Even more on male leadership in the home

There is a discussion about whether God has said whether man is to lead in the home or not. Someone stated in reference to Genesis 3:16,

The words are “he will rule“, not “he is supposed to rule” or “he will do right if he rules.”

But the thing is, if this was merely God describing what will be, He would not have given the prophecy which speaks to what Christ would do to Satan. This is more than simply a statement of what would occur, but this is the passage of a sentence on someone judged and found guilty by a judge.

Let us look at Genesis 3:11-19

11And He said, “Who told you that you were naked ? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat ?” 12 The man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.” 13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.” 14 The LORD God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, Cursed are you more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field ; On your belly you will go, And dust you will eat All the days of your life ; 15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed ; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel.” 16 To the woman He said, “I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children ; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you.”17 Then to Adam He said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it’; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life. . 18 “Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field ; 19 By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken ; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return.”

This is saying what would occur, but it is not simply saying what will occur – but what must occur. This is a recording of a judicial decree that was passed in judgement of Satan and Eve and Adam. There is a HUGE difference that and saying what God will allow to pass.

Because of what the various parties did, God decreed certain things would occur.

  1. The serpent is cursed; it will go about on its belly; there will be enmity between it and the woman and the offspring of both (indeed, this is thought to be a prophecy of Christ coming to conquer Satan).
  2. God will increase Eve’s pain in childbirth, yet she will desire her husband and he will rule over her.
  3. The ground is cursed because of Adam and he must toil all the days of his life to eat of it. Man will eat vegetables of the field. The ground will grow thorns and thistles. Man will sweat to eat bread.

According to Genesis 3:16, the husband is to exercise dominion over his wife. We see this reiterated and expanded in 1 Timothy 2:11-14, where he said women are not to teach or assume authority over men because Eve was deceived – reminding us of Genesis 3:16. Of course, the context is in a church.

11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

IF Satan had not deceived Eve, and IF Eve had not been deceived, and IF Adam had not listened to the voice of the woman God gave him, God would not have found them all guilty of sin and would not have decreed what He did.

The woman wrote,

Wbmoore, would, not should…

The “would” is because of the fact that Eve was deceived. She was judged and found guilty and given a sentence. Since it is a judicial sentence, it is a MUST, not simply a should.

She says that men are to be subject to women and vice-versa (which I agree with, although she seems to want to ignore me having said that, as it apparently makes for better propaganda to make her points), but she seems to want to forget that men are to be the head of the woman, just as Christ is the head of man.

But men are very obviously considered to be head of the house in both the Old and New Testaments. Take a look at the usage of oikodespotēs. It is a masculine noun and is only used to describe men. That term is translated as land owner and head of house.

The qualifications for elder/overseer and deacons are that a man should rule/manage his household well to be able to rule a congregation.

When we take it even farther and look at the term head, as was used in reference to Christ and men, kephalē, we see that this word indicates authority.

The same word that is translated as “chief” (in relation to the chief corner stone, Christ) is translated as “head” in describing Christ in relation to men and men in relation to women. And before one thinks this is in reference to anything other than authority, we see that in 1Cr 11:3, “But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.” And then in 1Cr 11:10 that the woman is to have a symbol of authority on her head, “Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.” This idea of a husband having authority over his wife is reiterated in 1 Timothy 2:11-14

11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

1 Corinthians 11:7-10 tells us that Man is the image and glory of God, while woman is the glory of God.

7 For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God ; but the woman is the glory of man. 8 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man ; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. 10 Therefore * the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

And we see in Eph 1:22 that God put all things in subjection to Christ and made Christ head (leader) over all things to the church: “And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the church,” Of course, being head entails much more than simply leadership – it means source of sustenance (food enters the body through the head, and in the same way, the leader provides for his household).

She tried to say that 1 Peter 3:7 was saying men should submit to their wives. It appears to me that she took 1 Peter 3:7 out of context, making it look like husbands are told to submit to their wives. But that is not what the text states. Go look it up: http://www.biblestudytools.com/nas/1-peter/passage.aspx?q=1+peter+2;1+peter+3

1 Peter 2:13-20 speaks of living righteously and submitting to all human authority for Christ’s sake.
1 Peter 2:21-25 speaks of it was for that purpose we have been called, and Christ is our example of righteous living and suffering in his submission to human authority.
1 Peter 3:1-6 speaks of wives following the example of Christ by living righteously and submitting to their husbands so they might be won over.
1 Peter 3:7 speaks of the husbands following the example of Christ by living righteously and living in an understanding way and honoring his wife so their prayers might not be hindered.
1 Peter 3:8-22 sums it up that we are all to live harmoniously and righteously.

She made the statement,

almost all submission verses seem to be in the passive voice in the original Greek.

A passive voice does not change the fact that wives are to submit to their own husband – just as we are all to submit to rulers (Titus 3:1).

She wrote,

He reacts as if I said there is no authority in Christianity, which is not what I said.

Did she forget what she said?

Let me refresh her memory:

So the first thing about the context is that everyone in the church should submit to one another(Nobody is given authority).

SHE said everyone IN THE CHURCH should submit to one another. SHE said NOBODY IS GIVEN AUTHORITY (when speaking about the church). So I presented scripture which speaks of the fact that some people are given authority and we are to submit to those in authority (Acts 14:23; 1 Timothy 5:17-18; Titus 1:5; 1 Peter 5:5; Hebrews 13:17).

She wrote,

I have no problem with Moore stating wifes are subject to husbands, except that he somehow links it to some never-mentioned-in-the-Bible male right to be the boss.

I have never said there is a right for males to be the boss. What I have said is that God is clear that men are to lead (in the home and church) and women are to submit (short of sin) to their husbands. It is a requirement because of what happened in the garden of Eden, not a right. It is a responsibility, not a right. To lead is to be sacrificial.
Mt 23:8-12 tells us that leaders need to be humble.

8″But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. 9Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10 Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ. 11 But the greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.

Titus 1:6-9 tells us that leaders have certain qualities they should possess.

6 namely, if any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion. 7 For the overseer must be above reproach as God’s steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, notaddicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of sordid gain, 8 but hospitable, loving what is good, sensible, just, devout, self-controlled, 9 holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and torefute those who contradict.

1 Timothy 3:2-12 gives us additional qualifications.

2 An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife,temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not addicted to wine orpugnacious, but gentle, peaceable, free from the love of money. 4 He must be one whomanages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity 5 (butif a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of thechurch of God ?), 6 and not a new convert, so * that he will not become conceited and fallinto the condemnation incurred by the devil. 7 And he must have a good reputation withthose outside the church, so that he will not fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. 8Deacons likewise must be men of dignity, not double-tongued, or addicted to much wine orfond of sordid gain, 9 but holding to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. 10These men must also first be tested ; then let them serve as deacons if they are beyondreproach. 11 Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate,faithful in all things. 12 Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.

Indeed, we see an example of a leader being a servant in John 13:5-10

5 Then He poured water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet and to wipethem with the towel with which He was girded. 6 So He came to Simon Peter. He said to Him,”Lord, do You wash my feet ?” 7 Jesus answered and said to him, “What I do you do notrealize now, but you will understand hereafter *.” 8 Peter said to Him, “Never * shall You washmy feet !” Jesus answered him, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me.” 9 SimonPeter said to Him, “Lord, then wash not only my feet, but also my hands and my head.” 10Jesus said to him, “He who has bathed needs only * * to wash his feet, but is completelyclean ; and you are clean, but not all of you.”

We see in Ephesians 5:25-31 that in the same way that Christ loved the church, sacrificing himself and nourishing and cherishing her to present  her to Christ holy, spotless, and blameless, the husband is responsible to love his wife (obviously to the best of his ability).

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gaveHimself up for her, 26 so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing ofwater with the word, 27 that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, havingno spot or wrinkle or any such thing ; but that she would be holy and blameless. 28 Sohusbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his ownwife loves himself ; 29 for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it,just as Christ also does the church,


So no, being a leader in the home is not a right. It is a responsibility which God has decreed a husband will have.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: