# What does honor and obey mean?



## LaurieBluedorn

Scripture speaks of children honoring their parents, and obeying their parents. Children argue that honor does not mean obey, and that once a child is older, perhaps twenty, the child does not have to obey his/her parents in anything, only honor them. To say older children must obey is necessarily abusive. 

What say ye? What did ancient authors say?


----------



## LaurieBluedorn

*Concerning parental approval in marriage, here is what William Gouge says*

Of Domestical Duties

Fifth Treatise, Duties of Children

by William Gouge, London, 1622


… <snip>

*16. Of parents' consent to the marriage of their children.*

II. That children ought to have their parents' consent unto their marriage is without all question evident. For

1. God himself hath given us herein a pattern: He first brought the woman to the man (Gen 2:22) whereby he would shew that he who gave a being to the woman, had a right to dispose her in marriage: which right parents now have: for from them under God, children receive their being. In this case parents stand in God's room, and are as it were God's hand to join their children in marriage.

2. God hath given express laws concerning this point. To omit that general moral law, Honour thy father and thy mother [which, as it is the ground of all other duties appertaining to children, so of this also] the authority and charge which God by his Law (Deut 7:3) hath laid upon parents, to give their daughters to husbands, and to take wives for their sons, hath the force of a law to bind children from taking wives or husbands, without or against their parents' consent. This law was not proper to the Jews only; but as a branch of the moral law it is pressed upon Christians (1 Cor 7:36,37).

To this may be added the judicial law [if it be to be accounted merely judicial] of a parent's power in giving his daughter, or refusing to give her in marriage to him that had deflowered her (Exo 22:17).

3. Answerable to the Law hath been the practice of God's Saints recorded and approved in Scripture. Isaac married the wife which his father provided (Gen 24:67). Jacob both obeyed his father in going to Laban's house for a wife (Gen 28:2) and also when he came to Laban asked his daughter of him (Gen 29:18, &c.).

Though Samson saw a daughter of the Philistines which pleased him well, yet would he not marry her before he had his parents' consent (Judg 14:2).

4. These words of Tamar (2 Sam 13:13) Speak unto the King [who was her father,] for he will not withhold thee from me, shew that children were not wont to be married without consent of parents: Which is further confirmed by this oath of the Israelites, There shall not any of us give his daughter unto Benjamin to wife (Judg 21:1).

5. The ancient fathers of the Church have in their ages taught children this duty, and pronounced marriages of children without consent of parents, to be unlawful.

6. The very heathen have observed the equity hereof. Though Shechem loved Dinah, and had deflowered her, yet would he not marry her without the consent of his and her father, (Gen 34:3). Ishmael had learned as much either by the instruction he had received out of Abraham's house, or else by the light of nature: for he stood to the choice which his mother made for him (Gen 21:21).

7. Though Papists in other cases make the authority of parents to be of no effect, yet in this case they count it utterly unlawful for children to marry without or against their parents' consent: and have thereupon made Canons against it.

8. The law of nature and nations, the civil and canon law, the common and statute law of our land, all manner of law is agreeable to God's Law in this point.

9. It hath been a custom in all Christian Churches throughout all ages, for the parent, or some in the parents' room, to give the bride to the bridegroom at the time of the marriage: whereby the parents' consent is openly manifested.

10. Many Divines of good note and name have judged such marriages as have been made simply without, or directly against parents' consent [especially if parents have just cause of exception against those marriages] to be of no force till the parent be brought to ratify them: and in many Churches upon due examination of the matter, they use to account them as no marriages. Experience hath manifested the boldness of many children in setting light by their parents' consent in those places where marriages once consummated are ratified, and made indissoluble, though they have been made simply without or directly against parents' consent.

Many children think, though it be unlawfully done, yet being done it shall stand. Whereupon if they doubt of their parents' consent, they will cast how to get their marriage consummate, so as their parents may not know of it to hinder it before it is done: and after it is done, impudently resolute to bear out as well as they can, the storm of the parents' displeasure. To prevent such contempt of the power of parents, and to establish that authority which God hath given them over their children, marriages without or against parents' consent as aforesaid, are in many Churches made void.

*17. Of the equity of the point, and reasons why children should have their parents' consent unto their marriage.*

1. By marriage children are put from their parents: for Man must leave his Father and Mother, and cleave unto his wife (Gen 2:24). Is it not then great reason that they from whom children had their being, and by whom they have been maintained and trained up till the time of their marriage, should have notice of that kind of leaving them, and consent thereto?

2. A parents' power by the marriage of his child is passed over to the husband or wife of the child. And shall such a power be taken away without consent of parent?

3. Children for the most part being heady and rash for want of experience; and seeking more to satisfy their present carnal desire, than to provide a good lasting help for themselves: but parents by the instinct of nature loving their children as well as children love themselves, and having by much experience better understanding of a meet help, and better able to use their discerning gift in this case, because it is not their own case, and yet the case of one whom they love as themselves, and to whom they wish as much good as to themselves; is it not meet even for the child's good, that in a matter of such moment as marriage, the parent should have a stroke?

*18. Of a child's carriage in case a parent provide an unfit mate or none at all.*

Quest. What if parents urge their children to marry such as they cannot affect and love: must children therein against their mind and liking yield obedience?

Answ. If there be no just exception against the party commended, they ought with the uttermost of their power to endeavour to bring their affection to the bent of their parents' will: and as an help thereunto, be persuaded that their parents are as careful of their good as they themselves are, and wiser than themselves: yea above all they ought to make instant prayer unto God [in whose hand man's heart is to turn it whithersoever he will (Prov 21:1)] that he would be pleased to alter the course of their affection, and to settle it on the party whom their parent hath chosen for them; if at least they see no just cause to the contrary. But if notwithstanding all the means that they can use, they still find their heart altogether averse, they may in a reverend manner entreat their parent to forbear to press that match, and to think of some other.

2. Quest. What if the parent be negligent, and in due time provide no fit match, may not the child provide one for himself?

Answ. A parent's negligence is not a sufficient pretext to make a child cast off that subjection which he oweth to his parent. Yet I deny not but that a child knowing where a fit match is to be had, may make known as much to his parent [as Samson did] and crave both his consent and help thereunto (Judg 14:2). And if his parent give no ear to his humble suit, he may use the mediation of his kindred or other friends. Yea if necessity require that the child be married, and his parent add willfulness to negligence, and will not be moved at all, neither by the humble suit of his child, nor by the earnest solicitation of any friends, means may be made to the Magistrate [who is in God's place over the parent as well as over the child, and ought to afford relief unto the child] and what the Magistrate doth in that case is as good a warrant to the child as if the parent had done it.

The like means may be used if a parent be an idolater, heretic, or atheist, and will not yield that his child be married to any but to one of his own profession and disposition.

*19. Of the sin of children in marrying without their parents' consent.*

Contrary is the mind and practise of such children as over lightly esteeming their parents' power, take matches of their own choice: and that sometimes privily without giving any notice at all to their parents: and sometimes most rebelliously against their parents' mind and charge: not much unlike those who in the old world are condemned for taking wives of all that they chose (Gen 6:2) [which was one branch of that wickedness for which the world was drowned] or rather like Esau who took such wives as proved a grief to his parents (Gen 26:35). What blessing can be expected to fall upon such marriages? or rather what curse may not be feared to follow them?

God's law is transgressed thereby: his image in parents despised, that which is more proper to them than any goods; or fraudulently, or violently taken from them: their souls grieved thereat: and they oft provoked to cast off their children, and curse their marriages. Now God's curse doth oft follow the just curse of a parent.

*20. Of objections for children's marrying without parents' consent, answered.*

1. Object. Though Jacob married one wife according to his parents' direction, yet he married other three [at least the two maids] without their consent.

1. Answ. Jacob's example in marrying more wives than one is not justifiable.

2. Answ. Jacob had a general consent of his parents to take a wife of the daughters of Laban (Gen 28:2): if therefore his marrying of two wives had been lawful, neither this nor that daughter had been taken without all consent of his parents. As for the two maids of whom he had children, neither of them was his wife: for long after they had children they are called his maids, and distinguished from his wives (Gen 32:22).

2. Object. Servants may marry without their master's consent: why then not children without their parents'?

1. Answ. It is not lawful for servants so to do while the date of their covenant lasteth (see Treatise 8, Section 17).

2. Answ. Though the servitude of a servant be greater than of a child, yet a parent hath in many respects a greater power over his child, than a master over his servant. The power which a master hath is by a mutual covenant betwixt him and his servant, and by the voluntary subjection of a servant unto his master. But the power of a parent is by the bond of nature, in that a child hath his being from his parents. Besides, this subjection of a child to his parents in case of marriage, is not for servitude but for the good of the child (see the third reason in Section 17).

3. Object. Children marry for themselves and not for their parents, why then should parents' consent be so much stood upon?

1. Answ. Though they marry not for their parents, yet they marry from their parents (see the second reason in Section 17): by marriage they are freed from the power of their parents.

2. Answ. Children are not their own: they are the inheritance of the Lord (Psa 127:3): the Lord hath given them to parents as an inheritance: a child therefore may no more marry for himself without consent of parents, than alienate his parents' goods for himself.

*21. Of stealing children from parents for marriage sake.
*
To the forenamed sin, and to the vengeance thereof, do they make themselves accessory, who fraudulently allure, or violently take away children to marry them otherwise than their parents would. This is a worse kind of felony than stealing away the goods of a man. For children are much more properly a man's own, than his goods: and dearer to him than any goods can be: yea and so much more highly to be esteemed, by how much reasonable creatures are to be preferred before senseless, and sensual things. Our statute law expressly condemneth this, and imposeth a severe punishment on such as shall offend therein. And justly do such offenders deserve to be severely punished, both in regard of the heinousness of the sin, and also in regard of the many mischiefs which follow thereon, as, Alienation of parents' affection from their children, Disinheriting heirs, Enmity betwixt the friends of each party so married, Litigious suits in law, Ruin of families, and [if the personages, whose children are married without their parents' consent, be great and noble] Disturbance of whole towns, cities, and nations. Instance the destruction of the Shechemites (Gen 34). This is said to have been the cause of the ten years' war betwixt the Grecians and Trojans, and of the ruin of Troy.

*22. Of Ministers' sin in marrying children without parents' consent.
*
Such Ministers also as through carelessness, not taking due account of the parties whom they marry, whether they have their parents' consent or no; or through bribery, being hired by reward, do marry such children as they know have not their parents' consent, do in an high degree make themselves accessory to the forenamed sin (see Section 19). Their fact is as bad as the fact of the principals themselves. Their solemnization of such marriages emboldeneth both the parties that are so married, and also all the persons that are present thereat. They highly dishonour God's holy ordinance, in that bearing the person of God they say of such as God hath forbidden to be so joined together, Those whom God hath joined together let no man put asunder. If Ministers had not their hand in such unlawful marriages, they could not be made: for our Church ratifieth no marriage but what is made by a Minister. Wherefore some Minister or other is guilty of this soul sin, whensoever any child is married without consent of parents. Well therefore doth our Church [to prevent this sin] expressly forbid Ministers to marry any without parents' consent: and inflict a severe censure on them that shall offend therein.

<snip> …


----------



## lynnie

Jonathan disobeyed Saul and covenanted with David. If your father is a Saul, do the same.

Mine used to scream at me to stop reading that g-d bible and going to effing church and go meet a normal ( ie non Christian guy) at the local bar. I am happy that God helped me to get past all the Bill Gothard bondage that I had to submit to my father. ( it was easier to do once he threw his kids out of the house because he was sick of their g-d Christianity).

At age 20, men entered army service in Israel, so my rough estimate for adulthood is age 20 ( depending today on if you are able to make it on your own, maturity comes later in this society with college). Once you are an adult, you need to seek wisdom and counsel just like every other Christian adult in making major decisions, but you are no longer under parental authority, you are an adult. 

If a woman had a truly godly father who was against her impending marriage I would of course urge her to wait, seek counsel, and have her father and her meet with her pastor and so forth. But I would not tell her that she must, as an adult, have his permission. I've actually seen too many fathers give approval to rotten guys, and so taking the father's approval as a sign of God's approval is another terrible mistake.


----------



## Elizabeth

In a Christian home, one would hope that the parent/adult child relationship would be such that consent to marry brought with it few, if any, relational skirmishes. If a parent is supporting an adult child, he/she could remove support as punishment for the adult child's impertinence, I suppose, and try to wield power that way. It's a tough line to walk, the letting go and keeping close. The ramifications of power plays between adult children and parents can have some devastating results. Personally, I would be very uncomfortable trying to make my adult children 'obey' me(they are not living under my roof, nor do I financially support them), but I would hope that they would listen to my counsel and give it some weight. Which they do. I thank God for that. And I am content with being honored by these good adults, whom I have had the pleasure of rearing and loving.


----------



## LaurieBluedorn

*John Calvin on duties of fathers and children*

*Ephesians 6:1-4*

1. Children, obey. Why does the apostle use the word obey instead of honor, { 1} which has a greater extent of meaning? It is because Obedience is the evidence of that honor which children owe to their parents, and is therefore more earnestly enforced. It is likewise more difficult; for the human mind recoils from the idea of subjection, and with difficulty allows itself to be placed under the control of another. Experience shews how rare this virtue is; for do we find one among a thousand that is obedient to his parents? By a figure of speech, a part is here put for the whole, but it is the most important part, and is necessarily accompanied by all the others.

In the Lord. Besides the law of nature, which is acknowledged by all nations, the obedience of children is enforced by the authority of God. Hence it follows, that parents are to be obeyed, so far only as is consistent with piety to God, which comes first in order. If the command of God is the rule by which the submission of children is to be regulated, it would be foolish to suppose that the performance of this duty could lead away from God himself.

For this is right. This is added in order to restrain the fierceness which, we have already said, appears to be natural to almost all men. He proves it to be right, because God has commanded it; for we are not at liberty to dispute, or call in question, the appointment of him whose will is the unerring rule of goodness and righteousness. That honor should be represented as including obedience is not surprising; for mere ceremony is of no value in the sight of God. The precept, honor thy father and mother, comprehends all the duties by which the sincere affection and respect of children to their parents can be expressed.

{1} "Timan properly signifies, ‘to perform one’s duty to any one;’ and here reverence must comprehend the cognate offices of affection, care, and support. The same complexity of sense is observable in the classical phrase timan ton iatron [to reverence the physician.] —Bloomfield.

2. Which is the first commandment with promise. The promises annexed to the commandments are intended to excite our hopes, and to impart a greater cheerfulness to our obedience; and therefore Paul uses this as a kind of seasoning to render the submission, which he enjoins on children, more pleasant and agreeable. He does not merely say, that God has offered a reward to him who obeys his father and mother, but that such an offer is peculiar to this commandment. If each of the commandments had its own promises, there would have been no ground for the commendation bestowed in the present instance. But this is the first commandment, Paul tells us, which God has been pleased, as it were, to seal by a remarkable promise. There is some difficulty here; for the second commandment likewise contains a promise,

"I am the Lord thy God, who shew mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments." (#Ex 20:5 6).

But this is universal, applying indiscriminately to the whole law, and cannot be said to be annexed to that commandment. Paul’s assertion still holds true, that no other commandment but that which enjoins the obedience due by children to their parents is distinguished by a promise.

3. That it may be well with thee. The promise is— a long life; from which we are led to understand that the present life is not to be overlooked among the gifts of God. On this and other kindred subjects I must refer my reader to the Institutes of the Christian Religion; {1} satisfying myself at present with saying, in a few words, that the reward promised to the obedience of children is highly appropriate. Those who shew kindness to their parents from whom they derived life, are assured by God, that in this life it will be well with them.

And that thou mayest live long on the earth. Moses expressly mentions the land of Canaan,

"that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee." (#Ex 20:12).

Beyond this the Jews could not conceive of any life more happy or desirable. But as the same divine blessing is extended to the whole world, Paul has properly left out the mention of a place, the peculiar distinction of which lasted only till the coming of Christ.

4. And, ye fathers. Parents, on the other hand, are exhorted not to irritate their children by unreasonable severity. This would excite hatred, and would lead them to throw off the yoke altogether. Accordingly, in writing to the Colossians, he adds, "lest they be discouraged." (#Col 3:21). Kind and liberal treatment has rather a tendency to cherish reverence for their parents, and to increase the cheerfulness and activity of their obedience, while a harsh and unkind manner rouses them to obstinacy, and destroys the natural affections. But Paul goes on to say, "let them be fondly cherished;" for the Greek word, (ektrefete,) which is translated bring up, unquestionably conveys the idea of gentleness and forbearance. To guard them, however, against the opposite and frequent evil of excessive indulgence, he again draws the rein which he had slackened, and adds, in the instruction and reproof of the Lord. It is not the will of God that parents, in the exercise of kindness, shall spare and corrupt their children. Let their conduct towards their children be at once mild and considerate, so as to guide them in the fear of the Lord, and correct them also when they go astray. That age is so apt to become wanton, that it requires frequent admonition and restraint.

*Colossians 3:20-21*

20-21. Children, obey your parents. He enjoins it upon children to obey their parents, {1} without any exception. But what if parents {2} should feel disposed to constrain them to anything that is unlawful; will they in that case, too, obey without any reservation? Now it were worse than unreasonable, that the authority of men should prevail at the expense of neglecting God. I answer, that here, too, we must understand as implied what he expresses elsewhere, (#Eph 6:1) —in the Lord. But for what purpose does he employ a term of universality? I answer again, that it is to shew, that obedience must be rendered not merely to just commands, but also to such as are [or seem] unreasonable. {3} For many make themselves compliant with the wishes of their parents only where the command is not grievous or inconvenient. But, on the other hand, this one thing ought to be considered by children—that whoever may be their parents, they have been allotted to them by the providence of God, who by his appointment makes children subject to their parents.

In all things, therefore, that they may not refuse anything, however difficult or disagreeable—in all things, that in things indifferent they may give deference to the station which their parents occupy—in all things, that they may not put themselves on a footing of equality with their parents, in the way of questioning and debating, or disputing, it being always understood that conscience is not to be infringed upon. {4} He prohibits parents from exercising an immoderate harshness, lest their children should be so disheartened as to be incapable of receiving any honorable training; for we see, from daily experience, the advantage of a liberal education.


----------



## LaurieBluedorn

*R. C. H. Lenski on honor and love*

“Honor is the form love assumes toward those who are above us by God.”
R. C. H. Lenski (1864-1936), The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles to the Galatians to the Ephesians and to the Philippians, page 647, commenting on Ephesians 6:2


----------



## Tripel

A few thoughts (some may be more my opinion as opposed to biblical prinicple)

Despite what the law says, there is not clear cut point when a child becomes an adult. Many factors are at play including maturity level, financial independence, and age.
If a child is still living under the roof of his parents and/or the financial support of his parents, he should submit to their authority (i.e. obey). 
Once a child reaches adulthood, he is the head of his own household
Obedience only comes into play when there are clearly defined roles of authority and submission. If an adult chooses not to do what his parents ask, it is not an act of _dis_obedience. Obedience has nothing to do with it because there is no longer that authoritative relationship. At this point, it's just the son/daughter choosing a different way.
Parents should always be honored, regardless of whether they still have authority. That does not mean you have to do what they say/suggest/ask, but it _does_ mean that you need to treat them with respect and love.


----------



## LaurieBluedorn

*John Gill on fathers and children*

Ephesians 6:1-4

Verse 1. Children, obey your parents in the Lord. The persons whose duty this is, "children," are such of every sex, male and female, and of every age, and of every state and condition; and though the true, legitimate, and immediate offspring of men may be chiefly respected, yet not exclusive of spurious [illegitimate] children, and adopted ones, and of children-in-law; and the persons to whom obedience from them is due, are not only real and immediate parents, both father and mother, but such who are in the room of parents, as step-fathers, step-mothers, guardians, nurses, &c. and all who are in the ascending line, as grandfathers, grandmothers, &c. to these, children should be subject and obedient in all things lawful, just, and good; in everything that is not sinful and unlawful, by the word of God; and in things indifferent, as much as in them lies, and even in things which are difficult to perform: and this obedience should be hearty and sincere, and not merely verbal, and in show and appearance, nor mercenary; and should be joined with gratitude and thankfulness for past favours: and it should be "in the Lord"; which may be considered either as a limitation of the obedience, that it should be in things that are agreeable to the mind and will of the Lord; or as an argument to it, because it is the command of the Lord, and is well pleasing in his sight, and makes for his glory, and therefore should be done for his sake:

for this is right; it appears to be right by the light of nature, by which the very Heathens have taught it; and it is equitable from reason that so it should be; and it is just by the law of God, which commands nothing but what is holy, just, and good.

Verse 2. Honour thy father and mother. This explains who parents are, and points at some branches of obedience due unto them; for they are not only to be loved, and to be feared, and reverenced, their corrections to be submitted to, offenses against them to be acknowledged, their tempers to be bore with, and their infirmities covered; but they are to be honoured in thought, word, and gesture; they are to be highly thought of and esteemed; they are to be spoken to, and of, very honourably, and with great veneration and to be behaved to in a very respectful manner; and they are to be relieved, assisted, and maintained in comfortable way when aged, and in necessitous circumstances; and which may be chiefly designed. So the Jews explain dwbk, "the honour" due to parents, by, &c. lykam, "giving them food, drink," and "clothing," unloosing their shoes, and leading them out and in {x}. Compare with this 1Ti 5:4,17; see Gill on "Mt 15:4";

which is the first commandment with promise: it is the fifth commandment in the decalogue, but the first that has a promise annexed to it: it is reckoned by the Jews {y} the weightiest of the weightiest commands of the law; and the reward bestowed on it, is length of days, as follows.

Verse 3. That it may be well with thee. In this world, and that which is to come; see De 5:16. The Jews {z} say,

“there are four things, which if a man does, he eats the fruit of them in this world, and the capital part remains for him in the world to come; and they are these; "honouring father and mother," doing acts of beneficence, making peace between a man and his neighbour, and learning of the law, which answers to them all.”

And thou mayest live long on the earth: length of days is in itself a blessing; and though men’s days cannot be lengthened beyond God’s purpose and decree; and though obedient children do not always live long; yet disobedience to parents often brings the judgments of God on children, so that they die not a common death, 2Sa 18:14 Pr 30:17. On those words in De 32:47, the Jews {a} have this paraphrase;

“because it is your life, this is honouring father and mother; and through this thing ye shall prolong your days," this is beneficence.”

It may be observed, that the words in this promissory part are not the same as in the Decalogue, where they stand thus, "that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee," Ex 20:12, referring to the land of Canaan; for the law in the form of it, in which it was delivered by Moses, only concerned the people of the Jews; wherefore to suit this law, and the promise of it, to others, the apostle alters the language of it.

Verse 4. And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath. Neither by words; by unjust and, unreasonable commands; by contumelious and reproachful language; by frequent and public chidings, and by indiscreet and passionate expressions: nor by deeds; preferring one to another; by denying them the necessaries of life; by not allowing them proper recreation; by severe and cruel blows, and inhuman usage; by not giving them suitable education; by an improper disposal of them in marriage; and by profusely spending their estates, and leaving nothing to them: not but that parents may, and ought to correct and rebuke their children; nor are they accountable to them for their conduct; yet they should take care not to provoke them to wrath, because this alienates their minds from them, and renders their instructions and corrections useless, and puts them upon sinful practices; wrath lets in Satan, and leads to sin against God; and indeed it is difficult in the best of men to be angry and not sin; see Col 3:21. Fathers are particularly mentioned, they being the heads of families, and are apt to be too severe, as mothers too indulgent.

But bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord; instructing them in the knowledge of divine things, setting them good examples, taking care to prevent their falling into bad company, praying with them, and for them, bringing them into the house of God, under the means of grace, to attend public worship; all which, under a divine blessing, may be very useful to them; the example of Abraham is worthy of imitation, Ge 18:19, and the advice of the wise man deserves attention, Pr 22:6.


----------



## seajayrice

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.


----------



## LaurieBluedorn

*A Modernization and Updating of a Selection of Gouge's Work Of Domestical Duties*

“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.” — John 10:1

The following is a *modernization and updating of a selection from*:

Of Domestical Duties, Fifth Treatise, Duties of Children, by William Gouge, London, 1622.
Regarding Parents’ Consent to the Marriage of Their Offspring

That offspring ought to have their parents’ consent to their marriage is evident beyond all question. Consider the following reasons:

1. God himself has given us this pattern: He first brought the woman to the man (Gen 2:22)

Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. — Genesis 2:22

By this God shows that he who gave human existence to the woman had jurisdiction to give her in marriage, which jurisdiction is now delegated to the parents because, under God, offspring now receive their human existence from them. In this case parents stand in God’s place, and function as God’s agent to join their offspring in marriage.

2. God has given explicit laws concerning this point.

a. The general moral law, which is the foundation for all other duties of offspring.

“Honor your father and your mother.” — Exodus 20:12; Deuteronomy 5:16; Matthew 15:4; 19:19; Mark 7:10; 10:19; Luke 18:20; Ephesians 6:2

b. The jurisdiction and directive which God has laid upon parents – to give their daughters to husbands, and to take wives for their sons – has the force of a law to bind offspring from taking wives for themselves or giving themselves to husbands without or against their parents’ consent.

“Nor shall you make marriages with them. You shall not give your daughter to their son, nor take their daughter for your son.” — Deuteronomy 7:3 (Compare Exodus 34:25; Joshua 23:12; Judges 3:6; 1 Kings 11:2; Ezra 9:2; Nehemiah 13:23-27; 2 Corinthians 6:14-17)

c. This law was not limited to the Jews only, but as a branch of the moral law it is for all men, and it is particularly pressed upon Christians.

But if any man [= the protector**] thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virgin [= the protected**], if she is past the flower of youth [= of full marriageable age], and thus it must be [= there is no technical restraint], let him [= the protector] do what he wishes [/chooses]. He does not sin [to consent]; let them marry. 37 Nevertheless he [= the protector] who stands steadfast in his heart, having no necessity [= no compelling obligation], but has power over his own will [literally: possessing authority concerning his own choice], and has so determined in his heart that he will keep [literally: continue protecting] his virgin [= the protected], does well. 38 So then he who gives her in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better. — 1 Corinthians 7:36-38

[**Verse 37 explicitly identifies the man as the lawful protector of , and verse 38 explicitly identifies the man as the one possessing authority to give or not to give her in marriage. Men commonly married in their thirties and died in their fifties or early sixties, so frequently enough a father would die before his younger daughters were of full marriageable age. With prospect of his untimely death, a father would duly and lawfully appoint another to be protector for his daughter – ordinarily a close relative, such an uncle as protector of his niece. Hence if Paul had written “father” and “daughter,” he would likely have introduced an unnecessary confusion. Modern life expectancies somewhat obscure this otherwise obvious point. Despite the variable identity of the protector, the constant in this passage is that the man either continues to protect the virgin or he gives her to another man – her husband – to protect her. Her coverture passes from one protector to another, usually from father to husband. She is always under the jurisdiction of one man to protect her choices (Genesis 3:16; 18:12; Numbers 30:1-16; Esther 1:16-20; Romans 7:1-3; 1 Corinthians 7:39; 11:3; 7-10; 14:33-35; Ephesians 5:22-24, 33; Colossians 3:18; 1 Timothy 2:11-13; Titus 2:5; 1 Peter 3:1, 5-6). It was the serpent who isolated the perfect woman from her protector and beguiled her to make a life-determining choice on her own though affecting everyone connected to her (1 Corinthians 4:15 with 2 Corinthians 11:2-3; Galatians 1:6 with 4:17; 1 Timothy 2:14). He essentially usurped Adam’s role by introducing doubt with a question about the order and intentions of things. In 1622, an explanatory note such as this was unnecessary. There is really no ambiguity here – it is self-explanatory. Confusion and ambiguity only arise when we try to read modern culture into this Scripture.]

d. To this may be added the judicial law of a parent’s power in giving his daughter, or refusing to give her in marriage to someone who had deflowered her.

“If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay money according to the bride-price of virgins.” — Exodus 22:17

3. The practice of God’s people recorded and approved in Scripture agrees with the Law.

a. Isaac married the wife which his father provided.

So Abraham said to the oldest servant of his house, who ruled over all that he had, “Please, put your hand under my thigh, 3 and I will make you swear by the LORD, the God of heaven and the God of the earth, that you will not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I dwell; 4 but you shall go to my country and to my family, and take a wife for my son Isaac.” … Then Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah's tent; and he took Rebekah and she became his wife, and he loved her. So Isaac was comforted after his mother's death. — Genesis 24:2-4, 67

b. Jacob both obeyed his father in going to Laban’s house for a wife and also when he came to Laban to ask for his daughter from him.

Then Isaac called Jacob and blessed him, and charged him, and said to him: "You shall not take a wife from the daughters of Canaan. 2 "Arise, go to Padan Aram, to the house of Bethuel your mother's father; and take yourself a wife from there of the daughters of Laban your mother's brother. — Genesis 28:1-2

Now Jacob loved Rachel; so he said, "I will serve you seven years for Rachel your younger daughter." 19 And Laban said, "It is better that I give her to you than that I should give her to another man. Stay with me." 20 So Jacob served seven years for Rachel, and they seemed only a few days to him because of the love he had for her. 21 Then Jacob said to Laban, "Give me my wife, for my days are fulfilled, that I may go in to her." … 26 And Laban said, "It must not be done so in our country, to give the younger before the firstborn. 27 "Fulfill her week, and we will give you this one also for the service which you will serve with me still another seven years." 28 Then Jacob did so and fulfilled her week. So he gave him his daughter Rachel as wife also. — Genesis 29:18-21, 26-28

c. Though Samson saw a daughter of the Philistines which pleased him well, yet he would not marry her before he had his parents’ consent.

So he went up and told his father and mother, saying, "I have seen a woman in Timnah of the daughters of the Philistines; now therefore, get her for me as a wife." — Judges 14:2

4. The testimony of God’s people shows that offspring had no custom or practice of being married without the consent of their parents.

a. Compare the words of Tamar:

“… Now therefore, please speak to the king [who was her father]; for he will not withhold me from you.” — 2 Samuel 13:13

b. Compare the oath of the Israelites

Now the men of Israel had sworn an oath at Mizpah, saying, "None of us shall give his daughter to Benjamin as a wife." — Judges 21:1

5. The ancient fathers of the Church have in their ages taught offspring this duty, and pronounced marriages of offspring without consent of parents to be unlawful.

6. Even the heathen have observed the justice of this.

a. Though Shechem loved Dinah, and had deflowered her, yet he would not marry her without the consent of his and her father.

So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, "Get me this young woman as a wife." … 6 Then Hamor the father of Shechem went out to Jacob to speak with him. — Genesis 34:4, 6

b. Ishmael had learned as much either by the instruction he had received out of Abraham’s house, or else by the light of nature: for he kept with the choice which his mother had made for him.

… his mother took a wife for him from the land of Egypt. — Genesis 21:21


----------

