Wives submit to your husbands

[grace]

Yes, I did. And for the most part, agreed with it. I don't agree 100% with your translation and application of hupotasso, and I took your "Submission is not a bad thing!" as a response to something that I didn't see. Perhaps it was just an editorial comment? If so, I totally agree.

If you don't mind, I don't feel obligated to answer your last personal question.

So you did submit, you just do not want to share the details?

"did"? Do. Submitting isn't a one-time event. It's a way of living. It's a book that doesn't have a final chapter.

Why the personal question?

Did not mean it to be personal...I was just showing you that Jesus showed His love for us on the cross first and we submitted to that love by obeying His words by action...right?

[zoonance]

I am not sure why such a passionate discussion on mutual submission has to exist except that it is clear that a woman may not want to submit to a husband and will have to give meaning to a text that is not naturally there.  I can understand that. (Yes, one could just as easily argue that a man does not want to submit to his wife either - and thus the resistance to accepting an alternative, historical, natural and common usage of the biblical text and examples from genesis to revelation)  The analogies offered are actually pretty good - though an analogy didn't hang on the cross.  Analogies do fall short.  (I have never had sex with Jesus, for instance.  Though the analogy I am sure will eventually involve a  "You do every time you have sex with your wife" line of reasoning)  Mutual submission is not a bad, nor sinful, nor particularly inaccurate biblical view of marriage (husband and wife - versus male and female).   But to carry (or worse yet, to force) the marriage analogy et al to every nook and cranny of theology, ecclesiology, cristology, etc will likely lead to a divorce of sorts - unfaithfulness to the words and the intent behind them.  The reason people resist alternative interpretations is not because we are a bunch of insensitive clods carrying a big stick wanting to keep our women "in their place" or barefoot and pregnant.    

[phoebe]

Yes, I did. And for the most part, agreed with it. I don't agree 100% with your translation and application of hupotasso, and I took your "Submission is not a bad thing!" as a response to something that I didn't see. Perhaps it was just an editorial comment? If so, I totally agree.

If you don't mind, I don't feel obligated to answer your last personal question.

So you did submit, you just do not want to share the details?

"did"? Do. Submitting isn't a one-time event. It's a way of living. It's a book that doesn't have a final chapter.

Why the personal question?

Did not mean it to be personal...I was just showing you that Jesus showed His love for us on the cross first and we submitted to that love by obeying His words by action...right?

I don't think I'm understanding you corrrectly. What I hear is a works-oriented salvation. Is that right? Maybe if you explain exactly what you meant: "...by obeying His words by action" 

[Mystery Man]

I believe submission to Christ involves some obedience above and beyond some sense of "mutual" functions.

Mutual submission is not "I will if you will". That's the human selfishness way. It's an intimate relationship where both parties trust the other to do what is best for them. I trust Christ to do what is best for me. Christ trusts me to do what is best for Him (i.e., for His Church).

What you are talking about, is mutual understanding, which is not even close to any type of submission towards one another.  Jesus Christ does not submit unto us, we submit unto him.  When he asks something of us, we should not question. But if we ask something of him, he has every right to question, especailly if what we ask is something that is selfish.   In the gospels, a mother asked Jesus to allow her two sons to sit on his right hand.  Jesus replied that it was not his to give.  That it was only for his Father to say who sits on the right and who sits on the left.  So you can see that Jesus did not "submit" to this mothers request !

[phoebe]

I am not sure why such a passionate discussion on mutual submission has to exist except that it is clear that a woman may not want to submit to a husband and will have to give meaning to a text that is not naturally there.  I can understand that. (Yes, one could just as easily argue that a man does not want to submit to his wife either - and thus the resistance to accepting an alternative, historical, natural and common usage of the biblical text and examples from genesis to revelation)  The analogies offered are actually pretty good - though an analogy didn't hang on the cross.  Analogies do fall short.  (I have never had sex with Jesus, for instance.  Though the analogy I am sure will eventually involve a  "You do every time you have sex with your wife" line of reasoning)  Mutual submission is not a bad, nor sinful, nor particularly inaccurate biblical view of marriage (husband and wife - versus male and female).   But to carry (or worse yet, to force) the marriage analogy et al to every nook and cranny of theology, ecclesiology, cristology, etc will likely lead to a divorce of sorts - unfaithfulness to the words and the intent behind them.  The reason people resist alternative interpretations is not because we are a bunch of insensitive clods carrying a big stick wanting to keep our women "in their place" or barefoot and pregnant.   

If that's what you're hearing, that a " a woman may not want to submit to a husband", then you are not carefully reading. You can claim it as an argument, but it is a false one.

And to make it about sex is quite disturbing.

The discussion is important because we don't practice this biblical form of living.

[zoonance]

mutual submission is a work.      I wondered how long it would take for some accusation of "works-oriented salvation" or the like would pop up.     Obedience is submission?   Or it isn't"?  


Sort of the old:
"Oh, yes, I obey because (fill in the blank) and not because He is my Master and He asked me to."

[zoonance]

I am not sure why such a passionate discussion on mutual submission has to exist except that it is clear that a woman may not want to submit to a husband and will have to give meaning to a text that is not naturally there.  I can understand that. (Yes, one could just as easily argue that a man does not want to submit to his wife either - and thus the resistance to accepting an alternative, historical, natural and common usage of the biblical text and examples from genesis to revelation)  The analogies offered are actually pretty good - though an analogy didn't hang on the cross.  Analogies do fall short.  (I have never had sex with Jesus, for instance.  Though the analogy I am sure will eventually involve a  "You do every time you have sex with your wife" line of reasoning)  Mutual submission is not a bad, nor sinful, nor particularly inaccurate biblical view of marriage (husband and wife - versus male and female).   But to carry (or worse yet, to force) the marriage analogy et al to every nook and cranny of theology, ecclesiology, cristology, etc will likely lead to a divorce of sorts - unfaithfulness to the words and the intent behind them.  The reason people resist alternative interpretations is not because we are a bunch of insensitive clods carrying a big stick wanting to keep our women "in their place" or barefoot and pregnant.   

If that's what you're hearing, that a " a woman may not want to submit to a husband", then you are not carefully reading. You can claim it as an argument, but it is a false one.

And to make it about sex is quite disturbing.

The discussion is important because we don't practice this biblical form of living.

How about bearing children then?  What are you so angry about?

[phoebe]

I am not sure why such a passionate discussion on mutual submission has to exist except that it is clear that a woman may not want to submit to a husband and will have to give meaning to a text that is not naturally there.  I can understand that. (Yes, one could just as easily argue that a man does not want to submit to his wife either - and thus the resistance to accepting an alternative, historical, natural and common usage of the biblical text and examples from genesis to revelation)  The analogies offered are actually pretty good - though an analogy didn't hang on the cross.  Analogies do fall short.  (I have never had sex with Jesus, for instance.  Though the analogy I am sure will eventually involve a  "You do every time you have sex with your wife" line of reasoning)  Mutual submission is not a bad, nor sinful, nor particularly inaccurate biblical view of marriage (husband and wife - versus male and female).   But to carry (or worse yet, to force) the marriage analogy et al to every nook and cranny of theology, ecclesiology, cristology, etc will likely lead to a divorce of sorts - unfaithfulness to the words and the intent behind them.  The reason people resist alternative interpretations is not because we are a bunch of insensitive clods carrying a big stick wanting to keep our women "in their place" or barefoot and pregnant.   

If that's what you're hearing, that a " a woman may not want to submit to a husband", then you are not carefully reading. You can claim it as an argument, but it is a false one.

And to make it about sex is quite disturbing.

The discussion is important because we don't practice this biblical form of living.

How about bearing children then?  What are you so angry about?

What does that have to do with anything? Bearing children is not about submission. Not in a healthy relationship, anyway.

I'm not angry. And you're saying I am won't make me angry.

[phoebe]

mutual submission is a work.      I wondered how long it would take for some accusation of "works-oriented salvation" or the like would pop up.     Obedience is submission?   Or it isn't"? 


Sort of the old:
"Oh, yes, I obey because (fill in the blank) and not because He is my Master and He asked me to."

Mutual submission is not a salvation-oriented works. It is because of a trusting, loving, respecting and honoring relationship, and because of those things, one yields when it is better for the other, not because of genitalia or a false idea of hierarchy. That's why it's mutual. Sometimes it is better for one, sometimes better for another.

[grace]

Yes, I did. And for the most part, agreed with it. I don't agree 100% with your translation and application of hupotasso, and I took your "Submission is not a bad thing!" as a response to something that I didn't see. Perhaps it was just an editorial comment? If so, I totally agree.

If you don't mind, I don't feel obligated to answer your last personal question.

So you did submit, you just do not want to share the details?

"did"? Do. Submitting isn't a one-time event. It's a way of living. It's a book that doesn't have a final chapter.

Why the personal question?

Did not mean it to be personal...I was just showing you that Jesus showed His love for us on the cross first and we submitted to that love by obeying His words by action...right?

I don't think I'm understanding you corrrectly. What I hear is a works-oriented salvation. Is that right? Maybe if you explain exactly what you meant: "...by obeying His words by action" 

You are reading something into my post that I am not saying....so yes! there is a misuderstanding.

I do not believe in works for salvation...I believe because we are saved..we work.

I believe because Christ died for us (love...and in submission to His Father) we respond(submit) to that love. To respond, I believe means action. How do we respond? This was the question that you took personal, that should have been general.

Some submit to his love and some reject it......We are covered by His love(blood). By His covering I believe we are also under!

[phoebe]

Thanks for clarifying.

I don't see submitting as a "work", but maybe that's because I don't understand it in the same way as you. I see it as an honor and privilege, one that sometimes comes with a painful price, but the satisfaction is that it is for the good of someone I love and respect. That someone in my life does the same for me. I don't believe it is loving or for the good of my husband to make him be the sole responsible person for the well-being of our family and home. Tough decisions should be equally shared so that should the burden of failure come, it doesn't fall on the shoulders of one.  That is a huge and unfair burden to place on another. (I believe this would decrease the divorce rate in huge numbers.) God gave us each other in this intimate relationship of oneness for a reason.

I also believe it works the same way within the church Body. I believe we would have far fewer church splits if we functioned in this way.

[grace]

Thanks for clarifying.

I don't see submitting as a "work", but maybe that's because I don't understand it in the same way as you. I see it as an honor and privilege, one that sometimes comes with a painful price, but the satisfaction is that it is for the good of someone I love and respect. That someone in my life does the same for me. I don't believe it is loving or for the good of my husband to make him be the sole responsible person for the well-being of our family and home. Tough decisions should be equally shared so that should the burden of failure come, it doesn't fall on the shoulders of one.  That is a huge and unfair burden to place on another. (I believe this would decrease the divorce rate in huge numbers.) God gave us each other in this intimate relationship of oneness for a reason.

I also believe it works the same way within the church Body. I believe we would have far fewer church splits if we functioned in this way.

I do believe in discussing things with your husband, I believe the wife has a lot of input in the marriage. Many of the men that have shared their testamonies of them listening to their wives shows how God said to ...love them with understanding. But I did not make the man the head....God did!

If you read my other post, I mentioned that if submission is not done out of the right spirit it is of no positive affect on the marriage.

Are you saying that by submitting there is not action taken?

[chosenone]

Thanks for clarifying.

I don't see submitting as a "work", but maybe that's because I don't understand it in the same way as you. I see it as an honor and privilege, one that sometimes comes with a painful price, but the satisfaction is that it is for the good of someone I love and respect. That someone in my life does the same for me. I don't believe it is loving or for the good of my husband to make him be the sole responsible person for the well-being of our family and home. Tough decisions should be equally shared so that should the burden of failure come, it doesn't fall on the shoulders of one.  That is a huge and unfair burden to place on another. (I believe this would decrease the divorce rate in huge numbers.) God gave us each other in this intimate relationship of oneness for a reason.

I also believe it works the same way within the church Body. I believe we would have far fewer church splits if we functioned in this way.

I do believe in discussing things with your husband, I believe the wife has a lot of input in the marriage. Many of the men that have shared their testamonies of them listening to their wives shows how God said to ...love them with understanding. But I did not make the man the head....God did!

If you read my other post, I mentioned that if submission is not done out of the right spirit it is of no positive affect on the marriage.

Are you saying that by submitting there is not action taken?

Submission, far from being at all weak, takes a lot of strength, especially if the wife who is doing the submitting is a very strong women. I am strong, I have had to be to get through some of ther awful life events that I have had to face, so being submissive isnt always easy but God has doen a lot of work in me and I know enough to know that Gods way is ALWAYS the best and is always for our good.
I have known women who are quite weak emotionally , but are very bossy and domineering with their husbands, I guess it is out of fear and insecurity that they do this. if they trusted God and their husbands they wouldnt be afraid of not being in control.

[His Princess]

Thanks for clarifying.

I don't see submitting as a "work", but maybe that's because I don't understand it in the same way as you. I see it as an honor and privilege, one that sometimes comes with a painful price, but the satisfaction is that it is for the good of someone I love and respect. That someone in my life does the same for me. I don't believe it is loving or for the good of my husband to make him be the sole responsible person for the well-being of our family and home. Tough decisions should be equally shared so that should the burden of failure come, it doesn't fall on the shoulders of one.  That is a huge and unfair burden to place on another. (I believe this would decrease the divorce rate in huge numbers.) God gave us each other in this intimate relationship of oneness for a reason.

I also believe it works the same way within the church Body. I believe we would have far fewer church splits if we functioned in this way.

I do believe in discussing things with your husband, I believe the wife has a lot of input in the marriage. Many of the men that have shared their testamonies of them listening to their wives shows how God said to ...love them with understanding. But I did not make the man the head....God did!

If you read my other post, I mentioned that if submission is not done out of the right spirit it is of no positive affect on the marriage.

Are you saying that by submitting there is not action taken?

Submission, far from being at all weak, takes a lot of strength, especially if the wife who is doing the submitting is a very strong women. I am strong, I have had to be to get through some of ther awful life events that I have had to face, so being submissive isnt always easy but God has doen a lot of work in me and I know enough to know that Gods way is ALWAYS the best and is always for our good.
I have known women who are quite weak emotionally , but are very bossy and domineering with their husbands, I guess it is out of fear and insecurity that they do this. if they trusted God and their husbands they wouldnt be afraid of not being in control.

Yes, chosenone, I agree with you completely.  People have the wrong idea of this, they think the wife sits in the corner like a doormat while her husband struts around issuing edicts and such....it's so not like that at all!  I, too, am very strong willed by nature.  But I've found that when I "let go" and just relax about everything and look to my husband's leadership, I feel such PEACE, the peace that passes all understanding.  It's really wonderful.  Of course, I am blessed with a husband who is wonderful to me.  He is so sweet it would be like a crime against nature (in my mind) to not submit to him!  He thoroughly deserves all of my love and respect.

I know that wives are still supposed to submit to their husbands even if they're not Christians; I don't know how they do that, but I know there are many women in that situation.

In the last five years, there was only one instance where something came up that we couldn't agree on together.  This was a situation where there was no way you could compromise -- it either had to go one way or the other.  I really, really wanted my way on this one and we debated it for like three days.  At that point, I realized that I really needed to let this one go.  So the next day I told my husband that even though I still felt the same way about the issue at hand, that I was going to step back and let him make the decision and that I would completely support whatever he decided without any kind of bad attitude.  In the end, he did decide to go the way I wanted to, but of course I didn't know that at the time. 

[phoebe]

I love it when people practice mutual submission unintentionally.

[chosenone]

I love it when people practice mutual submission unintentionally.

better to practice godly submission unintentionally, but that often has to be a decision that we make rather than something that we naturally want to do as women. Many women in my experiance struggle with any sort of submisssion becuase naturally many of us want to be in control and to have our way. Hmmm God is very wise isnt He in what He tellls us to do and not to do.

[grace]

Thanks for clarifying.

I don't see submitting as a "work", but maybe that's because I don't understand it in the same way as you. I see it as an honor and privilege, one that sometimes comes with a painful price, but the satisfaction is that it is for the good of someone I love and respect. That someone in my life does the same for me. I don't believe it is loving or for the good of my husband to make him be the sole responsible person for the well-being of our family and home. Tough decisions should be equally shared so that should the burden of failure come, it doesn't fall on the shoulders of one.  That is a huge and unfair burden to place on another. (I believe this would decrease the divorce rate in huge numbers.) God gave us each other in this intimate relationship of oneness for a reason.

I also believe it works the same way within the church Body. I believe we would have far fewer church splits if we functioned in this way.

I do believe in discussing things with your husband, I believe the wife has a lot of input in the marriage. Many of the men that have shared their testamonies of them listening to their wives shows how God said to ...love them with understanding. But I did not make the man the head....God did!

If you read my other post, I mentioned that if submission is not done out of the right spirit it is of no positive affect on the marriage.

Are you saying that by submitting there is not action taken?

Submission, far from being at all weak, takes a lot of strength, especially if the wife who is doing the submitting is a very strong women. I am strong, I have had to be to get through some of ther awful life events that I have had to face, so being submissive isnt always easy but God has doen a lot of work in me and I know enough to know that Gods way is ALWAYS the best and is always for our good.
I have known women who are quite weak emotionally , but are very bossy and domineering with their husbands, I guess it is out of fear and insecurity that they do this. if they trusted God and their husbands they wouldnt be afraid of not being in control.

Yes, chosenone, I agree with you completely.  People have the wrong idea of this, they think the wife sits in the corner like a doormat while her husband struts around issuing edicts and such....it's so not like that at all!  I, too, am very strong willed by nature.  But I've found that when I "let go" and just relax about everything and look to my husband's leadership, I feel such PEACE, the peace that passes all understanding.  It's really wonderful.  Of course, I am blessed with a husband who is wonderful to me.  He is so sweet it would be like a crime against nature (in my mind) to not submit to him!  He thoroughly deserves all of my love and respect.

I know that wives are still supposed to submit to their husbands even if they're not Christians; I don't know how they do that, but I know there are many women in that situation.

In the last five years, there was only one instance where something came up that we couldn't agree on together.  This was a situation where there was no way you could compromise -- it either had to go one way or the other.  I really, really wanted my way on this one and we debated it for like three days.  At that point, I realized that I really needed to let this one go.  So the next day I told my husband that even though I still felt the same way about the issue at hand, that I was going to step back and let him make the decision and that I would completely support whatever he decided without any kind of bad attitude.  In the end, he did decide to go the way I wanted to, but of course I didn't know that at the time. 

This is a wonderful example of submitting to your husbands lead.  Even if he went the other way with his decision... You showed a perfect picture of how it should be done.

[phoebe]

chosenone - I don't think women desire being in control any more than men do, so I think this picture you keep painting is quite out of balance, biased, and unfair. Learning to be a yielding spirit for the good of another is something we all must do.

I also think it is quite selfish of women/wives to burden their men/husbands with all of the responsibility and not share it, equally. No wonder they don't live as long as we do. We're killing them. Sharing that burden of responsibility is actually a selfless act, not one of power or control.

[grace]

Why do you think Sin came through Adam if it was Eve that first took of the fruit?

Why didn't it say through Eve?

[phoebe]

Why do you think Sin came through Adam if it was Eve that first took of the fruit?

Why didn't it say through Eve?

Is this rhetorical?

MO is that it came through Adam because he 1) failed to protect the Garden (his job in ch.2) which allowed the serpent in, and 2) did not relay God's instructions about eating/not eating accurately, which gave the serpent an open door for deception.

Both were wrong, no matter how you cut it. The woman's transgression seemed different, as she is referred to as being "deceived", and God is more forgiving toward her, giving her the Promise of redemption (some refer to it as "the curse", but that isn't correct).

[chosenone]

chosenone - I don't think women desire being in control any more than men do, so I think this picture you keep painting is quite out of balance, biased, and unfair. Learning to be a yielding spirit for the good of another is something we all must do.

I also think it is quite selfish of women/wives to burden their men/husbands with all of the responsibility and not share it, equally. No wonder they don't live as long as we do. We're killing them. Sharing that burden of responsibility is actually a selfless act, not one of power or control.

Thats quite amusing actually to say that men are dying early becuase they are being allowed to be the head of the home. Being the head doesnt mean that they have this 'awful' job of being the head and having to make all of the 'awful' decisions. It means that they have the ultimate descision when they isnt agreement as his princess said above.
If God tells them to be the head then he gives them the gifts and abilities that they need as he does with wives also.

The picture that I paint of women who are controlling is one that I have seen over and over in those who I have known. Maybe I am unlucky in that I just happen to have been in contact with many women like this but that is the fact of the matter. My husbands ex wife is one of them and his mother is another who I can think of immediatly. My husbands ex used to secretly be called 'Hitler' by her sons when they were teenagers, sort of says it all really doesnt it.
I was only speaking to  a man yesterday who said to us that he has been TOLD by his wife that they need yet another three peice suite and they have been out looking for one, despite that fact that they have had three in only 8 years. He was obviously unhappy about it but she evidently wears the trousers and so gets her way. I see it all the time.Men will put up with it to keep the peace.(or they think it does anyway)

Fortunately I have some good friends who arent like this and so the balance is redressed, but nevertheless I have known many women who really are the 'boss' and never allow their husbands to be the head in the right and godly way. Strangely enough in each of these cases that I know of the marriages have either ended or they are not happy ones.
I have also known marriages where the wife is a very strong person, but she has ensured that her husband is the head and hasnt tried to take this place and these are generally good marriages becuase they are being obedient to what God has told them, and He  blesses that.
I really feel that in a marriage where the women wants to be the head (and is the head) God cannot bless them becuase they are being disobedient to Gods order that He has set for marriage.

[phoebe]

chosenone - This is really quite frustrating for me when you take part of what I say and then add your editorialized version of it as if that was what I said. If you want, quote me, please, but do so without changing it.

For example, I said:

"I also think it is quite selfish of women/wives to burden their men/husbands with all of the responsibility and not share it, equally. No wonder they don't live as long as we do. We're killing them. Sharing that burden of responsibility is actually a selfless act, not one of power or control."

And you replied:

"Thats quite amusing actually to say that men are dying early becuase they are being allowed to be the head of the home. Being the head doesnt mean that they have this 'awful' job of being the head and having to make all of the 'awful' decisions. "

It changes the tone and intent of what I say when you do that. I didn't say the "job" was "awful", and I didn't say they are dying because they are being "allowed" to be the "head of the home". I said (paraphrasing it accurately) that it is a huge burden of responsibility to carry alone and that men die earlier than women because of it.  It is a statistical fact.

"I really feel that in a marriage where the women wants to be the head (and is the head) God cannot bless them becuase they are being disobedient to Gods order that He has set for marriage."

My marriage and life is proof that this is a wrong conclusion. It certainly isn't based on Scripture.

The point is not the picture you paint from what you see today in a fallen world, but the one that God painted when He made the first woman from the first man and then rejoined them in a marital relationship as one.

[Mystery Man]

chosenone - I don't think women desire being in control any more than men do, so I think this picture you keep painting is quite out of balance, biased, and unfair. Learning to be a yielding spirit for the good of another is something we all must do.

I also think it is quite selfish of women/wives to burden their men/husbands with all of the responsibility and not share it, equally. No wonder they don't live as long as we do. We're killing them. Sharing that burden of responsibility is actually a selfless act, not one of power or control.

As a man and a husband, I despise the use of the word "controll", in your statement.

No man wants to be in "controll".  God designed man to make descisions that effect the relatinship between husband and wife.  It is built into our being to be responsible .  Not only for our wife, but our whole household.  It is within the being of a woman to submit to the man's design to make those hard descisions.  A man wants his wife's input and suggestions.  But a man's being starts to tremble when his wife or any woman tries to usurp any authority over any man = married or unmarried.  

Now that is not to say that a man can not work for a woman.  As long as it is kept on a professional level.  But I will guarantee you, that no man would want a woman drill sergant in boot camp.   And I think it is a very bad idea that they put women and men in the armed forces in such a manner that they are to be looked at as equal.  If in a battle situation, if a man got shot and falls.  He might get one or two to help him up.  But if a woman gets shot and hits the ground. She will get 50 men to help her out.   And a man will stick his head out way beyond what he would do for another man, just because she is a woman.  That is because it is built into our design.  And if a man does not help out a woman, he is looked down upon from other men.

Our society is so mixed up nowadays.  That some men are affraid to be a man anymore.  Just think of the law suits or just think of the worldly view if you do not recognize a woman on equal plain with a man.    Again, I have not problem of a woman having a high postition or even owning her own buisness or whatever.  But to even suggest that she can usurp her authority over a man just because this and that, is not going to sit well with a Godly designed man.   But as long as it pertains to getting the job done, there is no problem.  

I know a lot of women that make me look dumb.  But that does not mean that my Godly designed manly  mentality is not going to easily submit unto the authority of a woman.   As a man you fight every being of your soul.  

In the Army, a man's authority is vital.  It can mean the difference between life an death.  But men can also at times need a woman's support.  As Barak did in the book of Judges.  But Barak still lead the army into the battle field.  This is also seen when King David soldiers were about to go into battle.  He told them to go unto their wives and not just for sex.  The purpose is for men to reminded of their responsibility .  They are the protectors and they are the one's who should go to war.   Again, it is ingrained within a man.  He knows it, but at times he needs to be reminded. And just as King David knew this, he also knew that men minds are then  only concerned one thing.  Winning the battle and being so focused on that one thing.

The man is willing to die for his wife.  That is because it is built into his Godly design.  The woman is to support the man and be helpful, even suggest, and submit, which is also her Godly design.

It is the way God built men and women.

[fanuvmxpx]

I know a lot of women that make me look dumb.  But that does not mean that my Godly designed manly  mentality is not going to easily submit unto the authority of a woman.   As a man you fight every being of your soul.  

Would you feel less of a man if a woman ordered you to do push-ups? Why can't my wife say "No" to my "Final Say" as a man? I guess push comes to shove, and its a split second decision, you can knock your wife out and carry her where you want to go...but in 99.9% of life...you shouldn't be usurping any authority...its not needed.

Your described "feelings" about how you would be insulted as a man if a woman did x,y,z are just that, feelings. Superiority complexes can blind people. My wife had a father whom had everyone "under thumb" and now she won't stop talking because she was never allowed to while growing up (I don't mind her talking, but often times she tries to shut me out from speaking due to frustration from her youth).

If a woman joins the Army, wants equal rights, and is on the battlefield...i sure hope 50 guys wouldn't go try to help her. She forfeited "chivalry" back at home when she enlisted, she is now another number. If I had to choose between my best friend and a female in the field of battle...I'm grabbing my best friend. For 1) My best friend is stronger and would be more valuable in the field and 2) She doesn't get to pull the chivalry card out after waiving a feminism flag her entire life.

If from this day forward, my wife made every single decision in our house, I would feel no less manly than I do now. I was a man when I was single, I am a man married, and will always be a man. *Fan drinks a lot of water so he can mark his territory later*

[chosenone]

chosenone - This is really quite frustrating for me when you take part of what I say and then add your editorialized version of it as if that was what I said. If you want, quote me, please, but do so without changing it.

For example, I said:

"I also think it is quite selfish of women/wives to burden their men/husbands with all of the responsibility and not share it, equally. No wonder they don't live as long as we do. We're killing them. Sharing that burden of responsibility is actually a selfless act, not one of power or control."

And you replied:

"Thats quite amusing actually to say that men are dying early becuase they are being allowed to be the head of the home. Being the head doesnt mean that they have this 'awful' job of being the head and having to make all of the 'awful' decisions. "

It changes the tone and intent of what I say when you do that. I didn't say the "job" was "awful", and I didn't say they are dying because they are being "allowed" to be the "head of the home". I said (paraphrasing it accurately) that it is a huge burden of responsibility to carry alone and that men die earlier than women because of it.  It is a statistical fact.

"I really feel that in a marriage where the women wants to be the head (and is the head) God cannot bless them becuase they are being disobedient to Gods order that He has set for marriage."

My marriage and life is proof that this is a wrong conclusion. It certainly isn't based on Scripture.

The point is not the picture you paint from what you see today in a fallen world, but the one that God painted when He made the first woman from the first man and then rejoined them in a marital relationship as one.

So why is it that married men live longer than single men then?(and that is a fact) If the burden of being married is so great then they would die sooner than men who dont have to be responsible for the same things. A man who is in his rightful position as head of the family wont die earlier than those who arent. You seem to be implying that if we do as God tells us to do then we will die sooner. I think that is a rather strange assumption to make.

[chosenone]

I know a lot of women that make me look dumb.  But that does not mean that my Godly designed manly  mentality is not going to easily submit unto the authority of a woman.   As a man you fight every being of your soul.  

Would you feel less of a man if a woman ordered you to do push-ups? Why can't my wife say "No" to my "Final Say" as a man? I guess push comes to shove, and its a split second decision, you can knock your wife out and carry her where you want to go...but in 99.9% of life...you shouldn't be usurping any authority...its not needed.

Your described "feelings" about how you would be insulted as a man if a woman did x,y,z are just that, feelings. Superiority complexes can blind people. My wife had a father whom had everyone "under thumb" and now she won't stop talking because she was never allowed to while growing up (I don't mind her talking, but often times she tries to shut me out from speaking due to frustration from her youth).

If a woman joins the Army, wants equal rights, and is on the battlefield...i sure hope 50 guys wouldn't go try to help her. She forfeited "chivalry" back at home when she enlisted, she is now another number. If I had to choose between my best friend and a female in the field of battle...I'm grabbing my best friend. For 1) My best friend is stronger and would be more valuable in the field and 2) She doesn't get to pull the chivalry card out after waiving a feminism flag her entire life.

If from this day forward, my wife made every single decision in our house, I would feel no less manly than I do now. I was a man when I was single, I am a man married, and will always be a man. *Fan drinks a lot of water so he can mark his territory later*

If your wife does say no to your final say that would mean that she is not being obedient to God. You personally may not mind that she makes all of the decisions but that isnt the way that God intends marriage to be. I am not sure it has anything to do with being manly or whatever, but as Christians we surely have to do our best to be what God wants us to be and do what he wants us to do.
Many men find it easier to just allow their wives to be in charge but that isnt what God tells them to do.lt is copping out in my opinion.(I am in  no way saying that you are doing this) Many women want to have things all their own way, but this also isnt what God tells them to do. Both the husband and wife are responsible for what God tells them to do in the Bible.
It isnt all about what we want but what God wants isnt it? He created marriage and He created us and he knows what is best for us.If we dont believe this then why are we Christians?

[Mystery Man]

I know a lot of women that make me look dumb.  But that does not mean that my Godly designed manly  mentality is not going to easily submit unto the authority of a woman.   As a man you fight every being of your soul.  

Would you feel less of a man if a woman ordered you to do push-ups? Why can't my wife say "No" to my "Final Say" as a man? I guess push comes to shove, and its a split second decision, you can knock your wife out and carry her where you want to go...but in 99.9% of life...you shouldn't be usurping any authority...its not needed.

Your described "feelings" about how you would be insulted as a man if a woman did x,y,z are just that, feelings. Superiority complexes can blind people. My wife had a father whom had everyone "under thumb" and now she won't stop talking because she was never allowed to while growing up (I don't mind her talking, but often times she tries to shut me out from speaking due to frustration from her youth).

If a woman joins the Army, wants equal rights, and is on the battlefield...i sure hope 50 guys wouldn't go try to help her. She forfeited "chivalry" back at home when she enlisted, she is now another number. If I had to choose between my best friend and a female in the field of battle...I'm grabbing my best friend. For 1) My best friend is stronger and would be more valuable in the field and 2) She doesn't get to pull the chivalry card out after waiving a feminism flag her entire life.

If from this day forward, my wife made every single decision in our house, I would feel no less manly than I do now. I was a man when I was single, I am a man married, and will always be a man. *Fan drinks a lot of water so he can mark his territory later*

Complex ?

So, would you or wouldn't you die for your wife ?   If you say yes, would you ask her to decide for you first ?

[Bon Voyage]

Wow.  31 pages when Ephesians 5 is so clear.

What happened to the RM mantra of "speak where the bible speaks, be silent where the bible is silent?"

[HRoberson]

So Christ has mutual submission to the church?

Yes.

He died for it.

It lives for Him.

[WileyClarkson]

No man wants to be in "controll".  God designed man to make descisions that effect the relatinship between husband and wife.  It is built into our being to be responsible .  Not only for our wife, but our whole household.  It is within the being of a woman to submit to the man's design to make those hard descisions.  A man wants his wife's input and suggestions.   But a man's being starts to tremble when his wife or any woman tries to usurp any authority over any man = married or unmarried. 

What a crock!  That is about as big an assumption as any I have seen so far!  My marriage has based on mutual submission since day one, and in the 1970's CoC, that was an unheard of view!  We make decissions together that will effect us together.  When only one is effected, the other has input but the one that is directly effected makes the decission (job decissions, serious health problems, etc).  When making decissions for children, we trusted each other to make them when ever necessary because we were usually not together at those times.  In emergencies, my wife has the same decission authority that I do and can make them wisely, and at times, better than I can, depending on the circumstances!   If you want to say YOU start to tremble when a woman/wife makes a decission, that's fine with me.  Go ahead and tremble and feel threatened!  BUT DON'T INCLUDE ME.  Speak only for youself!

I believe that almost all marriages that survive more than 20 years in this day and age can also be traced to the basic fundemental principle in the marriage of mutual submission.  My wife and I will hit the 35 years together mark in less than two weeks, and that doesn't count the 2 year engagement we had.  The marriages that I have seen have the toughest time surviving among my friends in and out of the church are those where the husband had the male in control mind set because God made men that way!  I have seen alot of divorces in my life, and this one factor was present in the majority of the divorces.

If a woman joins the Army, wants equal rights, and is on the battlefield...i sure hope 50 guys wouldn't go try to help her. She forfeited "chivalry" back at home when she enlisted, she is now another number. If I had to choose between my best friend and a female in the field of battle...I'm grabbing my best friend. For 1) My best friend is stronger and would be more valuable in the field and 2) She doesn't get to pull the chivalry card out after waiving a feminism flag her entire life.

So you would let a fellow officer die or have to save herself just because she is a woman or what if she was the only help you could get in that fire fight?  What if your best friend all of a sudden turned sour on you and ran, what then?
You apparently feel that women are not qualified to fight for their country, even though women have fought in every war the US has ever been in!  You also don't seem to think they should be helped by the men if a tough situation.  What if a man is in the same situation?  Or better yet, what if the man in that situation had only women to help him, should he allow them to save his butt?  I carry a gun for a living and have done so for 25 years.  I have worked with some very qualified women that I absolutely trust to cover my backside in a fire fight, some of them a whole lot more than some of the squirrly men I have had to work with.

     

[WileyClarkson]

Since I didn't get a response to my question, has anyone in this discussion seen the movie FireProof?

It was in the theaters about 4 months ago and is now out on DVD.  It is about a fireman who decides to try to save his marriage.  In the process of doing that, he becomes aware of just how selfish he was and, after accepting Christ, changes how he treats his wife by following a diary given to him by his father.  In the process, the wife, who has been terribly hurt by male ego selfishness, and is just a little selfish in some ways also, though the efforts of her husband's change, comes around to reaffirming their marriage at the end of the show.  It is a show that is based in the application of mutual submission.

If you haven't seen this show, it is well worth the $20 you will spend to purchase the DVD at Wal Mart!

[Mystery Man]

No man wants to be in "controll".  God designed man to make descisions that effect the relatinship between husband and wife.  It is built into our being to be responsible .  Not only for our wife, but our whole household.  It is within the being of a woman to submit to the man's design to make those hard descisions.  A man wants his wife's input and suggestions.   But a man's being starts to tremble when his wife or any woman tries to usurp any authority over any man = married or unmarried. 

What a crock!  That is about as big an assumption as any I have seen so far!  My marriage has based on mutual submission since day one, and in the 1970's CoC, that was an unheard of view!  We make decissions together that will effect us together.  When only one is effected, the other has input but the one that is directly effected makes the decission (job decissions, serious health problems, etc).  When making decissions for children, we trusted each other to make them when ever necessary because we were usually not together at those times.  In emergencies, my wife has the same decission authority that I do and can make them wisely, and at times, better than I can, depending on the circumstances!   If you want to say YOU start to tremble when a woman/wife makes a decission, that's fine with me.  Go ahead and tremble and feel threatened!  BUT DON'T INCLUDE ME.  Speak only for youself!

I believe that almost all marriages that survive more than 20 years in this day and age can also be traced to the basic fundemental principle in the marriage of mutual submission.  My wife and I will hit the 35 years together mark in less than two weeks, and that doesn't count the 2 year engagement we had.  The marriages that I have seen have the toughest time surviving among my friends in and out of the church are those where the husband had the male in control mind set because God made men that way!  I have seen alot of divorces in my life, and this one factor was present in the majority of the divorces.

If a woman joins the Army, wants equal rights, and is on the battlefield...i sure hope 50 guys wouldn't go try to help her. She forfeited "chivalry" back at home when she enlisted, she is now another number. If I had to choose between my best friend and a female in the field of battle...I'm grabbing my best friend. For 1) My best friend is stronger and would be more valuable in the field and 2) She doesn't get to pull the chivalry card out after waiving a feminism flag her entire life.

So you would let a fellow officer die or have to save herself just because she is a woman or what if she was the only help you could get in that fire fight?  What if your best friend all of a sudden turned sour on you and ran, what then?
You apparently feel that women are not qualified to fight for their country, even though women have fought in every war the US has ever been in!  You also don't seem to think they should be helped by the men if a tough situation.  What if a man is in the same situation?  Or better yet, what if the man in that situation had only women to help him, should he allow them to save his butt?  I carry a gun for a living and have done so for 25 years.  I have worked with some very qualified women that I absolutely trust to cover my backside in a fire fight, some of them a whole lot more than some of the squirrly men I have had to work with.

    

There is no such thing as mutual submission in my marriage.  I have been married for almost 38 years.

My wife submits to me, I do not submit to her.  I most definetly allow here to express herself and explain whatever it is that is on her mind.  I take everything she says seriously and consider it with the utmost respect and consideration.  And she looks forward to my final decision.  If she seems to disagree with it.  I ask her what is bothering her, so that I can review once again.  Maybe I misunderstood something or didn't get the whole picture as she might not have explained herself as clearly as I needed her too.  I want to know her heart on every matter.  But the last decision is still mine as the head of the household.  And I know this, and take this responsiblity very seriously.

[HRoberson]

No man wants to be in "controll".  God designed man to make descisions that effect the relatinship between husband and wife.  It is built into our being to be responsible .  Not only for our wife, but our whole household.  It is within the being of a woman to submit to the man's design to make those hard descisions.  A man wants his wife's input and suggestions.   But a man's being starts to tremble when his wife or any woman tries to usurp any authority over any man = married or unmarried. 

What a crock!  That is about as big an assumption as any I have seen so far!  My marriage has based on mutual submission since day one, and in the 1970's CoC, that was an unheard of view!  We make decissions together that will effect us together.  When only one is effected, the other has input but the one that is directly effected makes the decission (job decissions, serious health problems, etc).  When making decissions for children, we trusted each other to make them when ever necessary because we were usually not together at those times.  In emergencies, my wife has the same decission authority that I do and can make them wisely, and at times, better than I can, depending on the circumstances!   If you want to say YOU start to tremble when a woman/wife makes a decission, that's fine with me.  Go ahead and tremble and feel threatened!  BUT DON'T INCLUDE ME.  Speak only for youself!

I believe that almost all marriages that survive more than 20 years in this day and age can also be traced to the basic fundemental principle in the marriage of mutual submission.  My wife and I will hit the 35 years together mark in less than two weeks, and that doesn't count the 2 year engagement we had.  The marriages that I have seen have the toughest time surviving among my friends in and out of the church are those where the husband had the male in control mind set because God made men that way!  I have seen alot of divorces in my life, and this one factor was present in the majority of the divorces.

If a woman joins the Army, wants equal rights, and is on the battlefield...i sure hope 50 guys wouldn't go try to help her. She forfeited "chivalry" back at home when she enlisted, she is now another number. If I had to choose between my best friend and a female in the field of battle...I'm grabbing my best friend. For 1) My best friend is stronger and would be more valuable in the field and 2) She doesn't get to pull the chivalry card out after waiving a feminism flag her entire life.

So you would let a fellow officer die or have to save herself just because she is a woman or what if she was the only help you could get in that fire fight?  What if your best friend all of a sudden turned sour on you and ran, what then?
You apparently feel that women are not qualified to fight for their country, even though women have fought in every war the US has ever been in!  You also don't seem to think they should be helped by the men if a tough situation.  What if a man is in the same situation?  Or better yet, what if the man in that situation had only women to help him, should he allow them to save his butt?  I carry a gun for a living and have done so for 25 years.  I have worked with some very qualified women that I absolutely trust to cover my backside in a fire fight, some of them a whole lot more than some of the squirrly men I have had to work with.

    

There is no such thing as mutual submission in my marriage.  I have been married for almost 38 years.

My wife submits to me, I do not submit to her.  I most definetly allow here to express herself and explain whatever it is that is on her mind.  I take everything she says seriously and consider it with the utmost respect and consideration.  And she looks forward to my final decision.  If she seems to disagree with it.  I ask her what is bothering her, so that I can review once again.  Maybe I misunderstood something or didn't get the whole picture as she might not have explained herself as clearly as I needed her too.  I want to know her heart on every matter.  But the last decision is still mine as the head of the household.  And I know this, and take this responsiblity very seriously.

Re-read what you posted.

You will find considerable mutual submission.

[Volkmar]

(I am wondering why this thread was moved to the "marriage" forum, as it is clearly an issue of theology. It affects marriages, yes, but it is something to be discussed by everyone, not just the married. Something to be clear and in agreement on PREmarriage, not POSTmarriage.)

Ditto.

Wiley, why did this thread get moved to an outer orbit of a lesser star?  ;o)


V

[Mystery Man]

No man wants to be in "controll".  God designed man to make descisions that effect the relatinship between husband and wife.  It is built into our being to be responsible .  Not only for our wife, but our whole household.  It is within the being of a woman to submit to the man's design to make those hard descisions.  A man wants his wife's input and suggestions.   But a man's being starts to tremble when his wife or any woman tries to usurp any authority over any man = married or unmarried. 

What a crock!  That is about as big an assumption as any I have seen so far!  My marriage has based on mutual submission since day one, and in the 1970's CoC, that was an unheard of view!  We make decissions together that will effect us together.  When only one is effected, the other has input but the one that is directly effected makes the decission (job decissions, serious health problems, etc).  When making decissions for children, we trusted each other to make them when ever necessary because we were usually not together at those times.  In emergencies, my wife has the same decission authority that I do and can make them wisely, and at times, better than I can, depending on the circumstances!   If you want to say YOU start to tremble when a woman/wife makes a decission, that's fine with me.  Go ahead and tremble and feel threatened!  BUT DON'T INCLUDE ME.  Speak only for youself!

I believe that almost all marriages that survive more than 20 years in this day and age can also be traced to the basic fundemental principle in the marriage of mutual submission.  My wife and I will hit the 35 years together mark in less than two weeks, and that doesn't count the 2 year engagement we had.  The marriages that I have seen have the toughest time surviving among my friends in and out of the church are those where the husband had the male in control mind set because God made men that way!  I have seen alot of divorces in my life, and this one factor was present in the majority of the divorces.

If a woman joins the Army, wants equal rights, and is on the battlefield...i sure hope 50 guys wouldn't go try to help her. She forfeited "chivalry" back at home when she enlisted, she is now another number. If I had to choose between my best friend and a female in the field of battle...I'm grabbing my best friend. For 1) My best friend is stronger and would be more valuable in the field and 2) She doesn't get to pull the chivalry card out after waiving a feminism flag her entire life.

So you would let a fellow officer die or have to save herself just because she is a woman or what if she was the only help you could get in that fire fight?  What if your best friend all of a sudden turned sour on you and ran, what then?
You apparently feel that women are not qualified to fight for their country, even though women have fought in every war the US has ever been in!  You also don't seem to think they should be helped by the men if a tough situation.  What if a man is in the same situation?  Or better yet, what if the man in that situation had only women to help him, should he allow them to save his butt?  I carry a gun for a living and have done so for 25 years.  I have worked with some very qualified women that I absolutely trust to cover my backside in a fire fight, some of them a whole lot more than some of the squirrly men I have had to work with.

    

There is no such thing as mutual submission in my marriage.  I have been married for almost 38 years.

My wife submits to me, I do not submit to her.  I most definetly allow here to express herself and explain whatever it is that is on her mind.  I take everything she says seriously and consider it with the utmost respect and consideration.  And she looks forward to my final decision.  If she seems to disagree with it.  I ask her what is bothering her, so that I can review once again.  Maybe I misunderstood something or didn't get the whole picture as she might not have explained herself as clearly as I needed her too.  I want to know her heart on every matter.  But the last decision is still mine as the head of the household.  And I know this, and take this responsiblity very seriously.

Re-read what you posted.

You will find considerable mutual submission.

none whatsoever !