Do You Own Your Spouse?

[2PhiloVoid]

I know what you mean, but that's not how people are using this language. They're using that language in a controlling fashion. Consider the weird bra thread, just a few threads down, or the rebellious woman thread I linked to above.

I dont subscribe to a sin hierarchy where sexual immorality dominates all... sorry. Although your view is typical of most in Christendom I'm sure.

To me, it's a disgusting thread... pointing your finger at something else doesn't change that.

On a personal level, I'm kind of fond of my "Dismantling the Playboy Philosophy" thread.

 

[samir]

I've noticed a trend, a type of language I'm not entirely comfortable with, mainly because it implies I'm my partners boss, or that I can somehow own my spouse.

"You let your wife do that?"
"Do you think your wife should be allowed to..."
"What if your wife does this..."

I my wife's boss or something? Do I own her?

Where does this type of language come from, and do you think it's ethical? What do you think the Bible says on the topic?

It comes from scripture. Here's what the Bible says:

Ephesians 5:22-24 (NKJV) - "Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. 24 Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything."

 

[Kenny'sID]

It could be said they own each other, even just under their secular contract till death do they part, but especially under their biblical contract if they are Christian.

But that's not to say some don't take that "ownership" way too far, as mostly men can/will do.

 

[Tetra]

It comes from scripture. Here's what the Bible says:

Ephesians 5:22-24 (NKJV) - "Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. 24 Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything."

Part of hermeneutics is understanding cultural context, while I admit to not be the best when it comes to hermeneutics, I highly suspect it plays a role in the verse you just quoted.

 

[DingDing]

I've noticed a trend, a type of language I'm not entirely comfortable with, mainly because it implies I'm my partners boss, or that I can somehow own my spouse.

"You let your wife do that?"
"Do you think your wife should be allowed to..."
"What if your wife does this..."

I my wife's boss or something? Do I own her?

Where does this type of language come from, and do you think it's ethical? What do you think the Bible says on the topic?

Why are you asking this?

 

[Tetra]

Why are you asking this?

I thought that was clear in the OP? Basically I dislike that type of language and the implications that follow... so the questions I posed are; where does this type of language come from, and do you think it's ethical? What do you think the Bible says on the topic?

 

[DingDing]

I thought that was clear in the OP? Basically I dislike that type of language and the implications that follow... so the questions I posed are; where does this type of language come from, and do you think it's ethical? What do you think the Bible says on the topic?

You said that you had "noticed a trend", please explain. Where have you seen "this trend", and what are the particulars of it. I have not a clue what you are talking about.

 

[Tetra]

You said that you had "noticed a trend", please explain. Where have you seen "this trend", and what are the particulars of it. I have not a clue what you are talking about.

Do you truly wish me to find every post I think is fitting of this criteria?

I think you should check out these threads and the assumptions they make:
Rebellious Women
How do you feel about women not wearing bras?

These are the two threads that prompted my thoughts, but I'm fairly certain I can head back further than the first page of the ethics sub-forum to find more posts.

 

[AlexDTX]

I've noticed a trend, a type of language I'm not entirely comfortable with, mainly because it implies I'm my partners boss, or that I can somehow own my spouse.

"You let your wife do that?"
"Do you think your wife should be allowed to..."
"What if your wife does this..."

I my wife's boss or something? Do I own her?

Where does this type of language come from, and do you think it's ethical? What do you think the Bible says on the topic?

No. We are both owned my Jesus. We were bought with a price. We have been given the privilege to be espoused to one another.

 

[Monkish]

I've noticed a trend, a type of language I'm not entirely comfortable with, mainly because it implies I'm my partners boss, or that I can somehow own my spouse.

"You let your wife do that?"
"Do you think your wife should be allowed to..."
"What if your wife does this..."

I my wife's boss or something? Do I own her?

Where does this type of language come from, and do you think it's ethical? What do you think the Bible says on the topic?

Here my two cent no one own anyone and if looking to control someone that not real relationship let alone marriage. A couple need to work together and try please each other, but their husband or rife dose not own there. I think this out date view and sexist.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

I've noticed a trend, a type of language I'm not entirely comfortable with, mainly because it implies I'm my partners boss, or that I can somehow own my spouse.

"You let your wife do that?"
"Do you think your wife should be allowed to..."
"What if your wife does this..."

I my wife's boss or something? Do I own her?

Where does this type of language come from, and do you think it's ethical? What do you think the Bible says on the topic?

First, what's a "partner". Do you mean spouse? I would object to the use of the word, "partner" to describe a spouse in a Christian marriage. The term, "partner" was coined to describe a person one lives with, but is not married to.

Second, there are no issues with the sample questions you've posed, but they don't equate to "ownership".

 

[Tetra]

First, what's a "partner". Do you mean spouse? I would object to the use of the word, "partner" to describe a spouse in a Christian marriage. The term, "partner" was coined to describe a person one lives with, but is not married to.

Second, there are no issues with the sample questions you've posed, but they don't equate to "ownership".

Merry Christmas!!!

I think partner and spouse are currently used synonymously. I could be wrong but I'm fairly certain that's the case.

Why are these questions even being posed if it doesn't imply I have a "say" in the actions of my wife. The only say I have is the say she permits me to have.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Merry Christmas!!!

I think partner and spouse are currently used synonymously. I could be wrong but I'm fairly certain that's the case.

Why are these questions even being posed if it doesn't imply I have a "say" in the actions of my wife. The only say I have is the say she permits me to have.

Yes. May you see Christ, this day. Happy Christmas.

Those words may, in this day, be synonymous to some, but not to all, especially not to Christians.

Obligations don't equate to ownership. Spouses have obligations to one another.

 

[Landon Caeli]

The 'pimp' attitude comes not from God, but from hell.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Part of hermeneutics is understanding cultural context, while I admit to not be the best when it comes to hermeneutics, I highly suspect it plays a role in the verse you just quoted.

Do you object to the idea of husbands loving wives as dated and only applicable to some other culture?

 

[Tetra]

Yes. May you see Christ, this day. Happy Christmas.

Those words may, in this day, be synonymous to some, but not to all, especially not to Christians.

Obligations don't equate to ownership. Spouses have obligations to one another.

I will think on this more before I respond in full.

 

[JacksBratt]

My husband and I are partners with God. No one owns anyone. We are free to live happily and love each other as the people we are.

Why do people go on about controlling others? IMO, this is so dang stupid. If one feels the need to control someone, somebody needs to see a doctor.

That's crazy thinking.

All good things
Emmy

I know that I'm not going to be popular for saying this, especially being a man, but the Bible is clear on the order of responsibility or hierarchy in the home.

This order would be God, Husband, wife, kids....

The feminist movement has used been the tool of Satan in as much as portraying this order as a negative thing and that a man should not be, for the lack of a better term, the "boss".

This position has been twisted into a "right" to demand, control and abuse women and wives. This is the position used by the feminists to shed negative light on God's will for a family.

Men should no more use this to enslave women than a leader in an army would do so to his second in command.
This ranking is one of respect and honor.

Women are to be loved by their husbands as if the woman's body is part of their very own body.

 

[Tetra]

Do you object to the idea of husbands loving wives as dated and only applicable to some other culture?

Of course not. I guess what I mean is, maybe there is a more nuanced approach to those verses. Possibly we're misinterpreting the application of them.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

I know that I'm not going to be popular for saying this, especially being a man, but the Bible is clear on the order of responsibility or hierarchy in the home.

This order would be God, Husband, wife, kids....

The feminist movement has used been the tool of Satan in as much as portraying this order as a negative thing and that a man should not be, for the lack of a better term, the "boss".

This position has been twisted into a "right" to demand, control and abuse women and wives. This is the position used by the feminists to shed negative light on God's will for a family.

Men should no more use this to enslave women than a leader in an army would do so to his second in command.
This ranking is one of respect and honor.

Women are to be loved by their husbands as if the woman's body is part of their very own body.

Yes.

Feminists often argue against the distortion rather than the actual, which is similar to a straw man argument.

 

[Tetra]

Yes.

Feminists often argue against the distortion rather than the actual, which is similar to a straw man argument.

My understanding is they'd have issues with both.