My title for this
part of the review is “Who Speaks For God?” which flows
from this statement I made in Part One:
In several places, the author asserts that God speaks to us through
other people, such as people in our small group Bible studies, our
pastors and to husbands through their wives. I know of no biblical
support for this principle. In fact, I can think of several places in
the Bible where we are warned against this and where we are informed
that the only authority through which God speaks is His Word.
So the question I am asking is, does God really speak to us
through other people, and, in particular, does He speak to husbands
through their wives? Should men be seeking the will of God in the
words of their wives? Is that reliable? Is that wise? Or does it
fly in the face of what the Bible actually teaches about authority,
leadership, and revelation?
On
page 124 of the book, Pastor LaPierre begins a section entitled
“Submission Does Not Mean That Husbands Do Not Listen To Their
Wives.” In the following paragraphs he gives his opinion that “God
can use His Holy Spirit to speak to husbands through their wives.”
I have no doubt that God can
do this, but there is no evidence that God actually does this, and
there are no examples or commands in Scripture for a man to listen to
his wife unless God, Himself, separately confirmed the
prophecy or, the case of Abraham and Sara, in which God specifically told a
man to do the bidding of his wife. In addition, the whole idea contradicts the principle of the man as the leader and head of his home.
Because the author is unable to provide any Scripture to support his
assertion that a husband should listen to (obey?) his wife, he gives,
instead, examples from his own life where his wife's advice turned
out to be correct. Can you see why this is problematic? We cannot
test whether something is the voice of God based on whether it turns
out well. Our assessment of whether the outcome is “good”
may not be the same as God's will. God may want us to go through hard
times or to suffer. Outcomes are a terrible way to determine God's
will or whether God has spoken.
Even unbelievers, who do not have the Holy Spirit, can give good
advice. A wife is no different. Some of her advice may be good, other
times, it may be bad. The simple fact that she is a wife does not
mean her husband should value her advice and there is no reason at
all to assume that God is speaking through her. Why would God speak
to her when he could speak directly to the head, by means of His
Word? God's Word is the ONLY test for authority. Before the
Reformation, there were false teachers saying the Pope or the
Church could speak for God. That was a doctrine of demons, as we know the Bible itself is the only authority and is sufficient for all
our faith and life. A wife NEVER enters into the revelatory chain
from God to man.
The
author gives, as an example from Scripture, the story of the wife of
Pilate telling her husband that she was warned in a dream that Pilate
should have nothing to do with Jesus (pgs. 124-125). LaPierre claims that
her dream was from God, even though the Bible does not say this. It
could have been based on her feelings that Jesus was simply not
guilty of any crime. Being correct does not make her a prophet.
During the times of Jeremiah, there were other prophets advising the
king, claiming that God was speaking through them. Was there a way
for the king to have known that Jeremiah was the true prophet? Yes.
By the written Word of God. Jeremiah was proclaiming the Law of God
to the king, and exposing the violations and punishments that God was
sending. The false prophets were speaking pleasant words without
regard to the Word. The Word is always the test of whether a “word”
is from God.
God
could speak to a
husband through the grocery store clerk or through the dog. But He
doesn't. God has chosen to speak to us through His Word. The Holy
Spirit guides us to understand and apply the Word, but the Holy
Spirit does not give special revelation, outside of the Word of God,
to wives or any other advisers. To make such a claim is unbiblical.
It goes against the entire counsel of God and the history of the Church's understanding of how God speaks to His people.
If your wife gives good counsel, great! That does NOT equate her
words with the words of God. Some wives give rotten counsel and no
husband is required to seek his wife's advice, just because she is
his wife.
In the book, Pastor LaPierre shares that his wife wanted him to take
the job (his current pastoring job in Washington) and it has
turned out to be a good move. He claims this proves it was from God.
What if a man takes counsel from his wife and it turns out to be
horrible? Does that prove men should never listen to their wives? Of
course not. I once told my husband to turn at the wrong place. Does
that prove something? Does the outcome determine whether the choice
was or was not based upon the voice of God? It is from God if it
comes from and agrees with his Word. PERIOD. That is the only test
for whether it comes from God.
God's
Word has authority and must
be obeyed. The words of wives do not carry such authority, regardless
of whether they are “confirmed” by the Senior Pastor (see pg.
125), or any other person. It would seem, from Pastor LaPierre's own
comments about the move to Washington, that even he is not settled
about whether it was his choice or hers.
On page 125 he says the following:
I would like to share about a time I believe God really used Katie
to direct me, and it's when I was an associate pastor at Grace
Baptist Church in Lemoore, California. Although it was a wonderful
season of life for me, Katie found it difficult because she thought
God had gifted me to shepherd my own church. The senior pastor shared
Katie's thoughts, so she had confirmation from him as well....
Looking
back, Katie's encouragement is one of the only
(emphasis added) reasons I was able to make the move.... I invite you
to recognize that it was trusting that God was using Katie that
allowed me to become the senior pastor of Woodland Christian Church.
From his description, she is the one leading here, she is the one
guiding and directing him to move to Washington. He didn't want to
go. He didn't feel that God was leading him away from a good thing.
Instead of just telling him, the leader of the family to move, God
instead spoke to his subordinate, his wife, and to another man, the
senior pastor. But a few pages later, he back tracks a bit on this
by trying to say that his wife expressed her opinion, but he made the
decision for himself; that he was leading, and she was following.
Here is what he wrote on page 129:
Though
Katie encouraged me to take the position, she could see I was very
hesitant. I remember her clearly saying, “If this moves ends up
being a mistake and we went there because of me, I couldn't live
with that. The only way I can feel good about this decision is if you
(emphasis in original) make it. I respect your leadership, and I
believe God will direct you. Whatever you decide, I will support
you.
Very
noble on her part, to let him know that she wants to move, that the
senior pastor agrees with her, even though she KNOWS her husband
doesn't want to do it, but if he actually takes her advice, she
doesn't want to be responsible for the outcome. She respects his
leadership? Really? She knows he was not leading them to move to
Washington, that his leadership is keeping them in California. She
does not respect his leadership. She is leading from the rear. Pastor
LaPierre has said in previous pages that one of the only reasons he
made the move was because of her encouragement. He cites no other
reasons at all. So she gets what she alone wanted, but she announces
in advance that if it doesn't work, she is not to be blamed. This is what LaPierre calls "putting your husband in a position to lead." Apparently it means telling him what you want him to do, then saying, "But it's your decision, and if you blow it, I'm not responsible." This is
disturbing. Deeply disturbing. To advance this type of behavior in a
book aimed at wives is beyond irresponsible.
The closest the author comes to a proof text for his assertion that
husbands should listen to their wives and that God speaks to husbands
through their wives is the reference on page 124 to Genesis 2:18 which says:
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I
will make him an help meet for him.
Did God intend for this meet help to communicate God's will to the
man? What if Eve had said to Adam, “I know you like working in the
garden here, but I really feel that your full potential would be
better reached outside of this garden.”? Does anyone believe that
God would choose the woman over the man as the recipient of His
instructions? Wouldn't it make more sense for God to tell Adam
directly if he wanted him to exercise dominion in another location?
It sounds ridiculous to me to consider such a thing.
And then, making sure we understand that God DOESN'T intend to work
around the husband and give secret instructions or wisdom to the
wife, God says this to the man after he eats from the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil:
And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of
thy wife, (emphasis added) and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee,
saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for they sake;
in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life. Gen 3:17
God directly rebuked Adam for listening to and following the desires
of his wife. Why didn't God just say, “Because you ate of the
tree...”? The pattern we see being established in Genesis is
God leading a family through the husband. There is no time in history,
since the Garden of Eden, where God has changed this pattern of
dealing directly with men, rather than using wives as a conduit. In
the New Testament, Paul explains that the head of every man is Christ
and the head of every woman is the man, confirming the order
established by God in the beginning. (1 Cor. 11: 3) To suggest,
endorse, imply, or teach that God sometimes speaks to the wife
instead is to turn this entire order upside down.
To suggest to wives that God speaks through them is unbiblical. It
opposes the very design of God for marriage, where the husband is the
head, the Christ type, and the wife is under him, the Church type.
I'm not saying, nor does the Bible say that a man is forbidden from
seeking the opinion or counsel of a wife. But the Bible does not command it,
and her advice to him is no more the "voice of God" than any other
advice. He can give her opinions whatever weight and value that he
believes is appropriate. And if he chooses to never consult her, he
does not sin.
How did churchianity change the role of a wife from that of a help,
meet for her husband, to one of trusted adviser and prophet of God?
It frightens me to see how feminism has infiltrated the elect.
