New Warhorn Media post by Tim Bayly:
4 Likes
I donāt disagree, but I donāt even know how to start. Iāve struggled with this for awhile, trying to psych myself out in various ways (āTreat him like you treat your boss!ā), and Iāve come a long way in that I rarely now treat him with DISrespect, an improvement over the early days of our marriage. But the feeling, even of reverence, is not there. Love, appreciation, even respect are there, but not reverence, and certainly not fear.
1 Like
But you do fear God, donāt you? And you teach your children to fear you, donāt you? And you know that, in the godly, fear and love embrace, right? Think of your sinful and weak husband as standing in the place ordained for Him by God and fear him because God has placed him there and delegated His authority to your dear husband. Maybe this is helpful? Love,
7 Likes
It is, thank you.
2 Likes
Notice the absence of comments, here. Crickets. Letās talk about how bad the world and BLM are, okay?
Okay
2 Likes
The name of this post is a question directed to a wife. The majority - probably the vast majority - of Sanityville inhabitants are men, not women. Perhaps that contributes to the paucity of comments?
Considering for the nonce these male members of Sanityville, the ones who are married, that is, whatās to discuss? The ones who fear their wives rather than the other way round . . . should we expect them to rush forward to confess this? And the ones whose wives fear them for godly reasons (such as you outlined for Gnat above), the godly among them will have sufficient modesty to retard their rushing forth to display unseemly boasting.
To preempt the crickets, I report that my wife views marriage pretty much as youāve described it to Gnat, and she has done so for all of our 39 years of marriage.
Like most faithful Christians, her convictions have run way ahead of her success in practicing them (same with the companion convictions I hold about the office of husband). So the occasion for us to repent is constantly with us.
I am encouraged, however, to see my wifeās faithfulness - to repent when needed, and to practice what sheās preached to her daughters - replicated in those daughtersā marriages. They come to Mom from time to time with open ears and hearts willing to hear her counsel and encouragement.
9 Likes
A dumb question: why (and given the times in which it was translated) would the KJV render this word as āreverenceā when the Geneva and Douai-Rheims translations do have āfearā?
In Middle English āreverenceā meant something much closer to āfearā than it does today.
2 Likes
Right, Joseph. Meanwhile, Wycliffe and Tyndale are both ādread.ā
Abt comments, Bill, youāve missed the reason. On every forum Iāve been on among conservative Christian men for almost two decades now, the sins of the church bring much less discussion than the sins of the world. That no one is interested in discussing wives fearing their husbands and the gagging of Godās Word by all modern Bible translations at this point is most certainly not because all of us here have wives who dread us and teach their daughters the same, nor that all of us read Bibles that translate this correctly and teach our children to do the same, nor that all of us are interested and actively engaged in warning our sheep abt their own unfaithful Bible translation norā¦
I realize my criticism is somewhat amorphous in terms of proper responses, but Iām not looking for responses. Only self-awareness here on Sanityville of what we like and donāt like to give our attention to. Love,
4 Likes
Truly difficult topics are always less popular than the hot political topic du jour. Thanks for an informative essay.
5 Likes
This is a nit, but the King James Version is in Modern English.
Middle English is considered to have run from AD 1066 (Norman Invasion) to about 1500. Itās quite interesting to look up familiar passages in Old and Middle English to see just how far distant they are from even KJV. The Lordās Prayer is an interesting comparison. Well, I guess itās interesting if youāre a word nerd.
1 Like
For example, Iāve recently become convinced that head coverings for women in church is still required, so I brought the issue up with my wife, asking her to consider it, do some reading, and then weād discuss it.
We did the same thing. I did some research, read through the passage in Corinthians, and came away agreeing with Sproul that long hair is not the covering talked about. I showed it to my wife, she went away and did some research, and came back having agreed. < 2 hours or so. Ordered one of those Catholic looking veils on Amazon.
Not to distract from the current topic, but it was a blessing that she didnāt have any qualms over it.
1 Like
Think of it as something that your wife will grow in and grow into; one canāt expect overnight sanctification, starting with oneself, so the wiser option could well be to let her come to this conclusion in her own time.
Funny thing, but Iāve come to the opposite conclusion. I think head coverings is something a husband should ask his wife to doāand largely because itās so hard to do so, today. āYouāre husband actually TOLD you to cover! I mean, really? He didnāt let YOU make the decision! MY husband would never try to make the decision for ME!ā
After many years, it sort of came to seem as if I should make the decision myself, which is not to say my dear wife disagreed. But it seems certain decisions in marriage need to have the weight carried by the man which often is a relief to the woman. Just my own take on it. Love,
9 Likes
My wife was covering routinely for several years before we married, so my contribution was to endorse - and in one dramatic episode, to defend - her decision made as a single woman.
However, the more general principle youāve mentioned here is key to much of a wifeās submission from a practical point of view. For the wise submissive wife, her husband is an almost constant object of study: what is it that will advance his mission in life? how may I facilitate what he is doing? what, exactly, is it that he desires me to be doing?
āMy husband wishes me to do thisā is what my wife calls ācover.ā And she has at various times in our marriage petitioned me to extend that sort of cover for something she knows she needs to do but is anxious about the social ramifications. If she can āblameā me 
, if she can āhideā behind me in a plausible and honest way, then this is, as youāve said, a welcome relief to her.
11 Likes
Pastor @tbbayly as you know my plate is a little full at the moment. So sorry for not reading or responding till now.
I for one think back to Machiavelliās the Prince, who wrote about the kingās need to be both loved and feared. I donāt remember if the word respect crept into that text but I think it might have been used to describe the blending of the two.
But your translational points are well taken. I think I have read that footnote and also interpreted respect through that added information though I am certain that neither my wife nor my church would view a wife fearing her husband as a good thing.
I remember in a counseling session with one of our elders my wife told him that my kids told her that they were afraid of daddy. Of course the thought went immediately to, what would they have to fear of their father.
I explained that I interpreted their comments that they didnāt like receiving consequences from daddy when they were in rebellion. I also pointed out that though they claim to be afraid of me, when itās time to go to bed and the lights go out, and they are afraid of the dark, itās actually me and not mommy that both of them want to be with to protect them and assure them. Sometimes Iām up for a hour tending to my childrenās fears and praying with them or snuggling to get them to calm, or even just sitting in their rooms while they settle down.
I have to admit it pains to hear things like they are afraid of daddy. I much rather hearing them they say that they love me, and they do often. But I also know that if they didnāt fear me at all, I wouldnāt be doing my job and they wouldnāt grow up to be functional human beings much less citizens of the kingdom of heaven. To be honest, I think they still donāt really fear me.
So, does my wife fear me. Again Iāve never given her cause to fear for her safety but she has commented that she is sometimes afraid of me in that my sternness of disapproval can be rather intimidating. I honestly donāt try to intimidate, but I think I am somewhat of an intense personality. Iām not sure thatās a good thing, and itās no doubt been shaped by years of trials. I donāt want my wife to be terrified of me, but I do often see how her rebellious nature comes out when she forgets that she fears me.
Ugh, what an impossible balance. Maybe I should go back and reread the Prince and perhaps switch to the ASV, since it appears even the KJV translators took the same exception.
Ephesians 5:33
Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
7 Likes
Dear Pastor Tim (@tbbayly),
Thanks so much for your post. You post on sexuality always cause me to pause and do some self-examination. Invariably, I always find some blind spots in either family or church life that I need to be corrected, and for that I am very thankful. Most of us probably donāt write back because we need to let the Holy Spirit deal with our life.
The discussion about head covering also brings out a hole in my sanctification. I have to confess that I have been inconsistent in carrying out this command. I know that I can often rationalize it because in my church, Iām viewed as being āright of rightā, and I donāt want to give them anymore ammunition to throw at me. And also my English group is already small (as you know) and to throw this on top of all the commands that needs to be obeyed seems akin to- humanly speakign- trying to kill off the group. On top of that there are battles with my wife and teen daughters about this- some more successful than other. With other āimportantā things in ministry, I let it slide.
Can you offer any wisdom for me about taking steps to actively obey this command? Thanks.
Love in Christ,
Steve
p.s. Thereās an elder I regularly argued with about women in leadership. He always ends it by saying that I need to command all women at our church to wear a hat. He knows that is his trump card. But logically heās right. If ācomplementariansā pick and choose which commands to obey, whey canāt everyone else? And maybe headcovering is not such a side issue in our cultural war. But how do you best approach this?
3 Likes
Your elder is going a too far. I know many men whose wives only cover for the service, not before or after. And some only cover for parts of the service. Some only when theyāre up front participating in the service in āleaderlyā ways. And thereās room to only require it of married women. Be careful to implement change led by faith and not by fear.
And you only need to command your wife, not othersā.
Iād like to hear @Fr_Bill 's defense of his wife covering while single.
I had a grad school Christian brother who responded similarly to your elder but by demanding that I greet with a holy kiss. That hit the nail on head, leading to an explanation of how our church is bringing that tradition (and obedience) back. A few men have kissed me, on the neck during a hug, but only those who feel itās likely comfortable. And Iāve started it myself, barely, but in time to surprise my grandfather pleasantly before his death. What a joy! But reform is messy. It will be awkward. I had to get one man to stop with me. I couldnāt handle it. What a rare blessing to have something like that settled peaceably! This particular tradition (holy kiss) is probably not reasonable until a church first has a healthy culture of appropriate hugging.
All of this requires faith and trust in God and each other. A healthy culture that accepts faithful missteps.
4 Likes
Here are two non-marriage examples I hope are helpful. I think they are examples of what @tbbayly summarized well above: the point is Godly fear and fear of God. Children will begin to learn of God through their parents and learn to demonstrate fear, and into their eventual, Lord willing, roles of husband or wife will display Godly fear in leadership or in submission.
Love and fear combined in fatherhood
A story told by @jacob.mentzel, of him commanding his daughter to come to him out of the street because of an oncoming car. No time to explain. No time to count to three. No time to get to her and pull her to safety himself. (Iām telling my version) No time to be savior, only time to be lord. Only time to yell at her to come quickly. She ran to him, genuinely scared but probably not sure of what, then stood before him afraid, balling. He could then console her, thank her, confirm his love for her, explain the situation to her, hug her. She could have ran from him in fear further into the street, run in rebellion, or stood still in paralyzing fear or dismissal. But, thank God, love and fear combined to bring life-saving obedience.
Fearing God more than man allows a man to discipline his children in public, in front of his wife, or in front of his in-laws. We discipline children as an act of love (Proverbs 13:24). We obey God as an act of love (John 14:15). We also obey God because we fear Him (Matthew 10:28, Acts 5:9). We trust God, we love God; He loves us, first loved us. So fear, like obedience, is appropriately unidirectional and hierarchical, the flip side of authority. Love is mutual but not equal. Avoiding idolatry and pride, our fatherhood should mirror the Fatherhood of God, and our children have Jesusā model of Sonship. Children should hopefully have their father as an example of both fatherhood and sonship.
Dogs and their masters
A well-trained and -bonded dog presents many examples of obedience based on mutual love and one-way fear. My college roommates tried and usually failed to get my dog to break the rules when I was absent. He wanted to be on the couch but not without his masterās permission; only I could place him on a couch without causing him to shiver in fear. And then there were the times I led this country dog down a five-story, metal fire escape. That was a wide-eyed dog, shaking to the bone but following.
An old woman in my neighborhood keeps the scariest and most athletic dog around. She walks this huge German Shepherd off leash, and thereās no other dog I trust more here despite his intimidation. It doesnāt know me nor obey me much. But a chiding from its master, and he begins to obey meā¦for a short time, playing with me rather than toying with me. A good parent can do better, effectively having their children obey a baby-sitter all night. A trustworthy parent speaking with authority can delegate that authority, and even their trustworthiness. To obey a baby-sitter is to love her, and is also obedience and love of the parents. To obey and love parents is to obey and love God.
@Krlamb1, Iām glad you connected you childrenās various fears. Your nighttime routine demonstrates that theyāve combined fear with trust. Iāll take it one step further. Perhaps they know that even demons and monsters should fear daddy. That would be good. Itās really pointing to God. Brings to mind the Aslan quote,
āAslan is a lion- the Lion, the great Lion." āOohā said Susan. āIād thought he was a man. Is he-quite safe? I shall feel rather nervous about meeting a lionāā¦āSafe?ā said Mr Beaver ā¦"Who said anything about safe? 'Course he isnāt safe. But heās good. Heās the King, I tell you.ā
and a song by Ross King, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vIYs1zILgU
These relate to marriage because we have similar comparisons. Wives are to consider Lordship (1 Peter 3:6, Ephesians 5:22) without frightening fear (1 Peter 3:6) nor timidity (2 Timothy 1:7). So we donāt throw out the word fear but understand it as more and different than mere afraidness. If anything, fear of God and fear of husband emboldens and protects a women to live rightly, as @tbbayly and @Fr_Bill pointed out. Woman have as models those who call Jesus Lord, especially Sarahās calling her husband, but also husband and father submitting to God and church and family and government. Husbands in their headship (as Jesus is Head) are told to love their wives specially as Jesus loves.
Why is it so hard to apply these gulfs of distinction (father & son, man and animal) to man and wife? I had been thinking of writing how adult men and women are more equal than parents to children and men to animals. Adults are brothers and sisters in Christ, commanded to mutual submission, all with equal Christian liberty of conscience. So itās hard to find the balance. This has to be considered when adding the respective roles of husband and wife to Christian men and women. This doesnāt feel right. The distinctions are plain to see, in person and in scripture, and are beautiful. We only feel bad because we are accused (by Satan and men) of being unequal, lording it over others (1 Peter 5:3) and angering others (Ephesians 6:4). These qualifiers tell men how to lead. They donāt tell men how to be equals. Men are told to lead rightly, carefully, appropriately; but to lead regardless, and to love not like a female human but like the God-Man. Men are called to follow Jesus in more ways than women are. Mainstream complementarians get it wrong by stressing the equality, in league with egalitarianism/feminism/androgyny. Complementarianism is soft egalitarianism, except for some few who do softly believe in Patriarchy. Adam definitely appreciates and needs the sameness he saw in Eve, bone of his bone, flesh of his flesh, but letās take it for granted while we still can that humans are to be preferred over beasts (and pets).
Patriarchy, the Bible, celebrates the distinctions of men and women, most gloriously as husbands and wives, raising them to properly high statuses. Letās have a fairer sex. Hereās a bumper sticker design.
2 Likes
It has to do with several contextual features, to wit:
- Prior to 1 Cor. 11, Paulās been dealing with crimes and misdemeanors of various parties, factions, or individuals within the Corinthian congregation. Beginning in Chapter 11 and running through chapter 14, perhaps 15 as well, Paul is dealing with congregation-wide problems, most of them involving the conduct of the congregation when it is gathered for worship.
For this reason, I cannot treat 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 as dealing with married women to the exclusion of single women, any more than it does with married men to the exclusion of single men or vice-versa. No, itās the whole passle of them - old, young, married, single. All of them when gathered for worship.
- Paulās statements about women in this passage are ācategoricalā with respect to that sex. Single women are created for the manās sake, just as much as the the married woman. The single womanās hair is her glory, just as much as it is for the married woman. The single womanās hair is a covering, not just the married womanās.
Indeed, if you can discern that glory - whose is on display in worship - is the key to this exhortation, it becomes mandatory that all women have a covering. That way all three glories are rightly displayed in the worship service - the manās glory is covered (i.e. the woman), the womanās glory is covered (i.e. her hair), and only Godās glory is uncovered (i.e. the man). Who is married to whom (or not), is an irrelevancy. Whatās at issue is whose glory is covered or uncovered.
6 Likes