Dave

Hi Charis,

I had a look at the Dictionary according to Jesus. I do not have a problem with the fact that Jesus stretches our understandings of concepts. Some people say Jesus redefined the law (eg Matthew 5:21-22), or that he redefined forgieness (eg Mattheew 5:38-42), or love (eg John 15:13). But I do not think Jesus starts using words so that they mean different things, instead he strips away all the pretence and religion and gets to the heart of the matter. His definitions are pure, not soiled by sin (and excuses).

At the same time there are some here who would like to re-define authority to suit their theology. The truth is that one can nurture without authority. One can die on a cross without authority. One can be the least without authority. You can, I agree, have authority that respects others, and authority that does not, but authority is still authority either way. It is power, and if you choose to use it, then you choose to use the power.

So, if a man has authority over his wife he can tell her what to do. Is NN and others saying that husbands only tell wives to do things that are nurturing, encouraging and loving? That would be authority, but it is not the husband who is being nurturing – he is telling the wife to be nurturing.

Or do they tell them to do things in a way that is nurturing and encouraging? This is authority, and is nurturing, but are they the same thing? No.

Or, are they saying that husbands should nurture, love and encourage their wives? Because that does not require authority, as it does not require obedience on the part of the wife.

If Jesus has truly redefined authority in the way described, then unless the Prime Minister of Australia is nurturing, I do not have to obey him (or his government) as it is not authority. But this makes a bit of a mess out of the beginning of Romans 13!