Bible: Wives, be subject to your own husbands...in everything

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
paul this and paul that.

can you tell me why the wife must be submissive to the husband?

many things in the bible have a good reason behind them. don't work on the seventh day because god said so AND you need some rest yourself. don't steal because god said so AND the one you stole from will miss it AND society will shun you AND you didn't earn that ...[text shortened]... s your turn to play. The wife should be submissive to her husband because god said so AND ...

==============================
paul this and paul that.

can you tell me why the wife must be submissive to the husband?
=================================

I think I already explained Paul's teaching briefly.

Now if you don't like what I explained, what can I do? Can I MAKE you appreciate it ? I can't.

I don't think that Paul has in mind a wife submitting to her husband should he want to go rob a bank, plot a murder, steal a car, cheat on taxes, torture the children, drop a flower pot from a second story window on someone walking on the street below.

I don't think Paul meant for the wife to submit to the husband should he want to worship Satan, kidnap a baby, plot to beat up an elder, force her to allow him to whip her, chain her up, make her do prostitution duty, command her not to give medicine to sick children, help him lie on a job application, assasinate the mayor, force her to sleep with his uncle, or any number of things repulsive to her conscience or blantantly in violation to morality.

If you want to take Ephesians 5:22 and drive it to some extreme point, I don't think that represents the Apostle's thought there.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
why must a woman be submissive to her husband? i know paul said so but tell me your opinion. can you think of another reason other than paul said so?

Can you think of one social arrangement in which there is no 'pecking order' ie with someone in charge, or leading or making decisions, someone either directly appointed or incharge by default ?

That statement by Paul is not a commandment but rather a suggestion which can allow for the smoother running of the church and home. Plus the word 'submissive' is a rather strong word. And then there are suggestions for how a husband treats his wife. They both go hand in hand.

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]==============================
paul this and paul that.

can you tell me why the wife must be submissive to the husband?
=================================

I think I already explained Paul's teaching briefly.

Now if you don't like what I explained, what can I do? Can I MAKE you appreciate it ? I can't.

I don't think that P ...[text shortened]... rive it to some extreme point, I don't think that represents the Apostle's thought there.[/b]

for crying out loud. i am not liking or disliking paul in this very moment.

i am not talking what he said. i want to hear your opinion. not paul's. not the pope's.


your opinion.
why should the wife be submissive to the husband. can YOU think of any reason.

OTHER than the fact paul said so.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Can you think of one social arrangement in which there is no 'pecking order' ie with someone in charge, or leading or making decisions, someone either directly appointed or incharge by default ?

That statement by Paul is not a commandment but rather a suggestion which can allow for the smoother running of the church and home. Plus the word 'submissive' i ...[text shortened]... And then there are suggestions for how a husband treats his wife. They both go hand in hand.

the pecking order, without outside involvement, will always adjust to allow for the most suited individual. the strongest individuals will become guards to defend the home, the wisest might become leaders, the craftiest will become craftsmen, the ones that can count better might be entrusted with the that group's finances and so on.

also, once is clear that a certain individual is bad at something, the society will adjust its pecking order and assign someone else.


paul, or the guy that wrote that the woman should be submissive doesn't allow that. in a marriage the woman should be submissive to the husband even if she is more competent overall. a smart woman must listen to her idiot husband if he insists on putting their life savings under a rock.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Just to be clear, are you saying that the Baptist and Lutheran churches did not put it in context and so believed it? Just curious, was the Lutheran church Missouri Synod?

Seems like many, if not most, of the Christians who post here believe Paul's word as if God said it.

The Baptist & Lutheran churches (yes, Mo. synod), look at it somewhat differntly. I asked the preacehr of a Baptist church, "all else being equal, today, if I told my wife I felt God told me that we should sell all our worldly goods and become missionaries in Djibouti, and my wife said she believed that it wasn't God--it was indigestion, and both of us were God-fearing, faithful Christians, who would get the final say?" His answer was "You (the husband) would." The Lutherans see it more in context--women didn't have the same rights they do today and the wife in such a case would be within her rights not to acceed to her husband, but would not neccessarily have a right to stop him from going.
As for Paul, I can't speak for all Christians, but I've never been in a church (that I know of) that accepted his words as the word of God/Christ. The churches I attended made it quite clear that no human being on earth is God's mouthpiece.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Can you think of one social arrangement in which there is no 'pecking order' ie with someone in charge, or leading or making decisions, someone either directly appointed or incharge by default ?

That statement by Paul is not a commandment but rather a suggestion which can allow for the smoother running of the church and home. Plus the word 'submissive' i ...[text shortened]... And then there are suggestions for how a husband treats his wife. They both go hand in hand.

Jesus was all about breaking down the notions of hierarchy prevalent in the Roman world. All were to be equal before god. Men, women, masters, slaves, all were to be on equal footing in the coming kingdom. It was a revolutionary, egalitarian program of social justice.

Paul may very well have been in line with that program, with the Deutero Pauline epistles being added at a later date by church fathers seeking to water down that message.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
for crying out loud. i am not liking or disliking paul in this very moment.

i am not talking what he said. i want to hear your opinion. not paul's. not the pope's.


your opinion.
why should the wife be submissive to the husband. can YOU think of any reason.

OTHER than the fact paul said so.

================================
for crying out loud. i am not liking or disliking paul in this very moment.
==================================

Why can't you accept that my opinion is in harmony with the Scripture ?

My opinion is that if I am going to be a human being, I must be one who believes into Christ and is filled with His Spirit.

My opinion is that if I am going to be married, my wife and I need to live out Christ's love and humility.

I would like my marriage to be like that of Prisca and Aquilla. They expressed the Christ that they lived out and served.

My opinion is that the marriage relationship should mirror in a human way that relationship between Jesus Christ and His Wife, the Body, the church.

============================
i am not talking what he said. i want to hear your opinion. not paul's. not the pope's.
==============================

My opinion is that it is good that the Christian marriage life reflect that love of Christ towards the church and the submission of the church towards her Savior Christ.

================================
your opinion.
why should the wife be submissive to the husband. can YOU think of any reason.
================================

Christ is submissive. So in living in oneness with Him that submission should be allowed to flow out and be manifested.

Christ does the proper thing, in the proper way, at the proper time. Once we are in union with Him we should allow Him to manifest His nature in many ways, at the appropriate time.

Maybe it is a shock to you that some people want their opinion to be in harmony with that the word of God teaches ?

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]================================
for crying out loud. i am not liking or disliking paul in this very moment.
==================================

Why can't you accept that my opinion is in harmony with the Scripture ?

My opinion is that if I am going to be a human being, I must be one who believes into Christ and is filled with His ...[text shortened]... you that some people want their opinion to be in harmony with that the word of God teaches ?[/b]

Are you serious? You assume that their is a general consensus of "their opinion...in harmony with ...the word ..God teaches"?
How do you know your opinion is in harmony with Gods? (Did God tell you or do you think you have interpretted scripture 100% accurately?)

This is a blatant baseless assumption. To think that peoples opinions can be in harmony with Gods. Sure there may actually a handful of people that are in harmony with that, but for all practical purposes I think it is fairly safe to assume that everyone has their own unique interpretation of "Gods word".
😕

Originally posted by Rajk999
Can you think of one social arrangement in which there is no 'pecking order' ie with someone in charge, or leading or making decisions, someone either directly appointed or incharge by default ?

That statement by Paul is not a commandment but rather a suggestion which can allow for the smoother running of the church and home. Plus the word 'submissive' i ...[text shortened]... And then there are suggestions for how a husband treats his wife. They both go hand in hand.

Yes -- friends and partners. I would want to be an equal partner with my spouse. No one person should be in charge of making the decisions, such as "we're moving to another state because that's what I want to do and I'm in charge." I was not put on this Earth to be someone's subordinate assistant (help-meet) and no one was put on this Earth to be mine.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
[b]The woman was made for the man as a help meet.

But just because God set in order that the man is the head of his wife does not in any way diminish the value of the woman.

Are you married? Have you ever met any women? And told them that you believe this?

😲[/b]

Whatever you read of me in this forum is just what I believe and it is how I live my life.

Like Tom Petty sings " you can stand me up at the gates of hell, but I won't back down.."

Do you think I'm afraid? Of anyone? Do you think I live in a box? You'd be surprised to learn of some of the places I go and the kind of people I meet. I tell them all just what I believe. And I don't give a rip what they say or do.

I just ain't afraid of anyone, especially a woman.

Unless she's 6 foot 4 inches and weighs 300 pounds and is kickin' the crap out of me! 😉

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]But just because God set in order that the man is the head of his wife does not in any way diminish the value of the woman.

Value as what? As servant to her master?[/b]

God doesn't see any difference between man and woman. Why should I?

But men and women are not the same. We were created with different characteristics.

The Bible is clear. Woman was made for the man as a help meet, and when a man and a woman fulfill their prospective roles in marriage, as they were designed to do, all is at peace.

All this crap about man being superior to women is a distraction from the truth of God's word.

Originally posted by pawnhandler
Yes -- friends and partners. I would want to be an equal partner with my spouse. No one person should be in charge of making the decisions, such as "we're moving to another state because that's what I want to do and I'm in charge." I was not put on this Earth to be someone's subordinate assistant (help-meet) and no one was put on this Earth to be mine.

While everyone should have equal rights in a relationship, people often assume subserviant/dominant roles within a relationship. And there can be a number of complex roles enacted by spouses that dont always necessitate equality. One may be dominant with the finances the other may be the dominator of the family car.
While it is important to remain eqaul in mind and spirit, the relationships that assume subserviant/dominant roles can often be the best ones in my experience.
After all its just as obvious as it is obvious that men, in general, are physical stronger than females, just as we know that women live longer and control their emotions better than men.
Yes, yes, there are many exceptions but I think it is safe to generalize about the obvious.

Originally posted by josephw
Whatever you read of me in this forum is just what I believe and it is how I live my life.

Like Tom Petty sings " you can stand me up at the gates of hell, but I won't back down.."

Do you think I'm afraid? Of anyone? Do you think I live in a box? You'd be surprised to learn of some of the places I go and the kind of people I meet. I tell them all just ...[text shortened]... nless she's 6 foot 4 inches and weighs 300 pounds and is kickin' the crap out of me! 😉

You wouldn't be scared if she was kicking the crap out of ya. You'd be scared if she tried to sit on your face and tried to smother you out of death😉

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]================================
for crying out loud. i am not liking or disliking paul in this very moment.
==================================

Why can't you accept that my opinion is in harmony with the Scripture ?

My opinion is that if I am going to be a human being, I must be one who believes into Christ and is filled with His ...[text shortened]... you that some people want their opinion to be in harmony with that the word of God teaches ?[/b]

do you also believe that kings should love their subjects and subjects must be submissive to their kings? how about at work? do you tyhink your boss should love you and you should be submissive to your boss? wouldn't that mean you will never get to move up in your career? how can you be submissive if you get promoted?

what other areas do you think should adopt this love-submission relationship?

why cant we have a love-love relationship?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
do you also believe that kings should love their subjects and subjects must be submissive to their kings? how about at work? do you tyhink your boss should love you and you should be submissive to your boss? wouldn't that mean you will never get to move up in your career? how can you be submissive if you get promoted?

what other areas do you think should adopt this love-submission relationship?

why cant we have a love-love relationship?

=======================================
do you also believe that kings should love their subjects and subjects must be submissive to their kings? how about at work? do you tyhink your boss should love you and you should be submissive to your boss? wouldn't that mean you will never get to move up in your career? how can you be submissive if you get promoted?

what other areas do you think should adopt this love-submission relationship?

why cant we have a love-love relationship?
====================================

The submission is not to the person in him or herself. It is a submission to authority. It is a regard to fact that the univese is headed up in God.

In the Bible there are some instances when people had a submissive attitude but did not obey a improper command.

For example, the Egyptian midwives remained submissive in attitude to the position of Pharoah. Yet they did not obey Pharoah's command to have the Hebrew baby boys aborted.

Daniel and his companions were submissive to Nebuchadnressor. Though they respectfully submitted to his kingship they did not worship the statue that he erected. This act caused them to be cast into the fire from which God saved them.

Submission therefore is not always obedience.

You ask about employees and the boss. Next time on your job notice the attitude of your co-workers when the boss makes a mistake or is in a wrong doing. How do they act?

If they are submissive not to his person but to the authority he represents, they will not gloat and gossip in glee at the failure of the boss. The failure of a leader is a big test to people. And one can remain submissive to the authority of the person while not complying in obedience.

Submission should be with love. And it is not the person that one has such regard to but the order, the authority. Authority is everywhere in the universe. No one can be without regarding it.


I am not primarily interested in a "love-love relationship" for the sake of a "love-love relationship." Neither am I interested in a "love-submission relationship" just for the sake of a "love-submission relationship" (as if these were a dichotomy).

I am interested in Christ the living Person being dispensed into human beings for the building up of the kingdom of God.

I am not interested in social reform to put a few bandaids on this sin sick human society. I am not interested on self improvement, marriage counseling, or even developing a "Christian country".

Maybe Charles Dobson of Focus on the Family help you more in the rationals for such things

My interest is the Triune God being mingled with man for the producing of divinized humanity built up into local churches for the body of Christ. My only interest is the God and man being united to crush Satan and bring Jesus back physically to this world.

I think you are interested in a kind of social reform.