New Page 0

Morris, Henry M.: The Genesis Record : A Scientific and Devotional Commentary on the Book of Beginnings. Grand Rapids, MI : Baker Books, 1976, S. 75

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 1:ix-50

Response to Comment: "All the while his great loving God stays hidden behind and in scriptures, never revealing himself in the natural."

God revealed himself throughout history and in the person of Jesus Christ. God is not hidden from anyone who wants to be found by him (Jer 29:13, Ac 17:27).

Response to Comment: "Yet, his lonely, selfish God wants people to worship him so they can get to his enduring perfect heaven."

We can fulfill our God-given purpose. We can measure up to our God-given potential. This life is a probationary period (H. Morris).

God is the creator. We are the created. But many are spoiled brat works of his creation. "Shall the potter be esteemed as the clay; For shall the thing made say of him who made it, 'He did not make me'? Or shall the thing formed say of him who formed it, 'He has no understanding'?" (Isa 29:16).

You will not win a debate of logic with your creator. God has every right to require something of you. You have the choice to refuse to "endure" heaven. He created a place for such people.

God is anything but selfish. He has done everything heavenly possible to save us (Ro 5:8).

Response to Comment: "I could teach you what science is about..."Just a theory" in science is supported by so much data it is overwhelming. It is not a guess, as the word 'theory' is used in everyday language. Gravity is just a theory...do you believe in that? I thought so."

I thought science never stopped asking questions. Gravity is a physical law. Evolution is a theory of origins. Are you so "overwhelmed" by the theory that you have stopped asking questions? You are what Satan calls easy prey.

Response to Comment: "Evidence points to an old earth, SerpentDove."

That's funny. I've seen a petrified boot and and stalactites forming on a beer can. I thought these things took "millions of years".

Response to Comment: "You find something science doesn't know...then you say that if we don't know it, we're wrong about everything."

Man gets much wrong. But at least his watch is right twice a day. What matters is where you put your faith--in man or in God.

Response to Comment: "[U]nicorns...in the Bible[?]"

...Modern readers have trouble with the Bible’s unicorns because we forget that a single-horned feature is not uncommon on God’s menu for animal design. (Consider the rhinoceros and narwhal.) The Bible describes unicorns skipping like calves (Psalm 29:6), traveling like bullocks, and bleeding when they die (Isaiah 34:7). The presence of a very strong horn on this powerful, independent-minded creature is intended to make readers think of strength.

The absence of a unicorn in the modern world should not cause us to doubt its past existence. (Think of the dodo bird. It does not exist today, but we do not doubt that it existed in the past.). Eighteenth century reports from southern Africa described rock drawings and eyewitness accounts of fierce, single-horned, equine-like animals. One such report describes “a single horn, directly in front, about as long as one’s arm, and at the base about as thick . . . . [It] had a sharp point; it was not attached to the bone of the forehead, but fixed only in the skin...”(See full text: Unicorns in the Bible?).

Response to Comment: "[God] was supposed to be resting and not doing any more creating."

The living presence of the Holy Spirit is known by millions throughout the world.

Response to Comment: "SerpentDove, if you have anymore, please keep them coming..."

Alright. How about the mantis shrimp. Where is the evolutionary transitional form?

A face only a mama could love, the Mantis shrimp, also referred to as a snapping shrimp, possesses an amazing function to obtain food, it creates a cavity bubble underwater which collapses with such force that it produces a cracking sound of about 200 decibels, a tiny flash of light, and enough shock to stun or even kill its prey such as worms and goby fish. It is the only creature in the world with such a "weapon" to kill its pray (kgov.com, Real Science Friday). (See: Mantis Shrimp).

Response to Comment: "If one single living species could disprove evolution, I'm sure a real scientist would have found it by now."

But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong (1 Cor 1:27).

Response to Comment: "What so many creationist don't realize, is that the scientist that found sometime to truly disprove evolution would instantly be catapulted to fame. They would have all the money they could ask for to fund any research wanted. Plus having their names live in infamy in the history book[s]."

As a hen protects her chicks, God has offered you a safe place in his care. But, if because of your hatred and rebellion, you choose to venture away from his care, you become easy prey for wolves. The very fact that you are still alive means that God has not given up on you. Thank him for your first breathe today. Ask him for another, then thank him for that one. Or, you could continue to hate him each day as an ingrate. He wants to spend eternity with those who trusted him. He knows if our love for him is real.

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 1:ix-588

22:12–30 MORAL PURITY

The social laws (22:1–12) were followed by moral laws (22:13–30), the theme of which was to purge evil from the congregation of Israel (22:21–22, 24). The legislation of 22:13–19 was designed to protect a virgin against false allegations of unchastity.

Hughes, Robert B. ; Laney, J. Carl ; Hughes, Robert B.: Tyndale Concise Bible Commentary. Wheaton, Ill. : Tyndale House Publishers, 2001 (The Tyndale Reference Library), S. 75

Response to Comment: Jud. 5:28–30

Have they not sped? have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two; to Sisera a prey of divers colours, a prey of divers colours of needlework, of divers colours of needlework on both sides, meet for the necks of them that take the spoil? [Jud. 5:28–30].

The mother of Sisera knew in her heart what had happened. She knew he had been slain. She had thought all of the time that he would be coming home, but he did not come. Even in this case, the heart of Deborah went out to this woman because she was a mother.

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 2:55

Response to Comment:

If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.

If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out by himself.

And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:

Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever [Exod. 21:3–6].

This remarkable law states that if a man is a slave, after seven years he can go free. If he was married when he became a slave, he can take his wife with him. If he married while a slave, that is, if he married a woman who was already a slave of his master, at the end of seven years he could go free, but his wife would still belong to the master. He would be free but his wife would not. He could, however, if he loved his wife and master, decide to stay of his own free will. If he decides to stay, his master is to bore his ear lobe through with an awl signifying that he will serve his master forever.

This is a beautiful picture of the Lord Jesus Christ. He came to this earth and took upon Himself our humanity. And we were all slaves of sin. He could have gone out free. He could have returned to heaven, to His position in the Godhead, without going through the doorway of death. He did not have to die upon the cross. But He willingly came down to earth and took upon Himself our humanity. “And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross” (Phil. 2:8).

Psalm 40:6–8 goes on to say, “Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.” This passage refers to Christ, because Hebrews 10:5–9 tells us that it does. It was fulfilled when our Lord came to this earth. “Wherefore when he cometh into the world [speaking of Christ], he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me [it was not only his ear that was “digged,” or bored through with an awl, but God gave Him a body which He will have throughout eternity]: in burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.” Christ was “made like unto His brethren.” He chose not to go out free without us. He could have left this earth without dying, but He said, “I love My Bride. I love the sinner.” So He became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross so that He could redeem us from the slavery of sin. What a picture this is of Christ—placed right here after the giving of the Ten Commandments.

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 1:ix-271

21:1–36 RESTITUTION

The principle of restitution was applied to the issues of the worth of a servant, or slave (21:1–11) and death penalties for various acts (21:12–36). The key principle (21:13–25) is that justice demands equality of restitution, no more (which would be revenge) and no less (which would trivialize the seriousness of the offense). In the case of mothers and children, special laws were given to protect the helpless and innocent (21:22–25). If a man caused a woman to give birth prematurely but the infant was not harmed, then a simple fine was to be levied. If the child or mother was harmed, then the law of retaliation was applied. Punishment was restricted to that which was commensurate with the injury. In these verses God shows clear concern for protecting unborn children, a concern that people today would do well to heed. Surely the abortion of millions of unborn babies will fall under God’s condemnation.

Hughes, Robert B. ; Laney, J. Carl ; Hughes, Robert B.: Tyndale Concise Bible Commentary. Wheaton, Ill. : Tyndale House Publishers, 2001 (The Tyndale Reference Library), S. 39

Response to Comment: Gen. 19:8

Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof [Gen. 19:8].

When a man entertained a guest in that day, he was responsible for him. Lot was willing to make this kind of sacrifice to protect his guests!

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 1:ix-82

According to oriental custom, a host was responsible for protecting his guests from harm, whatever the cost (19:4–8). Thus, Lot offered his daughters to the wicked men in order to protect his guests. The demands of hospitality explain, but do not justify, Lot’s actions. Why did God have compassion on Lot (19:16)? Because “God had listened to Abraham’s request and kept Lot safe” (19:29), which was in accordance with his covenant with Abraham.

Hughes, Robert B. ; Laney, J. Carl ; Hughes, Robert B.: Tyndale Concise Bible Commentary. Wheaton, Ill. : Tyndale House Publishers, 2001 (The Tyndale Reference Library), S. 17

Response to Comment: Jud. 19:1–25

And it came to pass in those days, when there was no king in Israel, that there was a certain Levite sojourning on the side of mount Ephraim, who took to him a concubine out of Beth-lehem-judah.

And his concubine played the whore against him, and went away from him unto her father’s house to Beth-lehem-judah, and was there four whole months [Jud. 19:1–2].

These two verses give us another insight into the life of the children of Israel of that day, and it is a good illustration of Romans chapters 1–3. Can you imagine a Levite marrying a woman like that? Well, he did, and she played the harlot, left him, and went back to her father’s house. This Levite followed her, was warmly received by her father, and stayed several days. Then the Levite and his concubine left and headed northward. They stayed one night in Gibeah, a city of the Benjamites. An old man who was also from mount Ephraim and was sojourning in Gibeah offered them hospitality. That night, while they were being entertained by their host, some men of the city demanded (as was done in Sodom before its destruction) the Levite for their homosexual gratification. Believing it would mean final death for him, he gave them instead his concubine. They abused her all night and absolutely caused her death by raping her. This horrible act sounds like something that could have happened in our country—does it not? In fact, the parallel to our contemporary society is quite striking as you read through this section.

The Levite was really wrought up by this crime, and what he did reveals how low they were in that day. He took her and cut her up in pieces, then sent a piece to each tribe with a message of what had taken place!

The reaction of the rest of the nation to this outrage is recorded in the next two chapters.

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 2:85

19:1–21:25 The Events in the Tribe of Benjamin

The section of 19:1–21:25 outlines a civil war among the sons of Israel. The perversions at Gibeah (19:1–30) led to civil war and the destruction of many of the males of the tribe of Benjamin (20:1–48). The section ends with a strange scheme to allow the remaining males of Benjamin to find wives from among the Israelites (21:1–25).

A concubine (19:1) was a secondary wife, often acquired by purchase or as a war captive. In antiquity, when a marriage produced no heir, a barren wife would present a slave concubine to her husband to produce offspring. Although the practice was not condoned, the concubines were protected under the Mosaic law (Exod. 21:7–11). Since concubines were expensive to maintain, they were considered to be a sign of wealth and status.

Jebus (Judg. 19:10) is the Canaanite city that later became Jerusalem. Gibeah (19:12), located four miles north of Jerusalem, became Israel’s capital in Saul’s time. The moral intentions of the men of Gibeah (19:22) match those of the men of Sodom (Gen. 19:5). According to Oriental custom (Judg. 19:23–24), a host had to protect his guests from harm, whatever the cost. The demands of hospitality and the low status of women in this period of apostasy help to explain this horrendous proposal.

The dismemberment and distribution of the concubine’s body to the twelve tribes (19:29) constituted a warning concerning the nation’s deep immorality as well as a challenge to make things right.

The two military defeats of Israel by Benjamin drove Israel to prayer and fasting in an earnest attempt to discern God’s will (20:26). The rock of Rimmon was about four miles east of Bethel (20:45). The Israelites soon regretted their rash oath concerning Benjamin (21:1, 7, 18).

Jabesh Gilead (21:8), an Israelite city in Transjordan, was to be punished for failing to participate in the discipline of Benjamin. Years later, King Saul, a Benjamite, would rescue this city from the Ammonites (1 Sam. 11:8–11). As a result, the inhabitants of this city would show great bravery by coming to Beth Shan and removing the bodies of Saul and his sons from the city gate and burying them (1 Sam. 31:11–13).

Since the daughters of Shiloh were taken rather than given, the Israelites did not consider themselves in violation of their rash oath (21:19–23). Shiloh was situated in the hill country of Ephraim about twenty miles north of Jerusalem.

Moral decisions in the period of the judges were made on the basis of whatever seemed to suit the situation, not on God’s unchanging character. The result was political, moral, and religious chaos. This situation was partially remedied through the Davidic kings and has been perfectly remedied through the Son of David, Jesus the Messiah.

Hughes, Robert B. ; Laney, J. Carl ; Hughes, Robert B.: Tyndale Concise Bible Commentary. Wheaton, Ill. : Tyndale House Publishers, 2001 (The Tyndale Reference Library), S. 102

Response to Comment: Lev. 27:3–7

And thy estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of the sanctuary.

And if it be a female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels [Lev. 27:3–4].

When a person was dedicated by a vow to God, it did not mean that individual must serve in the tabernacle—that was the peculiar service of the Levites. A redemption price could be paid for the person which would relieve him of that service. This is called the commutation price of the person.

A man between the ages of twenty and sixty was of greater value because of the amount of work he could do. The labor value seemed to be the standard of evaluation. A male in the prime of life could render the most service. “By thy estimation” meant that which was the current value among the people.

The labor value of a female would be less, but the important feature is that a female could be devoted to God. I think this makes it clear that the daughter of Jephthah was not offered as a human sacrifice but remained unmarried and was vowed to God.

Hannah brought little Samuel to the temple as a thanksgiving offering to God in payment of her vow. She said, “For this child I prayed; and the Lord hath given me my petition which I asked of him: Therefore also I have lent him to the Lord; as long as he liveth he shall be lent to the Lord…” (1 Sam. 1:27–28). She kept her vow.

Have you ever come to God and presented yourself to Him? Have you presented your children to God? Your grandchildren? Have you presented your possessions to Him? He hasn’t commanded you to do that, but He has said that you may do it. If you do it, then it is mandatory that you make good.

And if it be from five years old even unto twenty years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male twenty shekels, and for the female ten shekels.

And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver.

And if it be from sixty years old and above; if it be a male, then thy estimation shall be fifteen shekels, and for the female ten shekels.

But if he be poorer than thy estimation, then he shall present himself before the priest, and the priest shall value him; according to his ability that vowed shall the priest value him [Lev. 27:5–8].

You see that the scale of values was determined by age and not by social position, riches, or prestige. The value was based on the ability to labor. Notice how wonderfully God provided for the poor so they could participate in this voluntary service. A fair and equitable price was set by the priest according to the man’s ability to pay. The widow’s mite is of more value in heaven than the rich gifts of the wealthy and affluent.

There is another striking feature about the vowing of persons. Ordinarily in human affairs, a man pays for the service of another. In the law of vows this is reversed and a man pays to serve God. It is a privilege to serve God.

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 1:ix-449

Response to Comment: Num. 30:3–16

If a woman also vow a vow unto the Lord, and bind herself by a bond, being in her father’s house in her youth;

And her father hear her vow, and her bond wherewith she hath bound her soul, and her father shall hold his peace at her: then all her vows shall stand, and every bond wherewith she hath bound her soul shall stand [Num. 30:3–4].

In other words, if a woman makes a vow while she is still single and in her father’s home, the father can be held responsible for her. If the father keeps quiet when he hears her make the vow, then that vow which she made will stand. However, if the father speaks up and says, “Wait just a minute. She has bought this dress, and I don’t intend to pay for it,” then he is protected in the matter. That vow is not binding.

But if her father disallow her in the day that he heareth; not any of her vows, or of her bonds wherewith she hath bound her soul, shall stand: and the Lord shall forgive her, because her father disallowed her [Num. 30:5].

Now what happens if the woman is married?

And if she had at all an husband, when she vowed, or uttered aught out of her lips, wherewith she bound her soul;

And her husband heard it, and held his peace at her in the day that he heard it: then her vows shall stand, and her bonds wherewith she bound her soul shall stand.

But if her husband disallowed her on the day that he heard it; then he shall make her vow which she vowed, and that which she uttered with her lips, wherewith she bound her soul, of none effect: and the Lord shall forgive her [Num. 30:6–8].

If the married woman goes out and makes expensive purchases and obligates herself, the husband can say that he disallows it and will not be responsible to pay for it. The vow will not stand and he is not obligated. So you see that either a father or a husband could be held responsible for the vow a woman made, unless they had disallowed it.

Sometimes we see this principle bypassed today. There are women who are golddiggers. They marry a man for his money. One sees this at times when a younger woman marries an older man. After she has his name, the can go to court and get practically everything that he owns. I’ve seen that happen several times. I knew a Christian man who was lonely after the death of his wife, and who then married a younger woman who was really after the money. This man had willed his money to mission boards and Christian organizations, but the young widow was able to break the will and get the money for herself so that the Christian organizations got none of it. Also I have had men tell me about marrying women who have taken them for everything they had. Well, that’s the foolishness of mankind. God says a man does not need to permit this sort of thing.

THE VOW OF A WIDOW OR DIVORCED WOMAN MUST STAND

But every vow of a widow, and of her that is divorced, wherewith they have bound their souls, shall stand against her [Num. 30:9].

A widow must stand on her own two feet. The vow that she makes stands. You notice how important these details are to God. He wants His people always to be as good as their word.

God keeps His vows, and He expects His children to keep theirs. He made a vow to Abraham. He made a promise to David. God will stand behind His vows. He has kept His promises in the past and will keep His promises in the future. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). That is the Word of God, God’s promise to you and me. And the Word of God stands. He has vowed that He will save you if you trust in Christ, and that vow stands. A dear, little Scottish woman had an unbelieving son, who returned home from college with some new ideas and told her, “Your soul doesn’t amount to anything in this vast universe.” She thought it over and replied, “I agree my soul isn’t worth very much, but if my soul is lost, God would lose more than I would lose. God would lose His reputation because He said that He would save me if I trusted Him.” Friends, God will stand by His Word. He doesn’t have to take an oath; all He needs to do is to say it, and it is truth. He wants those who represent Him down here to be that kind of a people. If they make a vow, they should stand by that vow. This kind of responsibility should be representative of the Christians in this world today.

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 1:ix-524

30:1–16 THE AUTHORITY OF MEN OVER THEIR WIVES AND DAUGHTERS

Numbers 30 describes the various levels of responsibility and authority between men and their wives as well as fathers and daughters in the matter of vows. The vow’s essence was a humbling of the person (30:13) before the Lord for service and therefore was highly sacred. The question of vows by a woman under the authority of a man was bound to arise and was answered here. The regulations concerning the discharge of vows upheld the sanctity of the promise (cf. Eccles. 5:4–5) while also recognizing the principle of subjection to authority in the home (Num. 30:3–5).

Hughes, Robert B. ; Laney, J. Carl ; Hughes, Robert B.: Tyndale Concise Bible Commentary. Wheaton, Ill. : Tyndale House Publishers, 2001 (The Tyndale Reference Library), S. 64

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 5:70

14:26–40 THE ORDER FOR TONGUES AND PROPHECY

All that is done in worship is to be for edification (14:26). This is the theme of Paul’s letter. There is an order given for speaking in tongues (14:27–28), for prophesying (14:29–33), and for women in the church (14:34–36). Compare 1 Corinthians 11:2–16 and 1 Timothy 2:11–15 with 1 Corinthians 14:34–35. Paul’s reference to “the law” (14:34) probably reflects Numbers 30 (on vows), which sets forth the principle of subjection of wives and daughters.

Hughes, Robert B. ; Laney, J. Carl ; Hughes, Robert B.: Tyndale Concise Bible Commentary. Wheaton, Ill. : Tyndale House Publishers, 2001 (The Tyndale Reference Library), S. 557

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee [Gen. 3:16].

This is the judgment upon woman. She cannot bring a child into the world without sorrow. Isn’t it interesting that that should be true? The very thing that brings joy into the life and continues the human family has to come through sorrow.

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 1:ix-27

Response to Comment: Eph. 5:21-33

Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God [Eph. 5:21].

“Submit” is a very interesting word. It does not mean obey. Paul is not saying that the child of God is a buck private in the rear rank taking orders from somebody in the church who thinks he is a sergeant or a captain. We do take orders, but they are from the Captain of our salvation.

Joshua thought he was a general of the children of Israel. He saw a Man with His sword drawn standing at the edge of the camp. He asked, “… Art thou for us, or for our adversaries?” If I may put it in good old Americana, he said, “Who told you to draw a sword? I’m the general here!” It was actually a rebuke. Then that One (who was the preincarnate Christ) turned and said, “… Nay; but as captain of the host of the Lord am I now come …” (Josh. 5:13–4). Joshua went down on his face and even took off his shoes because he was on holy ground. He learned that he had a Captain.

You and I are under a Captain, but the relationship is not military but on the basis of love. Our Lord said, “If ye love me, keep my commandments” (John 14:15). I think there is an alternative there: “If you don’t love me, forget the commandments.”

Now we see here that you and I are to submit ourselves “one to another in the fear of God.” That doesn’t mean we are to salute and fall down before some human being who outranks us. It does mean that in the fear of Christ we are to walk with one another in lowliness of mind.

If you will turn back to chapter 4, verses 1–2, you will see that Paul begins this section by saying that our walk should be in lowliness and meekness. That is the same thing that we have here. But notice in chapter 4 it begins with “I…beseech you.” This is not a command. It is the language of love. The fires of Sinai have died down, and now it is based on what has been done by Christ at Calvary. It is based on the grace of God. “I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, With all lowliness and meekness….”

“Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.” This means that you do not try to run the church. Pastors, officers in the church, members of the church, all of us are to submit ourselves one to another in the fear of Christ. It cannot be a “my way” proposition. No one can say, “I want you to know that I’ll do as I please. If I want to do it this way, I will do it this way.” Such an attitude is not a mark of a Spirit-filled believer. Submitting ourselves one to another in the fear of God is another mark of being Spirit-filled.

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing [Eph. 5:22–24].

I have been doing some research on that word submit, and I have some rather startling things to tell you. The word submit relative to wives needs to be understood a little differently from the way it has been so often interpreted in the past. It is not, “Wives, obey your husbands. Submit is a very mild word. It is a loving word. It means to respond to your own husband as unto the Lord. The way we respond to the Lord is that we love Him because He first loved us. And notice that it says “unto your own husbands.” A very personal, loving relationship is the ground for submission. Paul is definitely speaking to believers about Christian marriage.

In this relationship of husband and wife, the man is the aggressor. He is the aggressor physically. He is the one who makes love. He is the aggressor in the home. He should be the breadwinner, the one who goes out with the lunch pail each day. And that doesn’t give him the authority to be a top sergeant in the home either, by the way. The wife is to respond to him as the believer is to respond to Christ—in a love relationship.

A rough old boy came to my office one day with a request. He said, “Dr. McGee, I want you to talk to my wife. She’s very cold, and she’s not acting as a wife should.” He didn’t know it, but that was a dead giveaway—he was admitting failure as a husband. He showed what kind of a husband he was to draw that kind of response. I asked him, “Have you told her lately that you love her?” He said, “No. She knows I love her. I don’t need to tell her that.” I said to him, “I think you do. She does not need to tell you that she loves you until you say it first.”

Woman is the responder, and man is the aggressor. The man is to say, “I love you,” and he is the one who does the proposing. She is the one to say, “Yes.” No woman is asked to say “I love you” to a man until he has said “I love you.” When a man says he has a cold wife, it is because she has a cold husband. He is not being the husband that he should be. It is not her business to be the aggressor. Her role is the sweet submission of love.

“The husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church.” In what way? It is a love relationship, and the husband is to be the head for the sake of order. You will find in this section of Ephesians that there are four different areas in which there is headship for the sake of order. Wives are to be subject to their husbands. Husbands are to be subject to Christ. Children are to be subject to parents. Servants are to be subject to masters. It is to be a sweet subjection, a willing subjection to someone who loves you. It is to be that kind of relationship. If there is no love in it, the idea of submission isn’t worth a snap of the finger.

I have done a great deal of marriage counseling in my day, and I would say that 75 percent of the fault in marriages is on the side of the men. It is the man who is to keep the lovelight burning. In the beautiful Song of Solomon, the bridegroom says to the bride, “Behold, thou art fair, my love; behold, thou art fair …” (Song 1:15), and she responds, “My beloved is mine, and I am his …” (Song 2:16). He expresses his love first, and then she responds.

I know someone will say I am very idealistic and romantic about all this. Well, back in the Garden of Eden God made them that way. God started off with a romantic pair, Adam and Eve. Probably He didn’t give that woman to Adam until Adam realized that he needed someone. She was given as a helpmeet. A helpmeet is just the other half of man. Man is half a man without a wife. God joined them together and called them Adam—not the Adams.

Some young man will say, “Preacher, I’m not that kind of person. I’m no hero.” May I say to you that God never said that every girl would fall in love with you. Ninety-nine women may pass you by and see in you only the uninteresting boy next door. But one day there will come a woman who will see in you the knight in shining armor. It is God who gives that highly charged chemistry between a certain man and a certain woman.

My wife told me she thought I was the knight in shining armor. I want to tell you how it ended. Perhaps you have seen the television commercial of a knight in armor riding across the screen holding a can of cleanser. Do you know where he ended up? In that kitchen! Now that I am retired, that is where I have ended up. A friend of mine told me, “Now that you are retired, do things with your wife. When she washes the dishes, you wash the dishes with her. When she mops the floor, you mop the floor with her!” Well, I’m not about to do that, but I surely do wash dishes more than I ever did before.

Now let me say a word to you if you are a young woman. Perhaps you are not beautiful of face or figure. God never said you would attract every male—only animals do that. Ninety-nine men will pass you by and see no more in you than what Kipling described as a rag, a bone, and a hank of hair. But one day there will come by a man who will love you if you are the right kind of person. You will become his inspiration. You may inspire him to greatness—perhaps to write a book or to compose a masterpiece. If you are his inspiration, do not ignore him, do not run from him. God may have put you together for that very purpose.

You may be saying, “Preacher, you’re in the realm of theory. What you are talking about is idealistic. It sounds good in a storybook, but it doesn’t happen in real life.” You are wrong. It does happen.

Matthew Henry wrote the driest commentary I have ever read in my life, but, I want to tell you, he had a wonderful, romantic life as a young preacher. You would never think in reading his commentary that he was ever a romantic, but he was. In London he met a girl who belonged to the nobility. He was just a poor boy, but he fell in love with her and she loved him. Finally she went to her father to tell him about it, and her father tried to discourage her. He said, “That young man has no background. You don’t even know where he came from.” She answered, “You are right. I don’t know where he came from, but I know where he is going, and I want to go with him!” And she did.

Nathaniel Hawthorne was a clerk. He worked in a government customs office in New York City, and he was fired for inefficiency. He came home and sat down discouraged and defeated. His wife came up and put her arm around him and said, “Now, Nathaniel, you can do what you always wanted to do: you can write.” He wrote The House of the Seven Gables, The Scarlet Letter, “The Great Stone Face”, and other great works. So, you see, it does work out in life. It has worked out in the lives of multitudes of folk.

Paul’s instructions regarding the home teach that the Christian home is to be a mirror of the relation between Christ and the church. Christ’s relationship to the church is different from the relationship of husband and wife in that “Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.” The husband is not the savior of the wife. But in the realm of submission the wife should be subject to the husband and to the Lord Jesus Christ.

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 5:267-269

Response to Comment: 1 Tim. 2:9–14

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;

But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works [1 Tim. 2:9–10].

“In like manner also”—Paul has said how men are to pray in public, and now he will say how women are to pray. Note that he is saying women are to pray. That is not the issue, but he is telling them the way in which they are to pray in public. His emphasis will be upon inner adornment rather than outward adornment. Women are to pray in public, but they should not dress up from the viewpoint of appealing to God in a sexual or physical way.

I want to make it very clear that I feel that a woman should dress as nicely as she possibly can. There is nothing wrong with a woman dressing in a way that is appealing to her husband (or, if she is single, to a man). I have made this statement before, and one lady wrote me in reaction to it:

I never thought I’d see the day when I would feel a need to take you to task over anything. Usually I agree with you on everything that you say. But on Friday morning in your last study in Proverbs, I guess you hit a raw nerve. You were admonishing young men on choosing a wife, and you said, “First of all, make sure she’s a Christian.” I agree with that. Then you said, “And if possible, choose a pretty one.” Really, Dr. McGee, do you think that’s quite fair? After all, there are far more plain, ordinary-looking girls and women than really pretty ones, and pray tell, where would they be if men chose only pretty ones? I happen to be one of those plain, ordinary-looking women, and I’m so glad my husband didn’t choose one of the pretty ones, or I’d have missed out on twenty-five years of happy married life. I’m not really angry with you. How could I be when you’ve taught me so much of the deep truths of God’s Word? I just wanted you to know that I think you ought to say a little something for us women whom the Lord did not choose to bless with physical beauty.

I want to say something to that woman and to others: Have you ever stopped to realize that when your husband fell in love with you he thought you were beautiful? Yes, he did. I shall never forget the night that I met my wife. It was a summer night in Texas, and we were invited to the home of mutual friends for dinner. Frankly, these friends were trying to bring us together. I didn’t want to go because I had an engagement in Fort Worth that night. My wife didn’t want to go because she was going with another fellow! But that night when I saw her—I never shall forget her dark hair, her brown eyes—there in the candlelight I looked at her, and I fell in love with her. I proposed to her on our second date, and the reason I didn’t propose on that first date was that I didn’t want her to think I was in a hurry! She’d never won a beauty contest, but she was beautiful. How wonderful it was!

I have a notion your husband thought you were beautiful also, and there is nothing wrong in dressing in a way to be attractive to him. But when you go to God in prayer, you don’t need that outward adornment. You need that inward adornment. When a woman is going to sing in church, to speak or to have any part in a church service, she ought to keep in mind that her appeal should in no way be on the basis of sex. She should seek to please God, and there is no way in which she can appeal to Him on the basis of sex at all. Such appeal characterized the pagan religions in the Roman world, and Paul is stressing that it should not be a part of the public services of the Christian churches.

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence [1 Tim. 2:11–12].

These verses have to do with the learning and teaching of doctrine. Keep in mind that the women led in the mystery religions of Paul’s day, and they were sex orgies. Paul is cautioning women not to speak publicly with the idea of making an appeal on the basis of sex. Paul strictly forbade women to speak in tongues in 1 Corinthians 14:34.

For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

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

Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety [1 Tim. 2:13–15].

It was the sin of Eve that brought sin into the world. Now every time a woman bears a child, she brings a sinner into the world—that is all she can bring into the world. But Mary brought the Lord Jesus, the Savior into the world. So how are women saved? By childbearing—because Mary brought the Savior into the world. Don’t ever say that woman brought sin into the world, unless you are prepared to add that woman also brought the Savior into the world. My friend, no man provided a Savior: a woman did. However, each individual woman is saved by faith, the same as each man is saved by faith. She is to grow in love and holiness just as a man is.

McGee, J. Vernon: Thru the Bible Commentary. electronic ed. Nashville : Thomas Nelson, 1997, c1981, S. 5:439-440

Response to Comment: "We haven't explored only a tiny portion of the oceans.. in fact, there is only a tiny portion of the oceans we haven't studied! Those places are so inhospitable to life that it's really, really hard to go there."