The Wife Is Never Equal To The Husband

Rev Randy

Sometimes I pretend to be normal
Aug 14, 2012
7,410
643
Florida,USA
✟25,153.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
On paper, the idea of mutual authority sounds good, but is impossible.

Two people cannot rule at once.

In the relationship of the husband and wife, this means technically that the husband's authority is what matters. On paper, that sounds really really bad, I know. But here's the thing...a husband living up to his role as such will make decisions out of love for his family, not selfishness or self-gain. When I know that my husband has our entire family in his mind as he is making these decisions, I can easily back down from what I've been saying.

For example, there's a car here for sale that I really want. It's a nice car. It's $3600, has less miles than our current vehicle and we need a third vehicle since our oldest will be driving. Now, I could push and press this matter, but because I know my husband isn't thinking about what car HE could get with the money, or how HE could spend that money...but what our family needs that money for, there's no reason for me to push it. He knows my thoughts on the car, he knows that I like it and that I think it would be a good fit for the family. Ultimately, the decision is his.

How does a family where both the husband and the wife rule deal with something like this?
If this way works for you then I have no issue except for the concept of ruling. I agree the responsibility of any family decision falls on the husband but that does not mean he must make every decision.
You said your husband knows you thoughts on the car matter. That is good. We should discuss things before any decision is made.
I choose to allow my wife to make decisions . But I am aware (almost always) of her plans before she does things.
So how can two decide at once?(note I didn't say rule;)) By being one.
One of the things that attracted me to my wife was her level head. Now if that had something to do with why I chose to become one with her, why would I not trust her judgement?
But here's the kicker. If my wife makes a bad decision, it's on me as I am held accountable. But in reality, it affects her as well as we are one.

Jesus once said, If you have seen me you have seen the Father. He was speaking of authority and not saying they were the same person but that they were one as we (us married folk) as called to be one. likewise, when my wife says something, you have heard from me.
 
Upvote 0

brinny

everlovin' shiner of light in dark places
Site Supporter
Mar 23, 2004
248,794
114,490
✟1,343,276.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
This is worthy of study and delving into God's Word. A husband and wife are "one" flesh. They are unified. They both "enhance" one another. There is no health or blessing or thriving of body, mind, or spirit any other way. God's own description of a Godly wife is found in Proverbs 31.

As Paul said, there are times when remaining single is preferable if one cannot understand what a "bless-ed union" means and is not equipped to ever be a blessing, or even desire to be a blessing to their "beloved".

A bless-ed union should be just that, a "blessing" to both husband and wife, and never be the antithesis to that, which is a curse.
 
Upvote 0

Jack Terrence

Fighting the good fight
Feb 15, 2013
2,851
194
✟27,525.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Have you actually read the whole entry for kephale in the LSJ? I actually own this lexicon and I am looking at it right now. The LSJ never lists Ephesians 5:23 as being a context in which kephale means "source". One would have to assume this.
I did NOT say that the LSJ lists Ephesians 5:23 as being a context in which kephale means source. Here is EXACTLY what I said:

You will need to provide more than carnal and biased lexogrpahers my friend. There are lexographers on the other side of it (Liddell-Scott-Jones Lexicon ).
I said only that the LDS was on the "other side of it."

LSJ Definitions of Kephalē

This is in contrast to the NT Greek lexicons which explicitly state that kephale in the context of Ephesians 5 means "to have authority over". There is no assuming what the lexicon means here.
The NT Greek lexicons go by medieval usage and NOT New Testament usage:

Note the last sentence in this paragraph where Richard quotes Dhimitrakou who states that “leader” as a meaning of kephalē is medieval. That is, kephalē did not mean “leader” when the New Testament was being written, but it did in medieval times. Richard then goes on in his article to explain the reasons why most New Testament lexicons do have ‘leader” as a possible meaning.
Kephale_Richard-Cervin-paper.jpg

LSJ Definitions of Kephalē


[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif]Cyril (376-444) Archbishop of Alexandria, in De Recta Fide ad Pulcheriam et Eudociam wrote:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif]“Therefore of our race he [Adam] became first head, which is source, and was of the earth and earthy. Since Christ was named the second Adam, he has been placed as head, which is source, of those who through Him have been formed anew unto Him unto immor­tality through sanctification in the Spirit. Therefore he himself our source, which is head, has appeared as a human being. Yet he, though God by nature, has himself a generating head, the heavenly Father, and he himself, though God according to his nature, yet being the Word, was begotten of him. Because head means source, he establishes the truth for those who are wavering in their mind that man is the head of woman, for she was taken out of him. Therefore as God according to his nature, the one Christ and Son and Lord has as his head the heavenly Fa­ther, having himself become our head because he is of the same stock according to the flesh.” [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif]Even Wayne Grudem who argues that kephale implies authority concedes that: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif][FONT=Verdana,sans-serif]“There are some texts which indicate that the physical head was thought of as the source of energy and life for the body, and therefore the possibility exists that the word kephale might have come to be used as a metaphor for ‘source’ or ‘source of life’. . .” [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif](Grudem, Wayne, “ The meaning of Kephalē (Head): A Response to Recent Studies” in Rediscovering Biblical Manhood and Woman hood: A Response to Biblical Feminism, Wheaton, Il: Crossways, 1994, p467.)[/FONT]

Paul was saying that Christ was the source of the body's nourishment. Likewise, the husband is to be the source of the spiritual nourishmment of his wife and family. This is how Paul APPLIED the word kephale. This was his meaning in 1 Corinthians 11 and in Ephesians 5. In 1 Corinthians 11 he confirmed the EQUALITY of the man and the woman by saying that "the woman is nothing without the man and the man is nothing without the woman."
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Jig

Christ Follower
Oct 3, 2005
4,529
399
Texas
✟15,714.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The NT Greek lexicons go by medieval usage and NOT New Testament usage

Who is Dhimitrakou? And why is his opinion to be trusted?

[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif]
Paul was saying that Christ was the source of the body's nourishment. Likewise, the husband is to be the source of the spiritual nourishmment of his wife and family. This is how Paul APPLIED the word kephale. This was his meaning in 1 Corinthians 11 and in Ephesians 5. In 1 Corinthians 11 he confirmed the EQUALITY of the man and the woman by saying that "the woman is nothing without the man and the man is nothing without the woman."
[/FONT]I disagree. Not only is this a desperate stretch, this would mean that the wife cannot provide spiritual nourishment to her husband. After all, you paralleled this to how Christ nourishes the church. Do you believe the church is able to provide Christ with spiritual nourishment? I don't think so.
 
Upvote 0

TamaraLynne

Veteran
Mar 13, 2006
2,562
238
Michigan
✟11,138.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I did NOT say that the LSJ lists Ephesians 5:23 as being a context in which kephale means source. Here is EXACTLY what I said:

I said only that the LDS was on the "other side of it."

LSJ Definitions of Kephalē

The NT Greek lexicons go by medieval usage and NOT New Testament usage:




[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif]Cyril (376-444) Archbishop of Alexandria, in De Recta Fide ad Pulcheriam et Eudociam wrote:[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif]“Therefore of our race he [Adam] became first head, which is source, and was of the earth and earthy. Since Christ was named the second Adam, he has been placed as head, which is source, of those who through Him have been formed anew unto Him unto immor­tality through sanctification in the Spirit. Therefore he himself our source, which is head, has appeared as a human being. Yet he, though God by nature, has himself a generating head, the heavenly Father, and he himself, though God according to his nature, yet being the Word, was begotten of him. Because head means source, he establishes the truth for those who are wavering in their mind that man is the head of woman, for she was taken out of him. Therefore as God according to his nature, the one Christ and Son and Lord has as his head the heavenly Fa­ther, having himself become our head because he is of the same stock according to the flesh.” [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif]Even Wayne Grudem who argues that kephale implies authority concedes that: [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif][FONT=Verdana,sans-serif]“There are some texts which indicate that the physical head was thought of as the source of energy and life for the body, and therefore the possibility exists that the word kephale might have come to be used as a metaphor for ‘source’ or ‘source of life’. . .” [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,sans-serif](Grudem, Wayne, “ The meaning of Kephalē (Head): A Response to Recent Studies” in Rediscovering Biblical Manhood and Woman hood: A Response to Biblical Feminism, Wheaton, Il: Crossways, 1994, p467.)[/FONT]

Paul was saying that Christ was the source of the body's nourishment. Likewise, the husband is to be the source of the spiritual nourishmment of his wife and family. This is how Paul APPLIED the word kephale. This was his meaning in 1 Corinthians 11 and in Ephesians 5. In 1 Corinthians 11 he confirmed the EQUALITY of the man and the woman by saying that "the woman is nothing without the man and the man is nothing without the woman."
[/FONT]
I for one am very interested at what you have found....In a time where wars were fought and flags erected and lower class people forced into a religion or else...a dark time....where kings grabbed a hold of religion in order to not be beheaded by the people because the people were dieing of hunger as the king feasted...a time where torture devices were used and if someone wanted what was yours it was easy enough to make them look like a witch....and time before that and time before that...yes those who yell the loudest bully the bestest...

I don't know...I would like to read more up on all this...
 
Upvote 0

Jack Terrence

Fighting the good fight
Feb 15, 2013
2,851
194
✟27,525.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I disagree. Not only is this a desperate stretch, this would mean that the wife cannot provide spiritual nourishment to her husband. After all, you paralleled this to how Christ nourishes the church. Do you believe the church is able to provide Christ with spiritual nourishment? I don't think so.
Is it really a "desperate stretch"? The idea of "source" is the NATURAL DEDUCTION from context:

If "head" in Greek did not normally mean "supreme over" or "authority over," what did it mean in those seven New Testament passages where Paul used it figuratively? Careful examination of context shows that common Greek meanings not only make good sense, but present a more exalted Christ.
  1. Colossians 1:18 (context 1:14-20); kephale means “exalted originator and completer." "He (Christ) is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent." Paul seems to be using kephale with common Greek meanings--"source or beginning or completion" (Liddell, Scott, et al.)--in a sense that Christ is the exalted originator and completer of the church. Bauer does not list this passage among those where kephale means "superior rank."
  2. Colossians 2:19 (context 2:16-19); kephale means "source of life." Christ is the source of life who nourishes the church. Christians are told to hold fast to Christ, who is described as the "head," from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God. Bauer agrees that in this passage kephale does not mean "superior rank."
  3. Ephesians 4:15 (context 4:11-16) is very similar to Colossians 2:19. It reads, "We are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every joint with which it is supplied, when each part is working properly, makes bodily growth and upbuilds itself in love." This passage stresses the unity of head and body, and presents Christ as the nourisher and source of growth. Bauer classifies kephale here as meaning “superior rank,” although he does not see that meaning in the very similar Colossians 2:19.
  4. 1 Corinthians 11:3 (context 11:2-16); kephale seems to carry the Greek concept of head as "source, base, or derivation." "Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God" (NIV). In this passage Paul is discussing how men and women should pray and prophesy in public church meetings. His instructions apparently relate to the customs, dress, and lifestyle in Corinth and the tendency of the Corinthian believers to be disorderly. Paul discusses women's and men's head coverings and hair styles. {Veils are not mentioned in the Greek text.) Paul says, "man was not made from woman, but woman from man" (v. 8), he also says, "woman was made from man" (v. 12). This suggests that Paul used "head" in verse 3 with the meaning of "source or origin." Man was the "source or beginning" of woman in the sense that woman was made from the side of Adam. Christ was the one through whom all creation came (I Cor. 8:6b). God is from God”}

    When we recognize one Greek meaning of kephale as a source or origin, as Paul explains in verses 8 and 12, then verse 3 does not seem to teach a chain of command. Paul's word order also shows he was not thinking of chain of command: Christ, head of man; man, head of woman; God, head of Christ. Those who make it a chain of command must rearrange Paul's words. In fact, Paul seems to go out of his way to show that he was not imputing authority to males when he said, “For as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God.” (1 Cor 11:12)
  5. Ephesians 5:23 (context 5:18-23); "head" is used in a head-body metaphor to show the unity of husband and wife and of Christ and the church. "For the husband is head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body." Paul often used the head-body metaphor to stress the unity of Christ and the church. In fact, this unity forms the context for this passage. The head and body in nature are dependent on each other.
This verse follows Paul's explanation of what it means to be filled with the Holy Spirit. His last instruction is, "Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ" (v. 21). This is addressed to all Christians and obviously includes husbands and wives. Naturally, as part of this mutual submission of all Christians to each other, wives are to submit to their husbands.
The Greek word "submit 'or "be subject to" does not appear in verse 22. It says only, "wives to your husbands." The verb supplied must therefore refer to the same kind of submission demanded of all Christians in verse 21.
To stress the oneness of husband and wife, Paul then returns to his favorite head-body metaphor: "For the husband is the head (kephale) of the wife as Christ is the head (kephale) of the church, his body."
Paul develops his head-body metaphor at length in I Corinthians 12:22-27. If he thought of "head" as the part of the body that had authority over the rest of it, would not that meaning appear in this long passage?
We know that the brain controls the body. But Paul did not use that concept in his metaphor. He refers to the ears, eyes, and nose; the head as a whole is mentioned only in verse 21: "The eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of you,’ nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.' " Paul taught here the unity and mutual dependence of all parts on each other: "If one member suffers, all suffer together, if one member is honored, all rejoice together" (v. 26). There is no suggestion that the head has authority over other parts of the body.

Christ does have authority over the church (Matt. 16:18). But most of the passages that deal with Christ as the head of the church do not point to his authority over the church, but rather the oneness of Christ and the church. In Ephesians 5:18-33, this oneness is applied to husband and wife.

If we are to see a meaning in “head” in Ephesians 5:23 beyond the head-body metaphor of mutual dependence and unity, we must do so on the basis of the immediate context. Christ’s headship of the church is described like this: “Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her” (v. 25). Christ gave himself up to enable the church to become all that it is meant to be—holy and without blemish.

As Christ is the enabler (the one who brings to completion) of the church, so the husband is to enable (bring to completion) all that his wife is meant to be. The husband is to nourish and cherish his wife as he does his own body, even as Christ nourishes and cherishes the church (v. 29).

The concept of sacrificial self-giving so that a spouse can achieve full potential has been the role that society has traditionally given to the wife. Here Paul gives it to the husband. Of course, giving oneself sacrificially for the other is an excellent example of the submission wives and husbands are to have toward each other (v. 21).

6. Ephesians 1:20-23 (context 1:13-23); kephale means "top or crown." Paul presents an exalted picture of Christ and his authority over everything in creation: ". . . when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in that which is to come; and he has put all things under his feet and has made him the head over all things for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all." The authority of Christ, established in verses 20-21, is extended to every extremity from crown (head) to feet--including the church which is his body.

7. Colossians 2:10 (context 2:8-15); kephale again seems to have the Greek idea of life-source, as well as the idea of top or crown. This verse emphasizes the church as the "fullness" of Christ. "For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have come to fullness of life in him, who is the head of all rule and authority” (vv. 9-10).

Paul uses two metaphors here--the head-body metaphor, with the church coming to "fullness of life" in Christ (the life-source, nourisher, enabler), and also the concept of top or crown when he speaks of Christ as the head of all rule and authority. In these two passages, "top" or "crown" emphasize Christ's position by virtue of the cross and resurrection. He is the victor, and is crowned with glory and honor (Heb. 2:9; Ps. 8:5).
These are the only passages in the New Testament where kephale is used figuratively. They include the five given by Bauer as examples of kephale meaning “superior rank,” despite the fact that such meaning for kephale does not appear in the secular Greek of New Testament times. If Paul had been thinking about authority, or leader, there were easily understood Greek words he could have used, and which he did use in other places. He used exousia (authority) in Romans 13:1-2; and archon Romans 13:3.

The passages where Paul used kephale in a figurative way make better sense and present a more exalted, completed view of Christ when kephale is read with recognized Greek meanings that would have been familiar to his original readers. Among these meanings are: exalted originator and completor, source, base, derivation; enabler (one who brings to completion): source of life; top or crown.

Can we legitimately read an English or Hebrew meaning into the word “head” in the New Testament, when both context and secular Greek literature of New Testament times seem to indicate that “superior rank” or: "authority over" were not meanings that Greeks associated with the word, and probably were not the meanings the apostle Paul had in mind? Has our misunderstanding of some of these passages been used to support the concept of male dominance that has ruled most pagan and secular societies since the beginning of recorded history? Has this misunderstanding also robbed us of the richer, more exalted picture of Christ that Paul was trying to give us?
The Head of the Epistles by Mickelsen
 
Upvote 0

sunlover1

Beloved, Let us love one another
Nov 10, 2006
26,146
5,348
Under the Shadow of the Almighty
✟94,511.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I for one am very interested at what you have found....In a time where wars were fought and flags erected and lower class people forced into a religion or else...a dark time....where kings grabbed a hold of religion in order to not be beheaded by the people because the people were dieing of hunger as the king feasted...a time where torture devices were used and if someone wanted what was yours it was easy enough to make them look like a witch....and time before that and time before that...yes those who yell the loudest bully the bestest...

I don't know...I would like to read more up on all this...
Check this out, I have a feeling you'd like it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TamaraLynne
Upvote 0

Jig

Christ Follower
Oct 3, 2005
4,529
399
Texas
✟15,714.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Is it really a "desperate stretch"? The idea of "source" is the NATURAL DEDUCTION from context:

The Head of the Epistles by Mickelsen

Boxer, how about you read the thread. I have answered many of the context questions you (ah...Mickelsen) is talking about - especially the head-body metaphor. None of it works out as smoothly as he makes it sound. There's even other egalitarians who disagree with him!

Also...
who is Dhimitrakou? And why is his opinion to be trusted?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
A

Andrea411

Guest
How can any one believe that it is the will of God, for a wife to ever be equal to her husband?

Genesis, Chapter 3
16: Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

1 Corinthians, Chapter 11
3: But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

1 Peter, Chapter 3
1: Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
2: While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
3: Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
4: But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
5: For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
6: Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.

Jesus explicitly taught in Matthew 23:8-11 (read it for yourself to see) that the only person who rules Christian communities is the Lord Himself. Under Him, we are all equals. He emphatically rejected the world's system of top-down governance by declaring, "It shall not be so among you" (Mark 10:43). "The greatest among you shall be your servant" (Matthew 23:11). There is no emphasis in the New Testament on authority that is derived from any "office" or position. Let me repeat that again: Nowhere in the New Testament does it say that a Christian, because of title or position, has moral authority over another Christian. The idea of an 'office' of authority in the church, like that of the office of 'President of the United States,' simply does not exist. Christ alone has the position of authority in the church and He has no vicar on earth but His Spirit, who resides in the life of every believer.

The King James Version unfortunately translates the Greek word diakonia as "office" in Romans 11:13, but diakonia is always elsewhere properly translated as "service" or "servant." Christians serve others and any leadership in the church flows from this selfless service and oversight of others; pagans seek offices that grant authority so that their leadership (lordship) over other people is inherent to their positions or titles. Christians morally persuade others by our love and grace; pagans morally coerce others by their positions of authority. When Christians act like pagans, they turn their homes, churches, and organizations into structures of authority where everybody is coerced to submit to the authority and control of another person in a higher 'position' of authority. The equality of New Covenant believers in Christ is lost because Old Covenant Levitical forms of authority are imposed on Christian ministry.
source: Wade Burleson


...when I hear the arguments from complimentarians I just think, if they would just lay their egos down. Marriage 2000 years ago was a man owning a woman, that is not the case today. Jesus didn't come to change gov't and the gov't at that time said women were less then men ... inferior, unable to learn, or teach anything but cooking.... Jesus lifted the position of women but He did not change the gov't.... that comes as a result of people usually Christians reflecting on their own behaviors and changing. So I ask why would a man want to own a woman when he could have a helpmate... helpmate was the same word used for 'God' in Genesis - was God inferior? There was no one for Adam so the Lord sent someone to come along side of Adam to be His helpmate just as the Lord was a helpmate.
Men became head over women due to the curse.... Jesus lifted the curse but some still live as under it just as those that live under works (law) instead of grace....

God bless, andrea
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

TamaraLynne

Veteran
Mar 13, 2006
2,562
238
Michigan
✟11,138.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Just knowing that head might mean source....its like walls are falling down...I don't know...its weird because its like I'm looking at my husband in a new light....more spiritual light...to where I don't mind calling him Lord...its like i'm grateful that God made woman from man and i don't know its different....
Its like God has a certain order to things for a smooth flow...
Because God has many times talked of marraige concerning his church...its like the mystery..that is spoken of ....

Oh I'm thinking out loud and still thinking...

but anyways...my submission to my husband feels more spiritual and right...
 
  • Like
Reactions: sunlover1
Upvote 0

Johnnz

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2004
14,082
1,002
82
New Zealand
✟74,521.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Submission to ones husband is biblically. What isn't is having a husband as the leader, the final authority, with his wife to serve him. A wife is to submit, but only to her husband. A husbands responsibility is to love his wife in a self sacrificing way. He cannot demand or expect (both words being irrelevant for a servant husband anyway) his wife's submission. That is not his responsibility biblically.

The gospel raised nobody's, slaves, women, Gentiles, into a new level of equality and consequent function within the new community of Jesus followers. We revert to preJesus values by not doing the same. The original paradigms of Eden are being restored through Jesus. Wonderful news!

John
NZ
 
Upvote 0
A

Andrea411

Guest
Just knowing that head might mean source....its like walls are falling down...I don't know...its weird because its like I'm looking at my husband in a new light....more spiritual light...to where I don't mind calling him Lord...its like i'm grateful that God made woman from man and i don't know its different....
Its like God has a certain order to things for a smooth flow...
Because God has many times talked of marraige concerning his church...its like the mystery..that is spoken of ....

Oh I'm thinking out loud and still thinking...

but anyways...my submission to my husband feels more spiritual and right...

Ephesians 5:21—"submit to one another,"
 
Upvote 0

TamaraLynne

Veteran
Mar 13, 2006
2,562
238
Michigan
✟11,138.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ephesians 5:21—"submit to one another,"
Yes! :) it really does make more sense all of it! Oh and when I say submission its not the same as what the world thinks it means...its like me saying to God that his way is best...its a spiritual thing kind of submission to my husband...

But just curious....should my marraige mirror in a sense Jesus and his bride?

:)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
A

Andrea411

Guest
Yes! :) it really does make more sense all of it! Oh and when I say submission its not the same as what the world thinks it means...its like me saying to God that his way is best...its a spiritual thing kind of submission to my husband...

But just curious....should my marraige mirror in a sense Jesus and his bride?

:)

Jesus calls us "friend" so yes it should mirror Christ... whoever will be greatest will be servant... so submission is vital in a loving marriage - but if you think you can submit to someone for 40 years and they don't submit too- you are a stronger person then I.... and what does that mean for my husband, does he have a partner or a dependent. Am I able to make decisions and take responsibility for my actions or do I need to get his approval and make him responsible?? Does he support me if I make a mistake? Do I support him when he has poor judgement... after 40 years - of course. I have to forgive him anyway so we might as well jump to the forgiveness part and forego all the turmoil.
and just how far does tat one way submission go? Can he tell me how much to weigh, what to wear, how to do my nails? Why would a man want to own a woman? or would you rather spend the rest of your life with your best friend?
just saying. I believe these things are bt a couple, not dictated by a Patristic interpretation of Greek.
I go to CBE Christian for Biblical Equality and see what they teach - they are very sound and many theologians are rethinking the exact meaning of some of these scriptures.... such as women being saved in childbirth??? Think does that make sense in the way its interpreted?

God bless, andrea
 
Upvote 0

Joykins

free Crazy Liz!
Jul 14, 2005
15,710
1,181
53
Down in Mary's Land
✟29,390.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Yes! :) it really does make more sense all of it! Oh and when I say submission its not the same as what the world thinks it means...its like me saying to God that his way is best...its a spiritual thing kind of submission to my husband...

But just curious....should my marraige mirror in a sense Jesus and his bride?

:)

In a sense. In another way it should also be based in unity, as Paul draws the metaphor of the head and the body--these are not separate things, they are part of a whole. The one flesh.
 
Upvote 0

NorrinRadd

Xian, Biblicist, Fideist, Pneumatic, Antinomian
Sep 2, 2007
5,571
595
Wayne Township, PA, USA
✟8,652.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
In a sense. In another way it should also be based in unity, as Paul draws the metaphor of the head and the body--these are not separate things, they are part of a whole. The one flesh.

The complementarian view typically misses the boat by starting the passage at 5:22 and either omitting or waving away the "slaves" portion in ch. 6. But I'm realizing we egalitarians / mutualists also often miss the boat by failing to note that the passage builds on the unity / interdependence presentation in ch. 4.
 
Upvote 0

Jig

Christ Follower
Oct 3, 2005
4,529
399
Texas
✟15,714.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Ephesians 5:21—"submit to one another,"

Do you really feel that quoting half a verse with no context really clarifies the issue?

I've already explained how I view this verse. When closely inspected the idea that this means some kind of mutual submission fails. As we have seen, mutuality is not required by allelon ("one another"). It's also not compatible with the term hupotasso ("submit") unless the meaning of this word is changed - which egalitarians have attempted to do.

However, this verse is understood best when seen in context. It is based on the assumption that every Christian will be familiar with the fact that certain relationships of authority and submission do in fact exist, many, if not most of them, by God’s own decree (Rom 13:1–2). That is, every Christian already exists within one or more such relationships, depending on each person's individual circumstances.

Ephesians 5:21 (and following) simply says, if you occupy such a role that requires you to submit to another member of the body of Christ, do not make excuses and do not try to avoid your responsibility. Rather, be subject to one another as your circumstances dictate. If you are a wife, be subject to your husband. If you are a child, be subject to your parents. If you are a slave, be subject to your master.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Jig

Christ Follower
Oct 3, 2005
4,529
399
Texas
✟15,714.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Just knowing that head might mean source....its like walls are falling down...I don't know...its weird because its like I'm looking at my husband in a new light....more spiritual light...to where I don't mind calling him Lord...its like i'm grateful that God made woman from man and i don't know its different....
Its like God has a certain order to things for a smooth flow...
Because God has many times talked of marraige concerning his church...its like the mystery..that is spoken of ....

Oh I'm thinking out loud and still thinking...

but anyways...my submission to my husband feels more spiritual and right...

Kephale within the context of Ephesians 5 does not mean "source".
 
Upvote 0