The Lord gave specific commandments to both the husband and the wife. The Lord, knowing that man’s foremost love was, by nature, himself, commanded the man to “love” his wife as Christ loved the church (Ephesians 5:25). Additionally, the Lord, knowing that a woman would not naturally desire to submit, commanded the wife to submit to her own husband, as unto the Lord. This does not suggest that she only goes along with her husband so long as she agrees with his decisions, neither does it mean that she can never offer input into the decision-making process. But, in the end, she follows her husband’s leading, trusting the Lord to bless her faithfulness.
The Bible shows us that even heathen kings know it is proper for a woman to honour her husband. Some might suggest that because these words were spoken by a heathen, the reader should discount them, but these truths are supported elsewhere in scripture. For instance, Ephesians 5:33 says that the wife is to reverence her husband. Sara honoured Abraham, even to the point of calling him lord (1 Peter 3:6). Even Abigail, who had a husband that was a man of Belial, honoured her husband when she kept David from ending Nabal’s life (1 Samuel 25:23-33). A woman who honours her husband honours the Lord. She does so because the Lord commands it, not because her husband necessarily deserves her honour.
A normal man naturally desires to protect what God has given to him. Jacob was not always the best example of godliness, but he had the right desire to protect his family from harm. The Bible reveals to us how he reacted when he could see his brother Esau approaching. Unsure of how this reunion might disintegrate into harm, Jacob divided his family with the most precious at the rear. As his family’s protector, Jacob led the caravan. If there was going to be trouble, he would have an opportunity to intervene offering his family an opportunity to flee for safety. According to Ephesians 5:25, a man’s protection should include a willingness to lay down his life for his wife. A godly man will always intercede between his home and the impending danger.
The Bible explicitly emphasizes the spiritual responsibility of providing for one’s family. Sometimes believers wrongfully distinguish between the ministry work and any so-called secular work, but both are accomplished scripturally and prayerfully to please the Lord. 1 Timothy 5:8, in the direct context, deals with the responsibilities of providing for a household member who is a widow; yet, the emphasis upon “those of his own house” broadens the scope. A man who fails or refuses to provide for the needs of his family has “denied the faith” and said to be “worse than an infidel.” That is certainly a stiff and stern rebuke. It remains the man’s responsibility to provide for his family regardless of how far societal norms move away from God’s precepts. This does not mean that the woman cannot assist in the provision (Proverbs 31:13-16) but that the responsibility still belongs to the man.
As the head of the home, the man bares the responsibility for the biblical training of every individual within his home. Yet, many homes today have no man in them. Regardless of society’s disintegration, there is never a time when the man ever relinquishes his accountability to God as the spiritual leader of his home. In today’s passage, we read of Abraham bearing his personal responsibility. According to God’s testimony, Abraham bore that responsibility well. The Lord testified that Abraham would command his children and household after him. Abraham’s family would keep the way of the LORD and would do justice and judgment. Unfortunately, the same cannot be expressed for far too many modern Christian homes. In fact, church pews are overflowing with faithful women while their men are absentee husbands expressing little to no interest in the things of God.
In the Christian warfare, there are times where strife is both necessary and right. There are things for which preachers, teachers, moms and dads, and young people need to take a stand even if taking a stand brings about conflict. These particular positions are only to take place in times where the stand is good and profitable unto men (Titus 3:8). Unfortunately, most conflict, especially amongst the religious, falls under a completely different category. It often stems from “foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law” and these strivings “are unprofitable and vain” (Titus 3:9). Before entering into conflict, the believer should question the possible profit gained in such a battle.
The Lord gave laws to protect innocent life and punish those guilty of harming others. In the midst of these laws, the Bible has a section devoted to a scenario of what might occur when two men strive with each other. During their conflict, they might hurt a woman who was with child causing her to lose her unborn child. The conflict is literal or physical and the problems resulting are literal or physical, but one cannot miss the spiritual truth disclosed. When two people strive, those not even involved in the initial conflict suffer consequences. Before two people decide to take part in strife, they would be wise to consider how their contentious behaviour affects the innocent people around them.
In Bible times, the greatest form of defence for a city was to remain strong and surrounded by high walls. If a people group or nation had high walls and a strong city, they were extremely difficult to conquer. During these times, the barriers were imperative for a strong national defense. The Lord considered this scenario as an appropriate picture to demonstrate the state of an offended brother, resulting from contention. The Lord likens this contention to the bars on a castle. Even if the enemy were capable of getting into the strong city, other obstacles existed making it impossible to break through to its core. These included the bars erected to avoid someone from entering the castle. In like manner, contention makes it almost impossible to break through to the heart of an offended brother.
As Abram and Lot travelled together, it became increasingly obvious that the multitude of their possessions would make it difficult for them to dwell together. Eventually, the herdmen of the two men began to strive with each other over the pastures for their cattle. No doubt, both groups of herdmen were primarily concerned with the well-being of their own master’s cattle. Neither was willing to compromise their own needs or wishes in order to accommodate the needs of the other group. As Abram witnessed the relationship decay, he knew that he must concede to the inevitability of separating the two groups. He asked Lot to choose another piece of land in which to dwell.
