The Authority of a Father over an Adult Daughter

Mishpatim lists a seemingly random set of commandments, but a closer look shows that they are not really so random. The common theme is property rights.

Exodus 21:1	Introduction
Exodus 21:2-11	Rights of a master over a slave.
Exodus 21:12-36	Rights of a person over his own life and limb
Exodus 22:1-15	Rights of the owner of livestock, crops, and other property
Exodus 22:16-17	Rights of a father and future husband over a daughter and future bride
Exodus 22:18-23:19	God's expectations of those to whom he has delegated authority
Exodus 23:20-23	God's expectations of those under delegated authority
Exodus 23:24-33	Rights of God over his property
Exodus 24:1-18	Closing

A word about the rights of fathers over their daughters...I once wrote that a father always has the right to veto his daughter's choice of husband. I am no longer so strongly convinced.

Matot (Numbers 30-32) says that a father may annul the vows of his unmarried daughter still living in his house. I have had occasion since then to learn something of the life of an unmarried daughter who is not still living in her father's house, and it seems to me that Matot should be taken literally on that point. If she left her father's house with his consent and has lived on her own for many years, then she should probably be accorded the status of a widow or divorcee, responsible for her own finances, decisions, and vows. A situation like that would have been extremely rare in ancient Hebrew culture, so there would have been no particular reason to include it.

The Price of Patriotism and Leadership

Exodus 30:12
…every man a ransom for his soul… Although the King James translators chose to put “children” here instead of “sons,” the remainder of the text is clear that males are intended. This tax was only levied against men who were able to fight. No women or children were included. The resulting count of half-shekels was no doubt used to assign the leaders of tens, hundreds, and so forth, as well as to estimate the nation’s fighting strength. Women and children were not counted, because they did not participate in combat except in the most extreme circumstances. The half-shekel was silver, representing the blood of the donor. It was a statement of patriotism, of willingness to defend Israel to the death if required.

Exodus 30:20
When they go into the tabernacle of the congregation... Bronze represents judgment, and the priests were to wash in the bronze basin before ministering before God on behalf of the people. This is the same principle in effect when Peter wrote that "judgment must begin at the house of God." The more authority one has, the more responsibility and accountability. A husband and father must undergo judgment and purification before he is fully competent to judge and purify his family. A leader must be judged and found competent before he is placed in charge of a congregation.

Girls on the Left; Boys in the River

Exodus 1:16
...if it be a son... When a woman marries, ideally she leaves her father's people and joins her husband's. Hebrew women were as accustomed to this institution as were their contemporaries. Pharaoh knew that their daughters would be much easier than their sons to assimilate into Egyptian society. If his goal was only population control, one might think Pharaoh would have been wiser to kill the girls, thereby reducing the number of Hebrews for two generations instead of only one.  However, there were three good reasons to target boys.

1. If he had been successful, then the next generation of Israelites would have been Egyptians. He would have eliminated the Hebrews forever, while dramatically increasing the number of Egyptians in the next.
2. Battles are fought by men. By God’s design, they are more likely to forcefully resist oppression.
3. As a shadow of Yeshua, Moses’ arrival was almost certainly prophesied. Pharaoh, like Herod centuries later, thought to circumvent God’s design through force.

Update January 20, 2009: This could almost make one become a conspiracist: Declining Male Fertility Linked to Water Pollution.

Historic Patriarchy vs the Mythical Idyllic Matriarchy

Patriarchy Is Just a Scheme to Enslave Women...Right?

Strength or weakness can be expressed in one's decision making process. The greater one's authority, the greater one's responsibility in making decisions. A leader may ask his followers for their opinions, but he may not ask his followers to make his decisions for him. He has the final say, and his is the ultimate responsibility for the consequences.

For example, if a man is faced with a major decision that will effect his entire family--such as buying or selling a house, changing jobs, or relocating--he should not tell his wife, "We will move if you are willing to quit your job." That would put the final decision-making authority and responsibility onto his wife. However, he can legitimately ask God to tell him what to do: "If you want us to move, then tell me by providing employment in the new location or taking away employment here."

He who wears the pants bears the burden. This was a hard lesson for me to learn, and I still need reminders now and then.

What Happened to the Ancient Peace-Loving Matriarchy?

In the prologue to Marriage, East and West, David and Vera Mace wrote:

From the Fertile Crescent…to the rocky eastern shores of Nippon…the patriarchal family reigns supreme. For full four thousand years of recorded history it has held undisputed sway. The odd and fascinating family patterns of some island peoples and hill tribes–polyandry, matrilineal descent, matrilocal marriage, and the like–have captivated the anthropologists. But these are, by comparison with the patriarchal family system, of little account in the great stream of human culture…The hereditary pattern that has dominated the human family, that has been passed down through countless generations, in East and West alike, is solidly, unvaryingly patriarchal.¹

Their conclusion was most soundly reinforced by Stephen Goldberg throughout The Inevitability of Patriarchy. He went a step further than the Maces, however, by asserting that those few exceptions are either too unstable to last more than a few generations or else they are illusions, actual patriarchies behind a few token elements of matriarchy.<sup>2

1</sup> David and Vera Mace. Marriage, East and West. Garden City, NY: Dolphin Books, 1960. 29  
² Stephen Goldberg. The Inevitability of Patriarchy. New York: William Morrow & Company, Inc., 1974.

A Priest's Covering

Leviticus 16:4 
…therefore shall he wash his flesh in water, and so put them on. A priest must wash himself before donning his robes. On the surface, this is about respect for his office and the holy things of God. At a slightly deeper level, this is about the character of a good leader. As Paul wrote to Timothy, “Lay hands suddenly on no man.” Before annointing a leader, make sure that he won’t soil the mantle of his office.

Leviticus 16:16
And he shall make an atonement for the holy place... There are several orders of priest: Melchizedek, Aaron, father, and believer. Each one is a scaled down version of the one before. The Ark with its covering—here called the mercy seat—is a model of priesthood, while the other articles of the tabernacle represent the people or spheres over which each priesthood presides. The priest made a covering (or atonement, Hebrew kafar) for the sanctuary because of the sins of the nation. So too can a father provide a degree of covering for the sins of his house. He cannot forgive their sins against God nor remove them, but he has the authority to drive off unclean spirits, to invite godly and healing spirits, and to intervene with God on behalf of his wife and children.

Spiritual Network Security

Correctly structured relationships can be thought of as a sort of spiritual network security system and headcoverings are like firewalls. A covering in the wrong place can degrade communications and a missing firewall can leave one open to attack. If a man does not properly cover his wife with authority and love, or if a woman prays or prophesies without his covering, their prayers might be hindered by the cherubim of the throne room who act as Heaven's firewall blocking packets with corrupted spiritual signatures. She will also be vulnerable to attack, because she is missing her own firewall. When she prophesies, there is a strong possibility that she is receiving packets with a spoofed source address. If a man prays or prophesies with his head covered, the covering is a like a misplaced firewall that interferes with outgoing communications. (1 Peter 3:1-7 and 1 Corinthians 11:2-16)

Divorce Is Not the Problem

Dr. Stephen Baskerville at MensNewsDaily wrote that "...until we understand that the principal threat to marriage today is not cultural but political, and that it comes not from homosexuals but from heterosexuals, we will never reverse the decline of marriage. The main destroyer of marriage, it should be obvious, is divorce. Michael McManus of Marriage Savers points out that "divorce is a far more grievous blow to marriage than today's challenge by gays." The central problem is the divorce laws."

He's right that divorce is a problem and that the divorce laws are a problem, but he is way off when he says they are the central problem. The divorce laws are terribly perverse, but that is only a symptom of a greater problem that really is cultural. Or maybe I should say spiritual. The central problem with marriage today is feminism, rebellion against God's prescribed order. The absurdities of no fault divorce, mandatory and draconian spousal maintenance and child support payments, default child custody laws, homosexual marriage, et cetera, are the logical end of rejecting the common sense of created order. In that context, divorce is actually an oft-abused remedy that God has built into his Law.

Here's my ideal solution (as of today--I might change my mind later):

1. Take marriage out of the hands of government. Do away with marriage licenses. The civil government has no legitimate role to play in deciding who may marry whom. Neither does the church.
2. Replace marriage licenses and platitudinal "vows" that no one takes seriously with real marriage contracts that must be signed by the bride, groom, and at least one senior relative of each. Two would be better. If there are no relatives available, then a spiritual mentor, such as pastor, rabbi, or priest, would do.
3. Reduce the government's role in marriage and divorce to contract enforcement.
4. Immediately eliminate government financed welfare for able-bodied adults and corporations. Gradually eliminate most other government financed welfare programs as well and eliminate the income tax to compensate. Charity is admirable and spiritually mandatory, but there's no charity at the end of a gun.
5. Institute a biblically based land and property reform. Every family gets its own land, which will be returned every fiftieth year without obligation. No land can ever be permanently sold, but can only be leased for a maximum term of fifty years. The only way that land can be permanently divided or transferred is through inheritance. Eliminate inheritance taxes. (I did say ideal and not necessarily practical, didn't I?)
6. Replace the judicial concepts of punishment and reform with restitution and removal. Scrap 95% of all laws and send all the lawyers to an internment camp on the shores of the Beaufort Sea. The ones we don't just give to old Billy, anyways. All future judges in local courts must be unpaid and must be respected and successful men of the general public.

Then I think we might be getting somewhere. ;-)

Scientists Discover that Boys and Girls Are Different

AP medical writer, Maria Cheng, tells us that women may need different heart treatment than men, because they are fundamentally different. "There is a big question mark over why this is happening," [Dr. Eva] Swahn said. "We want there to be equality between the genders, but that doesn't mean that women and men should get the same treatment."

In other words, no matter how many times we are told that men and women are the same, they aren't. Pretending otherwise has real consequences.

Like it or not, we all have a job to do

What happens to a partnership if the partners continually pull in opposite directions? If one partner pulls while the other sits? If both partners sit on their arses? The relationship fails. Someone (or both) gives up.

Here’s the problem, as I see it, with marriage: most men don’t know how to be men and most women don’t know how to be women. Some relationships can be saved by just one of the partners doing their part; the other eventually comes around. That doesn’t work all the time, though. Many people will get really tired of carrying all the weight, and eventually they’ll just stop. They’ll take their ball and go home, maybe waiting for a better, saner game on some other day. They’re the John Galts of marriage.

Men, you need to learn how to be men. Not men in touch with their feminine side, and not men who bully their way through everything. Men with strength and humility. Burn your pink polos and your black sabbath t’s, too. (Metaphorically, of course. There's nothing particularly wrong with pink polos or Black Sabbath T-shirts.) Then you need to hold the line. Don’t back down. Don’t give in to political correctness. Don’t let the zeitgeist (or your wife) set your rules.

Women, you need to straighten up right now. Lose the tattoos, the whorish dress, and the attitudes, and take some responsibility for yourself and especially for your family. I don’t care if you don’t like it. I don’t care if it makes you sick. Submit to your fathers and husbands. Now.

Feminism's Unintended Consequences

At Eternal Bachelor, Duncan Idaho commented on an Independent News article:

When you take into account housing benefit and things like not having to pay Council Tax, prescriptions, etc, single mothers tend to have more income than single people and often more than a couple who both work full-time.

If you reward skank behaviour rather than punish it, you will encourage skank behaviour. Obviously.

This is both good and bad. The article states,

An extensive study published today reveals that girls as young as 13 are making a "career choice" by deciding to have children, since they see parenting as preferable to working in a dead-end job.

Most of the subjects of the report are not actually children--or at least they shouldn't be acting like children. By the time a girl is fifteen years old, she should be behaving like an adult and she should have been well prepared by her parents to be a wife and mother. Fifteen is past childhood and on the border of womanhood. A nineteen year old should be fully a woman. That's when she really should be having children.

At least these young women acknowledge that motherhood is a better career choice than desk-hood. But notice that I said wife and mother. Rampant bastardy and the subsequent rises in crime and socialism are products of modern feminism. Follow this ironic chain of unintended consequences: chivalry -> feminism -> licentiousness -> bastardy -> poverty and maltreatment of women. The feminazis actually wanted the process to go from bastardy back to more feminism and the further dissolution of the family. Unfortunately for them, you get what you pay for. The family is the foundation of a healthy society. If you lose that, you lose everything else.

Duncan Idaho essentially said the same,

It also shows that many girls do want to be full-time mothers rather than work full-time in a dreary office or factory. It's feminism they have to thank for that. Fifty-years ago, before feminists drove women in to the workplace, it would have been easily possible - and encouraged - for a girl to get married in her late teens and have a far more worthwhile career of running a home and raising children. Feminists didn't think women would want that - or, in some cases, knew women want that but decided that they, feminists, had more right to dictate what other women wanted than those women themselves. The more single mothers, the more cost to taxpayers, meaning it gets harder and harder for the few remaining traditional women to be full-time mothers and housewives.

So, whilst females used to marry young and have children, now many do the same but without the marriage bit, because the increase in the welfare state means the government can support a stay at home mother but the average man can't. So women who want to be full-time mothers often have no choice but to effectively make the government the daddy. This makes the welfare bill rise further, starting a chain reaction whereby more girls will have to have kids out of wedlock just to be able to be a full time mother. On and on it will go until the welfare kittie is empty.

And then everything falls apart, and hopefully we can forget about all this nonsense and get on with family life the way God intended it to be.

Happy Fathers Day. You're worthless.

I just watched Animal Planet's Most Extreme: Dads. By the end of the show, I was really feeling how great it is to be a man. Maybe their list of top ten animal dads will explain why:

10. Lion - Defends his children.
9. Antechinus Mouse - Mates nonstop.
8. Golden Jackal - Gives his food to his children.
7. Giant waterbug - Cares for the eggs.
6. Rhea - Cares for the eggs.
5. Stickleback Fish - Cares for the eggs.
4. Jacana Bird - Polyandrous and lets female kill his young.
3. Bull Frog - Cares for the young.
2. Penguin - Makes milk for the young.
1. Seahorse - Gestates and gives birth to young.

Number 10 is a pretty good pick. The lion is strong and fierce. He's number ten because he defends his family and territory from predators and intruders. So far so good.

Number 9 is OK. Hyper-potency is something to be proud of. I guess. It's not bad at least. Well, sometimes anyway.

Number 8 is pretty respectable. You have to respect a man who sacrifices for his children. We're not doing too badly yet.

Number 7 is...well, he's mom. He made the list because he does things that women traditionally do in a human household. Same with number 6 and 5 and 4. They all hang around the nest and care for the eggs. If that wasn't bad enough, the Jacana lets any old female come along and kill all his eggs before laying some more in his nest. He has no way of knowing whether this batch shares his genes or not. He's a polyandrous sex slave. And these traits make them great dads how? I suppose they're great dads for being bugs, birds, and fish, but Fathers Day is about human fathers, isn't it?

Number 3 is another homemaker, only he sticks around to care for the tadpoles, too. Yeah! Another Mr. Mom!

Number 2 not only cares for the young, but he makes a milk-like substance for them too.  Swap to a human Dad breast-feeding his baby. Isn't that sweet? Are you sick, yet?

Number 1 has an internal pouch into which the female lays her eggs. They gestate inside of him, they hatch, and he gives birth. Animal Planet says he is number one because he is both mother and father.

Now, dads, don't you feel special? Now you know that defending your children and sacrificing for them is the least of your good traits. Emasculating yourself and doing everything you can to turn yourself into a woman is your only hope of really measuring up.  Fathers are worthless except when they are able to emulate mothers.