Num 30:3 “If a woman vows a vow to the LORD and binds herself by a pledge, while within her father’s house in her youth,
Num 30:4 and her father hears of her vow and of her pledge by which she has bound herself and says nothing to her, then all her vows shall stand, and every pledge by which she has bound herself shall stand.
Num 30:6 “If she marries a husband, while under her vows or any thoughtless utterance of her lips by which she has bound herself,
Num 30:7 and her husband hears of it and says nothing to her on the day that he hears, then her vows shall stand, and her pledges by which she has bound herself shall stand.
Num 30:9 (But any vow of a widow or of a divorced woman, anything by which she has bound herself, shall stand against her.)
Num 30:12 But if her husband makes them null and void on the day that he hears them, then whatever proceeds out of her lips concerning her vows or concerning her pledge of herself shall not stand. Her husband has made them void, and the LORD will forgive her.
Num 30:16 These are the statutes that the LORD commanded Moses about a man and his wife and about a father and his daughter while she is in her youth within her father’s house.
Significantly, women were able to make vows and have a direct dealing with God. Even young women (with the approval of their father) could make promises to God, vow offerings to Him, or pledge seasons of self-denial to the LORD. “The very fact that women were making vows in this antique age is a step of great significance.” The father of a young woman in such circumstances also had the right to disapprove of his daughter’s vows, and to declare the vow invalid. He could approve of her vow by silence, with silence being understood as agreement. (Guzik)
But if her father held her back when he heard of it, i.e., forbade her fulfilling it, it was not to stand or remain in force, and Jehovah would forgive her because of her father’s refusal. Obedience to a father stood higher than a self-imposed religious service.(Keil)
If a husband objected to vows made by his wife, he had the right to overrule her. God considered the wife released from such disapproved vows. “The husband, as the male authority figure in the relationship, may choose from several courses of action: (1) permit the vow or oath to remain in effect by default—no action, (2) negate the obligation, or (3) affirm the commitment by word or deed.” if the husband confirmed his wife’s vow (either by silence or by specific approval), then he was responsible to make sure the vow was fulfilled (he shall bear her guilt).
That the widow and the divorced woman have the same status regarding the making of vows is significant. Such vows made by a woman not living with her parents and not married to a husband were considered binding. Any vows she made shall stand against her. “A woman who was no longer under the patriarchal authority of her father or her husband, whether by his death or by divorce, possessed the same status and responsibility of a man with regard to vows and obligations.”
This was an outworking of the principle of headship. When God declares someone to be in a position of rightful authority and others are expected to submit to that authority, the head is accountable before God for the result. When God grants authority, He also commands accountability. (Guzik)
“These regulations establish the headship of the father and the husband in regard to matters which belong to religion. And the significance of them lies in this, that no intrusion of the priest is permitted…. the father or husband was the family head and the judge. No countenance whatever is given to any official interference.” (Watson)