Christ Came NOT to be Served

[NickF]

If you haven’t done so you should find a copy of Debbie Pearl’s “Created to be his Helpmeet”. She covers a lot of this. But here are a few thoughts:
It is possible for a woman to be a very good wife to a prison inmate. In fact, putting your husband in jail to keep him from committing mortal sins is possibly the highest form of being a helpmeet. Such a woman who then remains a loyal wife is fulfilling all of her obligations.

Of course these worse case scenarios are a great way to make excuses for not doing what’s right but they have very little real application. They just don’t apply to 99.99% of situations.

BUT, there is an escape hatch. A woman can leave her husband IF she remains single or reconciled to him eventually. If his demands are so egregious that she just can’t live with him, and she is willing to live single, then she can separate.

Excellent points! Very familiar with the Pearls, their influence is a large part of why we have such well behaved and happy kiddos. My wife has read her book a couple times. I've read Mike's book a couple times and listened to most of his audio sermons and topical preaching a few times. He's one of the few pastors/teachers I really identify with doctrinally. Howbeit we disagree pretty strongly on a few topics where he doesn't rightly divide the Word. Namely on drinking alcohol, polygny, and a couple others.

1 Corinthians 7
Not sure I agree on the wife having freedom to separate except for fornication.
10And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband
So the Lord commands; wives, do not depart from your husband.
Then secondarily, IF you disobey this command and "depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband:"
I could be misconstruing this part of scripture but it seems pretty clearly to communicate what I just did.

 

[Keith Martin]

Howbeit we disagree pretty strongly on a few topics where he doesn't rightly divide the Word. Namely on drinking alcohol, polygny, and a couple others.

Glad you addressed this. I just gave away my Pearl books at the latest Biblical Families conference. I think the foundational aspect of their writing is valid, but after reading them I didn't even want my wife or children to read them, because they are a bit stuck in some misinterpreted fundamentalist mistranslations that strike me as, on the whole, stuffing pleasure into a very small box and demonizing that which is outside the box, with the net result being that it erodes the authority of the general message. I guess I'd recommend their books to couples in which the wife is already on board with polygyny AND obedience . . . or to couples who have no desire to acquire the truth about polygyny and are fundamentalist in their outlook but are struggling with authority and obedience. For the latter, the books are golden, but if one's wife is rigid in her approach to sexuality, I would be very cautious, because she may become convinced that she should provide more due benevolence, but she'll likely be carrying that out for reasons that bow down to some of her other agenda items.

 

[Shiloh.F]

I’ve always been told that you can delegate authority, but not responsibly.
I can give my wife a budget for food and the authority to plan and cook meals, but ultimately it is still my responsibility to ensure my family is fed. (While giving thanks to Him who provides and resting in the comfort that we are more precious than the sparrows.)
A battlefield commander can delegate air strike approval authority down the chain of command one or two levels, but he is still ultimately responsible for the effects of any ordnance dropped.
It should be noted that an unlawful order can be received from a lawful authority. These are serious situations that should be handled carefully and thoughtfully, but as Peter said to the Pharisees, “judge for yourselves if we should obey you rather that God”.

 

[NickF]

1-I’ve always been told that you can delegate authority, but not responsibly.
2- It should be noted that an unlawful order can be received from a lawful authority. These are serious situations that should be handled carefully and thoughtfully, but as Peter said to the Pharisees, “judge for yourselves if we should obey you rather that God”.

1- I agree, as long as your authority comes with it the authority to delegate said authority. We must look to scripture to determine when that is permissible.
2- 100% agree, which is why I'm at odds and still not positive as to my stance and where that line is drawn. On the one hand Sarah is lauded for her obedience in almost committing adultery. Yet on the other hand we as Christians are commanded to obey God rather than Man. It's a sticky situation to be sure.

 

[Shiloh.F]

1- I agree, as long as your authority comes with it the authority to delegate said authority. We must look to scripture to determine when that is permissible.
2- 100% agree, which is why I'm at odds and still not positive as to my stance and where that line is drawn. On the one hand Sarah is lauded for her obedience in almost committing adultery. Yet on the other hand we as Christians are commanded to obey God rather than Man. It's a sticky situation to be sure.

1- a very good point. I haven’t looked but I can’t think of any scriptures that would limit a husband’s ability to delegate authority. Do you have any in mind?

 

[NickF]

If God has set someone in authority but has not given them the power to abrogate that to someone else, then it is inherently restricted. If I give authority to watch over a bonfire to my oldest son, he has the authority and responsibility to stand watch and observe my commands as to when to wet down the dry forest and when to call for help. He is the one empowered and commanded. If I do not also bestow him with the right/power/authority to delegate that task/job/position, then he may not delegate because he was not given. I do not need to give a negative command limiting the authority. It is limited by nature.

Similarly when God commands that one spouse is in command, unless there is a clause giving permission to delegate that command, we cannot assume that the permission is given. We don't look for the absence of a negative command and assume we are permitted.

I feel that's as clear as mud.

 

[steve]

With the help of our enemy, all too often those that are under authority start borrowing bits and pieces of that authority. It becomes a case of usurping the authority by degrees.
Children will do it.
Wives will do it.
We husbands do it to our heavenly masters.

 

[Maddog]

Gentlemen, I enjoy your writings and opinions on issues pertaining to headship as I am quite the plebe in scriptural interpretation. Let me however posit the following and forgive me for not reading all 5 pages of responses in case I missed something. Is it possible that something is missed in the cultural connotation of the word Serve? To Serve is to give but is this giving out of something we own or are we passing along the abundance on a platter as in a butler handing out something that doesn't belong to him- a conduit for the flow of something? As a provider, I OWN the remuneration I receive from my employer in exchange for my efforts. I produce a product and my employer measures that in terms of money. My money is a measure of time and effort. That money now gets distributed to various entities for the products and services they provide me. Now that as a basic understanding, I focus on the idea of giving something to someone who does not have it but not by way of purchase but rather in the place of purchase, literally a gift. Now my position- I own therefore I give of myself in various ways to my wife, my children, to the larger community as a Patriarch in abundance but not as an exchange of (for instance sex for money to wife) services or goods. My efforts are consumed by my family not because they give me anything but because I am responsible for their care. Contrast that to the butler who doesn't own but transfers someone else's wealth. Butlers serve, Patriarchs give.

 

[Keith Martin]

Butlers serve, Patriarchs give.

I am in general agreement with your assertions and the summary statement in the last sentence.

I also happen to think that the emphasis on 'service' is a purposeful tactic the corporate church has used to enslave us to inappropriate shift our allegiance from Yah and Yeshua over onto The Church and Pastors/Priests. Thus, the mainstream churches much more closely resemble Kafkaesque soul-less bureaucracies than they do emulation of The Body of Christ.

Some of this is semantics and word definitions, but I believe your distinction more closely aligns with the holistic interpretation of the entirety of His Word than any proof texting we can do by bringing up one isolated passage to assert that it should be generalized across every aspect of our spirituality and/or headship.

 

[Raw Truth]

As a husband, I often have to remind myself that I represent Christ to my wives (Eph. 5:23-33). That can get very complicated, but the confusion turns into simplicity when I remind myself that I am to reflect Christ in the most basic sense. Just as Christ simplified the many (roughly 613) mitzvah of the Mosaic Law by stating that the entire Law is summed up in the commandments to love the LORD and to love your neighbor as yourself (Matt. 22:37-40, Gal. 5:14), the primary job of husbands can be boiled down to the fundamentals of Christ’s dealings with believers. At the root of everything, that boils down to two basic tasks: service and sacrifice.

Matthew, Mark and John recount Jesus’ plain statement that He came not to be served, but to serve and to give His life as a ransom. He states His primary purpose plainly, and that purpose is centered upon service and sacrifice.

Do we not, as the God-ordained leaders of our families, often succumb to the notion that our wives really exist to serve us as our helpmeets and that we shouldn’t need to sacrifice as much as we often have to? Remember that Jesus was the Messiah of an historically rebellious and stiff-necked people who ultimately killed Him, and yet He pleaded with His Father to forgive them even while He was dying and had just endured the most torturous pain and humiliation imaginable.

Living up to that example is unbelievably difficult, to say the least; yet it’s our calling as husbands and it’s all the more important for husbands of multiple wives. We shouldn’t beat ourselves up for failing to meet that goal (which we often won’t - even Paul gave in to the flesh more often than spirit after being personally taught by the resurrected Savior), but it helps to remember that the overwhelming responsibility we bear can be simplified to a more manageable degree.

Dwell on the two fundamentals of service and sacrifice, which by nature both defy selfishness, and you’ll be poised to be a good leader to your wives and children.I

You are supposed to rule over your wives. Genesis 3:16. Rulership is not to give up control to the one who is commanded to be a helpmeet. The woman is given the position of help meet who is under our rulership because from a woman came the beginning of sin and the fall of man. Men are giving up their leadership to women. The Most High is not a weak leader. He expects us to submit our entire lives to Him and give up everything for His sake. As the lord of your wife, she must do the same for you.

This video might help you.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Edit to include this one which may also help:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[steve]

You are supposed to rule over your wives. Genesis 3:16. Rulership is not to give up control to the one who is commanded to be a helpmeet. The woman is given the position of help meet who is under our rulership because from a woman came the beginning of sin and the fall of man. Men are giving up their leadership to women. The Most High is not a weak leader. He expects us to submit our entire lives to Him and give up everything for His sake. As the lord of your wife, she must do the same for you.

This video might help you.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Edit to include this one which may also help:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Excellent videos!

Edit: Are they yours?
Saw something that you later posted and wondered.

 

[Raw Truth]

You are supposed to rule over your wives. Genesis 3:16. Rulership is not to give up control to the one who is commanded to be a helpmeet. The woman is given the position of help meet who is under our rulership because from a woman came the beginning of sin and the fall of man. Men are giving up their leadership to women. The Most High is not a weak leader. He expects us to submit our entire lives to Him and give up everything for His sake. As the lord of your wife, she must do the same for you.

Excellent videos!

Edit: Are they yours?
Saw something that you later posted and wondered.

Yes, they are videos I created. I grew tired of the feminist doctrine weak men are pushing while also hiding the truths of the Bible. Decided to start speaking out against it on my own.

 

[steve]

Yes, they are videos I created. I grew tired of the feminist doctrine weak men are pushing while also hiding the truths of the Bible. Decided to start speaking out against it on my own.

That’s awesome, VERY well done!
They look professional. At least to my unprofessional eye.
And I didn’t have any disagreement with what you said, which is pretty unusual.

 

[Keith Martin]

Yes, they are videos I created. I grew tired of the feminist doctrine weak men are pushing while also hiding the truths of the Bible. Decided to start speaking out against it on my own.

Well, then, my desire for you to be at our next gathering just goes up exponentially, @Raw Truth.

Do you have any such videos that don't mention polygyny?

 

[Raw Truth]

That’s awesome, VERY well done!
They look professional. At least to my unprofessional eye.
And I didn’t have any disagreement with what you said, which is pretty unusual.

Well, then, my desire for you to be at our next gathering just goes up exponentially, @Raw Truth.

Do you have any such videos that don't mention polygyny?

I speak on polygyny a lot, however, the video below doesn't speak on. The topic in this video is very heated and some have strong disagreement with it, however, I have to bring the truth on all areas of the scripture if I"m going to speak on it.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Keith Martin]

Thanks, @Raw Truth; I've already forwarded that to my youngest daughter to discuss with her. She and I are in the middle of an effort on my part to correct the fact that I have insufficiently prepared her to be a wife.

 

[Victorious]

Once upon a time, a woman ate some forbidden fruit. And Almighty Creator came looking for her man...

it is thinkable that a fallen man, however well-meaning, can direct one of his wives, children, or other subordinate or associate to do something which would violate a scriptural command or divine principle.

In such a case, the one being wrongfully directed has two choices.

1: obey while praying to Almighty for both forgiveness of the command, forgiveness of the compliance with the command, intervention to correct the situation and/or the thinking which lead to it.

2: Appeal humbly to him to see the conflict and address it.

If my current understanding is correct, that my wife is scripturallly my property, then I am responsible not only for her and her needs, but also for her actions. Therefore, I must give account for her actions to my Head in the judgment. And she will be accountable in the great last day, as will I and we all, for submission to authority.

I do not add this to negate or detract from anything foregoing in this thread, but because it came up here, and I am currently digesting this issue and seeking clarity thereon.
Thank you for any insight.

 

[Keith Martin]

The only thing I'd add is that we often fall into the snare of failing to recognize joint responsibility, which is not a zero-sum game.

The man is 100% responsible for everything that occurs within his family, but that doesn't negate the likelihood that, in most cases, his woman is also 100% responsible for her behavior.

Owning a living being doesn't remove either agency or culpability from the owned.