CHAPTER 3

When Desire Becomes Control

The Hidden Power Struggle

“...and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” (Genesis 3:16 KJV)

There is a battle in marriage that does not always shout. Sometimes it whispers. It sits at the dinner table, goes to church and smiles while keeping score. It calls itself “helping”, “submission” or “keeping the peace”. Yet appearances can deceive us. What looks like rebellion may be the courage to speak truth, while what looks like submission may be agreement with wrongdoing.

Ruth’s story in Chapter 2 invited us to bring sorrow before God, seek refuge beneath His wings and take the faithful step available today. That same trust matters when marriage becomes a struggle over whose will prevails. Having considered the sorrow described in Genesis 3:16, we now turn to another part of the verse: “thy desire shall be to thy husband.” What happens when a legitimate longing for love, security, partnership or intimacy becomes a demand to control?

An equally important question follows: how does a godly wife distinguish between attempting to control her husband and courageously intervening when something is genuinely wrong?

The stories of Abigail, Zipporah and Sapphira help us examine that distinction. Each woman faced a serious situation within her marriage and made a consequential decision. Abigail intervened to prevent bloodshed. Zipporah acted during a crisis involving circumcision and covenant responsibility. Sapphira knowingly agreed with her husband in deception. Their stories call us to exercise discernment as we seek to obey God within marriage.

Holiness requires us to recognise when to release a preference, when to act and when to refuse participation in sin.

When Good Desire Becomes a Demand

The Hebrew word translated “desire” in Genesis 3:16 is teshuqah (תְּשׁוּקָה). It appears only three times in the Hebrew Bible: in Genesis 3:16, where the woman’s desire is towards her husband; in Genesis 4:7, where sin’s desire is towards Cain; and in Song of Solomon 7:10, where the woman says, “I am my beloved’s, and his desire is toward me.” Its precise meaning in Genesis 3:16 has been debated, and its few occurrences must be read in their respective contexts.1

In 1975, Susan T. Foh argued that the parallel wording of Genesis 3:16 and Genesis 4:7 points to a desire to control or master the husband.2 Her interpretation has influenced later readers, but it remains disputed. Other interpretations emphasise longing, attraction or relational desire. We should therefore distinguish the meaning of the word from a particular reading of the passage: the Hebrew word teshuqahdoes not, by itself, mean “control”.

Genesis 3:16 presents the relationship between husband and wife within God’s words about life after the Fall. Whatever conclusion we reach about the precise meaning of “desire”, Scripture elsewhere makes clear that sin can corrupt what we want and how we pursue it (James 4:1–3). That truth gives us firm ground for examining the power struggles that can develop in marriage.

A desire to be loved can become a demand. The search for security can become control. A desire to help can become management, while the wish for order becomes domination. Communication turns into interrogation, and a longing for spiritual leadership becomes constant criticism: Why do you not pray? Why do you not lead? Why do you not read your Bible? Why are you not like that husband?

The original desire may be legitimate even when the method becomes destructive. Asking for affection, shared responsibility, honest communication or prayer is not inherently controlling. Control emerges when we use pressure, punishment or manipulation to make another person comply. The question is not simply what we want, but how we respond when our spouse does not give the answer we hoped for.

Genesis 2:18 describes the woman as “an help meet for him”. The Hebrew expression is ʿezer kenegdô, commonly understood as a helper corresponding to the man. The noun ʿezer means “help” or “helper”, and Scripture also uses it of God’s help: “My help cometh from the LORD” (Psalm 121:2). The word itself does not imply inferiority or the absence of a voice. The woman was created to be a corresponding partner, able to bring strength, wisdom and help to the relationship.

After the Fall, even our strengths can become distorted. A woman gifted to help may begin to supervise every detail. Encouragement becomes constant correction, discernment gives way to suspicion, and organising becomes a refusal to let anyone else act differently. Nurturing can become mothering her husband. She may believe, I am only helping, while he hears, Nothing I do is good enough.

In some marriages, a painful cycle develops: she feels insecure and increases her efforts to control; he feels controlled and withdraws; his withdrawal deepens her insecurity, and she presses harder. Each response reinforces the next. Recognising the pattern can help both spouses examine their conduct, but neither is excused from responsibility for the choices they make.

The effects of Genesis 3 touch us all. Control rarely introduces itself by name, so we need to recognise the forms it can take.

Sometimes control appears as mothering: a continuous stream of reminders, corrections and instructions that slowly changes partnership into parenting. A reminder or correction is not automatically wrong. The problem is a persistent pattern whose message is, You cannot function properly without my supervision. A husband is not another child.

At other times, control becomes scorekeeping. Paul says that love “thinketh no evil” (1 Corinthians 13:5). The Greek verb logizomai can mean to reckon or take into account; in this context, many translations express the thought as not keeping a record of wrongs.4 A marriage can become an accounting department in which each spouse tallies who initiated intimacy, apologised last, cooked more often or sacrificed most. Past actions become weapons in the next disagreement. This does not forbid honest discussion of unequal responsibilities or recording harm when accountability or safety requires it. The issue is using a ledger of grievances to punish or gain power.

Control may also take the form of withdrawal as punishment. Healthy space during conflict communicates a need and an intention to return: “I am overwhelmed. Please give me thirty minutes, and then I want us to continue this conversation.” Punitive silence seeks compliance: “You will feel my absence until you give me what I want.” A pause can help a couple regain calm; withholding connection to force an outcome can damage trust.

One particularly deceptive form is spiritual pressure. A wife may say, “God told me you should...” or “I prayed and God showed me what is wrong with you.” She may invoke her pastor’s words or repeatedly insist that her husband become “the priest of the home”. Spiritual concerns deserve honest conversation, but claiming divine authority for our preferred outcome can silence a spouse’s conscience and voice. The Holy Spirit does not need a wife to impersonate Him. We can pray faithfully while allowing God to do the work of conviction.

Yet this raises a serious question. What if something really is wrong?

Abigail and the Wisdom to Intervene

Recognising control must not make us afraid to respond to genuine wrongdoing. Simplistic teaching can leave a wife uncertain when her husband threatens the children’s wellbeing, acts recklessly with money, struggles with addiction or practises deception. She may wonder whether speaking or intervening would make her controlling.

Not necessarily. Biblical submission does not require moral blindness. Helping does not mean enabling. Respect does not require dishonesty, and peace does not require pretending. Scripture gives us an extraordinary example in Abigail.

“Now the name of the man was Nabal; and the name of his wife Abigail: and she was a woman of good understanding, and of a beautiful countenance: but the man was churlish and evil in his doings”  (1 Samuel 25:3 (KJV)

Scripture contrasts Abigail’s good understanding with Nabal’s harsh and evil conduct. The Hebrew adjective translated “churlish” is qāšeh, which can mean hard, harsh or difficult. His own servant later describes him as “such a son of Belial, that a man cannot speak to him” (1 Samuel 25:17). The household regards him as unapproachable, and his conduct has now placed them in danger.

David’s men had protected Nabal’s shepherds while they tended the flocks (1 Samuel 25:15–16). During sheep-shearing, David sent messengers requesting provisions. Nabal answered with insults: “Who is David? and who is the son of Jesse?” (1 Samuel 25:10).  David became furious, armed his men and set out intending to kill the males of Nabal’s household.

A servant brought the danger to Abigail’s attention, explaining both David’s protection of the shepherds and Nabal’s response. There are households where everyone learns to navigate one person’s temperament: Do not tell Dad yet. Wait until he is in a good mood. Do not mention money. Let Mum handle it. When a family must constantly arrange its life around one person’s anger or unpredictability, the problem needs to be acknowledged and addressed.

Scripture says, “Then Abigail made haste” (1 Samuel 25:18). She gathered food, prepared provisions and sent servants ahead. Then comes the controversial sentence: “But she told not her husband Nabal” (1 Samuel 25:19).

Was this rebellion or control? The purpose of her action matters. Abigail was not trying to force Nabal to become the husband she wanted. She was not punishing or humiliating him. She was responding to an immediate crisis created by his foolishness. More than that, she intervened not only for Nabal but for David.

When Abigail meets David, she tells him that the Lord has withheld him “from coming to shed blood, and from avenging thyself with thine own hand” (1 Samuel 25:26). Nabal was behaving foolishly, but David’s response was also wrong. In his anger, the future king was preparing to kill the men of Nabal’s household. Abigail stood between her husband’s folly and David’s threatened violence, speaking wisdom into the crisis.

David responds, “Blessed be the LORD God of Israel, which sent thee this day to meet me”, and adds, “blessed be thy advice” (1 Samuel 25:32–33). He recognises God’s restraint through Abigail’s arrival and words. Her intervention cannot fairly be reduced to a wife refusing her husband’s leadership. God used her wisdom to prevent bloodshed.6

Here we see the kind of strong, discerning help a spouse can bring: Abigail acts for the household’s protection and speaks truth to a man preparing to commit violence.

Abigail’s wisdom also appears in her timing. When she returns, Nabal is holding a feast and is very drunk. Scripture says that “she told him nothing, less or more, until the morning light” (1 Samuel 25:36). She waits until he is sober and then tells him what happened. Her urgent action is followed by truthful disclosure when the moment is suitable. Not every conflict can be resolved tonight, and an intoxicated or threatening person may be unable to hear what needs to be said.

A wife today may face reckless financial decisions, excessive drinking, anger that dominates the household or a serious problem involving the children that her husband refuses to address. Abigail’s example encourages her to respond with wisdom rather than vengeance. If children are endangered, they need protection. Destructive financial behaviour or addiction may require qualified help. Violence or coercive control calls for safety and appropriate professional support. A wife need not wait for an unsafe person’s agreement before seeking help, and she should not put herself or her children at risk merely to secure a conversation. Trusted people must be allowed to help; isolation can deepen the danger.

Her example helps us examine both our purpose and our response. Am I trying to force my husband to become the person I want, or to respond faithfully to what is happening? Will my action protect someone or punish him? Am I willing to speak truth when it is safe and appropriate? A wife may warn, establish boundaries and seek help, but she cannot manufacture repentance. Abigail acted within the responsibility available to her; the story does not say that she changed Nabal’s character.

Scripture records that God later judged Nabal (1 Samuel 25:38). That outcome belongs to this particular narrative; it is not a promise that every difficult marriage will resolve in the same way. Our calling is to act faithfully, not to determine another person’s response or God’s timing.

Zipporah and Neglected Responsibility

Abigail’s story concerns an urgent threat to her household. Zipporah’s brings us to a different kind of crisis, recorded in one of the most difficult passages in Exodus. Moses has received his calling and is travelling towards Egypt when “the LORD met him, and sought to kill him” (Exodus 4:24). Zipporah circumcises her son, and the account then says, “So he let him go” (Exodus 4:25–26).

The Hebrew pronouns leave questions about who was threatened and whose “feet” are mentioned, while Zipporah’s words have prompted several explanations.7 We must acknowledge those uncertainties before applying the story. What the narrative explicitly shows is that she circumcises her son and the threat ceases. Genesis 17:9–14 identifies circumcision as the sign of God’s covenant with Abraham and his descendants.8 Against that background, a common reading understands the episode as a crisis concerning an uncircumcised son within Moses’ household. The passage does not tell us why circumcision had not taken place or explain how responsibility for that omission had been shared.

On that reading, the man called to lead God’s covenant people also faced an unresolved covenant responsibility within his own family.

Moses had encountered the burning bush, heard God’s voice and been commissioned to confront Pharaoh. Yet the journey includes a grave crisis within his own household. His story gives ministry families reason to examine the relationship between public calling and private obedience. We may preach, lead worship or counsel others while leaving difficult matters at home unattended. Ministry cannot substitute for faithfulness in the relationships and responsibilities closest to us.

Anointing does not exempt us from obedience.

Whatever questions remain about the episode, Zipporah acts and the immediate threat ends. Her action gives us reason to reflect on responding faithfully when a serious responsibility remains unattended. This is an application of the story, not a detailed account of her motives, which the text does not explain. Nor does it require a wife to take over everything her husband neglects; carrying every responsibility alone can create another unhealthy pattern.

A wife does not have to suspend her own obedience while waiting for her husband to act. She can pray, read Scripture with the children and seek wise counsel for herself. Where necessary, she can obtain advice about protecting essential finances, establish boundaries around addiction or seek safety from abuse. Such steps should be guided by the actual circumstances and appropriate help, rather than by a wish to direct every part of her husband’s life.

That is not necessarily control. Sometimes it is responsibility.

Zipporah declares, “Surely a bloody husband art thou to me” (Exodus 4:25). The Hebrew phrase ḥatan damim is often rendered “bridegroom of blood”, but its precise significance remains debated. We should not build a doctrine on an explanation the passage does not supply. Its account of her action and the cessation of the threat is clear enough to remind us that faithfulness may require a decisive response.

Sometimes holiness acts.

The examples of Abigail and Zipporah do not give us unrestricted authority over a spouse. They cannot justify constant surveillance, secret control of every financial decision, public humiliation or recruiting the children into a marital dispute. Neither story supports announcing, “God showed me your problem, so I am taking over.” These are exceptional episodes involving threatened bloodshed and a crisis associated with covenant responsibility. Their seriousness must not be used to turn an ordinary disagreement into an emergency.

Discernment asks whether we are addressing genuine wrongdoing or harm or simply resisting a choice we would have made differently. That question can expose control while leaving room for honest discussion and shared decisions.

Sapphira and Complicity

Alongside the courage to act, we need the courage to refuse agreement with wrongdoing. Acts 5 introduces “a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife” (Acts 5:1). They sell property and retain part of the proceeds. Peter makes clear that they were entitled to keep the property and to decide how to use the money (Acts 5:4). Their sin was deception: they presented part as though it were the whole price.9 Sapphira knew of the arrangement; Scripture says, “his wife also being privy to it” (Acts 5:2).

When Peter later questions Sapphira, she confirms the false account. He asks, “How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord?” (Acts 5:9). She is questioned separately and held accountable for her own participation.10

There is such a thing as ungodly marital unity. Agreement does not make a decision righteous.

Husband and wife should seek agreement in truth, bringing their decisions under God’s authority. Ananias and Sapphira agreed, but their agreement was sinful. A wife should not lie because her husband asks her to, and a husband should not sin because his wife pressures him. Marriage does not create a private morality separate from the Word of God.

Sapphira’s opportunity to tell the truth makes the lesson particularly searching. She could have answered honestly, but she continued the deception. Submission does not remove moral responsibility or require participation in sin.

A wife today may be asked to misrepresent a donation, conceal income from an accountant, mislead a counsellor or sign something dishonest. She may be pressured to hide mistreatment at home or to assure church leaders that everything is well when it is not. The decision concerns integrity as well as the marriage’s appearance. A truthful response may be, “I love you, but I cannot lie about this.” When speaking directly would be unsafe, she can seek confidential help from a trustworthy person or appropriate professional.

Christian language becomes dangerous when “covering” a spouse is confused with concealing wrongdoing. Praying for a husband, protecting his dignity where possible, encouraging repentance and avoiding needless public humiliation can express love. Lying for him, hiding abuse or fraud, shielding addiction from consequences or silencing children serves a different purpose. It conceals the very harm that needs to be confronted.

Abigail protected her household from the consequences of Nabal’s folly. Sapphira maintained a deception. The distinction lies in what their actions served: the prevention of harm or the preservation of a lie.

Discernment in Marital Decisions

Read together, these stories sharpen our discernment. Abigail responds to danger, restrains David from bloodshed and later tells Nabal what happened. Zipporah circumcises her son during a crisis, after which the immediate threat ceases. Sapphira knowingly maintains a lie when she has an opportunity to tell the truth. Each story asks us to examine whether our response is faithful to God.

Holiness is neither controlling your husband nor blindly following him. Holiness means obeying God faithfully within your marriage.

Before intervening, consider whether the issue concerns sin, danger, a shared responsibility or personal preference. Disliking the way a husband loads the dishwasher is a preference; allowing him to drive drunk with the children creates danger. Other matters require conversation and agreement because they affect both spouses. If he chooses differently and no harm or wrongdoing is involved, can you allow room for that difference? Releasing control does not mean withdrawing your voice from decisions that belong to you both.

Timing matters, as Abigail’s decision to wait until Nabal was sober shows. Wise counsel can also help us see beyond fear or anger: “in the multitude of counsellors there is safety” (Proverbs 11:14). Seek people who can assess the circumstances honestly. A faithful response should remain truthful, but truthfulness does not require disclosing a safety plan to someone who may use it to cause harm. Confidential help and dishonest concealment serve different purposes.

In everyday disagreements, communication often begins with curiosity and a specific request. Instead of saying, “You never help me”, we might say, “I am overwhelmed between six and seven in the evening. Could we work out how to share that hour?” Rather than declaring, “You do not care about this family”, we can explain, “When this happens, I feel alone. May I tell you what would help?” A wish for prayer together might become, “I would love us to pray together more. What would make that easier for us?” Such invitations allow a spouse to respond and help the couple work towards agreement.

The need may remain the same, but the way it is expressed changes. We can speak plainly without trying to force an answer. These approaches are useful where both spouses can participate safely; wise wording alone cannot make another person become trustworthy or willing to change.

Song of Solomon gives us another occurrence of teshuqah: “I am my beloved’s, and his desire is toward me” (Song of Solomon 7:10). Whatever precise lexical relationship we draw among the three occurrences of the word, the Song gives us a beautiful picture of desire without hostility—belonging, delight and mutuality.

Marriage was never intended to become a wrestling match over who controls whom. The gospel calls husband and wife to bring their conduct under Christ’s lordship. Ephesians 5 places its household teaching within the call to be filled with the Spirit and to submit “one to another in the fear of God” (Ephesians 5:18–21). It then commands husbands to “love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it” (Ephesians 5:25). Christ’s self-giving love directs us towards service rather than domination. Both spouses remain accountable to Him.

When tempted to manage everything, remember Abigail’s purposeful intervention. When a serious responsibility remains unattended, consider Zipporah’s decisive action without assuming that every detail of your situation matches hers. When agreement would involve wrongdoing, remember Sapphira’s opportunity to tell the truth. In each case, belonging to Christ comes before preserving appearances or securing the outcome we want.

Peace purchased with deception is too expensive.

Before you are somebody’s wife, you belong to Christ. That truth gives you both the humility to repent of control and the courage to obey when obedience is costly.

Who Is Controlling Us

The struggle described in this chapter brings us to a final question. We can spend our strength asking, Who controls whom? Yet we also need to examine what is directing our own choices:

Who is controlling us?

Fear, pride, anger and resentment can direct our choices. So can the wish to preserve appearances, please our families or win an argument. Bringing those motives before Christ begins with our own heart. We cannot compel a spouse to repent, but we can seek His wisdom about how to respond faithfully.

Christ calls the wife to release manipulation and the husband to reject domination. Each can repent of their own wrongdoing, speak truth, listen and seek wise help. Appropriate boundaries can support that faithfulness. As both spouses yield to Him, there is room to grow in trust and love; where one refuses, the other still belongs to Christ and can seek His guidance and support.

We can bring our will before God and ask Him to teach us obedience in the circumstances we face. The application and worksheet that follow invite us to examine our motives, recognise our responsibilities and practise that discernment.

That is holiness.

Chapter 3 Application

The Abigail–Zipporah–Sapphira Test

When you encounter a serious problem in marriage, ask three questions:

The Abigail question: Does wisdom require me to intervene to prevent genuine harm?

The Zipporah question: Is there a responsibility I must faithfully carry because it cannot simply remain neglected?

The Sapphira question: Am I being asked, directly or indirectly, to participate in something I know is wrong?

Then ask the greatest question:

What response allows me to obey God without attempting to become God over my spouse?

Chapter 3 Worksheet

From Control to Discernment

1. Identify Your Control Pattern

Which pattern appears most often?

□ Mothering

□ Correcting

□ Scorekeeping

□ Silent punishment

□ Spiritual pressure

□ Financial control

□ Emotional manipulation

□ Constant checking

□ Taking over

□ Other: __________________________________________

Give one recent example:

2. What Is Beneath the Control?

Complete this sentence:

“If I stop controlling this, I am afraid that...”

What are you afraid of losing?

□ Security

□ Respect

□ Money

□ Love

□ Reputation

□ Stability

□ Influence

□ Connection

□ Other: __________________________________________

Bring that fear before God.

3. Sin, Danger or Preference?

Describe your current disagreement: 

Now classify it:

□ Biblical or moral issue

□ Safety issue

□ Serious financial issue

□ Relationship issue

□ Personal preference

□ I cannot yet tell

What changes when you classify it honestly?

4. The Abigail Test

Is your spouse currently behaving in a way that creates serious consequences for the household?

What action would protect rather than punish?

Does the situation require:

□ Direct conversation

□ Better timing

□ Pastoral counsel

□ Marriage counselling

□ Financial advice

□ Addiction support

□ Professional safeguarding assistance

□ Legal advice

□ Emergency safety action

5. The Zipporah Test

Is there a godly responsibility you have neglected because you are waiting for your husband to act first?

What can you faithfully do without trying to control him?

Controlling statement:

“You never ________________________________________________.”

Rewrite it as:

“When __________________________ happens, I feel ____________________. I would value ________________________________. Would you be willing to talk about how we could do that?”             

   6. The Sapphira Test

Is there anything you are helping to conceal simply to preserve peace or reputation?

Are you being asked to:

□ Lie

□ Hide money

□ Conceal addiction

□ Protect appearances

□ Hide mistreatment

□ Mislead church leadership

□ Mislead professionals

□ Keep an unsafe secret

□ Other: __________________________________________

What truth needs to be told?

Who is a safe and appropriate person to speak with?

7. Check Your Timing

Think about your last difficult conversation. Was your spouse:

□ Calm

□ Angry

□ Exhausted

□ Intoxicated

□ Distracted

□ Defensive

Was it wise timing?

What could you do differently?

8. Rewrite the Sentence

9. Open-Hands Prayer

Write something you are trying to control:

Now complete:

“Father, I release ______________________________________________ into Your hands. Show me what is my responsibility and what belongs to You.”

A Seven-Day Control Fast

Day 1: Do not correct a harmless preference.

Day 2: Replace one accusation with a question.

Day 3: Pray for your spouse without asking God merely to “fix” him. Ask God to bless and transform both of you.

Day 4: Praise one genuine strength in your spouse.

Day 5: Identify one responsibility you have taken over unnecessarily and discuss returning appropriate responsibility.

Day 6: Tell one truth you have been avoiding, with wisdom and appropriate timing.

Day 7: Read Genesis 2:18–25; Genesis 3:16; 1 Samuel 25; Exodus 4:24–26; and Acts 5:1–11. Write what God shows you about help, control, courage and complicity.

Declaration for the Wife

I was created to help, not to control. I will not confuse wisdom with manipulation or submission with complicity. I will not mother my husband or attempt to become his Holy Spirit.

When wisdom requires action, I will act wisely. When truth requires speech, I will speak truthfully. When safety requires boundaries, I will establish them. When a matter is merely preference, I will learn to release it.

I will not cover sin by covering it up. I will not agree with deception for the sake of false peace. I choose holiness over control, truth over appearance and wisdom over reaction. I place my husband, my marriage and myself beneath the lordship of Jesus Christ.

Prayer

Father,

Search my heart. Show me where love has become fear and where fear has become control. Show me where helping has become managing, discernment has become criticism and silence has become punishment. Show me where I have tried to perform the work of Your Holy Spirit in my husband’s life. Forgive me.

Give me the wisdom of Abigail—to recognise genuine danger, act without vengeance, choose the right moment and speak words that prevent destruction. Give me the courage of Zipporah—to obey when obedience is required, even when somebody else has neglected responsibility. Keep me from the error of Sapphira. Never let marital unity become more important to me than unity with You.

If I am ever asked to choose between pleasing a human being and obeying God, give me courage to obey You with humility, truth and love. Teach me the difference between controlling my husband and establishing a boundary, between covering and covering up, between patience and enabling, and between submission and complicity.

Where my husband is weak, teach me to pray without despising him. Where he is wrong, teach me to speak without becoming self-righteous. Where I am wrong, give me humility to repent. Where danger exists, give me courage to seek safety and wise help.

Redeem our desire, our communication and our power struggles. Let neither domination nor manipulation rule our home.

Let Jesus Christ rule us both.

In Jesus’ name,

Amen.

Notes and References

1. Teshuqah (תְּשׁוּקָה) occurs in Genesis 3:16, Genesis 4:7 and Song of Solomon 7:10 (7:11 in Hebrew verse numbering). Brown, Driver and Briggs define it as “longing”. The contexts differ, so its meaning in Genesis 3:16 cannot be settled by assigning a single English gloss to all three occurrences. See Francis Brown, S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1907), s.v. תְּשׁוּקָה.

2. Susan T. Foh, “What Is the Woman’s Desire?”, Westminster Theological Journal 37, no. 3 (1975): 376–383. Foh argues from the parallel wording of Genesis 3:16 and 4:7 that the woman’s desire involves an impulse to control or master her husband. This is an interpretation of the passages, rather than the undisputed lexical meaning of teshuqah.

3. The expression ʿezer kenegdô in Genesis 2:18 is commonly understood as “a helper corresponding to him”. The noun ʿezer is also used of divine help; compare Exodus 18:4; Deuteronomy 33:7, 26, 29; Psalm 121:1–2. See Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon, s.vv. עֵזֶר and נֶגֶד. Its use does not, by itself, establish the helper’s inferiority.

4. The Greek verb logizomai (λογίζομαι), used in 1 Corinthians 13:5, can mean to reckon, calculate or take into account. The expression in this verse is commonly understood as love not keeping an account of wrongs. See Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1889), s.v. λογίζομαι. The chapter distinguishes resentful scorekeeping from truthful recognition of patterns and appropriate accountability.

5. The KJV’s “churlish” in 1 Samuel 25:3 translates qāšeh (קָשֶׁה), an adjective with senses including hard, harsh or difficult. Brown, Driver and Briggs give “rough, rude” for its use here; see Hebrew and English Lexicon, s.v. קָשֶׁה. The servant’s description of Nabal in 1 Samuel 25:17 reinforces the narrative’s portrayal of him as unapproachable.

6. Abigail’s actions and speech must be read within the whole narrative of 1 Samuel 25. She protects the household and restrains David from bloodguilt and personal vengeance. David acknowledges God’s restraint through her intervention (1 Samuel 25:32–34). The application concerns wise action in response to danger, rather than unrestricted authority over a spouse.

7. Exodus 4:24–26 leaves several details unresolved, including the antecedents of its pronouns and the significance of ḥatan damim, often rendered “bridegroom of blood”. The text explicitly associates Zipporah’s circumcision of her son with the cessation of the threat. It does not explain her motives or why circumcision had not previously occurred. For further study of the passage, see Nahum M. Sarna, Exodus, JPS Torah Commentary (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991); Douglas K. Stuart, Exodus, New American Commentary (Nashville: B&H, 2006).

8. Genesis 17:9–14 identifies circumcision as the sign of God’s covenant with Abraham and his descendants. This background informs a common reading of Exodus 4:24–26 as a crisis involving an uncircumcised son in Moses’ household. The passage does not specify how responsibility for the omission had been shared.

9. Acts 5:1–4 makes clear that Ananias and Sapphira had authority over their property and its proceeds. Peter’s question to Sapphira about the sale price (Acts 5:8) reveals the deception: the amount presented was represented as the whole price. Retaining part of the proceeds was not, by itself, the sin.

10. Acts 5:9 describes Ananias and Sapphira as having “agreed together” to test the Spirit of the Lord. Sapphira’s separate questioning in Acts 5:7–9 demonstrates her responsibility for her own participation in the lie.

Selected Bibliography for Further Study

Alter, Robert. The David Story: A Translation with Commentary of 1 and 2 Samuel. New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.

Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1907.

Bruce, F. F. The Book of the Acts. Revised edition. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1988.

Foh, Susan T. “What Is the Woman’s Desire?” Westminster Theological Journal 37, no. 3 (1975): 376–383.

Hamilton, Victor P. The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1–17. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990.

Sarna, Nahum M. Exodus. JPS Torah Commentary. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991.

Stuart, Douglas K. Exodus. New American Commentary. Nashville: B&H, 2006.

Thayer, Joseph Henry. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1889.

Tsumura, David Toshio. The First Book of Samuel. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007.

Waltke, Bruce K., with Cathi J. Fredricks. Genesis: A Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001.

Primary Scriptures for Further Study

Genesis 2:18–25; Genesis 3:16; Genesis 4:7; Genesis 17:9–14; Exodus 4:18–31; 1 Samuel 25:1–42; Psalm 121; Proverbs 11:14; Proverbs 15:1; Song of Solomon 7:10; Matthew 20:25–28; Acts 5:1–11; 1 Corinthians 13:4–7; Ephesians 4:15, 25–32; Ephesians 5:18–33; Philippians 2:1–8; James 1:19–20; James 4:1–3.