A Woman's Role

[Cordy]

Remember sister that all Scripture is written by God through his apostles (2 Timothy 3:16, 2 Peter 1:20-21) and the word of God stands forever (Isaiah 40:8).

Good stuff. I hope you remember that too!

You can not choose what scripture you wish to follow and disregard the rest. You either take it as a whole or do not take any of it.

So true! Why do people simply choose to push the scriptures of the wife submitting, and disregard the portions that explain that men are to submit well?

The husband's are to be the spiritual leader of the household.

Says who? You stress the importance of the Bible, yet make statements as though they are spiritual truths without back up. Where does it say the husband is the leader? Some argue that “head” means leader, but the Greek word for head found in that passage is rarely translated as leader. It is not an obvious interpretation. But, even if one chooses to interpreter it that way, leaders are called to be servants, so it should end up looking like mutual submitting, anyway.

The Husband's role is to Love and serve his family,but at the same time leading his family to christ.

We are all supposed to try to lead others, including our families and loved ones, to Christ. God clearly uses women to lead their husband and children to Christ, as well. Loving, serving and leading others to Christ is not a “male” role, but the calling to all the saints as we follow the example of our Master.

The wife's role is to Love and willingly submit to her husband in everything,

Submission is, in its very definition, an act willingness. And yes, of course women are called to do submit to their husbands, for why would they be exempt from what all believers are called to do? This is, again, not a woman's role, but a calling to all the saints.

She will give her husband advice but will submit to his decision.

Where have you found this in scripture? I have personally never come across scripture that states this. Nothing about decision making. Nothing about how a wife can give advice, but not make the decision. Nothing about "final say". Nothing. This is a cultural standard that Christians have picked up – but it is not in the Bible.

 

[intricatic]

We have to look at this practically. The Eph. passage is exemplifying the husband putting his wife's needs before his own, and likewise for the wife to put her husband's needs before her own. Primarily, however, we're called to love the Lord; this is the most important commandment.

If we're told to love our neighbors as ourselves, does this not also tie into the interpretation of this passage? How can you love your neighbor as yourself, if you're putting your needs before the needs of your neighbor?

Ephesians 5
15Be very careful, then, how you live—not as unwise but as wise, 16making the most of every opportunity, because the days are evil. 17Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord's will is. 18Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit. 19Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, 20always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
21Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

So, basically, I agree that this entire argument is over semantics. The practical application of a marriage is gong to be hierarchical no matter how you word it because that's how human relationships operate. We're told to submit to one another and serve one another as Christ both served, and is served by the Church, and this to establish unity because the two become one flesh;

Ephesians 5
30for we are members of his body. 31'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' 32This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

...much like we have become part of Christ's body, the Church.


Galatians 5
19The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

Should this not make us pause and wonder what this argument over a man and a woman's role in marriage is?

 

[bliz]

So, basically, I agree that this entire argument is over semantics. The practical application of a marriage is gong to be hierarchical no matter how you word it because that's how human relationships operate. We're told to submit to one another and serve one another as Christ both served, and is served by the Church, and this to establish unity because the two become one flesh;

So which is it? Is marriage to be hierarchical or a relationship of mutual submission? You seem to be arguing for both. I do not know who you have been having relationships with, but the vast majority of my relationships are not hierarchical.

 

[intricatic]

So which is it? Is marriage to be hierarchical or a relationship of mutual submission? You seem to be arguing for both. I do not know who you have been having relationships with, but the vast majority of my relationships are not hierarchical.

All relationships are hierarchical. It's impossible for a human relationship to function otherwise. The problem is, this concept is being looked at in a semantic and mutually exclusive way. You can't honestly expect both members of any relationship to be equally skilled with every part of domestic life. The two become one flesh. That idea of unity of body is metaphoric for the relationship of the Church to Christ. Likewise, it's metaphoric for how the Church, as a whole, operates.

Let's look at how the Church is described in 1 Corinthians. Afterall, this is the metaphoric relationship that we're given in Eph 5, no?

1 Cor. 12
14Now the body is not made up of one part but of many. 15If the foot should say, 'Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,' it would not for that reason cease to be part of the body. 16And if the ear should say, 'Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,' it would not for that reason cease to be part of the body. 17If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be? 18But in fact God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. 19If they were all one part, where would the body be? 20As it is, there are many parts, but one body.

21The eye cannot say to the hand, 'I don't need you!' And the head cannot say to the feet, 'I don't need you!' 22On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, 24while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honor to the parts that lacked it, 25so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. 26If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.

Do you disagree that this is both hierarchical and mutually submissive at the same time?

Do you think the Church has no congressional leader to act as the head in worship and lead in teaching? Is this part any more important than any other, according to this passage? Should the head recieve any special recognition or sacrifice from the foot? Should the ear be envious of the eye's position?

 

[Blank123]

hm... why would I ever want to be with a husband who I didn't love and respect enough to submit myself to him and recognize him as the spiritual head of the household that God ordained him as?
Likewise why would I ever be with any man who didn't love me and respect me as Scripture clearly demands he should?
It's not necessary that just because I believe in the idea of submitting to whoever I end up marrying that suddenly I become a doormat for him, and its not necessary in order to have a healthy and Godly relationship with my future husband that he would or could not be allowed to take his place as head of the household. there is a happy medium between the two

 

[bumblebee62331]

Thread closed for staff review.

Ok thread is being re-opened.

Let's keep this civil and a friendly debate. I know it's a topic that can get a little heated, so please read over what you are about to post before posting it to ensure it doesn't violate the "No Flaming" or "No Baiting" rule (you can read over them here if you are unfamiliar )

There's some really good posts in here, so it would be a shame to have to close this thread again to clean up.

MOD HAT OFF

 

[Tuffguy]

I think this conversation should have started in Genesis, not Corinthians. Women where created because it was not good for man to be alone. Men need a helper.
We depend on women, women depend on us. We don't depend on each other for the same things otherwise it wouldn't work.
The Bible doesn't specify exactly how things are supposed to be in your household. No two people are going to live exactly they same way. However, He does give a very very good outline of the behaviors of men and women and how they should relate to each other. What women are supposed to be doing and men are supposed to be doing. No one verse is ment to be taken all by itself. The Bible is to be read as a whole and translated as such.

 

[Amilala]

I think this conversation should have started in Genesis, not Corinthians. Women where created because it was not good for man to be alone. Men need a helper.
We depend on women, women depend on us. We don't depend on each other for the same things otherwise it wouldn't work.
The Bible doesn't specify exactly how things are supposed to be in your household. No two people are going to live exactly they same way. However, He does give a very very good outline of the behaviors of men and women and how they should relate to each other. What women are supposed to be doing and men are supposed to be doing. No one verse is ment to be taken all by itself. The Bible is to be read as a whole and translated as such.

 

[Sketcher]

[/SIZE]

You bring up Ephesians 5:22, but ignore 5:21! 5:21 commands all of us to submit to one another.

To me it is not clear. If husbands are to have the ultimate authority, (headship) why does God command all belivers to submit to all other belivers, which would include husbands and wives?


Well, that's exactly my question, since that is what we are all called to do in Eph. 5:21, the premise statement for the rest of the chapter. We dcan't ignore that verse, even though it seems, at face value, to conflict with other verses.

There are verses that say "Wives submit to husbands." No argument from me. But the church has been ignoring the command to all of us to submit to one another, which must include husbands submitting to wives.

Ephesians 5:21 is a general instruction, the way people in the church as a whole are to relate to each other (see the verses before it for context). The verses after it specify the proper dynamics of a marraige relationship, which is obviously just the husband and wife. Wives aren't really losing anything by not having "submissive" husbands if they have husbands that love them as Christ loves the church. You can't be a brutish tyrant when you're doing that.

 

[Cordy]

Ephesians 5:21 is a general instruction, the way people in the church as a whole are to relate to each other (see the verses before it for context). The verses after it specify the proper dynamics of a marraige relationship, which is obviously just the husband and wife. Wives aren't really losing anything by not having "submissive" husbands if they have husbands that love them as Christ loves the church. You can't be a brutish tyrant when you're doing that.

Ephesians 5:21 and the following verses on marriage are all in the same sentence in the original Greek, which means they are all part of the same message.

If you argue that the “general instructions” and the “marriage instructions” are separate, wives would not be asked to submit. The Greek word for submit is not found in the original Greek in vs. 22. It says "wives to your husbands" (notice the word “submit” is missing). But we know it is referring to submission, because it is part of the same sentence that tells all believers to submit. The message to husbands and wives is under the umbrella of submission.

Yes, wives do miss out if they have unsubmissive husbands, because that means their husbands are failing to demonstrate a characteristic asked of all believers. A yielding and submissive attitude is extremely important in marriage, and a person who is unwilling to have that kind of humility will likely bring struggles to the relationship and to their spouse.

 

[bliz]

I think this conversation should have started in Genesis, not Corinthians. Women where created because it was not good for man to be alone.

Not good for whom? You are assuming that the verse means that is was not good for man. But look at the whole context. God is day by day creating the universe and He repeatedly says "It is good." For whom? For whom was it good? There is only one character in the story so far, God. It was good for God. So, when God says "It is not good." it was not good from God's perspective to have man be alone. This has nothing to do with what man wanted or man's feelings, but with God's plan.

Woman was made for the same reason man was made - to worship God and to enjoy Him forever.

Men need a helper."

The Hebrew word used here is ezer. The word is most frequently used in the book of Psalms, where the Psalmist refers to God as his ezer. Was God subordinate to the Psalmist? I think not. In English when we say "Bill is my helper." take that to mean the Bill is in the subordinate position. It is clear to me that God has a different meaning in mind.

We depend on women, women depend on us. We don't depend on each other for the same things otherwise it wouldn't work.
The Bible doesn't specify exactly how things are supposed to be in your household. No two people are going to live exactly they same way. However, He does give a very very good outline of the behaviors of men and women and how they should relate to each other. What women are supposed to be doing and men are supposed to be doing. No one verse is ment to be taken all by itself. The Bible is to be read as a whole and translated as such.

Please, share this outline with us.

 

[bliz]

Wives aren't really losing anything by not having "submissive" husbands if they have husbands that love them as Christ loves the church.

So God's plan for marriage is not best? When we have husbands who do not submit, we have less that what God would have for us. The same as when husbands who have wives who do hot submit - they are not having the marriage God designed. I think that we lose a great deal when we have less that God wants us to have.

 

[bumblebee62331]

Thread closed for staff review.

The reason for this closing is because there are many posts by members who don't fit into the 18 - 35 age bracket for this forum.

Please be patient while a solution is discussed.

ETA: As there has been no reply from the OP in regards to this thread, it is being permanently closed.