Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Men get to correct.
Women get to be corrected.
I repeat my last post as well.
When you say it like that, it sounds like you are correcting an errant child. I would rephrase this as "spouses need to learn how to communicate better especially when there is conflict". "Correction" implies that you are right and she is wrong. I fail to see things that way. There were times I was right and he was wrong (many of them), yet instead of "correcting", I would attempt to explain why his view was incorrect or off-base.
I've been there, Link. There are people who make it a habit to jump all over people's use of certain words and twist other's words - one of my pet peeves on the forum is that there are those who are so skilled at word games that they actually take the very concept you post, twist it to make it sound like you are wrong, then post the original concept as though it were their own. There are one or two who do that here. There are also those who make a point of exposing all your inconsistencies - you said this in post ____ but in post ___ you say that - all the while taking things out of context.
Imo, there is a difference between those who make a habit of those kinds of word games and those who do it only when that language will perpetuate long-held social biases or when the inconsistency is pertinent to the outcome of a thread.
It's interesting that you didn't use the language the other way - as in women correcting their husbands and men criticizing their wives. Imo, that would have elicited a whole different response from us. Bias shows up in the language we use.
If you would like to discuss criticism, it is far different than correction. And correction is used far too frequently for every little sin - or even for things that are not sins but rather nothing more than different ways of doing things or other annoyances. Iow, being "corrected" for how the toilet is cleaned is far different than being "corrected" for ongoing and unrepentant adultery. One is clearly a sin and the other is a matter of control. But that is why so many women get so riled up over things like your use of language in your earlier post - the fact that women need "correction" is absolutely no different than either men needing correction or it is nothing more than a Christianese way of justifying and excusing their criticism. Iow, correction has been abused in marriage, primarily by husbands over their wives, and wives are not going to take that anymore. So in the context of this thread when we are talking about love and respect, it was perceived disrespect towards us as women (and wives, even that of other men), to talk about "correcting" wives and how wives criticize husbands. I also think in terms of this thread, that is not making a mountain out of a molehill - it is the whole basis on which this mountain (thread) is formed - [dis]respect.
I've been there, Link. There are people who make it a habit to jump all over people's use of certain words and twist other's words - one of my pet peeves on the forum is that there are those who are so skilled at word games that they actually take the very concept you post, twist it to make it sound like you are wrong, then post the original concept as though it were their own. There are one or two who do that here.
There are also those who make a point of exposing all your inconsistencies - you said this in post ____ but in post ___ you say that - all the while taking things out of context.
It's interesting that you didn't use the language the other way - as in women correcting their husbands and men criticizing their wives. Imo, that would have elicited a whole different response from us. Bias shows up in the language we use.
there are very few men who really do self-examine and work on their own improvement rather than expect the wife to make all the adjustments and changes."
If you would like to discuss criticism, it is far different than correction. And correction is used far too frequently for every little sin - or even for things that are not sins but rather nothing more than different ways of doing things or other annoyances. Iow, being "corrected" for how the toilet is cleaned is far different than being "corrected" for ongoing and unrepentant adultery. One is clearly a sin and the other is a matter of control.
But that is why so many women get so riled up over things like your use of language in your earlier post - the fact that women need "correction" is absolutely no different than either men needing correction or it is nothing more than a Christianese way of justifying and excusing their criticism. Iow, correction has been abused in marriage, primarily by husbands over their wives, and wives are not going to take that anymore.
I do recall reading several comments about a wife's correction being taken by a man as biting criticism in the book.
So in the context of this thread when we are talking about love and respect, it was perceived disrespect towards us as women (and wives, even that of other men), to talk about "correcting" wives and how wives criticize husbands. I also think in terms of this thread, that is not making a mountain out of a molehill - it is the whole basis on which this mountain (thread) is formed - [dis]respect.
ValleyGal,
I don't see that as characteristic of myself.
We also can learn stuff and change our minds while we post and read on these forums.
I get the sense that people are finding fault with me, though, when I'm using Eggerich's language. And as I recall, Eggerich is talking about how men perceive wive's comments which are not intended to be disrespectful criticism. I'm not going to blame him for his choice of words. It seems to be a real issue.
Feminism in general tends to train women to be sensitive to this type of wording.
But that is why so many women get so riled up over things like your use of language in your earlier post - the fact that women need "correction" is absolutely no different than either men needing correction or it is nothing more than a Christianese way of justifying and excusing their criticism. Iow, correction has been abused in marriage, primarily by husbands over their wives, and wives are not going to take that anymore.This sounds like a perception based on individual experiences. I'm more used to seeing couples where the wife is critical of the husband. Lots of marriages are like that, too. 'Everyone Loves Raymond' marriages seems to be a more salient stereotype of marriage in the culture these days.
If a husband "corrects" his wife, she will likely take it as criticism, just like a man takes correction from his wife as criticism.
Some of us are extremely sensitive to words and biases because we have grown up and lived in that power imbalance, which creates dissonance for us because the social trend is that women are supposed to be equal. It is not the trend that is making us sensitive.
It is coming out of ignorance to it that is making us sensitive.
That is the bottom line, so to divide that up and say women need to respect and men need to love, why not simply teach love as the moral marital imperative instead?
Ephesians 5 tells wives to respect their husbands. It does not tell husbands to respect their wives. It tells husbands to love their wives, but it doesn't say for wives to respect their husbands.
Another passage tells older women to teach younger women to love their husbands. 'Love thy neighbor' also applies. I Peter 3 tells husbands to honor their wives.
In the context, I don't think wives are supposed to 'respect' their husbands in the same way, considering the Greek word which can also be rendered 'revere' or 'fear.' Fear as in fear God, fear the king, etc. The word usage seems consistent with hierarchy.
In our modern sense of 'respect', the way we usually use it, sure, husbands should respect their wives and vice versa. I'd agree with that.
I think Eggerich is taking a bit of a leap in connecting the theme verse in Ephesians 5 about the command for wives to respect their husbands with the idea that this is an emotional need. The teaching of the passage stands regardless of whether a husband percieves a need for respect. We had about 18 people in our class, all married couples except for one young engaged couple. The idea of men needing respect didn't resonate much at first with one young man and one middle aged married man. The young man said he thought about it and it made sense. It seemed to resonate well with the other men in the class. Even with Eggerich's survey results, we'd expect some men not to care as much about respect as others. No matter what the feelings are, it's right to obey what the verse says.
Ephesians 5 tells wives to respect their husbands. It does not tell husbands to respect their wives. It tells husbands to love their wives, but it doesn't say for wives to respect their husbands.
Another passage tells older women to teach younger women to love their husbands. 'Love thy neighbor' also applies. I Peter 3 tells husbands to honor their wives.
Ephesians may not tell the husbands to respect their wives, but you do find that in I Peter 3 when the bible speaks of honoring them.
Ephesians may not tell wives to love their husbands, but you do find that in many other parts of the bible - Love Thy neighbor, etc.
FI was just going to ignore the last several posts, but maybe it's best to comment on it. From my perspective, this just feels like nit picking over a choice of words. I know you don't perceive it that way. Think of it as 'Christianese'. I have heard 'correction' used in church to refer to pointing out a sin or shortcoming of a fellow believer. I wasn't using it in some kind of gender-specific way. I never said men are always right.
This forum used to be really bad about people making a big deal out of the use of some word, making mountains out of molehills, sometimes even twisting words. Fortunately, that has improved in recent years. Occasionally, though, someone gets irritated about another person's choice of words and a few posters jump on it, making a mountain out of a molehill or implying things the poster did not say or intend. From my perspective as the poster whose words are being picked apart, that's what it feels like.
For me, there are different levels of respect.
I respect my fellow humans, because I feel it is taught to do so. I also feel that when you finally OWN that, instead of attempting to do this out of some sense of obligation? A heart change maybe...it becomes much easier and almost natural.
There was a time in my life in which I truly struggled with this concept. As God opened my heart things changed. It doesn't mean I have to accept their way of life, prospective, etc. Just respect them as another of God's creatures. To me, this includes individuals I find as poisonous too.
You then have different levels of respect towards your friends, family, children, and spouse.
I.to put to flight by terrifying (to scare away)
A.to put to flight, to flee
B.to fear, be afraid
i.to be struck with fear, to be seized with alarm
a.of those startled by strange sights or occurrences
b.of those struck with amazement
ii.to fear, be afraid of one
iii.to fear (i.e. hesitate) to do something (for fear of harm)
C.to reverence, venerate, to treat with deference or reverential obedience
Luk 1:50
And his mercy is on them that fear G5399 him from generation to generation.
Luk 18:2
Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared G5399 not God, neither regarded man:
Rom 13:3
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid G5399 of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
Eph 5:33
Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence G5399 her husband.
Jesus tended to persuade people more than concentrating on 'commands'.
Let me give you example! Let's use your comment, using what I seem to be reading on this thread that the author shows no TRUE acknowledgement that is not just men need respect:
When you state, "It does not tell husband's to respect their wives" it will come across to many that respect isn't a man's obligation at all.
Sadly, this author seems to suggest that wives have a real problem with respect...when in reality to me human's in general do. I guess I shouldn't even say suggest - the author pretty cements that concept. I find that quite insulting, because respect is for all humans. We all struggle with this, and not 'especially' women.
The aspect of sex was even different. Today, the big preaching term is making sure you spouse gets enough. In the bible you find in that culture that the man was obligated to give his wive a child/children. Children gave him a place of honor, and a sense of security for her. You notice in the OT especially the concentration was on the man to fulfill this obligation to his wife...and not the other way around like today.
He wanted the genders to take it to the bigger spiritual step. Love and Respect on a deeper level wasn't needed by social terms, but in the spiritual realm...it is what God wanted for us.
Sadly, today you see in many church circles that just because you read it in the bible some instant change is going to come over you. If you can't do that? Your shamed with not being 'biblical', and all that jazz.
So, this hypothesis that men are perceived as needing respect MORE, and aren't getting it since women don't remember Ephesians? Its demeaning to be perfectly honest. It's also a show of disrespect towards women.
It's almost like he made his hypothesis - decided on his conclusion - and then filled in all the things he needed and what procedures to follow to make sure it all lined up nicely. That's prejudicial.
I think he mentions that both genders need both up front. I see a lack of respect toward husbands on the part of wives and the culture in general as a big problem, so I think it is a good topic to focus on in a book like this. d
Also, if he's writing to an audience where a lot of people are very conditioned to think in terms of 'equality' just based on their culture and philosophy (not something God has revealed) that his book is a good start to get people to think about their different roles in marriage, by different roles I mean different roles for husbands and wives.
I wouldn't phrase it like that. The author is pushing wives in the direction of phobeo, which they should show toward their husbands. I think the book could have been improved if it had more emphasis on respectful behaviors back and forth. If he'd talked about a kind of baseline of common respect for both genders, that might have improved it. The book might have been a lot longer. He had a message to communicate in the space he had, which he did.
Personally, I think you may be a bit hypersensitive if you consider this aspect of the book to be insulting. Do you find it insulting when any author points out a potential problem a reader might have? Would you be insulted if Dave Ramsey's book pointed out that too many Americans go into debt? Why should pointing out common marriage problems that he's seen in his own experience be insulting to you? Do you buck against the idea of a wife respecting her husband? What about fearing/reverencing her husband like the passage actually commands?
That was an emphasis of Judaism. Paul applies it to both genders in I Corinthians7.The aspect of sex was even different. Today, the big preaching term is making sure you spouse gets enough. In the bible you find in that culture that the man was obligated to give his wive a child/children. Children gave him a place of honor, and a sense of security for her. You notice in the OT especially the concentration was on the man to fulfill this obligation to his wife...and not the other way around like today.
This is where I disagree. I look at the culture, and disrespect is all over the place. I don't see it as a one way street majority of the time. I see in churches, and society as well.
I can agree with that. But if wives disrespecting their husbands is one aspect of this problem then it is a good thing for a book to attack one tiny part of the problem. Someone else could write a book on respecting parents, or teachers, or whatever.
But the New Testament teaches wives to do more than respect their husbands. The word used in the passage translated 'respect' in one translation is translated 'reverence' in another. It's literally the word for 'fear' but the word for fear is used in a variety of ways, including deferential reference. It is used in reference to the fear of God and fear of government officials as the minister of God.
The book doesn't emphasize husbands respecting wives, but it does encourage specific behaviors that are respectful.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?