Instigating Headship/Submission?

[Johnnz]

This is a great article, hope it helps.

http://www.themarriagebed.com/submission.shtml

There is some good information there, and it is quite sensitive. However, it essentially takes the traditional position of male leadership (headship), which I believe Paul never taught.

John
NZ

 

[mghalpern]

When I first got married (and while dating), I had simply accepted the females-submit-while-men-lead concept. I would voice my opinion and we would discuss, but in the end, we did what my husband wanted – he had the “final say”. Man! We made many mistakes because of it. My husband is an incredible guy, but he is still human. So many times my husband misunderstood the situation, or had an uninformed understanding of what do to. Most of the bumps we have experienced in our marriage took place because we were trying to fashion our marriage to the submission/leadership dichotomy relationship we have heard so many times in church.

I believe in the Bible. I believe it is God’s word to us. I want to live pleasing to God, and we pray that He will lead our lives and our marriage. Well, slowly, we began to discover some incredible truths deep in the Word. We have learned that many of the things we believed to be “straight from the Bible” are not actually based solely on the Word, but mixed from Greek and Roman culture, as well as other unbiblical sources. When studying the meaning and the context of the Bible, we have come to the understanding that the leadership/submission in marriage shouldn’t have to be an issue as it has become in the church. When both spouses are truly trying to submit to each other, and treating each other as equals, there is incredible unity and happiness in a marriage. One can easily see why we are all supposed to submit to one other as Ephesians tells us, and marriage is an incredible example of this.

We have since dropped the leadership/submissive concept from our marriage, and replaced it with simply focusing on submitting to one another and encouraging each other as individuals. We don’t fight. There is no need to. We know that we love each other enough that we will talk things through until we come to an understanding that we can both agree to. I think there is a reason why the Bible mentions that two are better than one. As individuals, we are limited in our understanding, in our scope of view etc. But together there are two minds working towards a common goal, and as a team we are able to come to much better solutions that if we simply settled for my husband’s decision. Sometimes our discussions are really short, and sometimes they are a little longer. Sometimes (and really only SOMETIMES) does it take a while for us to decide something. But in the end, our choices have proven to be much better than when we simply gave up working it out and said “ok, you’re the guy – decide”. That is our experience. It works, and we both believe we have a stronger marriage because of it

mbams... That's pretty interesting and I'm glad you two are doing so well. My only concern is that you mentioned Ephesians 21, but you ended it there. What do you do with Ephesians 22? I addressed this in an earlier post to "Johnnz" Today @ 2:21 PM. I would love for you to comment on the verse following Ephesians 21. I don't disagree with Ephesians 21, just wondering how you handle the next verse...Michael

 

[bliz]

Christ is most certainly the HEAD (as in, "authority") of His bride, is He not? Eph.5 clearly says that the human marraige relationship is to PICTURE that of Christ and His Bride.

Yes, and in that relationship the husband is to love the wife as Christ loved the church. How did Christ love the church? He loved the church by dying for it. Jesus gave up His life, He gave up His claim to power and authority and sacrificed all that He had. He endured seperation from God the Father. He gave up everything for the church.

Women are to submit to their husbands. What does it mean to submit? When I submit I give up my wishes and desires and goals and defer them for the wishes of my husband.

Women give up everything for their husbands. Husbands, emulating Christ, give up everything for their wives. Sounds like mutual submission to me.

The egalitarian movement is essentially saying that Christ and His Bride are totally equal--that She is just as much in authority as He is.

No one in the "egalitarian movement" believes this or teaches this or implies any such thing. This is a distortion. You are saying that those who believe in Biblical equality see Christ as something less than God. That's quite a serious charge. Speak to your own position as loudly and often as you wish, Molly, but please don't misrepresent other perpectives.

Unfortunately, Scripture does not back this up. Sure, she is beautiful, she is made spotless, she is royal and majestic...but it's the name of JESUS that every knee shall bow to, not hers.

Again, those who believe in mutual submission between husband and wives do not advocate worship of the church instead of worship of God.

 

[Sascha Fitzpatrick]

I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that what Molly was TRYING to establish, was the link between Christ and Church, and husband and wife. Christ - loves church, husband - loved wife, church - submitted to Christ, wife - submitted to husband. That's where that equal link she came to happened - if our marriages are supposed to be like Christ and the church, and we are preaching equal 'headship' of a marriage, then comparing that to Christ and the church would be like saying the church and Christ are equal - which isn't true...

PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong in assuming what you were saying with that - it was the impression that I got from your post (which I liked), and the impression I got from other posters...

And I think it's great that some of you think you must be equal in all things in your marriage, I do. But, from what I take out of Ephesians v 21-22 is that I am to submit to my husband (when he becomes that), and he is to love me. That's what we're doing Submission doesn't mean I let go of my dreams and desires - because B loves me enough to not say 'don't go horseriding/swimming/working etc', I have all my dreams and desires still intact and used when I'm in submission to my 'future' husband, because he loves me, and wants the best for me, as I do him.

I am encouraging him in the leadership of this relationship. I trust him and I trust my Lord to be directing US in the way we should be going. It doesn't put me in a dumber, dominated, depreciated place in our relationship, I feel inspired knowing that I have done as the Lord directed us to, according to Ephesians.

I personally think B will have the tougher job by that too! Doesn't mean I don't help out, but as head of my household, he is developing into the man God chooses him to be, and as the helpmeet, I am developing into the woman God chooses me to be.

Forgive me, as I am still unmarried, but I have thought long and hard as to headship and submission, and I think some people have the wrong idea of them, and so, rightly by their definitions, feel threatened by the idea. The way I see it, I think it is a beautiful development of marriage, having those two guidelines in place...

I don't feel threatened, undermined, or 'less than' in my relationship, just because I have willingly allowed B to be the leader - I feel released!

Sasch

 

[mghalpern]

Christ - loves church, husband - loved wife, church - submitted to Christ, wife - submitted to husband. That's where that equal link she came to happened - if our marriages are supposed to be like Christ and the church, and we are preaching equal 'headship' of a marriage, then comparing that to Christ and the church would be like saying the church and Christ are equal - which isn't true...

Sascha... Great extrapolation. Excellent point!...Michael

 

[Cordy]

mbams... That's pretty interesting and I'm glad you two are doing so well. My only concern is that you mentioned Ephesians 21, but you ended it there. What do you do with Ephesians 22? I addressed this in an earlier post to "Johnnz" Today @ 2:21 PM. I would love for you to comment on the verse following Ephesians 21. I don't disagree with Ephesians 21, just wondering how you handle the next verse...Michael

Hi Michael,

I didn’t actually specifically mention vs.21 in my post. This is because the mutual submitting I am referring to is more that simply what we read vs. 21. I realize that when Ephesians was first written, it wasn’t separated into the verses and sentences we now find in our Bibles. I therefore think it is important to present the context of the passage when examining the details within.

In the Greek, vs. 22 is part of a larger sentence which has been divided into seperate sentences and verses in our Bibles (vs. 18-23). I think this often presents a false sense that these are separate ideas. Some Bibles even put a subheading in between the verses, thereby bringing even more separation to what is actually a single sentence. I think this breaks the unity of the sentence and the message being given here.

From what I have learned concering how this sentence is found in the Greek, the central focus of the sentence is teaching us to be filled with the Spirit. The sentence begins by stating we should be filled with the Spirit rather than wine. Then, in the same sentence, Paul continues on with sub-clauses explaining how to be filled with the Spirit – these include speaking to one another in psalms, singing, making music, giving thanks, and submitting to another. There one main point with supporting points. Then as we move through the sentence Paul, using an ellipsis, writes a sub-clause to his sub-point of submitting (involving marriage). The portion of that sentence goes something like this “…submitting to one another out of in the fear of God, wives to your husbands as to the lord…..”. The word submit that we read in vs. 22 of our Bibles if actually found in the previous “verse” of mutual submission. Verse 22 is just a specific example or a greater principle we are to follow – submitting to one another in Christ. The fact that the word "submit" that we read in vs.22 is actually found in vs. 21 demonstrates that the meaning we give to submission in vs.22 should derive from the meaning of submission given in vs.21. And all of this works towards the larger picture of living in the Spirit.

That is my understanding

I hope that answers your question.

 

[Johnnz]

mbams... That's pretty interesting and I'm glad you two are doing so well. My only concern is that you mentioned Ephesians 21, but you ended it there. What do you do with Ephesians 22? I addressed this in an earlier post to "Johnnz" Today @ 2:21 PM. I would love for you to comment on the verse following Ephesians 21. I don't disagree with Ephesians 21, just wondering how you handle the next verse...Michael

Hi. Here's how I see it.

Back to first principles. The Genesis story does not teach a heirarchy - male and female were both required to represent the image of God. Male domination was a consequence of the fall = man shall rule over Gen 3:16. To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you."

This verse also states that women wil easily accept that sinful rule. Read any thread on abusive relationships, see what women have put up with and you will see thow true that is. I prefer to believe that Jesus undid the curse, that he meant what He did when he said that he had come to destroy all the works of the Devil.

Salvation releases us from those judgements. Jesus, then Paul built on that principle. If you argue that God imposed a divine order of submission in that verse then all dedicated women must also scorn medical techniques to reduce the pain of childbirth! Agreed?

In Ephesians v21 begins a section on submission. The Greek is quite clear - it means submit. Thus, what does it mean to submit to one another - how can people mutually submit if someone has a leadership role?

Wives submit. My wife submits to me when she accepts my love, when she understands my requirements and voluntarily seeks to meet them in some way, when she accepts my helping arond the house, when she doscovers that I have an insight into Scripture. No chain of command is needed in any of this. There are areas she is so much better than I am. I submit to her better judgement.

V 22. Head. There are two possible interpretations of head – a) boss or b) source, nurturer. Which one applies? The basic interpretive principle is to look at the same word in context, recognising that the word translated head was almost never understood as boss or leader at the time of Paul’s writing.



The word is used in Ephesians

Eph 1:10 to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfilment — to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head , even Christ.

The focus is on “bring all things together” i.e. speaks of unity into what is now divided, of which Christ is its source.



Eph 1:22-23

And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.

This appears to be a boss usage, but reading on we see Paul outline the redeeming ministry of Christ to his people, the church, as the source and protector of our salvation. The immediate context of the verse “for the church which is his body: we know to refer to his sacrificial life and death to achieve that.



Eph 4:15-16

Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head , that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.

Clearly a reference to Christ’s sustaining, nourishing role with His people



Eph 5:23-24

For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Saviour. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Clearly headship here is as Saviour, again a servant, sacrificial role.



Thus, the boss concept is not at all self evident in any of these verses. To chose that option is to go against the use of the word head within the context of the letter. There is absolutely nothing in vv22-23 to justify automatic acceptance of the boss concept. If Paul used the word head with its other meaning elsewhere in his letter, he would be obliged to indicate in some way that he was using it differently here.



Then Paul spells out mutual submission by using the suffering, sacrificial role of Christ to define the role of husbands – i.e. to be servants as Christ was our Servant.



There is much more that can be said about these and other verses. This is enough for now.



One footnote. Consistency is essential in any exegesis. If male leadership and female submission is the scriptural pattern we run into real trouble when we see elsewhere in Scripture women who had senior roles, right up to and including apostles and prophets.



John

NZ

 

[alaskamolly]

Some responses to responses of responses...

Yes, and in that relationship the husband is to love the wife as Christ loved the church. How did Christ love the church? He loved the church by dying for it. Jesus gave up His life, He gave up His claim to power and authority and sacrificed all that He had. He endured seperation from God the Father. He gave up everything for the church.--Bliz

Yes, and egalitarians LOVE pointing this out... and seem to equally LOVE to avoid the fact that His sacrificial love INCLUDES leading.

He is not simply the "Head" as in source, but He is also the Head as in Leader.


The husband and wife are to be a picture of Christ and the Church. Whatever you want to find in Ephesians 5, that's obviously a CLEAR message (one that is not 'culturally dismissable') You want to take the leadership role out of that. Then I say that's not an accurate picture of Christ and His church.

Eph 1:22-23

And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.

This appears to be a boss usage, but reading on we see Paul outline the redeeming ministry of Christ to his people, the church, as the source and protector of our salvation. The immediate context of the verse “for the church which is his body: we know to refer to his sacrificial life and death to achieve that.--Johnnz

Woah, there, buddy!

You say that this verse doesn't show Christ in a leadership position???
What do the words, "placed all things under His feet (that includes us!)," mean to you, if not someone being placed in Supreme Authority???

Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head , that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work.

And you say this one doesn't have anything to do with authority either????
Sure, this verse has a LOT to do with a nourishing sustaining role, but that is BECAUSE OF his position of authority!

Let's look at the literal analogy being given in this verse, that of a head and body (ie, a whole being) up close:

The Head of the Body mutually submits to the Body and vice versa, YES--the blood flow back and forth, etc. (no one is saying that mutual submission does not exist in marraige, by the way), but, at the same time, the Head is where the Body's direction is determined.

You can't take the aspect of leadership away--it is intricately mixed in with the equally valid existance of the mutual submission.


We all know of people who's heads do not send accurate information to their bodies--cerebral palsy is a great example, especially for me because one of my children has a mild case of it. Her leg doesn't work properly...but it's not because of anything wrong with her leg, it's simply because the part of her brain that was supposed to LEAD her leg, doesn't lead.

Her leg is fine. But the Head doesn't give the orders that the leg needs in order to function at it's fullest capacity. She tries to emulate her older (active!) sister, but always seems to stumble where her big sister leaps. Without the leadership role working properly, both the head and body suffer.




The head sends the messages to the Body that give the Body the ability to act. The Body sends messages to the Head, yes, that help it determine where the Body will go and what it will do--in fact, the Body is what keeps the Head alive (and vice versa!), but it is the HEAD that determines the movement and motive of the Body.

No one in the "egalitarian movement" believes this or teaches this or implies any such thing. This is a distortion. You are saying that those who believe in Biblical equality see Christ as something less than God. That's quite a serious charge. Speak to your own position as loudly and often as you wish, Molly, but please don't misrepresent other perpectives.

No, Bliz, you are saying that Christ is on the same level as His Bride, in ALL areas.

The marraige relationship is supposed to represent Christ and His Bride, or so says Eph.5. Your definition of marraige says that Christ and His Bride operate in mutual submission ONLY, that Christ is not actually the leader.


***


From the bulk of the 'mutual-submission' comments, I think that the most interesting thing is the way in which authority is described. You all seem to have this idea of authority being the same type of authority as manifested in the world...

Where did you get that definition?

...Becuase, the way I see it, God's idea of authority (and of a husband in authority) has a much different definition and practice than the abusive domineering "let-me-step-on-you-so-I-can-get-higher" spirit that the world's "boss" mentality has.

You bring that false definition right over into your Scriptural interpretation and then (rightly!) conclude that God can't possibly be meaning what He seems to be saying...and so you go through all sorts of Scriptural gymnastics to make it say something different than the obvious interpretation.


God's view and definition of authority is altogether different from what fallen man has made it to be. Headship has been described by you all in some very degrading terms. It only shows just how much you've identified with the world's definition of 'head.' I wish that you could see God's definition (or at least our concept of it) because I think then you could understand why some of us find the authority roles in marraige so beautiful and so freeing.


Warm Regards,
Molly

 

[Johnnz]

“His sacrificial love involves leading”

“He is not simply the head as in source but he is also the head as in leader”



This is sheer presupposition, based on a prior assumption of head meaning leadership. Where is Eph 5:23 does it say beyond any doubt that Paul used the term head to mean leader? I endeavoured to show that the predominate use of that term in Ephesians had nothing to do with leadership or being the boss.



The husband and wife are to be a picture of Christ and the church. That is not what Paul said at all. The husband’s love is to be modelled on or reflect the love of Christ for His church Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Saviour. This verse unequivocally relates headship to nurture and sacrificial servanthood – Jesus’ love was that of a Saviour – so is the husbands to be towards His wife. Here Paul is setting out what mutual submission entails for the husband.



You validly raised a part objection to my presentation of Eph 1:10. Yes, under his feet is a common expression of victory over an enemy. All rulership of any kind is now subject to the Christ. By placing all things under the feet of Christ God has the entirety of His creation once again in unity. His creation, He who was its reason and origin i.e. source will once again have an order without rebellion. The source of that unity is Christ – it is through what he achieved that God’s dominion again is complete. Note that it was God who placed all things under Christ’s feet, not Jesus taking that role. My original statements are still valid. This verse does not substantiate head as boss. Its context gives the final authority to God. Jesus was the means, the church the recipient of the victory and benefits. Jesus as source.



Eph 4:15 Building itself up in love is not a leadership image. It is one of function, or nurture, of care and mutual concern. Why is growing and building itself up in love an authority image? That, again is an imposed presupposition. Am I exercising authority when I feed, or support of care for my son? Am I as a man exercising my authority when I do those things, but my wife is only exercising her care? Authority and leadership just does not belong to this verse.



You wrote: “The head is where the Body’s direction is determined”. The problem here is that in Paul’s day it was the heart, not the head, that was the centre and guiding principle of life. Jesus said the same on several occasions. This is another modern concept read into scripture.



The remainder of your post just restates in various ways your modern understanding of head.



The point I raised in my last post remains. If there is a hierarchy of submission of husband to wife, how can a husband mutually submit to his wife, or for that matter, any church leader mutually submit to another member, when. by definition of that role, one is always ‘in charge’ and the other always to submit?



John

NZ

 

[Svt4Him]

There is some good information there, and it is quite sensitive. However, it essentially takes the traditional position of male leadership (headship), which I believe Paul never taught.

John
NZ

Actually there are enought verses in the Bible to support this view. I can certainly post them, as there was a 30 page thread earlier. Not only that, but it looked at the whole translation of head/origin. I'll take a look and see if I can get the link.

Here it is: http://www.christianforums.com/t164279-male-submission-in-marriage.html

Now someone who says they rule according to their giftings is very simular to what happened to Moses, Aaron, and the Miriam. A&M came to Moses and said they are gifted, they have heard from God, they have prophecied, and God said why would they go against God by rejecting Moses, whom God has put in charge? It has nothing to do with ability, it has to do with authority, and God has deligated His authoirity to the man in a marriage.

 

[Johnnz]

Now someone who says they rule according to their giftings is very simular to what happened to Moses, Aaron, and the Miriam. A&M came to Moses and said they are gifted, they have heard from God, they have prophecied, and God said why would they go against God by rejecting Moses, whom God has put in charge? It has nothing to do with ability, it has to do with authority, and God has deligated His authoirity to the man in a marriage.

Thanks for that link. I will follow it up later.

Two quick comments for now.

1 Leadership is a recognised function in Scripture. But, in the NT it was radically revised by Jesus. No longer was authority and rule to characterise the true leader. Matt 20:25-28 Jesus called them together and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 26 Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 27 and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

2. None of your examples apply to marriage - they are of a much wider role of leadership. The NT just does not delegate authority to the male in a marriage.

John
NZ

 

[shania]

Well I believe wives don't have to love their husbands because it doesn't say so in the bible.

I also believe husbands don't have to respect their wives because it doesn't say so in the bible.


Well not really.....but there are no verses to my knowledge what say they should do this, so should we assume wives don't have to love their husbands and husbands doesn't have to respect their wives?

To do that would be taking the bible out of context.

It is just like saying the husband is head of the wife means the husband makes all the decisions because of a couple of lines in the bible when in the rest of the book there is no example of when Jesus was forceful and imposed himself on us.

On the contrary, he taught and was obedient to God, even when we weren't. He exerted self-disciple and patience, let us make our own decisions in the end (loving God and Jesus are choices) even if we chose not to follow in the end.

I think Jesus came on earth to tell to save our souls, and didn't care about what furniture we bought, when we went on vacation, which house we bought, and so on. Technically, I think Jesus would say who cares about the house or car you buy, what we do for vacation.......(Jesus never made these decisions for us). Instead, he was concerned about our souls and would say are we making our house into a home and living Godly lives? Are we welcoming strangers and the needy into our home? We don't need a flashy car. Give the extra money to the needy. Wife, you decide these things if it pleases you. These are worldy things and the Lord is cornerned more about your heart and your salvation. This is more important than worldly things.

I could go on, but I'll stop there. This is my opinion about those verses.

 

[Sascha Fitzpatrick]

Shania,

So, if your husband was the one who makes the final decisions, that would make him 'forceful' and 'imposing'? Hmmm, you see, as I said before, we discuss things, and then the final decision is in B's hands - he is not forceful or imposing, he loves me, respects my opinion, and more often than not goes with what my opinion was, so long as it was the most educated and sensible.

Anyway, back to my OP - this was not to argue the value of headship or submission, just to ask people how they instigated headship/submission in their household. I've since found that most on here are doing what I thought I'd do - mutual discussion of ideas, and if we tend to disagree on something, we go with his.

As I said, I'm not married, but I'm trying to instigate this Biblical way beforehand, seeing our relationship will head that way.

Just because HE makes the final decision, does not mean he goes against what I believe all the time (it's probably happened ONCE). The final decision is usually one that either a) we both agreed on or b) made the most sense.

For example, we went and bought a fridge the other day (we live together, but I'm moving out ASAP). I had my eye on one, he had his eye on another. We both said why we liked the particular fridges, and I ended up saying, 'listen, it's your decision, this is just a difference of opinion, so whichever one you wanna get, it's cool with me'. So he thought about it, and eventually went with mine, cos he realised I'd be the one cleaning the fridge out most of the time, and my choice would be easier to keep clean and tidy up. That was a very SMALL example of where I've submitted, but it sort of gives an explanation about how we approach it.

I'm getting the impression people think a man would be rude when he made the final decision - I've yet to find a Christian man in my circle of married friends who have used this form, who is domineering and forceful and imposing when he makes the final decision. The men love their wives, and the decisions are never made in such a way as to prove them 'superior' to the women at all - most agree that mutual discussion is best, followed by the final decision made by him.

Why do people flare up so much when they hear 'submit' and 'head'? If it's done in the way it was supposed to be (as a mirror of Christ to the Church), they are actually good things, lacking in disrespect, arrogance, domination and inferiority, as some who are against it tend to raise in their arguments.

Anyway, back to the OP? How was it instigated in YOUR marriage???

This was not meant to be a debate thread!

Sasch

 

[shania]

Well I'm not saying if a husband makes the decisions that this would make him forceful or impose himself on us.

I just meant that Jesus never did that with us when he was on the earth (he honestly didn't care about what kind of shoes we had on our feet, how many goats we had as opposed to donkeys, etc.....) He did not make these decisions, but the traditional view is that a husband should make these decisions because he is to be as Jesus is to the church. Yet Jesus never did these things for us.

Jesus died for more important things and how these issues are settled in a marriage depend on the individual couple, and it could vary depending on the situation.

Ideally and realistically the couple should submit to each other when coming to a decision about wordly and material issues - cars, homes jobs, spending, etc.

Spiritual and Godly issues are a different matter in the home -- and all other types of situations Jesus taught us about. In this case the husband ought to act as Christ was to the church and the wife should submit to him. In otherwords, they would end up submitting to one another, since Christ sacrificed everything for us.

Example, husband is a mechanic so he makes the final decision on the car to buy (as long as it isn't flashy or wasteful) , but the wife is a chartered accountant so she makes the final decision on how to invest the stocks if the couple can't decide (as long as she is reasonable and would do as she would professionally advise to someone else).

This is how I view the situation, but if couples choose to submit to eachother in a different way regarding material and worldly issues, this is their personal choice.

 

[Svt4Him]

Thanks for that link. I will follow it up later.

Two quick comments for now.

1 Leadership is a recognised function in Scripture. But, in the NT it was radically revised by Jesus. No longer was authority and rule to characterise the true leader. Matt 20:25-28 Jesus called them together and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 26 Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 27 and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— 28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

2. None of your examples apply to marriage - they are of a much wider role of leadership. The NT just does not delegate authority to the male in a marriage.

John
NZ

"But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God"

Now I know the origin issue will come up, so here too is a good read. http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/cbmw/rbmw/appendix1b.html

 

[alaskamolly]

Anyway, back to the OP? How was it instigated in YOUR marriage???

This was not meant to be a debate thread!

Sasch

I think you might want to start a new thread...

 

[Katydid]

Sascha,

I have to give you an example that is occuring right now.

I know that something is wrong with my 3 year old. I have suspected for a while, and now I KNOW. Well my husband disagrees, just thinks he is a little slow and maybe just takes his time. So we completely disagree. I am worried sick though, so I said I want him checked out. Hubby disagrees. We discuss somemore, I believe in submission and would never just take my son without Hubby's agreement. He loves me as Christ loved the church, so what does he do. He tells me to wait until we move so that my son can see a pediatrician, which he can't where we live now.


This would not work if he did not love me as he should, and I would not wait if I did not respect his authority. It all works out in the end, because HaShem has his hand in it as well. He will lead the husband to the right decision. If your boyfriend loves you as he should, it is actually quite simple. Especially, if you allow yourself to not fight against it.





Apparently someone felt that my post was saying something that it wasn't. I left out details out of respect for my son,but apparently I need to make some of them known. My son, until he turned 3 was under the care of an Early Intervention program for speech and motor skills delay, sensory integration problems, communication problems and a few other things. He has outgrown their treatment, but now more symptoms are showing up. My husband thinks that he just takes his time learning things and is an anxious child. I think he has a more serious problem. At this age there is not much that can be done for him anyway, I just want a diagnosis so I know how to deal with it.

I wrote my post at 2a.m. and apparently someone got the wrong impression and felt that I was neglecting my child. THIS IS NOT OCCURING! My husband would never condone neglecting any of our children. I am sorry if that is the impression that was given.

 

[Johnnz]

Sascha,

I have been a major contributor in diverting the thrust of yor thread. I feel so deeply about this submission thing because my wife and I have spent over three decades of seeing the devastation it causes in families - destroyed wives and children - and in the church - pastorial control, manipulation, hurt people and the destruction of active christian comittment. So back to your original post.

As a husband I endeavour to have a relationship with my wife that respects her views, readily accept areas where she is far better/more gifted/more knowledgeable than I am, am prepared to share responsibilities with her with family care, household duties and other mutual activities.

I have learned that, when we differ, she is often proved right by subsequent events, so I must always attempt to listen to and properly evaluate her counsel and advice.

She need her own space, time and interests. She cannot be expected to always agree with me, to follow all that I do or become involved in. She needs friends and relationships outside of me.

I recognise that when God created a woman as his helper it was for them to learn to share all of life with each other, as equal beings crafted in the Divine image.

John
NZ

 

[mghalpern]

Sascha,

I have been a major contributor in diverting the thrust of yor thread. I feel so deeply about this submission thing because my wife and I have spent over three decades of seeing the devastation it causes in families - destroyed wives and children - and in the church - pastorial control, manipulation, hurt people and the destruction of active christian comittment. So back to your original post.

As a husband I endeavour to have a relationship with my wife that respects her views, readily accept areas where she is far better/more gifted/more knowledgeable than I am, am prepared to share responsibilities with her with family care, household duties and other mutual activities.

I have learned that, when we differ, she is often proved right by subsequent events, so I must always attempt to listen to and properly evaluate her counsel and advice.

She need her own space, time and interests. She cannot be expected to always agree with me, to follow all that I do or become involved in. She needs friends and relationships outside of me.

I recognise that when God created a woman as his helper it was for them to learn to share all of life with each other, as equal beings crafted in the Divine image.

John
NZ

Johnnz... Very nice...Michael

 

[alaskamolly]

That's funny, because my experience as a minister's wife has seen quite the opposite. We see homes totally out of harmony and breaking up, or together but lacking joy, and often it has much to do with lack of Biblical roles being practiced (and the lacking Biblical comprehension of those roles)...

In our travels, we've stayed in many 'pastor's homes,' and it's always easy to tell who's living in Biblical harmony versus who is 'sharing headship.' There is an undescribable undercurrent of tension in the homes where Biblical roles are not being practiced.


But really, though I'm participating in this "but this is what I've seen that works" part of the discussion myself, it doesn't matter one flip whether or not one way has been seen to 'work' or not in one person's experience--because we don't know all the in's and out's of that relationship, nor all the issues involved. We all have differing opinions and differing experiences...but the real issue here is NOT 'Well, this works for me..."

It's not ABOUT what works or what FEELS best... Yeesh, when I was a young college gal, drugs and sex and loud punk rock felt really darn good!!! We all know that didn't make it God's way... The issue isn't what "I like," or what "you like." It is what GOD likes--what is His way, how is He best expressed, what instructions did He give?

What DOES matter is what we see God telling us. We do know that if we correctly understand His heart and follow His direction, we will be BLESSED.



I know that in my own life, coming into my marraige with nothing but a distorted view of marraige from my past (called: seriously domineering father--not that it was his fault though, becuase that's all he grew up with), and a lot of charismatic college prof's in a lot of sociology classes with titles like, "Race, Class, Ethnicity, and Gender" (guess what THAT class was about??? Yup, the evil White Male and all the terrible things he has done...) and the like, when I first REALLY met the Lord at 20 and started Bible College, I was basically a 'baptised' femi-nazi. Married my husband, a very godly man who seriously loved God (and still does!) but also who had no clue as to what a healthy home was like, I leave YOU to guess as to the quality of our first year of marraige!



After God grabbed hold of my heart and began to show me what HE meant by authority and gender differences (wholly different from my former 'enlightened' interpretation of the concepts!), my heart changed and my behaviour followed.

We have grown into our marraige roles, and are still growing into them. I can say that as I began to be an active follower, instead of a leader, our marraige blossomed into something I never thought I would experience in my lifetime...

By no means am I made a passive bystander--my husband values and requests my opinion often, my particular talents, my particular giftings...often delegating his leadership to me in various areas, and certaily valuing me as a sister in Christ.

...And yet, in our home, he is the leader, and I am his helpmate. We are no longer a two-headed beast, which is what we formerly were. We are one now, ONE being--a head and a body--equally important, equally given valuable and far-reaching tasks, but no longer trying to be something that we were not made to be.


So I guess, Sascha, in answer to your original question, it is something you grow into.

Going from being your own to being united to another is no 'overnight' thing. It is a step by step process, learning eachother, learning how to love eachother, learning to get over your preconcieved ideas about what that means and coming to understand what it REALLY means and how it really looks (which will be different for you both, as it is for each unique family)...

I think the important thing is your heart is in a constant state of 'going for God,' and wanting to show Him in your life, through your marraige, through your everything... That way, He brings up each issue as you come to it, each particular step, and shows you how He wishes you to change or how He wishes you to react... and you learn and grow.

It is a living breathing thing, this thing called "marriage," and if it's being built on and in Christ, it is always growing in perfection, brighter and brighter till the Full Day dawns.

Blessings,
Molly