HUSBAND

A married man. In Israel a man who was engaged or betrothed was also spoken of as “husband” and the girl as “wife.” (Deut. 22:23, 24; Matt. 1:18-20) A man would betroth a woman or contract for future marriage by paying her father or guardians the bride-price or purchase money. (Ex. 22:16, 17) She then became his property. (Ex. 20:17) The word baʹʽal, meaning “owner, master,” applied to him, and the woman was called b^eʽu·lahʹ, meaning “owned as a wife.” (Gen. 20:3; Deut. 22:22; Isa. 62:4) To the ancient nation of Israel, Jehovah said: “I myself have become the husbandly owner [a form of baʹʽal] of you people.”—Jer. 3:14; Isa. 62:4, 5.

In patriarchal times the husband served as a priest and judge in the family, and throughout the Scriptures the husband and father was almost invariably accorded deep respect.—Gen. 31:31, 32; Job 1:5; 1 Pet. 3:5, 6; compare Deuteronomy 21:18-21; Esther 1:10-21.

A man, upon marrying a woman, brings her under a new law, “the law of her husband,” according to which the husband can make rules and regulations for his family. (Rom. 7:2, 3) He becomes her head to whom she should be subject. (Eph. 5:21-24, 33) This is a relative headship, rated third, in view of the superior headships of God and Christ.—1 Cor. 11:3.

INHERITANCE

In Israel, since the wife was considered part of the husband’s property, she evidently could not inherit his hereditary possession. It would thus pass on to his sons or daughters who, of course, were to respect her and take care of her until she should remarry, or until her death as his widow. If the husband died without offspring, levirate (brother-in-law) marriage could take place, and the firstborn son of this union would inherit the possession. (Deut. 25:5-10) Before the woman was taken in brother-in-law marriage she was looked upon as owning the property, at least as a temporary holder of it. When Boaz the kinsman of Elimelech married Ruth, he bought the possession of Elimelech from Naomi, and the child born through the marriage was considered the son of Naomi, being posterity raised up to the name of her dead husband Elimelech.—Ruth 4:3-10, 13, 17.

VOWS

As stated at Numbers 30:10-15, a husband could affirm or annul a vow made by his wife. Verses 6 to 8 of this chapter also refer to this authority, but commentators differ as to the application of these verses. Some hold that the reference is to a single woman who makes a vow or a rash promise in her singleness and who thereafter is betrothed and married. Her vow or promise now comes to the attention of her husband and he makes a decision as to letting it stand or annulling it. The rabbinical view generally has been that the verses describe the situation with a betrothed woman who has come under her future husband’s headship but who is still living in her father’s house. (Compare verse 10.) Thus, their view is that the future husband could also affirm or annul vows made by the woman during that betrothal period. The text itself does not allow for any arbitrary conclusion as to the application.

DIVORCE

Under the Mosaic law a man could divorce his wife, but she could not divorce him. He was required to give her a written certificate of divorce. (Deut. 24:1-4) Jesus Christ showed that such an arrangement for divorce in Israel was made as a concession out of regard for their hardheartedness. (Matt. 19:8) If, however, a man had seduced a virgin girl who was not engaged, she was to become his wife (unless her father refused to give her to him), and he was not allowed to divorce her all his days.—Deut. 22:28, 29.

Both the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Greek Scriptures stress that the husband should limit his sex relations to his marriage mate (Prov. 5:15-20), and that marriage must be kept honorable, for God will judge fornicators and adulterers. (Heb. 13:4) During patriarchal times and under the Law, polygamy and concubinage were practiced by allowance from Jehovah, but in the Christian arrangement a man may have but one living wife. (Gen. 25:5, 6; 29:18-28; Deut. 21:15-17; Matt. 19:5; Rom. 7:2, 3; 1 Tim. 3:2) The only Christian ground for divorce is adultery, meant by the term “fornication” at Matthew 19:9. (See FORNICATION.) The husband, while head of the house, is, nevertheless, required to render to his wife marriage dues, sex relations, for “the husband does not exercise authority over his own body, but his wife does.” (1 Cor. 7:3-5) He is also responsible for the spiritual and material welfare of his family.—Eph. 6:4; 1 Tim. 5:8.

ILLUSTRATIVE USE

In view of the fact that the ancient nation of Israel was bound to Jehovah by means of the Law covenant, God was their “husbandly owner.” (Jer. 3:14) The apostle Paul speaks of Jehovah as the Father of anointed Christians, his spiritual sons, and of the “Jerusalem above” as their mother, indicating that Jehovah considers himself as a husband to this heavenly Jerusalem.—Gal. 4:6, 7, 26; compare Isaiah 54:5.

The headship of the husband places on him a weighty responsibility. While he is the owner of the wife, he has to recognize that she is precious in the eyes of God, especially so when she is a Christian. He is to love her as he loves himself, for she is “one flesh” with him.—Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:4-6; Eph. 5:28, 33.

Jesus Christ is viewed as the Husband of the Christian congregation. (Eph. 5:22, 23; Rev. 19:7; 21:2) Husbands are to exercise for their wives the same loving care that Christ does for the congregation. (Eph. 5:25, 28-30, 33) They are to recognize that the wife is “a weaker vessel,” assigning her honor, taking into consideration her physical and emotional makeup and vicissitudes. This is especially important if the couple are Christians, being fellow heirs of “the undeserved favor of life,” in order for their prayers not to be hindered. (1 Pet. 3:7) Even if the wife is not a believer, this gives the husband no excuse for divorce or separation. Rather, he should dwell with her if she is agreeable to it and realize that he may help her to become a believer and also work toward the salvation of the children.—1 Cor. 7:12, 14, 16; see FAMILY, FATHER; MARRIAGE.

HUSHAH

(Huʹshah) [possibly, haste].

Either a “son” of or a city “fathered” or “founded” by Ezer of the tribe of Judah. (1 Chron. 4:1, 4; for a comparable example see ATROTH-BETH-JOAB.) If Hushah designates a city, then it was likely the home of one of David’s mighty men, Sibbecai, who was probably also called Mebunnai. (1 Chron. 27:11; compare 2 Samuel 23:27; 1 Chronicles 11:29.) Those who regard Hushah as the name of a city generally identify it with Husan, about four miles (6.4 kilometers) W of Bethlehem.

HUSHAI

(Huʹshai) [hasty].

A loyal Archite friend of King David who helped thwart Absalom’s rebellion. (1 Chron. 27:33) Hushai, with his robe ripped and dirt on his head, met the fleeing king on the Mount of Olives. He followed David’s suggestion that he go back into the city, feign loyalty to Absalom, endeavor to frustrate Ahithophel’s counsel, and keep David informed through the priests Zadok and Abiathar. (2 Sam. 15:30, 32-37) At first Absalom was suspicious, but Hushai succeeded in winning his confidence. (2 Sam. 16:16-19) When Absalom called for Hushai’s opinion concerning the best military strategy, Hushai spoke contrary to Ahithophel and recommended a course that would in fact allow David time to get organized. Hushai presented his idea in a way that made it appear better to Absalom and his associates than Ahithophel’s advice to attack immediately. Hushai then informed the priests of what happened. (2 Sam. 17:1-16) Hushai’s counsel frustrated that of Ahithophel, just as David had petitioned God, and thus ‘Jehovah brought calamity upon Absalom.’—2 Sam. 15:31; 17:14; see FRIEND (COMPANION) OF THE KING.

HUSHAM

(Huʹsham) [haste].

A native of the land of the Temanites who succeeded Jobab as king of Edom. (Gen. 36:31, 34, 35; 1 Chron. 1:45, 46) This was “before any king reigned over the sons of Israel.”—1 Chron. 1:43.

HUSHATHITE

(Huʹshath·ite).

A resident, or perhaps a descendant, of Hushah.—2 Sam. 21:18; 23:8, 27; 1 Chron. 11:26, 29; 20:4; 27:1, 11.

HUSHIM

(Huʹshim) [hasters].

1. Son of Dan (Gen. 46:23), evidently called Shuham at Numbers 26:42.

2. A designation given to the sons of Aher of the tribe of Benjamin.—1 Chron. 7:6, 12.

3. Wife of the Benjamite Shaharaim and the mother of Abitub and Elpaal.—1 Chron. 8:1, 8, 11.

HYACINTH

(hyʹa·cinth) [Gr., hy·aʹkin·thos].

A deep-blue semiprecious stone; primarily the word referred to the flower by that name, probably describing the dark-blue iris. At Revelation chapter 21 the New Jerusalem is described as seen by the apostle John in vision. The eleventh of its foundation stones is said to be hyacinth (vs. 20).

Hyacinth blue (hyacinthine) is one of the colors of the breastplates in the description of the heavenly armies of cavalry, at Revelation 9:16, 17. The breastplates spoken of were probably those worn by the riders of the horses. Fire-red and sulphur are mentioned as the other two breastplate colors. In view of the later statement that the horses breathed out fire, smoke and sulphur, the hyacinth blue may represent the darkness of smoke, which, along with fire and sulphur, may be destructive to life.

HYKSOS

See EGYPT, EGYPTIAN.

HYMENAEUS

(Hy·me·naeʹus) [named after Hymen, the Greek god of marriage].

An apostate from Christianity during the first century, Hymenaeus was identified by Paul as a blasphemer, full of “empty speeches that violate what is holy.” In his deviation from the truth, Hymenaeus, along with a certain Philetus, taught false doctrine, subverting the faith of some. One of their false teachings was that ‘the resurrection had already occurred’ in their day. Evidently this was their teaching: that the resurrection was merely a spiritual one, of a symbolic kind, and that the dedicated Christians had already had their resurrection, that this was all there was to the matter and there was no further resurrection in the future under God’s Messianic kingdom. (But compare 1 Corinthians 15:12-23.)

In Paul’s first letter to Timothy, Hymenaeus’ name is associated with another apostate, Alexander. The apostle states that he had handed Hymenaeus and Alexander “over to Satan,” evidently referring to Paul’s expelling or disfellowshiping them from the congregation. This constituted discipline or training for the Christians who had been acquainted with these apostate men, as a warning not to follow their blasphemous course.—1 Tim. 1:18-20; 2 Tim. 2:16-18.

HYPOCRITE

One pretending to be what he is not; a person whose actions are out of harmony with his words.

Although words from the Hebrew root hha·nephʹ are rendered “hypocrite” or “hypocrisy” in some translations, such as the Authorized Version, Douay and Leeser, other translators have variously rendered these words “profane” (Yg), “impious” (Ro), “godless” (RS) and “apostate” (NW). According to A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament by Francis Brown with the cooperation of S. R. Driver and C. A. Briggs, pages 337 and 338, hha·nephʹ, when used as an adjective, may be defined as “profane, irreligious, . . . godless”; or, as a verb, “be polluted, profane, . . . inclining away from right.” In the Scriptures hha·nephʹ appears in parallel with those forgetting God (Job 8:13), the wicked (Job 20:5), evildoers (Isa. 9:17), and is used in contrast to the upright and innocent ones.—Job 17:8; see APOSTASY.

The Greek word rendered “hypocrite” (hy·po·kri·tesʹ) means “one who answers,” as well as a stage actor. Greek and Roman actors employed large masks with mechanical devices for amplifying the voice. Hence, the Greek word hy·po·kri·tesʹ came to be used in a metaphorical sense to apply to one playing false, or one putting on a pretense. The same word appears in the Septuagint translation at Job 34:30; 36:13. Hypocrites are “unfaithful ones” (compare Luke 12:46 with Matthew 24:51) and “hypocrisy” (hy·poʹkri·sis), as used in the Scriptures, may also denote “wickedness” and “cunning.”—Compare Matthew 22:18; Mark 12:15; Luke 20:23; see also Galatians 2:13, where hy·poʹkri·sis is rendered “pretense.”

Jesus Christ identified as hypocrites those making gifts of mercy with showy display, those praying and fasting to be seen of men and one picking on the strawlike fault of his brother but doing nothing about removing his own rafterlike fault. Christ classified as such those who claimed to be God’s servants but who failed to discern the significance of the time in which they were living and the events that were occurring, while readily drawing conclusions from the appearance of earth and sky as to what the weather would be like.—Matt. 6:2, 5, 16; 7:1-5; Luke 6:42; 12:54-56.

Not only did the Son of God while on earth denounce the religious leaders of Israel as hypocrites, but he also stated his reasons for doing so. They rendered mere lip service to the Creator, making the word of God invalid because of their traditions. (Matt. 15:1, 6-9; Mark 7:6, 7) Their actions were out of harmony with their words. (Matt. 23:1-3) The scribes and Pharisees not only deliberately refused to avail themselves of the opportunity to enter the kingdom of the heavens, but they added to their sin by trying to hinder others from doing so. They put forth every effort to convert someone, only to make him twice as much a subject for Gehenna as they were. They were sticklers for the little things of the Law, but disregarded the weightier matters of it—justice, mercy and faithfulness. As hypocrites, they possessed only a seemingly clean outward appearance; inside they were full of immoderateness. Like whitewashed graves, outwardly beautiful, they appeared righteous to men, but inside were “full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.” They built the graves of the prophets and decorated the memorial tombs of the righteous ones, claiming that they would not have shed the blood of such ones. However, their course of action proved them to be just like their murderous forefathers. (Matt. 23:13-36) The teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees was actually hypocrisy.—Matt. 16:6, 12; Luke 12:1; see also Luke 13:11-17.

A striking example of a hypocritical course was that followed by the disciples of the Pharisees and the party followers of Herod when approaching Jesus on the tax question. First, they resorted to flattery, saying: “Teacher, we know you are truthful and teach the way of God in truth.” Then they posed the catch question: “Is it lawful to pay head tax to Caesar or not?” Appropriately Jesus referred to them as hypocrites, since they were not really desirous of getting an answer to their question but merely raised it with a view to trapping Jesus in his speech.—Matt. 22:15-22; Luke 20:19-26.