING this thread. You are encouraging a very persuasive exploration of the effective exercise of spiritual authority.
This desire may be common, but it is not shared by me. I would prefer that marriages stop being registered, licensed, whatever. I do not need anyone's legal recognition of my relationships. I desire that everyone stay out of the business of the choices I make with other people along the lines of making covenants. It is my business if I choose to declare those covenants and with whom I choose to share them.
Now back to our regularly-scheduled programming . . .
@steve, I am LOVING this thread. You are encouraging a very persuasive exploration of the effective exercise of spiritual authority.
There are multiple conversations going on in this thread that I am not engaging in. I hope nobody minds, but it is just not where my focus is.
I have no concerns about anyone derailing this thread because, quite frankly, I’m still discovering the rails. They were buried under a mudslide almost 2000 years ago when the Universal Church stuffed the autonomy of the family under the skirts of the priests robes.
I’m sure that some look at this thread a bit quizzically and wonder why the concept of a husband/father’s specific authority in healing is apparently so new to me. Well, only because it is.
I grew up in a Baptist church where we never even prayed as a family for healing, that was reserved for Prayer Meetin on Wednesday night which was just some generic begging. There was also the women’s prayer chain for emergencies.
Later we had more of a Pentecostal experience, but never was there any acknowledgement of any real spiritual authority for healing that belonged to the leader of the household beyond the authority that every believer has. Outside of those that had Gifts.
So yeah, that a man could expect to exercise spiritual authority in his own home just because he was the leader was something that wasn’t taught.
Authority in the physical realm, of course! He was the Head, under Yeshua. But the spiritual realm was reserved for those that were somehow Spiritual, no matter the familial relationship.
I have no concerns about anyone derailing this thread because, quite frankly, I’m still discovering the rails. They were buried under a mudslide almost 2000 years ago when the Universal Church stuffed the autonomy of the family under the skirts of the priests robes.
I’m sure that some look at this thread a bit quizzically and wonder why the concept of a husband/father’s specific authority in healing is apparently so new to me. Well, only because it is.
I grew up in a Baptist church where we never even prayed as a family for healing, that was reserved for Prayer Meetin on Wednesday night which was just some generic begging. There was also the women’s prayer chain for emergencies.
Later we had more of a Pentecostal experience, but never was there any acknowledgement of any real spiritual authority for healing that belonged to the leader of the household beyond the authority that every believer has. Outside of those that had Gifts.
So yeah, that a man could expect to exercise spiritual authority in his own home just because he was the leader was something that wasn’t taught.
Authority in the physical realm, of course! He was the Head, under Yeshua. But the spiritual realm was reserved for those that were somehow Spiritual, no matter the familial relationship.
I think part of what I’m struggling with here is it seems you are describing “power” with regards to healing but your using the term authority.
Authority implies there is another person under that authority which is the case for a man over his women. But power is simply power to heal its not necessarily authority. As described above a woman could have that power and intervene on behalf of her husband but she has no authority over her husband. I think the same thing follows for elders. Elders have power but they have no authority over anyone outside their own household...
Authority implies there is another person under that authority which is the case for a man over his women. But power is simply power to heal its not necessarily authority. As described above a woman could have that power and intervene on behalf of her husband but she has no authority over her husband. I think the same thing follows for elders. Elders have power but they have no authority over anyone outside their own household...
Yeah, it’s a bit of a sticky wicket, but what I am talking about here is power that is derived from or comes through his authority.
The elders would have the authority that is handed to them by the petitioner, which, interestingly enough, brings us right back to my op.
Giftings are independent of ones position in the hierarchy of authority.
@steve , honestly, I am really looking forward to retreat because this a specific topic the Father has begun showing me some things in and I want to discuss w you. We (collectively) are definitely onto something here that is a significant piece of headship, authority and leadership.
I can tell you, @Judgemenot and I have recently experienced this area for a second major time in our lives. The first, in 2009, was elders (collection, not 'ours') who prayed over her in ICU after the medical community had given up and told me to plan her funeral. Six hours later they changed their tune, two days later she was out of ICU and a couple weeks later when released by her atheist Dr., he shrugged his shoulders, said he had no idea what her illness was and that he had witnessed a miracle.
The second, more recent, involved a cancerous sore on her face that had to be cut out. I prayed and asked Abba for the scar, 3" long, to heal and disappear. See it at the retreat... nearly gone.. more details in person regarding the change in heart that is being reflected in her health and appearance. There is a direct connection that began to heal upon her submission in key areas....
A final thought: how many times in Torah does Moshe or Aharon intercede for the people and a plague stops, healing happens or provisions materialize? Are we not the priests and heads of our family? We need to discuss. You are right. There is MAJOR power/authority there that is untapped.
I can tell you, @Judgemenot and I have recently experienced this area for a second major time in our lives. The first, in 2009, was elders (collection, not 'ours') who prayed over her in ICU after the medical community had given up and told me to plan her funeral. Six hours later they changed their tune, two days later she was out of ICU and a couple weeks later when released by her atheist Dr., he shrugged his shoulders, said he had no idea what her illness was and that he had witnessed a miracle.
The second, more recent, involved a cancerous sore on her face that had to be cut out. I prayed and asked Abba for the scar, 3" long, to heal and disappear. See it at the retreat... nearly gone.. more details in person regarding the change in heart that is being reflected in her health and appearance. There is a direct connection that began to heal upon her submission in key areas....
A final thought: how many times in Torah does Moshe or Aharon intercede for the people and a plague stops, healing happens or provisions materialize? Are we not the priests and heads of our family? We need to discuss. You are right. There is MAJOR power/authority there that is untapped.
Amen on all counts, brother!
The advantage that I have is that I have two different personalities and their differing perspectives to experiment with, in my Petri dish.
Last edited:
That metaphor is clever funny on many levels, yet also very sad.
Thank you, successful communication is such fun.
I am a disciple of Christ. What is a disciple? One who is disciplined. Discipline is a word for training.
A talking to, is what is referred to as chastisement. Being fired is a negative consequence for bad behavior. You've described forms of discipline, but while calling it 'not discipline'!
The word 'discipline' conjures bad emotions and emotional scenarios so you speak against it while speaking well of other forms of discipline you support, while claiming they aren't discipline.
Your tieing yourself up in illogical knots because you're making judgements based on emotion instead of truth.
This...
is in direct opposition to this...
Any exercise of headship by the husband in our society is characterized as abuse. The ONLY way to not be considered abusive is to engage in matriarchy and be in subjection to your wife. Full stop, end of story. You can have headship, or be insulated from the possibility of perception of abuse, but not both. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.
Abuse is a scare word, much like nazi, racist or sexist, that the propaganda machine built up an emotional edifice around, while quickly expanding the word all out of proportion to its literal traditional meaning. It is a tool they use to control your mind and your actions in order to get you to embrace matriarchy. Look at you, you can't even have a conversation with people using simple words without getting distracted by the emotional baggage. That is how powerful the affect is.
The only way to deal with these possibilities without becoming enslaved to the whims of anyone who would take offence is to reject such emotional manipulation. Tiptoeing around scare words only enslaves you to those who created them.
Let's take another word: control. Immediately the adjective 'controlling' comes to mind, which conjures thoughts of overbearing abusive husbands who won't let their poor wives do anything. But what is headship? It means you are above someone in a hierarchy. If someone does not have any measure of control over you, you are not under them in the hierarchy. To "correct his family and lead them in the right path" is to control their behavior by definition.
Christians need to get over the whole 'but someone might call us bad names!'
This is very true. Here is a link to an "Anti thought control dictionary" a lot of the entries are excellent, but one of my favorites is patriot, because it takes the reader back to the patriarchal roots of the word. Just organic (non polluted) food for thought here.
https://benwilliamslibrary.com/dictionary_set.html
I agree with your post but there's much more to the word "disciple" in the context your using it. When we read “disciple” or “follower” in our English translations, the word behind the English behind the Greek is “talmid” or “talmidim” in the plural. There's not really a concept in contemporary Western thinking as an analog for a talmid. We translate it as disciple, but there is no place in our culture for someone who voluntarily seeks to fully identify with his master in all areas of life–who dedicates his life to becoming like the master in all ways. When Yeshua tells us to go make disciples–talmidim–of people throughout the world, he is calling us to first dedicate ourselves to the task of living, eating, sleeping, working, playing, loving, suffering, bleeding, and breathing every moment of our lives with God so that not only does His purpose becomes ours, but we become His purpose