Leader

[Arclight610]

Hi all,

I have a question that me and my girlfriend were discussing. In a relationship, the guy is suppose to be the leader. What if the woman in the relationship is significantly older and/or more experienced in life? i.e. 18 year old man with 27 year old woman or something among those lines. Would it make more sense for the woman to take the leadership role?

 

[K9_Trainer]

It doesn't matter IMO.

There shouldn't be a "leader" in a relationship. It's a partnership, two people working together. Therefore, it should be treated as such. Decisions need to be mutual. The issue needs to be discussed and both opinions/views taken into consideration. Of course if one opinion differs, then a compromise needs to be reached. This doesn't mean she must back down because you're the man and your the leader, or vice versa. This means you talk it out and either decide that one idea is more appropriate and go with that, or you find a way to make both of you happy.

 

[peanutbutter12]

The days of the man bringing home the bacon are long over. We're in a time of both man and wife having jobs, so the stereotype of the man being the source of income and the woman sitting by the oven are long over in that aspect of that axiom.

As the Bible says, the man should be the spiritual leader, and that is for sure. There is a good thread on that topic in the long term forum going on right now. However, as K9 said, a relationship is a partnership in many ways. Communication is the key to making things work out or making decisions.

 

[Luther073082]

I agree with Terra here. If the guy is too young to do such a thing, he's probably too young to get married.

I will quote a previous post of mine to help understand this.

There are leaders, bosses, dictators etc etc. God is looking for a leader. I've had this confirmed by a independent translation of the greek.

Here is how a leader leads. He leads by example and he serves those whom he leads.

A person becomes a leader not out of any position given to them by anyone or by demanding it. They lead because their followers TRUST them. The bible lays out how a man should lead when he says "love your wives as Christ loved the church."

How did Christ love the church? He sacrificed for it.
How did Christ lead the church? By trust and love. Christ never demanded that ANYONE follow him. He said "Follow me" gently. And whats amazing is alot of people people just followed him without him even saying it.

The people that followed Christ trusted in him and he sacrificed for them.
The word that is translated into submit in greek actually means "voluntary obedience out of love."

Men should not stomp their feet, yell or get angry demanding that women follow them. God asks women to follow their husbands but does not ask or tell men to "keep women in their place." He asks husbands to love their wife as Christ loved the church. A good husband should concern himself completly with if he is loving his wife as Christ loved the church. And if he is, then often enough the wife will follow naturally without it even needing to be said.

And one should always remember they are responsible TO their spouse first and foremost behind God.

None of this is restrictive in what "roles" a man or a woman leads in their married life. God never talks about having women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen all the time. He talks about a man having a self sacrificial love for his wife and family and he talks about a wife having undying respect for her husband.

And this can and should be true no matter how things are done. Even if the dad is staying home with the kids and cleaning the kitchen and the mom is out being a CEO.

I think if a man can't handle the above. That is loving his wife as Christ loved the church (in a self sacrifical way) then he's too young/immature to get married. And the only way to really lead if you ask me is to take on Christ's model.

 

[Cjwinnit]

Think of the situation in the military. Some NCO's have far more experience and age than the rookie officers, but there is no ambiguity about who is in command.

 

[bliz]

While she is your girlfriend you have no authority over her whatsoever.

It has never made any sense to me that two people need to declare one of them the "leader". Two people can work things out.

When it comes to marriage, I and many other CHristians bellieve that husband and wife should be in mutual submission to each other. The head of the household should be God.

 

[Bootstrap]

Think of the situation in the military. Some NCO's have far more experience and age than the rookie officers, but there is no ambiguity about who is in command.

Do you think most of these rookie officers treat their recruits as Paul told husbands to treat their wives? Does Paul seem to be prescribing the same relationship?

Jonathan

 

[SparkyMaddie]

i dont believe in this. my bf is older but he isnt my leader or will be. its gotta be 50/50 i mean what if your partner at some time loses their mind,gets in jured whatever? ya have to be prepared to be strong so i am prepared to be a strong woman and lead my own life.
its how my mom and dad raised me.

 

[peanutbutter12]

I do have to add this which may apply here.

When it comes down to a disagreement about something or a hard decision, that is when the whole leader thing comes to play. While we may meet half way with the relationship, at the end of the day, my decision is final, not hers, and she accepts this because if something like this does come up, it's my job to take that leadership role.

 

[Luther073082]

i dont believe in this. my bf is older but he isnt my leader or will be. its gotta be 50/50 i mean what if your partner at some time loses their mind,gets in jured whatever? ya have to be prepared to be strong so i am prepared to be a strong woman and lead my own life.
its how my mom and dad raised me.

I don't think you are understanding the dynamic of what a leader is and thinking of it as a dictator or a pseudo parent. My GF tends towards following and I prefer she be like that as a wife in the future.

But that does NOT mean she can't live her own life. She does live her own life. I would never date a woman who can't live their own life. I don't want to marry myself to a pseudo daughter and be her father. She can figure things out on her own with or without me.

She doesn't NEED me for survival. I don't want someone who is needy.

First of all you are young so some of this doesn't apply to you.

But first of all turn to the gospels. The same scripture asks men to love their wives like Christ loved the church. As in to treat their wives as Christ taught his diciples and others around him.

Read the gospels, and its easy to see that Jesus was a leader. He had 12 diciples following him around plus a couple women that where usually hanging around, and often times entire crowds following him just so they can listen to and hang on his every word and teaching.

But I'll bet if you open up the bible you will never see Jesus say anything like "Do this I'm the leader", or follow me here "I'm in charge" No one followed him just because he his name was Jesus. They didn't know he was God yet. But they knew he was wise and he was loving. And so they followed him. And he set the tone, he acted in a way that he wanted others to act.

Jesus never had any earthly authority over anyone and he never used his Godly authority to make anyone follow him. But still a lot of people did based on HOW he led. He led the way and people realized he was that rock and foundation people could take confidence in. That he was that guy that just knew the right way to go, and they didn't really have to know where they where going or why, but since Jesus was going that way they KNEW it would be good.

All of them could have ignored him and lived out the rest of their earthly lives. But they knew Jesus could create that community that made their lives better. And in the end he sacrificed his life on a cross for that community.

Now no man is Jesus and he's never going to lead as perfectly as Jesus did. But a man should still try to be that head that gives people that emotional confidence. His family should have the confidence that he loves them so much he will sacrifice himself for their benefit if necessary. And so they will let him make final decisions and trust in him taking the family in a good direction.

Now lets note, its not like Jesus was never questioned. Peter questioned him a lot. A wife should question her husband respectfully to. But eventually when Jesus made a decision Peter went with it. He could have thrown a big stink and caused division but he didn't. The only difference is that because normal men are imperfect a wife's questioning and disagreeing may correct him and prevent him from making a major mistake. Peter's questioning never did that because he was Jesus and he knew EXACTLY what he was doing and for most of that time Peter and his diciples where clueless

And I will point out Jesus left the diciples with Peter as the leader. So it wasn't like Peter was helpless afterall.

In this scripture God doesn't ask a wife to stay in the kitchen. He doesn't ask men to "keep them in their place." He doesn't ask women to follow their husbands even when they have become unhinged loons. He doesn't ask women to do everything he says when he says it. Nor does he ask them to take abuse or anything of that nature.

He asks men to lead the way humbly like Christ would lead the way. And he asks women to voluntarily let them lead the way. Because eventually especially if times aren't the best, the family will have to rely on someone to put their emotional and spiritual strength, hope and faith in. If there is no one, people will be broken emotinally and spritually. If there are two people, the children will be confused and there may be discord in the household.

There needs to be no offical recognition of a leader. Leaders don't need a position to be in to lead. They just need to be the person that a group looks to feel safe.

 

[DIVA_for_Christ]

Hi all,

I have a question that me and my girlfriend were discussing. In a relationship, the guy is suppose to be the leader. What if the woman in the relationship is significantly older and/or more experienced in life? i.e. 18 year old man with 27 year old woman or something among those lines. Would it make more sense for the woman to take the leadership role?

Eph 5: 22-33 Wives and Husbands

22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— 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.

The understanding that I have is that God holds the husband accountable as the head. Both husband and wife can be leaders but the headship falls on the shoulders of the husband. God is all about order and His established order is the husband as the head. This does not mean that the wife is the lesser person. She just has a different role in the order of God.

For example if the husband and wife can not come to agreement on a certain decision in their home, the wife should submit to her husband and TRUST the God in him to be right or TRUST God to deal with him to change his mind if his decision is not in line with the will of God.

By no means does this mean that the wife has no say or that the wisdom of God in her is not valued. It's actually the opposite. It's humbling for both people. For example, if a husband believes he's right with a decision and the wife believes it's the wrong decision and she trusts God to deal with him to get him to make the right decision, he will be humbled once God deals with him and he realizes that he was wrong. This works the other way as well if the husband was right and God reveals that to the wife she will be humbled as well. It's very humbling when you truly believe you are the one right in hearing God only to realize later on that you actually missed it and the other person was correct.

Being submitted like this to first and foremost God and honoring His order not only keeps us humble but it puts us in a position to ALWAYS keep God as the One we trust to guide us. It ensures the marriage is a three fold cord. It can prevent the "I told you so's, etc".

When the husband and wife just make decisions and can't agree and the one who tends to be more "dominant" gets their way you're bound to miss God because it's easy to leave God out of the equation. This is dangerous because pride can be the root behind the dominance. As we all know pride comes before destruction but humility before honor.

 

[Bootstrap]

I really appreciated Luther's perspective on this.

I don't think this passage says that a woman is off the hook if she agrees to sin in order to obey her husband. It doesn't address that question, but many passages suggest that we are to stand up to authorities if they ask us to sin.

This applies to women just as it applies to men. Consider the story of Ananias and Saphyra:

Acts 5:1 Now a man named Ananias, together with Sapphira his wife, sold a piece of property. 5:2 He kept back for himself part of the proceeds with his wife’s knowledge; he brought only part of it and placed it at the apostles’ feet. 5:3 But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back for yourself part of the proceeds from the sale of the land? 5:4 Before it was sold, did it not belong to you? And when it was sold, was the money not at your disposal? How have you thought up this deed in your heart? You have not lied to people but to God!” 5:5 When Ananias heard these words he collapsed and died, and great fear gripped all who heard about it. 5:6 So the young men came, wrapped him up, carried him out, and buried him. 5:7 After an interval of about three hours, his wife came in, but she did not know what had happened. 5:8 Peter said to her, “Tell me, were the two of you paid this amount for the land?” Sapphira said, “Yes, that much.” 5:9 Peter then told her, “Why have you agreed together to test the Spirit of the Lord? Look! The feet of those who have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out!” 5:10 At once she collapsed at his feet and died. So when the young men came in, they found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 5:11 Great fear gripped the whole church and all who heard about these things.

Ananias and Saphyra agreed to sin. Each was held responsible for their own sin. Saphyra was not let off the hook because it was done in obedience to her husband.


Jonathan

 

[gobettygo]

Relationships should be an equal partnership. There are going to be times when you are weak and need to lean on her, and times when she is weak and needs to lean on you. It is in those times that one of you should step up and be a leader. While the Bible tells wives to honor their husbands, it also tells husbands to treat their wives well. My soon-to-be fiance and I ALWAYS go to one another for advice and I can't tell who the leader is most of the time. Hope this helped!

 

[Luther073082]

I don't think this passage says that a woman is off the hook if she agrees to sin in order to obey her husband. It doesn't address that question, but many passages suggest that we are to stand up to authorities if they ask us to sin.

Since submit in the greek means "voluntary obedience" and not "blind obedience" I would definatly agree with you.

We can't seperate this from the model of Christ. Christ didn't lead his people into sin, and he would not want a wife to follow her husband into sin.

I submit in voluntary obedience to my pastor. That is the order of things, he was called to lead the church. This means I operate in my service to the church the way he asks. I teach based on the lesson plan he approved and do not go off and do my own. I do my best to make myself available to help further if he needs me. I follow his spiritual advice, and listen to him intently with the upmost respect during both sermon and private consultation.

That does not mean I participate in a mob hit if he asks me to. It doesn't mean that I will launder money for him if he asks me to.

 

[Bootstrap]

Since submit in the greek means "voluntary obedience" and not "blind obedience" I would definatly agree with you.

I think it's the context rather than the verb that tells us this. The verb can be used both ways, but in this passage it clearly indicates voluntary obedience. I sent you email on this separately, since I think I'm being a bit geeky here ...

We can't seperate this from the model of Christ. Christ didn't lead his people into sin, and he would not want a wife to follow her husband into sin.

Yup, the same verb is used to tell all of us to submit to those who work diligently for the Lord, to secular authorities, and to our elders, but other passages clearly tell us to resist the secular authorities and even our leaders if they call us to sin.

I submit in voluntary obedience to my pastor. That is the order of things, he was called to lead the church. This means I operate in my service to the church the way he asks. I teach based on the lesson plan he approved and do not go off and do my own. I do my best to make myself available to help further if he needs me. I follow his spiritual advice, and listen to him intently with the upmost respect during both sermon and private consultation.

That does not mean I participate in a mob hit if he asks me to. It doesn't mean that I will launder money for him if he asks me to.

I like your constant emphasis on the way that Jesus leads us. That's our model.

Jonathan

 

[bliz]

I don't think this passage says that a woman is off the hook if she agrees to sin in order to obey her husband. It doesn't address that question, but many passages suggest that we are to stand up to authorities if they ask us to sin.

This applies to women just as it applies to men. Consider the story of Ananias and Saphyra:

Ananias and Saphyra agreed to sin. Each was held responsible for their own sin. Saphyra was not let off the hook because it was done in obedience to her husband.

Jonathan

There is nothing in the passage to indicate that Saphyra did anything out of obedience to her husband. Every step of the way we see them agreeing and working together.

 

[Johnnz]

Male leadership and headship are quite bizarre concepts, but very popular these days

Greek culture regarded the head as the source of reason and therefore the seat of our most godlike capacity. Our neck separated the head from the lower and inferior body with its desires and feelings. Women, being more feeling and emotion oriented were thereby deemed grossly inferior to men. Paul's request for men to love their wives as their own bodies thus turned popular thought upside down. Women were to be loved equally as Christian teaching saw one's body as the creation of God and the recipient of his glory (temples of the Holy Spirit). Therefore Paul was teaching within a cultural context which considered bodies and women as inferior, that both were now to be given honour.

That honour was not by 'headship' in the sense of authority over, as detached reason was the prime function of the head according to common belief. Rather by using the term 'loves his own body' Paul placed our body with its emotions and feelings as equally important as the head. That was a very radical concept indeed for Roman society.

Then Paul uses a sacrificial concept 'gave himself'. Jesus' life and power are manifested in weakness Paul wrote. A wife is to experience the redeemed life of her husband, never its unredeemed capacities. That would expose her to power, greed, selfishness, insensitivity without recourse. Resurrection cannot happen until there has been death.

It is only within this understanding that a wife's submission is safe. Paul never intended that a woman could be compelled to bury her talents, gifts, ambitions, freedoms and decision making abilities to any limitations that an uncaring, shallow, or domineering man could enforce based on the common teaching on headship and male leadership.

John
NZ

 

[Beauty4Ashes]

.