In response to TV01's request, here's the thread that would provide us the platform for the various questions raised in another thread in order that we don't derail that one.

So, TV01, welcome.

Dear TayoD,

Here is my response to your post in the other thread on this link:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-61492.96.html#msg1246693


Thank you for your comments. But there are a few concerns your rejoinder raises:

TayoD:

This issue of church authority and man-wife relationship is a very touchy and personal one to me because I have watched a close family virtually disintegrate over it. Believe it or not, I think both of you are right in a sense though I tend to agree more with TV. I find it hard to make a categorical statement, one way or the other because the situation I witnessed was way too complex to be solved by saying to the participants "this is the way, walk ye in it." My advice then was, and still is: "follow the Spirit's leading." I guess that is the best advice from someone who doesn't want to get blamed for the eventual consequences, which either way won't be pleasant!

You know what? That is precisely what I'd expect in any given case as above - a virtual disintegration. The reason is quite simple: when we emphasize our our personal agenda and preferences either way, then the result will be just that.

On the other hand, I've witnessed several situations where the husbands saw themselves as members of the same Body to which their wives belonged. It didn't take much struggle to see the beautiful harmony that resulted from the seeming 'difficulty' when the husbands supported the submission of their wives to the Lord's leading expressed in their local churches (even though they were admittedly tough decisions to make).

A case in point: a missionary friend I knew years back was in one such situation concerning what decision to make as pertaining to a serious concern in his local church as pertaining an exercise to further their fellowship and growth. He has asked his wife about it; and she was more in favour of their planned wedding anniversary that would come up midway into the programme. So he went into fasting and prayer on his own; while still seeking the fellowship of his local church.

Two days before the event, both wife and man felt led to seek the development of the life of the Church more than their anniversary (although some among the leaders were strongly in favour of his taking time off for the anniversary). What had happened? The missionary, speaking to us in exhortation sometime afterwards, said that he felt the Lord impressing John 21:15-17 on his heart. Eventually, he sought to place that burden above his plans, and was evetually blessed in many things that he had personally sought from the Lord.

This is just an example; but there are many cases where I know matured believers seeking the health of their churches far above their personal preferences - and much blessing have resulted. Yet, I haven't come across any verse as yet stating that a husband's plans should take precedence over the concerns of the Church.

TayoD:

A married christian woman is in a very interesting position. By God's design, she finds herself under the leadership of two Lords - Christ and her husband. It so happens that the wishes of the two Lords are sometimes contrary to each other, especially if the husband is not born again as in the situation I witnessed.

Now, what would happen if she was dealing with a husband who is a believer but still expresses a contrary wish to what she knows is against what the Lord is leading her to do?

TayoD:

Now this is closely related to the issues you guys are discussing here. Assuming the church calls out an extensive period of fasting and praying. And according to Paul, fasting must necessarily involve abstinence from sex too. What happens if the husband is feeling randy tonight and wants to 'get it on'? At that point, she will have to make a choice of following the leading of her pastor (inspired by Christ to call out a fast), or submit to her husband for some carnal pleasing activities. What call would you make?

I would offer just this: please husband, follow your heart if it pleaseth thee to set that carnal desire above the promptings of the Spirit.

@stimulus,

Thanks for starting this thread.

I would offer just this: please husband, follow your heart if it pleaseth thee to set that carnal desire above the promptings of the Spirit.

Now I am not saying you are wrong, but doesn't that violate her submission to an express demand of her Lord to abstain from sex while fasting and praying?

Lol TayoD,

TayoD:

Now I am not saying you are wrong, but doesn't that violate her submission to an express demand of her Lord to abstain from sex while fasting and praying?

Well, let's carefully look at what it says:

"Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give
yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not
for your incontinency" (I Cor. 7:5).

There - I don't think that's a "demand" as such; but as long as they have a mutual consent, all's well.

I'm here O 

Presumably the "Apostle" question will be dealt with on this thread at a later stage, or on a completyely different one. No probs.

I note TayoD's submission on the situation he witnessed. Fine. My aim is not to speak around a particular situation of which I am unfmiliar with the full detail, but to understand the generic and clear leading of scripture on the family unit and the authority within, and how it aligns with the church and the authority there.

Again, my understanding from scripture is that a wife is subject first and foremost to her husband (unless of course he asks her to do something criminal or blasphemous).

It's plain to see that Stimulus is championing an over-arching church authority that subsumes and overides anything a family and more pertinently a husband may decide is best for his family. Indeed, I seem to be hearing that God works through the church (or it's leadership), to determine what is best for families and if families don't adhere or subscribe to church initiatives, they are rebelling against God.

That to me is a total misstatement of what Christian life is all about, what a relationship and walk with God entails, and of course a total unbalancing of Family, church and secular life. I begin to see why some people thing their Christian walk is articulated thropugh church and their service or activity to it or in it. Not to my understanding.

So as not to be tedious, and in recognition of the fact that you started the thread, may I suggest that you raise a specific question to start the discussion.

God bless
TV

I figure this is a broader topic for discussion. Thanks Stimulus!

I'd like to know to what extent can a woman in church participate without contravening any scriptural rules? I have seen a lot of women in various denominations that are allowed to preach and evangelize freely. There have been hundreds of thousands of souls who have come to Christ as a result of their ministry.

How do you view such success? Did they do all that in vain?

@TV01,

Glad to read your response setting forth your persuasions in clear terms. However, I'd try and do the same in the context of what you've offered.

TV01:

Presumably the "Apostle" question will be dealt with on this thread at a later stage, or on a completyely different one. No probs.

No worries - we may have occasion to do so.

TV01:

Again, my understanding from scripture is that a wife is subject first and foremost to her husband

Well, maybe this is where I might have been getting it wrong. But all the same, I'm persuaded that for believers the case is simply that everyone first and foremost submits to the Lordship of Jesus Christ - whether such believers are husbands, wives or unmarried. However, in domestic issues, that submission is expressed in how a wife relates with her husband (Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord - Eph. 5:22).

Yet, in all things the godly wife submits to the Lord in her relating with other believers in the collective life of the Church. This is expressed in the following terms:

(a) submitting ourselves to one another: [Eph. 5:21 - "Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God."]

(b) submitting to church leadership as pertaining to Church life: [Heb. 13:17 - "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.]

(c) submitting to civil authorities for the Lord's sake: ["Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God" - (Rom. 13:1); "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme" - (I Pet. 2:13)]

Perhaps then, the question of present concern would be: where does Scripture set a husband's preference (however expressed - 'right of veto' etc.) over matters of Church authority as far as Church life is concerned?

I'm still trying to look into Scripture for this; and have yet to come across any verse in support of that. What I would rather offer is that domestic issues are the concerns of each family; but Church life expresses that which I've often referred to as "Church authority" - and that is what informs my persuasion that a husband's personal agenda (please read 'domestic') do not supercede the collective authority invested in the Church.

TV01:

(unless of course he asks her to do something criminal or blasphemous).

Aye. Col. 3:18 - "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord."

TV01:

It's plain to see that Stimulus is championing an over-arching church authority that subsumes and overides anything a family and more pertinently a husband may decide is best for his family. Indeed, I seem to be hearing that God works through the church (or it's leadership), to determine what is best for families and if families don't adhere or subscribe to church initiatives, they are rebelling against God.

Well, would my outline above help you see that is not my position at all?

TV01:

That to me is a total misstatement of what Christian life is all about, what a relationship and walk with God entails, and of course a total unbalancing of Family, church and secular life. I begin to see why some people thing their Christian walk is articulated thropugh church and their service or activity to it or in it. Not to my understanding.

Calm down. At least now you have my outline to see how much you've misread me - and I've offered my persuasion on the three perspectives of the walk of a believer as relates Church, Family and secular life.

TV01:

So as not to be tedious, and in recognition of the fact that you started the thread, may I suggest that you raise a specific question to start the discussion.

Which again would be seen in the outlines given above.

Cheers.

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

I figure this is a broader topic for discussion. Thanks Stimulus!

Welcome on board. Indeed, the topic suggests the broad concerns that have been raised in other threads; and I'd not be in a hurry to be asked to open another thread for yet another incidental question that may be discussed here.

Bobbyaf:

I'd like to know to what extent can a woman in church participate without contravening any scriptural rules? I have seen a lot of women in various denominations that are allowed to preach and evangelize freely. There have been hundreds of thousands of souls who have come to Christ as a result of their ministry.

How do you view such success? Did they do all that in vain?

Evangelizing the nations in order to bring souls to come to the saving grace of the Lord Jesus Christ is a matter for both men and women. However, if we look at the one concern that I raised in the other thread, it would be that women were not permitted to teach - I Tim. 2:12. If one studies that verse in relation to other verses expressing the same concerns, I'm persuaded that we shall come away understanding a clear consistency is maintained throughout Scripture thereto.

I don't know if this helps?

Hi Stimulus,

So, at last some common ground  !

I agree with first submission being to the Lord. But I would suggest that the Lords pointer is "wife submit to your husband in all instances" (noting the criminal/sin/blasphemy disclaimer).

The difference appears to be in our leaning in determining if the authority of the church trumps the mandate of the husband?

I've written something up, It was written before your post, but I think speaks very much to it. I'll post following and continue tomorrow.

God bless
TV

As promised;

Eph 5:22-24 ~ Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.
(Col 3:18 ~ Wives, submit to your own husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. 20 Children, obey your parents in all things, for this is well pleasing to the Lord).

There is no inserting a “wife submit to church leadership before your husband or instead of your husbands”. This violates the essence of the spousal union.

I see an articulation of Christianity that says “Church is all”. Frankly I don’t see this in scripture, neither do I subscribe to it.

One of the outworkings of this is that some think they are married to the church or that the church is their “head). No. They are the church and the church is the bride of Christ (and of course it’s Head). Erroneously taking the church as their head, means everything (incorrectly) is articulated through and submitted to the church leadership. Again, I don’t see that as scriptural.

There is a home/family setting and a church/ fellowship gathering (lets ignore the secular to keep things focused). A disconnect in the relationship between the two is a result of wrong understanding and incorrect emphasis on the mandates, structure responsibility and authority of either to the detriment/warping of the other.

A point in question, I attended a marriage seminar where I was told that any courtship had to be reported to and sanctioned by the church. Again, not scripturally true, marriage is first and foremost a family affair.

You have a daughter 9or son), take care for raising, nurturing, modeling marriage and Christian family life to her for 21 odd years, then when it’s time to wed, she needs to “see pastor for 6 week marriage counseling and instruction” or else church will not sanction or perform the wedding. It’s not churches place to sanction or give away a mans daughter. Just like church was not responsible for raising, feeding or educating her.

Said daughter (ideally) is under her fathers authority until such time as she weds, whereupon authority passes to her husband. And just as her father was responsible for providing and protecting her, her husband now assumes this role.

I am not saying church cannot offer, support, counseling or other help, but church and more specifically pastor, have no overriding authority in this essentially family affair.

1 Corinthians 3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

A man has a direct responsibility for his wife and family with direct recourse to the Lord.

1Timothy 5:8 ~ But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever

Read this in the broader context of providing for widows. That responsibility as Paul outlined, fell to the immediate family first. The first and foremost reason church does not take authority over the family is because it does not have prime responsibility for it. The responsibility for widows fell to the church only in the event that there was no family.

Likewise in my “girl gets married” scenario outlined above. Ceding authority to the church could only happen if there was a familial void.


This misunderstanding of the nature and limits of church authority leads to warped church structures & hierarchies. Submitting to Sole Authority Pastors and relinquishing personal/familial responsibility (and/or authority) to the church engenders rampant abuse. It’s right there before our very eyes. It’s why the church throws up Rev. Kings, it’s why the unscriptural tithe can be enforced and then wantonly misappropriated. It why everyone runs to hear the end-of/beginning of year prophecy from some pompously titled, self-styled MOG. It’s key for one to understand the proper biblical alignment of family and church, and more importantly that family and a walk with God lead to church. Church does not moderate family or an individual walk with God.

An idea of Church/fellowship that controls your time, your money and your family, is simply not to be found in scripture.

1Corinthians 7:23 ~ You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men.

The parallels and outlines the bible draws are clear. Before church there was the spousal union, there was family.

I have not even begun to touch on the whole purpose of fellowship or gathering as church.

God bless
TV

@TV01,

TV01:

I agree with first submission being to the Lord. But I would suggest that the Lords pointer is "wife submit to your husband in all instances" (noting the criminal/sin/blasphemy disclaimer).

Well, I'd have to look through your sequel in order to understand what you mean by "all" instances, so as not to prejudge what I haven't read.

TV01:

The difference appears to be in our leaning in determining if the authority of the church trumps the mandate of the husband?

I don't know if a husband has a mandate as such; but there again I'm open to learning.

TV01:

I've written something up, It was written before your post, but I think speaks very much to it. I'll post following and continue tomorrow.

Okay, I see the sequel already posted. My response will follow in due course.

Cheers and many blessings.