Love for wife vs. love for neighbor

I don't think it's a hierarchy of love so much as it's a question of different roles, and how love is expressed appropriately within those roles.

If that makes sense?

I think a difference would be the types of love. We are to love our Christian family with agape love, that is, self-sacrificial and altruistic. But with your wife, while you love her in that same way because she too is a Christian sister, you are called to love her as your own self, that is, as if she was you as well as yourself is. Marriage is a union of two... so you both become one entity, and so just as you'd take care of yourself you should care for her as if there is no difference (because, infact, there really isn't).

Your sense of agape love should be more clear and intense with your wife as well naturally, because you experience the covenant of God's love for the church more directly than you would in any other relationship besides your children.

I also think the two types of love I mentioned are one with each other in your relationship. There is no seperation between the two... it's all mingled in with each other.

And just to disregard all of what I just said, both types of love are technically included in one's love for the Church as well because we too are all members of one body, and thus one entity. But I think you can see the difference lies in the intensity of such loves.

Hopefully that's not too confusing, it's harder to bring out in writing. I also think it's one of these things that should flow without too much thought... although it's fun to be curious about it.

A husband has intimate access to his wife* (and vice versa) that he shouldn't have toward his neighbor (unless he's their doctor...).

*Ephesians 5:26 carries a sense of bathing.

I agree with Paidiske on the issue of different roles & the boundaries within those roles for love to be expressed.

Here are some more distinctions that may help you out concerning loving a spouse vs loving your neighbor.

First, one has to do with covenant (Mal 2:14; Prov 2:17), the other with commandment. (Lev 19:18)

Second, one has to do with companionship by cleaving (Gen 2:24), the other with concern for a fellow human being. (Lev 19:16)

Third, one has to do with being heirs of the grace of life (I Pet 3:7), the other as being merciful. (Luke 10:37)

Fourth: one has to do with a new commandment (John 13:34,35), the other with the old commandment. (Mt 5:43)

Five, one has to do with mystery & comparison to Christ & the church (Eph 5:25-33), the other has to do with treating foreigners as native born. (Lev 19:34)

Six, one has to do with consummation as one flesh (Gen 2:24; Eph 5:31):, the other has to do with summing up other commandments. (Rom 13:9)

Seventh, one has to do with godly offspring (Mal 2:15), the other has to do with fulfillment of the Law (Gal 5:14)

Eighth, one has to do with headship & submission (Eph 5:22,23), the other with not bearing false witness or coveting. (Exodus 20:16,17)

Good Christian wives submit to their husbands. This they do by their consent's virtue; for they're subject to the husband as to Jesus.

Christian women are in a state of submission to Jesus, so the obedience which they render to their husbands is one rendered to Jesus, the husband being the wife's head and typifying to her Jesus.

In Jesus' case it's headship's matter, for he's the body's God; his Church, having accepted him by faith, have become his body's members, the saints' communion.

In the husband's case, it's always a headship-question. It's God’s will that the husband be the wife's head; the provision made at Creation is thus confirmed.

Not all of us take that approach to marriage; for some of us the emphasis falls on mutual submission and unity rather than hierarchy.

That Jesus is the Church's Savior in no way affects the fact that he's also the Church's Head.

Though the husband isn't the body's savior, as the Church's subject to Christ, so, too, are wives subject to their husbands. This is to be in all things, the wife not being allowed to make exceptions.

It's clear that the man's headship is confined to this life's matters only. So far as Christianity's sphere's concerned, there's neither male nor female, for we're are all one in Jesus.

Ttalkkugjil said:

Though the husband isn't the body's savior, as the Church's subject to Christ, so, too, are wives subject to their husbands. This is to be in all things, the wife not being allowed to make exceptions.

Click to expand...

That is one view. It is not the only Christian view.

Ttalkkugjil said:

Good Christian wives submit to their husbands. This they do by their consent's virtue; for they're subject to the husband as to Jesus.

Christian women are in a state of submission to Jesus, so the obedience which they render to their husbands is one rendered to Jesus, the husband being the wife's head and typifying to her Jesus.

In Jesus' case it's headship's matter, for he's the body's God; his Church, having accepted him by faith, have become his body's members, the saints' communion.

In the husband's case, it's always a headship-question. It's God’s will that the husband be the wife's head; the provision made at Creation is thus confirmed.

Click to expand...

And when that happens, it should be noted with fear and trembling that the husband to whom a wife has given her submission has accepted an awful responsibility and will be held terribly accountable to Christ for her mental, physical, and spiritual well being.

Paidiske said:

That is one view. It is not the only Christian view.

Click to expand...

It isn't the only view held by Christians, granted. It's, I believe, the biblical view, which is why I shared it.

On the women's part it's a matter of submission in a relation to their husbands which is compared to that of the Church to Christ.

On the men's part, danger consists in being overbearing, in deeming themselves authorized to be severe. Husbands are rather to show their love for their wives in their actions. They should be loving.

The proof of Jesus' love for the Church consisted in this, that he offered up himself, that he sacrificed his own life for the Church, in the Church's interest, for sins' expiation.

Only in the case of the believers is the redemption realized; and so Jesus' work, his love's proof, took place in the Church's interest.

This work's result is that Christ might sanctify believers' lives, cleansing them by water's washing in the word.

Sanctification is occurring in the Church, having been begun in the believers in their baptism to be perfected on the last day.

Christ consecrated his Church by cleansing each Church member by baptism. For baptism's water cleanses from inherited sin's corruption, it has the power to renew.

Both the husband and wife are to mutually submit to one another as per Ephesians 5:21.

As for the husband loving the wife as Christ loved the church....it is again humbling himself and putting her needs before his own.

Male domination and headship is not God's design, but a misinterpretation of Ephesians 5:21, which applies to ALL Christians, including husbands and wives. It's the topic sentence of the verses that come afterwards concerning wives, husbands, children, and servants. The advice is the same for all, though different examples are given.

Paul was not recommending that families be set up as patriarchal hierarchies for all time, but was using the already existing pagan Greco-Roman family structure of his time to teach new converts about Christ using existing examples that were familiar to them. Since marriages in our time (at least in most of the west) are considered more egalitarian, it would seem we would be closer to Ephesians 5:21 than they were in the first century. We need not go backwards, but instead continue to use Ephesians 5:21 as a way of comparing where we are now to where we need to be.

Note that per John 13:34 we are ALL to love one another as Christ loved us, so it is not advice solely for husbands, but a commandment directly from Jesus to everyone.

"Male domination & headship is not God's design, but a misinterpretation of Eph 5:21, which applies to ALL Christians, including husbands & wives. It's the topic sentence of the verses that come afterwards concerning wives, husbands, children, and servants. The advice is the same for all, though different examples are given."

"Paul was not recommending that families be set up as patriarchal hierarchies for all time, but was using the already existing pagan Greco-Roman family structure of his time to teach new converts about Christ using existing examples that were familiar to them. Since marriages in our time (at least in most of the west) are considered more egalitarian, it would seem we would be closer to Eph 5:21 than they were in the first century. We need not go backwards, but instead continue to use Eph 5:21 as a way of comparing where we are now to where we need to be."

Click to expand...

This needed to be addressed.

Male domination is not God's design but headship is God's design.
Female domination is not God's design but submission to Christ & to a husband IN A MARRIAGE COVENANTAL RELATIONSHIP is God's design.

God designed the covenant of marriage since the very beginning. It hasn't changed over time, nor changed due to cultural or historical dictates.

Jesus made that plain to the Pharisees when they asked about divorce: 'But since THE BEGINNING it was not so, concerning the institution of marriage.'

To say that Paul was not recommending patriarchal hierarchies for all time is reading something into the text that isn't there. Paul didn't say that anywhere in the text; you did, adding that into the text. That is called eisogesis not exegesis.

So let us go back to the beginning to see what God said is true concerning the covenant of marriage & the role of a husband & a wife.

Before Eve was created, Adam was given the role of headship over the earth. He named all the animals. God gave him a garden to cultivate. God gave him the commandment to eat freely in the garden except for the tree of the knowledge of good & evil.

THEN God said it was not good for man to be alone, that He would make an helpmeet or mate, a helper suitable & fitting for Adam, to assist him in this headship & to provide companionship & be fruitful.

So God then created Eve out of the man & brought the woman to the man. The covenantal institution of marriage was established by God: leave, cleave, one flesh for life & let no one separate them.

Adam as head apparently instructed his wife about God's commands. He was to work with her in following those commands & to guide & protect her. She is his flesh & his bones for life.

Then Adam gave up his headship. He followed what his wife said not what God said. The wife followed what the devil said, not what her husband said, in telling her of God's commands given before she was created. The result was the fall. But it didn't change the covenantal institution of marriage.

Who was the one God held responsible for all this & for the introduction of sin & death into the world & disobeying God's command? Adam not Eve, because he was the head as God designed & as the TYPE of the Last Adam, Jesus Christ, who is the head of the church & the head over all creation. He is the one to reconcile all things in all creation that fell when one man, Adam, sinned, as the head of the human race.

The picture is there ever since the beginning & down through time. God's determined plan hasn't changed.

Romans 5:12-19 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through ONE MAN & death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned...Death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who did not sin in the way that Adam transgressed. He is a TYPE OF THE ONE TO COME...

This truth is reiterated again & again in Scripture, confirming what God established in the beginning. By the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses let every fact be confirmed.

What did God say in the beginning? Gen 3:16 "You will desire your husband & he will rule over you."

I Cor 11:1-3 Be followers of me, just as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you because you remember me in everything & hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ & the head of the woman is man & the head of Christ is God.

I Tim 2:11-14 Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise dominion over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. Because Adam was formed first, then Eve & Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived & became a transgressor.

Again the picture of WHY points back once again to Genesis: the idea of exercising dominion over, Adam being formed first then Eve. It is not some temporary appeal to the culture or the time of Paul but points once again back to the order of headship that God established since the beginning.

Col 2:17-20 And whatever you do, in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him. Wives, submit to your husbands just as it is FITTING in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives & do not be harsh with them.

Fitting gives the picture going back to Genesis, where God made a suitable, fitting helpmate for Adam.

Eph 5:22-24 Wives, submit to your husbands JUST AS to the Lord; because the husband is the head of the wife JUST AS Christ is the head of the church, His body, of which He is the Savior. Now JUST AS the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

I didn't include Eph 5:21 in this passage & new paragraph because of the grammatical construction, where vs 21 fits in as a continuing string of prepositional phrases, concerning the church members in general.

(Redeeming...speaking...singing...making melody...giving...submitting)

Here the topic turns from the general body to the topic of the marriage relationship in an extended section. It is not a misinterpretation nor the topic sentence for the topic of marriage as already shown.

Almost every Bible translation team, fluent in the Biblical languages, does not include vs 21 with the new topic starting in vs 22, again due to the Greek language construction, tying it to the prior section. A few translations put it separate all by itself.

Eph 5:25-33 Husbands, love your wives JUST AS Christ loved the church & gave Himself for her, to sanctify her by cleansing her with the washing of the water by the word, so that he may present the church to Himself as glorious – not having a stain or wrinkle, or any such blemish, but holy & blameless.

IN THE SAME WAY husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one has ever hated his own body but he feeds it & takes care of it, JUST AS Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body. FOR THIS REASON a man will leave his father & mother & will be joined to his wife & the two will become one flesh.

This mystery is great – but I am actually speaking with reference to Christ & the church. Nevertheless, each one of you must also love his own wife JUST AS he loves himself & the wife must respect her husband.

Again this section uses the phrases, 'just as' & 'in the same way' to compare the marriage relationship with Christ & the church. Then once again an appeal is made that goes all the way back to Genesis, tying these things together, as something that God instituted since the beginning.

The earthly marriage is a picture & type of Christ & the church, being a mystery hidden back then but now revealed in the NT. Earthly marriage is temporary; heavenly marriage to Christ is eternal.

I Cor 4:17 He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which is exactly what I teach everywhere in every church.

As you can see in the many examples above, Paul shows that he taught the same thing in the same way to the various local churches scattered in the Roman empire. It is consistent & it continually points back to Genesis as the standard not contemporary societal norms or culture.

That is why I state that you are also adding something foreign into the text when you say that Paul was 'using the already existing pagan Greco-Roman family structure of his time to teach new converts.' Where does Paul state that in the text? Where does he mention using a pagan family structure to teach new converts? It is nowhere in the text. You added that.

Headship is what God purposed & designed, starting with the First Adam, who was a type of the Messiah & culminating in the Last Adam.

Eph 1:22 And God put everything under His feet and made Him head over everything for the church..

Eph 4:15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ...

Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church...

"We need not go backwards, but instead continue to use Eph 5:21 as a way of comparing where we are now to where we need to be."

We do need to go backward, all the way to Genesis & use that as the pattern that God instituted, not Eph 5:21 picked out of isolation to the context in Ephesians 5 & the whole counsel of Scripture concerning marriage. It hasn't changed by God's design & pictures Christ & His headship over the church & the type of the First Adam with the Last Adam.

Mathetes66 said:

This needed to be addressed.

Male domination is not God's design but headship is God's design.
Female domination is not God's design but submission to Christ & to a husband IN A MARRIAGE COVENANTAL RELATIONSHIP is God's design.

God designed the covenant of marriage since the very beginning. It hasn't changed over time, nor changed due to cultural or historical dictates.

Jesus made that plain to the Pharisees when they asked about divorce: 'But since THE BEGINNING it was not so, concerning the institution of marriage.'

To say that Paul was not recommending patriarchal hierarchies for all time is reading something into the text that isn't there. Paul didn't say that anywhere in the text; you did, adding that into the text. That is called eisogesis not exegesis.

So let us go back to the beginning to see what God said is true concerning the covenant of marriage & the role of a husband & a wife.

Before Eve was created, Adam was given the role of headship over the earth. He named all the animals. God gave him a garden to cultivate. God gave him the commandment to eat freely in the garden except for the tree of the knowledge of good & evil.

THEN God said it was not good for man to be alone, that He would make an helpmeet or mate, a helper suitable & fitting for Adam, to assist him in this headship & to provide companionship & be fruitful.

So God then created Eve out of the man & brought the woman to the man. The covenantal institution of marriage was established by God: leave, cleave, one flesh for life & let no one separate them.

Adam as head apparently instructed his wife about God's commands. He was to work with her in following those commands & to guide & protect her. She is his flesh & his bones for life.

Then Adam gave up his headship. He followed what his wife said not what God said. The wife followed what the devil said, not what her husband said, in telling her of God's commands given before she was created. The result was the fall. But it didn't change the covenantal institution of marriage.

Who was the one God held responsible for all this & for the introduction of sin & death into the world & disobeying God's command? Adam not Eve, because he was the head as God designed & as the TYPE of the Last Adam, Jesus Christ, who is the head of the church & the head over all creation. He is the one to reconcile all things in all creation that fell when one man, Adam, sinned, as the head of the human race.

The picture is there ever since the beginning & down through time. God's determined plan hasn't changed.

Romans 5:12-19 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through ONE MAN & death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned...Death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who did not sin in the way that Adam transgressed. He is a TYPE OF THE ONE TO COME...

This truth is reiterated again & again in Scripture, confirming what God established in the beginning. By the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses let every fact be confirmed.

What did God say in the beginning? Gen 3:16 "You will desire your husband & he will rule over you."

I Cor 11:1-3 Be followers of me, just as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you because you remember me in everything & hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ & the head of the woman is man & the head of Christ is God.

I Tim 2:11-14 Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise dominion over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. Because Adam was formed first, then Eve & Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived & became a transgressor.

Again the picture of WHY points back once again to Genesis: the idea of exercising dominion over, Adam being formed first then Eve. It is not some temporary appeal to the culture or the time of Paul but points once again back to the order of headship that God established since the beginning.

Col 2:17-20 And whatever you do, in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him. Wives, submit to your husbands just as it is FITTING in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives & do not be harsh with them.

Fitting gives the picture going back to Genesis, where God made a suitable, fitting helpmate for Adam.

Eph 5:22-24 Wives, submit to your husbands JUST AS to the Lord; because the husband is the head of the wife JUST AS Christ is the head of the church, His body, of which He is the Savior. Now JUST AS the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

I didn't include Eph 5:21 in this passage & new paragraph because of the grammatical construction, where vs 21 fits in as a continuing string of prepositional phrases, concerning the church members in general.

(Redeeming...speaking...singing...making melody...giving...submitting)

Here the topic turns from the general body to the topic of the marriage relationship in an extended section. It is not a misinterpretation nor the topic sentence for the topic of marriage as already shown.

Almost every Bible translation team, fluent in the Biblical languages, does not include vs 21 with the new topic starting in vs 22, again due to the Greek language construction, tying it to the prior section. A few translations put it separate all by itself.

Eph 5:25-33 Husbands, love your wives JUST AS Christ loved the church & gave Himself for her, to sanctify her by cleansing her with the washing of the water by the word, so that he may present the church to Himself as glorious – not having a stain or wrinkle, or any such blemish, but holy & blameless.

IN THE SAME WAY husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one has ever hated his own body but he feeds it & takes care of it, JUST AS Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body. FOR THIS REASON a man will leave his father & mother & will be joined to his wife & the two will become one flesh.

This mystery is great – but I am actually speaking with reference to Christ & the church. Nevertheless, each one of you must also love his own wife JUST AS he loves himself & the wife must respect her husband.

Again this section uses the phrases, 'just as' & 'in the same way' to compare the marriage relationship with Christ & the church. Then once again an appeal is made that goes all the way back to Genesis, tying these things together, as something that God instituted since the beginning.

The earthly marriage is a picture & type of Christ & the church, being a mystery hidden back then but now revealed in the NT. Earthly marriage is temporary; heavenly marriage to Christ is eternal.

I Cor 4:17 He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which is exactly what I teach everywhere in every church.

As you can see in the many examples above, Paul shows that he taught the same thing in the same way to the various local churches scattered in the Roman empire. It is consistent & it continually points back to Genesis as the standard not contemporary societal norms or culture.

That is why I state that you are also adding something foreign into the text when you say that Paul was 'using the already existing pagan Greco-Roman family structure of his time to teach new converts.' Where does Paul state that in the text? Where does he mention using a pagan family structure to teach new converts? It is nowhere in the text. You added that.

Headship is what God purposed & designed, starting with the First Adam, who was a type of the Messiah & culminating in the Last Adam.

Eph 1:22 And God put everything under His feet and made Him head over everything for the church..

Eph 4:15 But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ...

Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church...

"We need not go backwards, but instead continue to use Eph 5:21 as a way of comparing where we are now to where we need to be."

We do need to go backward, all the way to Genesis & use that as the pattern that God instituted, not Eph 5:21 picked out of isolation to the context in Ephesians 5 & the whole counsel of Scripture concerning marriage. It hasn't changed by God's design & pictures Christ & His headship over the church & the type of the First Adam with the Last Adam.

Click to expand...

You're read quite a lot into scripture to justify human male domination and calling it "headship". You've also set the male human above God by diminishing the word "helper" into some sort of servant rather than a word that describes God himself in others passages where it is used.

By claiming that women are less than men because Adam was created first, you are also make the claim that Adam is less than the animals and every other thing that God created first.

To claim that we have any other head besides Christ and Christ alone is using scripture to subjugate and harm other human beings and creating a hierarchy of masters and slaves based on gender (and sometimes race when people were using scripture in the same way to prove that black slavery was God-ordained.

The way gender complementarians use the word "headship" to refer to human males is basically a seemingly less threatening word than saying that they are the masters over everyone else who are enslaved and subjected to them in some way. Cherry picking verses out of scripture to "prove" that females are sub-human is not of Christ and not the intended message of scripture. It's just another case of humans attempting to elevate themselves above other people and above God and misusing scripture to do so.

Not what Christ is all about at all, and certainly not what Paul was suggesting. Ephesians 5:21 applies to ALL, males included.

"You're reading quite a lot into scripture to justify human male domination and calling it "headship". You've also set the male human above God by diminishing the word "helper" into some sort of servant rather than a word that describes God himself in others passages where it is used."

Click to expand...

You moved to another level in this response to my post. It is called bearing false witness. That is breaking one of God's 10 commandments. You made accusations against me but gave no examples. I will show example after example of your bearing false witness against me to the point of slander.

#1 You have read QUITE A LOT into Scripture to justify human male domination & calling it 'headship.'

Quite a lot is a large amount. The burden of proof whether this is true or not is upon you to show example after example where I did that. When I went through your post, I specifically pointed out twice when you did that to come to your false conclusions & made sure to show where the Scripture didn't say what you said it did.

Second, the burden of proof is again on you to show where I justified human male domination 'quite a lot.'

The very FIRST line of my post stated: male domination is NOT God's design. This directly contradicts what you accuse me of. Then I balanced that with saying female domination is not God's design either.

I never mentioned the word domination again until the 18th & 19th paragraphs of my post! The verse In I Tim 2 mentioned that a woman isn't to exercise domination over a man. That simply agreed with my prior post that female domination isn't God's design either.

So far there isn't one example in those 18 paragraphs where I said anything about male domination being God's design or even implied it. The burden of proof is on you to show not only just ONE example but 'quite a lot' of examples. If you cannot then you have indeed bore false witness about me.

In the 19th paragraph I mention for the 4th & last time the word domination. Here I refer back to Genesis again, mentioned exercising dominion over. This was not in any way stating that Adam exercised dominion over Eve. I didn't have time nor space to quote those passages. I will do so now to show what I meant.

The Scripture here says JUST THE OPPOSITE with which you accuse me.

Genesis 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea & over the birds of the heavens & over the livestock & over all the earth & over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

The term 'man' here is generic, referring to mankind. This is shown by 'let THEM have dominion over.' This is God's initial design for mankind to have dominion over the sea creatures, the birds, the livestock, every creeping thing & over all the earth. Dominion wasn't to be over each other. That has never been God's design, as I stated at the very beginning paragraph.

Gen 1:27,28 ...Male & female He created THEM. God blessed THEM & said TO THEM, “Be fruitful & multiply & fill the earth & subdue it; rule over the fish of the sea & the birds of the air & every creature that crawls upon the earth.

Now God gets specific, mentioning the man & woman only that He has just created. He created them, blessed them & said to them: 'be fruitful, multiply & fill the earth. He then said to both the man & woman the same thing he generically said in verse 26: rule over (exact same Hebrew word in vs 26 where there it is translated as 'have dominion over'; they are one & the same meaning.) the fish, birds & every creeping thing on the earth.

This was a shared dominion & not over each other or mankind; only over the other creatures.

"You've also set the male human above God by diminishing the word "helper" into some sort of servant rather than a word that describes God himself in others passages where it is used."

Click to expand...

You have gone farther in this statement than just false witness. Now you are slandering me--accusing me of blasphemy against God! You need to understand the seriousness of this! Under the OT Law, this was punishable by death!

You again have the burden of proof to SHOW SPECIFICALLY where I have done that. You state I somehow, vaguely 'diminish' the word 'helper. into 'some sort of' (again vague) servant.

I will directly quote what I wrote about the word 'helper' in my post to show that none of what you accused me of is true.

"THEN God said it was not good for man to be alone, that He would make an helpmeet or mate, a helper suitable & fitting for Adam, to assist him in this headship & to provide companionship & be fruitful. He was to work with her in following those commands & to guide & protect her. She is his flesh & his bones for life."

Nowhere is the word 'servant' ever used in mentioning it above. For helper I used: helpmeet or mate, a helper suitable & fitting for Adam. I then said this 'helper' was to assist Adam in this headship over all the earth because God said to them to have dominion over the things on the earth. He is also to guide & protect her; she is his very flesh & his very bones!

Nowhere did I EVER elevate the human male over God in my definition of 'helper.' That is nowhere said in the above 2 paragraphs. Not once. Again for lack of time & length, I did not go into depth like I normally do in Hebrew & Greek word studies. Yet you didn't either, making a passing reference to verses that use the word 'helper' to describe God himself. You didnt even offer one example.

One proof of this is found in the actual Scripture translations where that Hebrew word is mentioned.

Gen 2:18 (Berean Study Bible) “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make for him a SUITABLE HELPER.”

Gen 2:18 (KJV/JPS Tanakh 1917/Jubilee Bible/ASV/ERV/WBT) It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an HELP MEET for him.

Gen 2:18 (GNT) "It is not good for the man to live alone. I will make a SUITABLE COMPANION to HELP him."

Gen 2:18 (NIV/NASB/NHEB/WEB) "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a HELPER SUITABLE for him."

Gen 2:18 (DBT) It is not good that Man should be alone; I will make him a HELPMATE, his like.

Gen 2:18 (CEV) "It isn't good for the man to live alone. I will make a SUITABLE PARTNER for him."

Gen 2:18 (CSB) "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a HELPER CORRESPONDING to him."

Comparing what I wrote in my post: helpmeet or mate, a helper suitable & fitting for Adam, to assist him in this headship & to provide companionship.

The 15 various translations above, as a large sample, match what I said over 95%! I did not deviate in my definition of 'helper' from any of the Bible translations above. The agreement was amazingly accurate.

Again the burden of proof is on you to even show ONE example where I mistranslated it or made it sound like Eve was a servant or that the human male was elevated above God Himself! It isn't there. So again you have not only bore false witness but falsely accused me of blaspheming God!

There is an accuser of the brethren. You might check your life so that you are not being used by him to do the above.

"By claiming that women are less than men because Adam was created first, you are also make the claim that Adam is less than the animals & every other thing that God created first."

Click to expand...

I don't know where in the world you come up with these things. Again nowhere did I say because Adam was created first that that made women less than men. You won't find me saying or even implying that in my post. The burden of proof is for you to show that SPECIFICALLY, even just one.

I was only quoting actual Scripture that said, Adam was created before the woman. It was to show that God gave him headship, commands, responsibility to cultivate the garden, etc. FIRST. And this ties in with God holding Adam responsible for the fall, not Eve, for the purpose of revealing 'the seed of the woman--Gen 3:16--the Last Adam that would reconcile all that Adam lost.

That Adam & all other husbands since then, were designed to be the head of the wife (as Christ is the head of the Body), is abundantly made plain in many passages concerning the covenant of marriage. God did that & stated that. Your argument is with Him not me.

"To claim that we have any other head besides Christ & Christ alone is using scripture to subjugate and harm other human beings & creating a hierarchy of masters & slaves based on gender (& sometimes race) when people were using scripture in the same way to prove that black slavery was God-ordained."

Click to expand...

This paragraph of yours seems to be preaching to the choir & not directed to me.

"The way gender complementarians use the word "headship" to refer to human males is basically a seemingly less threatening word than saying that they are the masters over everyone else who are enslaved & subjected to them in some way. Cherry picking verses out of scripture to "prove" that females are sub-human is not of Christ & not the intended message of scripture. It's just another case of humans attempting to elevate themselves above other people & above God & misusing scripture to do so."

Click to expand...

Again this paragraph doesn't refer to me at all, so no need to comment on it.

"Not what Christ is all about at all, and certainly not what Paul was suggesting. Ephesians 5:21 applies to ALL, males included."

Click to expand...

Again this line isn't directed to me personally. I have no problem with it being applied to males or females IN GENERAL, WITHIN THE BODY OF CHRIST.

Mathetes66 said:

That Adam & all other husbands since then, were designed to be the head of the wife (as Christ is the head of the Body), is abundantly made plain in many passages concerning the covenant of marriage. God did that & stated that. Your argument is with Him not me.

Click to expand...

And this is where your entire argument fails as there is no such statement anywhere in scripture that husbands were *designed* to be the head of the wife. As you said near the beginning of your post, Adam and Eve were to have mutual dominion (or stewardship) over the the things of the earth in partnership, which is only emphasized by Ephesians 5:21.

The Greco-Roman household of Paul's day was typically composed of a male patriarchal head of household who ruled over his wife, his minor children, and his slaves who were all basically his property and who gave him status within the community. Marriage was not about love and he was under no obligation to love his wife. She existed to bear children for his household and lineage and she was required to submit to him by Roman law and had no choice in the matter. Men typically sought out prostitutes or younger men/boys for "companionship".

The new Gentile converts to The Way were familiar with this household structure because they currently lived in it, so Paul used this "household code" (as it was called in secular writings that emphasized it) to try to help these pagan converts understand Christ. So you can almost hear Paul explaining to them, "You see Marius over there who is the head of his household...well that's similar to how Christ is the head of his church..." Paul wasn't using Christ to tell people how they had to run their households. Paul was using the current household setup (with all of it's flaws) to tell people about Christ and how Christ's way was better than their former way. Because in Christ's church, people put each other's needs before their own, men, women, children, slaves...everyone. Again, it all goes back to Ephesians 5:21.

Also, you cannot truly follow Christ's commandment in John 13:34 by enforcing a family structure that has one person as the head and everyone else as property. Only by mutual submission is everyone able to love each other as Christ loved.

The doctrine of male headship in marriage or anywhere else is false and a contradiction to Christ's teachings.

(quote and edit are not the same)

But an amazing thing happens to us Christians. We are members of one body & are to love one another from the heart. I forgive you, in Jesus' Name. I have no animosity toward you whatsoever. May the joy of the Lord be your strength, sincerely, Doc

bekkilyn said:

You're read quite a lot into scripture to justify human male domination and calling it "headship". You've also set the male human above God by diminishing the word "helper" into some sort of servant rather than a word that describes God himself in others passages where it is used.

Click to expand...

Which is, most often, a reference to God Himself.

Surely God is my help
the Lord is the one who sustains me.

The Hebrew for "help" ezer, here is the same Hebrew as used in Genesis 2:18.

A couple of times it refers to a rescuing army.

Once it refers to a woman.

No, the love expressed for a spouse is different than should be shown toward a neighbor-or any other person/peoples.

Bible writers used four different terms-of the ancient Greek (Koine) language-for describing conditions of love .

Eros was used in association with romantic relation between a husband and wife.-Proverbs 5:15-20.

Storge was used to identify the natural affection among family relationships (parents, siblings, extended family)-John 11:1-44; 1 Thessalonians 2:7; Isaiah 49:15.

Philila was used in describing affection between friends-without sexual desires.-2 Samuel 1:26; John 20:2.

Agape is love governed/guided by principle, unselfish, not prejudicial and is moved to doing good to others without any expectations of reciprocation from the recipient.-Romans 5:7, 8.