Christian Forums

Hey....  We see the word submit and we get all up in arms about what that means for "US".... for "ME"...  In the beginning it was not that way.  God set down the leadership role in the Garden of Eden and the pattern has not changed.  We try to force it, only because we take that word submit as some bad thing.  But, that is not the way God intended it when he set the pattern.  Society and the many voices we hear from birth did that.  We have heard for so long that to submit is to be under that we think the term "submit" means some sort of "servant" life.  But, not servant as in laying down your will willingly, but having it taken and we are somehow pushed down.

I just don't think that is what God intended when He said that we should submit.  He realized the need for the man to be the strong, tall back boned one, and the woman to be the tender nurturing one.  And that the husband should stand between the woman and anything that may come against them as one.  That they man should seek to find all that God has for him to do in the area of husband and to do that to the very last breathe he might breathe. The man lifts up the woman and sees her good qualities.  She has independant ideas and qualities, but brings them into the submission to her husband to be part of the whole picture concerning how they succeed in their home and marriage, ministry and parenting.  

I am what is called a Master Scrapbooker... LOL... silly but true.  I have worked and worked until I am that good.  People beg me and pay me to do them albums and or teach them, help them.  I have thought of opening my own store, but I bring that to my husband, and he will make that decision for our family, he oversees the finances, the credit, the time we'd both have to put in and what it would mean or cost our whole family.  There is no way I could just start a business without his support and help, and even time.

I mean I could... I'm capable, but if I did...  my marriage and my walk with the LORD would suffer, my kids would have to work also, and it would be hard... very hard.

But, when I speak of this and talk of having looked at the footage, the inventory and the design, and my husband is with me, I have all confidence that it will work.  When people say ... "What does your husband think"... I don't say... "Oh this is my idea, I'm on my own"... but, He speaks up to support, encourage and even let me relax as he explains the in's and out's of starting your own business.  

I truely believe that the Proverbs 31 woman came equiped to be and do what she did.  I think she came to him independent, and educated in business, maybe already with her finances in order to kick off the successful business she had, and she was organized to boot, she had that home running smoothly before she left the house each day to buy and sell, or trade.  He did good to find her.  I don't think He ruled over her, I think he admired her openly (at the gate) and supported her and encouraged her any time he could.  She being who she was, doing what she did, freed him up to be involved in the matters of the day...  in the city, at the gate.  

But, I think that she also submitted what she had to his leadership (not ownership) for the betterment of their marriage, home, servants and children.  I just do.

I see a lot of words of summations, but very little scriptural support. Where are the Scriptures for "veil" and "headship"?

"He realized the need for the man to be the strong, tall back boned one, and the woman to be the tender nurturing one."

One cannot be tall back boned and nurturing at the same time? Or a nurturer can't be strong? Do you have Scripture to support that idea? How does that work when a woman's husband is in a wheelchair? or mentally ill?

How well has the man submitted to Christ?

About half the time, then woman submit to your husband, about half the time. Now who is going to carry around this kind of measuring stick.

Tell me how to measure as he follows the Lord.

Husband don't expect you wife to submit any more than you do.

FTL

Quote from: phoebe on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 15:39:25

Quote" In fact, in personal development one grows from dependance (childish) to independance (adolescence) to interdependance (maturity)."

BINGO!!!!!

What we have modeled in the hierarchy is the dependent-independent combined model. This is not the model of interdependence of God's design, nor the model Jesus talks about when He reminds us that we are "no longer two, but one", nor the picture Paul paints of mutual submission.

It's so biblical, and the design works so beautifully that I don't understand the resistance to it.

I see posturing and exclamation marks but no scripture... where is "BINGO" in the bible?  Are you speaking from your own mind, with your own words?  For shame.

Phoebe,  I may have missed something...  is no one who does not agree with you supposed to post in this topic?  Are we not to offer our opinions or understanding to this discussion?  If you are going to follow me and snip and snipe at me for every post, I can stop posting in this.  I didn't realize this was your thread and I needed to be invited to contribute ideas.  But, just let me know. 

I see Bvag was the OP... but just asking to be sure.  Because you are taking it to such a personal level.  No one attacked you or your marriage.  You've become very territorial about it.   I can leave the discussion if it's that big a deal for you.

Quote from: kensington on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 16:04:11

Quote from: phoebe on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 15:39:25

Quote" In fact, in personal development one grows from dependance (childish) to independance (adolescence) to interdependance (maturity)."

BINGO!!!!!

What we have modeled in the hierarchy is the dependent-independent combined model. This is not the model of interdependence of God's design, nor the model Jesus talks about when He reminds us that we are "no longer two, but one", nor the picture Paul paints of mutual submission.

It's so biblical, and the design works so beautifully that I don't understand the resistance to it.

I see posturing and exclamation marks but no scripture... where is "BINGO" in the bible?  Are you speaking from your own mind, with your own words?  For shame.

I am more than glad to post the outlines of  my studies if you want to engage in a discussion over them. But not tonight. Start tomorrow. It's several days/weeks worth of study and will take some time.

Tonight is Family Night in our home.

Quote from: kensington on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 16:04:11

Quote from: phoebe on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 15:39:25

Quote" In fact, in personal development one grows from dependance (childish) to independance (adolescence) to interdependance (maturity)."

BINGO!!!!!

What we have modeled in the hierarchy is the dependent-independent combined model. This is not the model of interdependence of God's design, nor the model Jesus talks about when He reminds us that we are "no longer two, but one", nor the picture Paul paints of mutual submission.

It's so biblical, and the design works so beautifully that I don't understand the resistance to it.

I see posturing and exclamation marks but no scripture... where is "BINGO" in the bible?  Are you speaking from your own mind, with your own words?  For shame.

You are certainly free to disagree, but do so with Scriptural support.

I'm sorry...  But I have spoken to what the Bible says... and I won't sit and qoute the bible for you.  I'll just stop... thanks.  Good luck with running your topic that you started in your forum. 

Quote from: phoebe on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 16:12:12

Quote from: kensington on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 16:04:11

Quote from: phoebe on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 15:39:25

Quote" In fact, in personal development one grows from dependance (childish) to independance (adolescence) to interdependance (maturity)."

BINGO!!!!!

What we have modeled in the hierarchy is the dependent-independent combined model. This is not the model of interdependence of God's design, nor the model Jesus talks about when He reminds us that we are "no longer two, but one", nor the picture Paul paints of mutual submission.

It's so biblical, and the design works so beautifully that I don't understand the resistance to it.

I see posturing and exclamation marks but no scripture... where is "BINGO" in the bible?  Are you speaking from your own mind, with your own words?  For shame.

I am more than glad to post the outlines of  my studies if you want to engage in a discussion over them. But not tonight. Start tomorrow. It's several days/weeks worth of study and will take some time.

Tonight is Family Night in our home.

Your studies?  Why would I want to read that?  That is just your opinion on the word based on what you think it says.  Which is what we all have done.  Moot point... no thanks... 

I'll stick to this...  I'm sorry...  But I have spoken to what the Bible says... and I won't sit and qoute the bible for you.  I'll just stop... thanks.  Good luck with running your topic that you started in your forum.

Nite.

Quote from: phoebe on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 15:39:25

Quote" In fact, in personal development one grows from dependance (childish) to independance (adolescence) to interdependance (maturity)."

BINGO!!!!!

What we have modeled in the hierarchy is the dependent-independent combined model. This is not the model of interdependence of God's design, nor the model Jesus talks about when He reminds us that we are "no longer two, but one", nor the picture Paul paints of mutual submission.

It's so biblical, and the design works so beautifully that I don't understand the resistance to it.

Because the Bible tells wives that their husbands are the head, that is the resistance to what you think.Being under our husbands headship is nothing to with being dependant but of being obedient to God and trusting husbands.
if we are a wife we are supposed to do what God tells us to do , if we are a husband we are also to do what God tells us to do. No where does it say that we can pick and choose what WE want to do to not to do. I am not a naturally submissive person but as I have learnt what Godly submission is to be, I have also learnt that this the right and godly order in a marriage as stated by God. Once I reaslised this, I have been working on it with Gods help and it is only when the wife allows her husbands to take his rightful and very resonsible position as the head that he can take up this position. Many women that I actually know in real life wan to be the head and the marriage is out of the right order as stated by God.

Quote from: Harold on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 16:00:05
How well has the man submitted to Christ?

About half the time, then woman submit to your husband, about half the time. Now who is going to carry around this kind of measuring stick.

Tell me how to measure as he follows the Lord.

Husband don't expect you wife to submit any more than you do.

FTL

I dont think the Bible actually says that if the other spouse does what they are supposed to do then we are to do what we are supposed to do. One is not conditional upon the other surely. The wife is responsible for what she is to do and the husband is responsible for what he is told to do. They each have to be responsible for their part before God, EVEN IF their spouse sometimes fails, and after all, we all fail sometimes, as we are all human.Our spouse will never be perfect just as we will never be perfect, but it is our hearts intention that matters.

Quote from: phoebe on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 15:58:44
I see a lot of words of summations, but very little scriptural support. Where are the Scriptures for "veil" and "headship"?

"He realized the need for the man to be the strong, tall back boned one, and the woman to be the tender nurturing one."

One cannot be tall back boned and nurturing at the same time? Or a nurturer can't be strong? Do you have Scripture to support that idea? How does that work when a woman's husband is in a wheelchair? or mentally ill?

Phoebe I posted scriptures some time ago (on the topic of women teaching) when it got onto the subject of the headship of the man in the marriage. I will do so again tomorrow.There are scriptures that clearly say what the godly order in the marriage is.Many women really dont like this and of course it is not 'politically correct' teaching but since when was God politicaly correct.? (Thank goodness)

Quote from: emilylauren on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 15:20:49

QuoteI don't see how you get that a wife being under her husband, puts her under all men.  Not at all...   God deals with us individually, He was speaking to a husband and wife situation.... not in their relation to anyone else, no other group or people.  The man first relates to God, as Adam did, and his covering that comes from God extends to include his wife. 

But in this situation Paul is writing about women wearing veils, not just because they are married, but because they are praying. :/ The woman "glorified" the man, so she had to "cover" her glory, but the man "glorified" God, so he must be uncovered. The way it was written it implied that women in general were under men, in general.

Emilylauren,

Exactly.  Correct hermeneutic and interpretation.

V

Quote from: kensington on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 14:54:09

Quote from: phoebe on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 08:57:40
kensington and chosenone - You totally misunderstand mutual submission in the parent-child relationship, and that is no surprise as you seem to misunderstand biblical mutual submission as it applies to all Christ-followers.

I don't need to defend my parenting to either of you. My kids are top-notch, loving, giving, serving followers of Christ.

I believe the comment that brought on defending was the one you made to me... that WHEN my kids got to be where your kids are, I will learn what you think.

I did not attack you or your marriage in any way.  Or your kids in any way either.   That is a false implication.  I stated my opinion to the topic.  It is different than yours.  I'm not going to sit and list kid for kid accomplishments for you either.  Moot point.
Your "hierarchy" comments are not any better than your "Kids" comment either.  My husband is not the ruler, He is the lead.  He takes the time to search out where he should lead us in all areas, and seeks the LORD to guide him in leading our family as a Christian family.  Why wouldn't I submit to that?  If he is lining himself up with leadership the way the LORD spoke it and Paul taught it, why would I need to make sure that I get that position or name of "Mutual leader" with him?  It would be a moot point.  He gets on his face before the LORD and seeks out the answers and of course he considers what I think or need or ask...   But, in every marriage there is going to be a decision that must be made for the future of the family, and if the two have different ideas as to what they should do, someone has to make that final choice.  That would be my husband.  He is not a dictator, he is a leader, he seeks to make sure that he is always leading us where we need to be.  He strives for that. 

I'm sorry that offends you personally, I don't see why it would.  I'm not offended that you choose the two headed path.  It's your marriage.  Please stop sniping at me now.

By my reading Phoebe was responding to chosenone's comments about "heirarchy" (which, btw is spelled "hierarchy"...but I'm not all that warped out of shape by silly little spelling errors).

Chosenone's comment below:

Quote from: chosenone on Fri Jan 16, 2009 - 12:02:07
You say the word 'heirachy' relationship as if it is some sort of swear word, on the contrary it is what we have been told to do.by the Bibles teachings. Wives are told thay are to respect their husbands and they are to submit to them as the head. How it can be taken any other way I just cant see. I may not like it, you and many other women may not like it, but it is there none the less and we need to decide whether we do what we want or what God wants. The decision is up to each of us.

Jesus doesn't teach hierarchy type relationships.  Perhaps you aren't using the word in the real sense of it's meaning?  How do you define "hierarchy"?



Also, Kensington, you make some statements that seem contradictory.  For example, you wrote;

QuoteMy husband is not the ruler, He is the lead.

Then you say;

QuoteHe takes the time to search out where he should lead us in all areas, and seeks the LORD to guide him in leading our family...

I concur that there is a difference between "ruling" and "leading".  However, what you describe is hierarchial rulership...husband consults the Lord and gets direction, then husband tells you what the direction is, then you follow.  That describes "line of command".  That is "hierarchy".

Do you and husband both together look to the Lord for direction, then compare answer/impressions/sensing, then look for a consensus?  When husband and wife have consensus on an issue it's more likely that they are in God's will.  Where there is not consensus, then it means that more time in prayer and seeking the Lord is required.  This process takes into consideration the reality that both male and female Believers are indwelt by the Holy Spirit and both husband and wife (both of whom are Believers) "hear from the Lord".


The key terms are "head" and "submit".  We suggest that the way those words are understood in contempory English (and older English for that matter) do not accurately reflect the meanings of the words that Paul used in Koine Greek (kephale, hypotassō).


V

After the last few posts I will post a couple of verses. I use the amplified version becuase if there is more than one meaning of the word it gives them all, and is vgenerally very accurate to the original text.

Ephesians 5v33
let the wife see that she respects and reverences her husband (that she notices him regards him. honors him, prefers him,venerates and esteems him:and that she defers to him, praises him, and loves and admires him exceedingly.)

1Peter 3 v 1
In like manner, you married women, be submissive to your own husbands (subordinate yourselves as being secondary to and dependant on them, and adapt yourselves to them) so that even if any do not obey the word of God, they may be won over not by discussion but by the godly lives of their wives.

two lots of instructions for us as wives. Reading them, I know I fall short of many of these instructions except the one that says to love and admire him exceedingly. That one is easy cos he is such a great guy, extremly godly and moral and kind.

Hope I have spelt everything right this time, dont want to get into trouble again!

Another very relevant verse ie ephesians 5v22

Wives, be subject (be submissive and adapt yourselves) to your own husbands as a service to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife as Christ is head of the church.Himself the saviour of (his) body.
As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives be subject in everything to their husbands.

These three verses are very clear instructions to us as wives. There are clear instructions to all of us generally, but if we are a wife then therse verses must surely apply to us. If I want to please God I need to strive to be as He wants me to be and do what he wants me to do, and dont what I want to do and how I want to be. 
He is the creator , we are the created. He knows us better than we know ourselves. He also knows what is best for us and if He tells us to do something then that is for a reason surely.  How each of us works out the way to obey these instructions is up to us but surely we cannot just ignore them  becuase we dont like them?

As women we wouldnt like it if the men thought that they would just totally ignore what they, as husbands, are told to do would we? So what do we think that we can just read these verses and disregard them ourselves?

I am sorry I have let this set on the shelf for a while because I am not really sure where to take it. One thing I do know is that it took a turn I had not intended to go. It seems that in this discussion all one wants to do is look only at the wife's role in the relationship.

I see a lot of good thinking going on and we have  got the wife role covered heavy but I was hoping to look more at the husband role in this. Chosenone posted a scripture we should look at which is the heart oaf what  I wanted to get out in this. See below.

QuoteEphesians 5v33
let the wife see that she respects and reverences her husband (that she notices him regards him. honors him, prefers him,venerates and esteems him:and that she defers to him, praises him, and loves and admires him exceedingly.)

Note in that scripture it defines what a wife's role is. It defines her relationship to her husband. Now go back and study the relationship of the husband to the wife. They are the same the husband should love the wife in the same way. We have covered the wife's relationship pretty heavy so now let look at the husband and see if he is to love his wife the same way the wife is to love him. Then we can get back to studding what the headship is about.

Thank you, Bill, for seeing this through in its fullness. I cannot begin to adequately express it to you. Manna to you. May it be an encouragement to spur you on to teaching the fullness of the gospel message.

Perhaps you can see how it has been beaten into the brain of woman to submit-submit-submit  to man. The reason? She is flawed since the Garden, as if the Cross never happened. For me, this teaching began in cradle roll, and was heavily pressed in my teen years. It led me to submitting to the "lead" and "authority" of an evil husband. That was when I knew there was something horribly wrong with this traditional teaching. My faith in man-as-teacher was shaken. 20 years passed before I realized that God wanted me to dig to find the truth. He led me to it, of that I am absolutely certain. It was a moment that solidified my faith in a loving God and a fully Redeeming Savior, even for woman.

Wives submit, yes, but not because one is less than or incapable of being more than a servant or co-leader alongside her husband, not because of poor translations or men who want to keep women "in their place" (which is at the feet of Jesus, not under the thumb of man), but submit because she is following the lead of her Savior, as her husband will also follow Christ and submit to his wife. This is what the Eph. passage is about, and it seems to presume that both partners are followers of Christ. We need to remember that. "Unequally yoked" has a different MO, and different set of guidelines.

The word translated as "submit" must be heavily scrutinized if it is to dictate the hub of the family and Body of Christ.

kensington, I asked for your Scripture, etc. to support your comments, did I not? How can we discuss the validity of any teaching if we don't dig into it? If you don't care to participate, then simply choose not to. There was no need for those other comments.

Quote from: bvaug on Sat Jan 17, 2009 - 11:13:35
I am sorry I have let this set on the shelf for a while because I am not really sure where to take it. One thing I do know is that it took a turn I had not intended to go. It seems that in this discussion all one wants to do is look only at the wife's role in the relationship.

I see a lot of good thinking going on and we have  got the wife role covered heavy but I was hoping to look more at the husband role in this. Chosenone posted a scripture we should look at which is the heart oaf what  I wanted to get out in this. See below.

QuoteEphesians 5v33
let the wife see that she respects and reverences her husband (that she notices him regards him. honors him, prefers him,venerates and esteems him:and that she defers to him, praises him, and loves and admires him exceedingly.)

Note in that scripture it defines what a wife's role is. It defines her relationship to her husband. Now go back and study the relationship of the husband to the wife. They are the same the husband should love the wife in the same way. We have covered the wife's relationship pretty heavy so now let look at the husband and see if he is to love his wife the same way the wife is to love him. Then we can get back to studding what the headship is about.

Each spouse has their own part to play but the fact that the husband has his instructions makes no difference oit the fact that the instructions to the wife  are as I have posted here in the verses.
What do those who think that the husband doesnt need to be the head make of the three verses that I mentioned?. As a wife they apply to me just as the verses for the man apply to my husband (and he takes his very seriously and is a very good husband in every way)

QuoteNote in that scripture it defines what a wife's role is. It defines her relationship to her husband. Now go back and study the relationship of the husband to the wife. They are the same the husband should love the wife in the same way. We have covered the wife's relationship pretty heavy so now let look at the husband and see if he is to love his wife the same way the wife is to love him. Then we can get back to studding what the headship is about.

I agree. One thing I've noticed is that the people who assert that they are submitting to their husbands and it has made their marriage better are also quick to point out that their husbands are so "loving, laid-back, and caring" that it is 'easy to submit and obey'. My question is this: did the thought ever come up that ones husband is seen as being loving, caring and laid-back because he is also submitting to you? You submit to him and at the same time, he does the same for you? I think the misunderstanding with egalitarian marriages is that, somehow, the wife is no longer submitting to her husband! But that is not what is being said. In those marriages the wife still "submits", but so does her husband. They both work towards something that is good for the other.

At any rate, I've found a couple of interesting articles on the topic.

Statistics and Biblical Interpretation

Debate-- both sides present

The one other thing that bothers me is the comparison between male/female relationships and parent/child and worker/boss relationships-- saying that these people are all "equal in Jesus" but are not nessisarily equal to each other. My problem, however, is that a (male) child will grow up and be 'equal' and given 'authority', but a female child will not. She will always be 'under' someone, no matter what. And a worker can work hard and 'climb the ladder' to a better position of authority, but you can't 'climb the ladder' in a husband/wife situation. So by the very nature of being female, you are stuck. That would be like saying 'because you are a Gentile, you are always inferior to the Jew'. But God clearly removed those sort of distinctions.


I do like how, in the second link, one of the posters quotes Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. This is how I tend to see the "traditional" marriages working out. I would like to hear other thoughts, however.

Quote from: phoebe on Sat Jan 17, 2009 - 13:40:34
kensington, I asked for your Scripture, etc. to support your comments, did I not? How can we discuss the validity of any teaching if we don't dig into it? If you don't care to participate, then simply choose not to. There was no need for those other comments.

It's convenient that you forgot your comments to me.  There was no need to them either.  But, there you are.  Just stop telling me how to post. That would be nice.  I've noted at least twice that this is not your topic or thread.  I don't see the word mod under your name, so just leave me alone.  You made the comments to imply that mine and chosen had marriages less than you...  and that I would learn when my kids got to be where your kids are.  Mine are there, have been there and are past there.  Raised and married serving the LORD also, just like you felt you needed to declare to me.

You really didn't have to reply back to me at all, and you don't now, but you will, it's in your make up... you must be right.  You see, that is the kind of marriage I just don't need or desire. 

How can we discuss the validity of teachings... we can't.  That was my point.  I am not interested in discussing this with you further, once you started the snips... I wasn't interested.  What I post to others, is between me and them.  I still can't figure out why you thought I owed an explanation to you.  It kind of confuses me.  It never was your topic to begin with.  Bvag started it. 

"I agree. One thing I've noticed is that the people who assert that they are submitting to their husbands and it has made their marriage better are also quick to point out that their husbands are so "loving, laid-back, and caring" that it is 'easy to submit and obey'. My question is this: did the thought ever come up that ones husband is seen as being loving, caring and laid-back because he is also submitting to you? You submit to him and at the same time, he does the same for you? I think the misunderstanding with egalitarian marriages is that, somehow, the wife is no longer submitting to her husband! But that is not what is being said. In those marriages the wife still "submits", but so does her husband. They both work towards something that is good for the other."

I agree... and they seem to think that those who understand submit in their marriage means mindless following also.  It just isn't so.  In my case, in our marriage, I took the time before I got married to see if he would be the kind of man I wanted to be married to in the LORD, and he is.  He is not so laid back though, he actually is very high speed and going at life all the time.  I did say he took the time to seek the LORD to know where he was to lead us...  That is his role as Bvag asked us to look at it.  He isn't a rouge on his own just dragging me and the kids around.  He actually seeks out answers and even wisdom from me before making the decisions for our family that he is called to make.  He leads... as in being willing to go there and walk it out, not to just tell us to do it.  Not at all.

Adam was first and he learned of the LORD first and then he passed things to Eve she needed to know.  Abraham was the same way, He made the choices and led the family.  Not in places they should go... but in areas and places they were all going together.  I can trust and do trust my husband for these things, because he is proven.  God has revealed and proven him to be a man who does lay down his life and make all choices based on his love and willing sacrifice for our family. 

Reference: "Husband's love your wives, as Christ loved the church, in that He gave His life for her".  Yep...  that is the role model, right there.  Yes, Christ died for the church.  And a husband dies to self for the wife and family.  He gives up a life for himself and life becomes about her and providing, protecting, and walking with her.  He is a man proven to do all things because of his wife, for her, for them. 

  Please Let us all just drop the who said what to who and forgive each other and get back to the topic at hand  

Quote from: emilylauren on Sat Jan 17, 2009 - 15:56:56

QuoteNote in that scripture it defines what a wife's role is. It defines her relationship to her husband. Now go back and study the relationship of the husband to the wife. They are the same the husband should love the wife in the same way. We have covered the wife's relationship pretty heavy so now let look at the husband and see if he is to love his wife the same way the wife is to love him. Then we can get back to studding what the headship is about.

I agree. One thing I've noticed is that the people who assert that they are submitting to their husbands and it has made their marriage better are also quick to point out that their husbands are so "loving, laid-back, and caring" that it is 'easy to submit and obey'. My question is this: did the thought ever come up that ones husband is seen as being loving, caring and laid-back because he is also submitting to you? You submit to him and at the same time, he does the same for you? I think the misunderstanding with egalitarian marriages is that, somehow, the wife is no longer submitting to her husband! But that is not what is being said. In those marriages the wife still "submits", but so does her husband. They both work towards something that is good for the other.

At any rate, I've found a couple of interesting articles on the topic.

Statistics and Biblical Interpretation

Debate-- both sides present

The one other thing that bothers me is the comparison between male/female relationships and parent/child and worker/boss relationships-- saying that these people are all "equal in Jesus" but are not nessisarily equal to each other. My problem, however, is that a (male) child will grow up and be 'equal' and given 'authority', but a female child will not. She will always be 'under' someone, no matter what. And a worker can work hard and 'climb the ladder' to a better position of authority, but you can't 'climb the ladder' in a husband/wife situation. So by the very nature of being female, you are stuck. That would be like saying 'because you are a Gentile, you are always inferior to the Jew'. But God clearly removed those sort of distinctions.


I do like how, in the second link, one of the posters quotes Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. This is how I tend to see the "traditional" marriages working out. I would like to hear other thoughts, however.

The specific instructions to husbands are NOT to submit to their wives, but to LOVE their wives, There is a big difference.

The reason that my husband is laid back and patient and caring is just becuase he is like that. He always has been. It has nothing to do with him submittng to me or anything else.It is his personality, maybe partly to do with the fact that he is Australian, and they do tend to be very laid back and patient.

I just wonder what you or anyone else thinks when you read the verses that I posted that are God instructions to wives. they are pretty specific, but I dont think anyone has actually specifically commented on them yet which is quite concerning.
Also I never said that my marriage improved when I started obeying God and submitting to him.It has been a brilliant marriage from the start.
The thing is that I dont HAVE tot treat him as the head, that is just my decision going by what God tells me in the Bible. Godly submission is a choice not a trial. It brings peace and not hardship.if we trust God and our husbands what is the problem. God knws best what marriage is all about, and  not me or anyone else.

I really think to look at the role of the husband .... we have to go back to the beginning.  Adam.  Abraham, Noah, Jacob, etc.

These men were placed first in the ROLE of "God to man"... and they sought the LORD, obeyed the LORD, listened to the LORD, and shared that with their wives in life, where they went, what they did, why they did it.

It's no different for marriage today.  Or by what God has given us to go on.  Men who seek God first, and listen to Him, sharing that with their wives, they become one before the LORD, and she can understand his role better before the LORD, and she waits upon the LORD, she submits unto the LORD and the pattern for marriage that He gave not just in a few NT passages, but all through the word by those saints who walked it out before.  The husband lays down his life...  He lay aside his personal gain and seeks to walk with the LORD concerning the marriage, his wife and their children.  He leads by going there.  He is willing to go first into all areas of life to make a way for her to follow.  He is tried and proven by God to be a husband, and he does lay down his life to do that, and by example, shows you a man you can trust, respect, love, follow and submit to his leadership.  

Quote from: emilylauren on Sat Jan 17, 2009 - 15:56:56

QuoteNote in that scripture it defines what a wife's role is. It defines her relationship to her husband. Now go back and study the relationship of the husband to the wife. They are the same the husband should love the wife in the same way. We have covered the wife's relationship pretty heavy so now let look at the husband and see if he is to love his wife the same way the wife is to love him. Then we can get back to studding what the headship is about.

I agree. One thing I've noticed is that the people who assert that they are submitting to their husbands and it has made their marriage better are also quick to point out that their husbands are so "loving, laid-back, and caring" that it is 'easy to submit and obey'. My question is this: did the thought ever come up that ones husband is seen as being loving, caring and laid-back because he is also submitting to you? You submit to him and at the same time, he does the same for you? I think the misunderstanding with egalitarian marriages is that, somehow, the wife is no longer submitting to her husband! But that is not what is being said. In those marriages the wife still "submits", but so does her husband. They both work towards something that is good for the other.

At any rate, I've found a couple of interesting articles on the topic.

Statistics and Biblical Interpretation

Debate-- both sides present

The one other thing that bothers me is the comparison between male/female relationships and parent/child and worker/boss relationships-- saying that these people are all "equal in Jesus" but are not nessisarily equal to each other. My problem, however, is that a (male) child will grow up and be 'equal' and given 'authority', but a female child will not. She will always be 'under' someone, no matter what. And a worker can work hard and 'climb the ladder' to a better position of authority, but you can't 'climb the ladder' in a husband/wife situation. So by the very nature of being female, you are stuck. That would be like saying 'because you are a Gentile, you are always inferior to the Jew'. But God clearly removed those sort of distinctions.


I do like how, in the second link, one of the posters quotes Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. This is how I tend to see the "traditional" marriages working out. I would like to hear other thoughts, however.

What is so awful about being under authority? We are all under authority all the time. We have authority in the church, in the country where we live, the authority of law and order, the laws of the land, under the boss at work, the teachers at school.etc etc as well as under Gods authority. You can never  get away from being under any authority whether you are a man or women.If there was no authority there would be bedlam.
Gods authority, as the BIble states in the marriage is that the man is under Christs authority and the wife is under her husbnds. Where is the problem.? We are all under someones authority all the time.  I dont get why women sometimes cannot see this and why it is so hard to accept.

kensington,

QuoteAdam was first and he learned of the LORD first and then he passed things to Eve she needed to know. 

Would you please show us in Genesis where this is stated! 

The only scripture we have related to the instruction not to eat of the tree regarding both Adam and Eve is:

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any animal of the field which Yahweh God had made. He said to the woman, "Has God really said, 'You shall not eat of any tree of the garden?'"
3:2 The woman said to the serpent, "Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat,
3:3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'"  

Eve was taken out of Adam by God.  Created from his side to stand equal.  That is why the Hebrew uses the word that carries a meaning of help from God and not a lesser help.  God instructed both of them and added to the basic instruction he gave to Adam before Eve was created.  To say Adam instructed Eve and God did not is to deny the plain teaching in Genesis.  That understanding of Ch 2 and 3 is just not there.  God made them equal to begin with and he treated them equal until they sinned together.  He still treated them equally after he kicked them out into the world.  He told them both what to expect after leaving the Garden.

QuoteAbraham was the same way, He made the choices and led the family. 

No, Abraham was operating under the patriarchal system which is a very tight male control and women are of just slightly more worth than a slave.  They also practiced polygamy, slave ownership, having cocubines, ets.  It was a system of male control that grew out of sin after Adam and Eve left the Garden.  It was built partially in the differences of pure physical strength and the desire/requirement of having male offspring to control property, family, wealth, etc.  It was not what God commanded.  God's example of marriage was one man-one woman to become one husband-one wife and the two, through marriage, would again become as a single person as before Eve was taken out of Adam.  The patriachal system of Abraham what God allowed because of man's sinfull nature.  God used what was to bring about what would be.

Adam fellowshipped with the LORD first.  Even before Eve was taken from him.  He named the animals, he learned and gleaned from God before Eve came to be.  I'm convinced he informed and educated her in a few things that had been between he and God... like the names of the animals.  That may be a small thing to us, but it is where we begin.  We, all of us, marriage and the way marriage is, began with Adam, and God seeing he needed someone. They were already communing and God saw his emotion and the place where woman would go in his life, then placing her there. 

PAT scripture answers do not speak to the intimacy between God and man, you may have to look for it.  You may have to use understanding to find it.  We need to be able to see past the forest for the trees... so to speak.

Bill wrote;

QuoteNote in that scripture it defines what a wife's role is. It defines her relationship to her husband. Now go back and study the relationship of the husband to the wife. They are the same the husband should love the wife in the same way. We have covered the wife's relationship pretty heavy so now let look at the husband and see if he is to love his wife the same way the wife is to love him. Then we can get back to studding what the headship is about.

Yes, Bill, we have been heavily engaged in the wife's side of the equation...however, the husband and wife are the two elements both on the same side of the = sign, so to speak.  In talking about one we are also speaking to the situation of the other.  (ok, enough with the algebra...not my strong point and it might put everyone to sleep ;o)  )

Looking back at the Eph. 5:21-33 passage, which is where you began this thread...

When Paul instructs wives to "submit themselves

Quote from: emilylauren on Sat Jan 17, 2009 - 15:56:56

QuoteNote in that scripture it defines what a wife's role is. It defines her relationship to her husband. Now go back and study the relationship of the husband to the wife. They are the same the husband should love the wife in the same way. We have covered the wife's relationship pretty heavy so now let look at the husband and see if he is to love his wife the same way the wife is to love him. Then we can get back to studding what the headship is about.

I agree. One thing I've noticed is that the people who assert that they are submitting to their husbands and it has made their marriage better are also quick to point out that their husbands are so "loving, laid-back, and caring" that it is 'easy to submit and obey'. My question is this: did the thought ever come up that ones husband is seen as being loving, caring and laid-back because he is also submitting to you? You submit to him and at the same time, he does the same for you? I think the misunderstanding with egalitarian marriages is that, somehow, the wife is no longer submitting to her husband! But that is not what is being said. In those marriages the wife still "submits", but so does her husband. They both work towards something that is good for the other.

At any rate, I've found a couple of interesting articles on the topic.

Statistics and Biblical Interpretation

Debate-- both sides present

The one other thing that bothers me is the comparison between male/female relationships and parent/child and worker/boss relationships-- saying that these people are all "equal in Jesus" but are not nessisarily equal to each other. My problem, however, is that a (male) child will grow up and be 'equal' and given 'authority', but a female child will not. She will always be 'under' someone, no matter what. And a worker can work hard and 'climb the ladder' to a better position of authority, but you can't 'climb the ladder' in a husband/wife situation. So by the very nature of being female, you are stuck. That would be like saying 'because you are a Gentile, you are always inferior to the Jew'. But God clearly removed those sort of distinctions.


I do like how, in the second link, one of the posters quotes Animal Farm: All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. This is how I tend to see the "traditional" marriages working out. I would like to hear other thoughts, however.

Good points.  Don't have time to respond at the moment.  Perhaps no response is necessary from me...


V

Kensington,

So you think that Adam instructed Eve in the forbidden fruit instead of God when it is plainly stated by Eve that God told them not to even touch the tree which is more than what God told Adam which was not to eat the fruit?  And you believe that because Adam gave Eve her name and names to the animals shown to him by God before Eve was taken out of Adam, that automatically puts man over woman even though the scriptures, when translated into the purest form, say that Eve was created as an equal helper to be with Adam?  That's quite an assumption. 

QuoteWe need to be able to see past the forest for the trees... so to speak 

Well, I think that is not quite what is occuring here.  You are adding to what is said by assuming what isn't said.  I think that you are reading through very "traditional" colored glasses which color the plain reading of the text.

Quote from: WileyClarkson on Sat Jan 17, 2009 - 21:06:25
Kensington,

So you think that Adam instructed Eve in the forbidden fruit instead of God when it is plainly stated by Eve that God told them not to even touch the tree which is more than what God told Adam which was not to eat the fruit?  And you believe that because Adam gave Eve her name and names to the animals shown to him by God before Eve was taken out of Adam, that automatically puts man over woman even though the scriptures, when translated into the purest form, say that Eve was created as an equal helper to be with Adam?  That's quite an assumption. 

QuoteWe need to be able to see past the forest for the trees... so to speak 

Well, I think that is not quite what is occuring here.  You are adding to what is said by assuming what isn't said.  I think that you are reading through very "traditional" colored glasses which color the plain reading of the text.

As Marc has pointed out on another thread, the only one who does not read through "very colored glasses which color the plain reading of the text," is Gary (aka me) for I agree with God.

Quote from: Gary on Sat Jan 17, 2009 - 21:22:05

Quote from: WileyClarkson on Sat Jan 17, 2009 - 21:06:25
Kensington,

So you think that Adam instructed Eve in the forbidden fruit instead of God when it is plainly stated by Eve that God told them not to even touch the tree which is more than what God told Adam which was not to eat the fruit?  And you believe that because Adam gave Eve her name and names to the animals shown to him by God before Eve was taken out of Adam, that automatically puts man over woman even though the scriptures, when translated into the purest form, say that Eve was created as an equal helper to be with Adam?  That's quite an assumption. 

QuoteWe need to be able to see past the forest for the trees... so to speak 

Well, I think that is not quite what is occuring here.  You are adding to what is said by assuming what isn't said.  I think that you are reading through very "traditional" colored glasses which color the plain reading of the text.

As Marc has pointed out on another thread, the only one who does not read through "very colored glasses which color the plain reading of the text," is Gary (aka me) for I agree with God.

You can't be me, I am, therefore I am Gary, translated - the one who agrees with God.

Quote from: WileyClarkson on Sat Jan 17, 2009 - 21:06:25
Kensington,

So you think that Adam instructed Eve in the forbidden fruit instead of God when it is plainly stated by Eve that God told them not to even touch the tree which is more than what God told Adam which was not to eat the fruit?  And you believe that because Adam gave Eve her name and names to the animals shown to him by God before Eve was taken out of Adam, that automatically puts man over woman even though the scriptures, when translated into the purest form, say that Eve was created as an equal helper to be with Adam?  That's quite an assumption. 

QuoteWe need to be able to see past the forest for the trees... so to speak 

Well, I think that is not quite what is occuring here.  You are adding to what is said by assuming what isn't said.  I think that you are reading through very "traditional" colored glasses which color the plain reading of the text.

Well, of course not, but do you think the forbidden fruit is all they talked about?  You are assuming that ONLY what has been written about the tree is all Eve knew.  I find that silly.

I'm saying that God put Adam as husband in leadership over Eve.  They sinned.  No doubt about it.  But, according to the word, what happened next did not change the fact that Adam was the man and she was to submit.  Had they not sinned, this may be different today, but they did, and God continued through His word to relate first to man, and then to woman in a marriage.  Sure there are marriages where men have abdicated that role.  But, it hasn't happened in all marriages.  Being the helpmate does not take away that He is the priest of the home and he is the one who does and should lead, especially in spiritual matters and in all areas.  If the husband/father is not leading in these areas for the Christian family, how do they arrive where they are supposed to be?  Certainly I have areas of the marriage, home and children that are my domain, but they are all subject to my husband's leading.