Jethro Bodine
Member
But don't you think that's love, nonetheless? I sure do. I wonder which 'love' abide had in mind when she said wives are not commanded to love their husbands. I'd bet she was thinking in the emotional sense, not the obedient sense. Perhaps she'll tell us.hello Jethro Bodine, dirtfarmer here
Abide is correct. The love(agape) that men are commanded toward their wife is the sacrificing type. Just as Christ bears with us in our weakness and frailty, we are to be likewise toward our wife. Christ brings us alone with love and gives himself up for us, a willingness of self sacrifice, but no where are wives instructed to reciprocate that type of love to her husband.
Titus 2:4 the word love is translated from the Greek word "philandrous " which is similar to love for a friend type, not a self-sacrificing agape type love as is required from the husband.
But the valuable point here is the 'phileo' love that wives are commanded to have toward their husbands is an emotional love, whereas 'agape' love may not be, and by definition, does not have to be, and often is not. I would settle for 'phileo' kind of love in my relationship with my wife at this present time. At least I'd be in a successful worldly marriage if my wife loved me that way.
I cringe every time I hear the suggestion that wives do not have to love their husbands. Wives are going to use that to rationalize just being there in the relationship and not providing more than just respect for their husbands. Nothing wrong with a wife respecting her husband and only loving him that way, of course, but I can't think of any man I know that would settle for that alone. After all, the union of a man and his wife models the relationship Christ has with the church, and the church is indeed commanded to love her husband, Christ, with heart, mind, body, and soul. That's why it seems so inconsistent to me for people to say wives do not have to love their husbands. It doesn't model the kind of relationship Christ and his bride have.
Last edited: