Meaning of Due Benevolence

[Created2Write]

See the thing is, for families, for nations, for morality - God does have a standard. It's not every man for himself and to each his own. Scriptures even warn against that attitude multiple times when you see the mention of "And they did what was right in their own eyes" verses "They did right in the sight of the Lord".

QFT! ITA!.

 

[Created2Write]

Was Moses a demi-God? Was Abraham? Were the judges of Israel? Was Paul? No certainly not, but yet when the idea of submission to husbands is suggested, its a huge deal.

Moreover, no one here has suggested that we make our husbands demi-gods. That such an idea is even seen shows just how little is really understood when we advocate submission.

 

[LinkH]

Link, I've told you before that I hope you and your wife can be like Priscilla and Aquilla. But you will need to nourish and cherish her spiritual authority, not be threatened by it. Be a Prov 31:11 husband!

I appreciate your well-wishing for us.

Proverbs
11 Her husband has full confidence in her
and lacks nothing of value.


I have great confidence in my wife, but before the Lord did a work on her that resulted in her being more submissive and respectful toward me, I still had confidence in her. But since the Lord has done that work, my confidence in her has greatly increased.

 

[LinkH]

This deserves its own thread, I suppose. But I hear people say the husband is the priest of the home, the prophet of the home, and a couple of posters have commented on it. Aside from the Lord making saints a kingdom of priests (or kings and priests as some translations render it) and similar verses that apply to the whole church, I can't find any scripture that describes the husband as the priest of the home.

Head of the wife, yes. Ruling his own house well-- ideally yes, at least those who would be overseers in the church. I can understand how one might describe the Christian father's role as somewhat priestly, but I can't find specific scripture to back up the 'priest of the home' thing. Maybe someone can help me out.

 

[LinkH]

And that's not something that troubles me. It's not a salvation issue.

It troubles me when a Christian considers an area of obedience to the Lord not to be important because it is "not a salvation issue." Isn't obedience a fruit of our salvation.

I don't who "everyone" is, but I'm fine with the way I'm carrying out my Christian life, and I'm glad when people don't feel the need to check how my standing is with Him just because I don't build my lifestyle around one scripture.

Isn't that better than building a lifestyle around no scripture?

There are at least four passages of scripture on it in the New Testament alone. Are there any passages with specific instructions to wives that don't say anything about submitting? Maybe the deacon's wife passage if that is talking about deacon's wives instead of deaconesses.

I'm not going to make a change that my husband has already told me he doesn't like.

It sounds like you are trying to interact with your husband the way he wants you to. That sounds 'submissive'. Why not embrace the idea of submission? You don't have to meet your husband at the door with an apron and say 'Yes sir' when he tells you to do something. What do you think submission looks like?

 

[mkgal1]

QFT! This! I heartily agree with this. The Word of God is our mirror, not any imperfect, sinful human being.

If that's the case..then after a person accepts Christ...why do they still remain here on earth, if all that's necessary is our Bible to gauge our progress and maturity? What's the purpose of the entire body of Christ? (Which really is the bigger "mirror"...IMO).

 

[LinkH]

I had to dump a lot of bad theology about marriage and my husband being "the leader" who had "final decision making authority" over everything in my life. It didn't start out as him controlling my every move, but its like the frog in the kettle.... It became progressively more and more oppressive over the course of 2 decades until it felt like I was living in a concentration camp and I could not bear it anymore....

So, anyway, not sure if it will work long term for you or not, but I had to scrap it and go back and dig deeper with God and scripture.

I can't really comment on the details of your marriage. I am not a dictatorial husband, and I seek to please my wife and not make her oppressed.

But the Bible does say what it says on this issue. Ephesians 5 isn't the only passage, and the words are not always in the same mood and tense. From context, we see that the Bible teaches wives to submit to their husbands.

AND BTW, my husband still believes YOUR WAY. How will

you feel and what you will do if your wife someday rejects the "party line" on wife submission, and starts making decisions that rock your world?

As far as the partly line part goes, my wife makes all kinds of decisions and I am fine with that. The Proverbs 31 woman is industrious and does all kinds of things. Her husband should know better than to make her feel like she is walking on egg shells, which could hinder her work.

What happened in our marriage was clearly a work of the Lord, and an amazing answer to very specific prayers. It also brought great peace to my wife, not just the submission issue, but to issues she dealt with related to anger and frustration and with always having to appear capable.

Another thing is, the understanding my wife received when she head the Lord speak to her about this is also very much in line with scripture. She didn't have to make an argument that a certain Greek dictionary does not say that a certain tense can be a command form, or make folk etymology arguments about people's names to see these things in scripture.

It also brought a stronger sense of peace and unity to our marriage. Has your change in your belief system brought more unity? I saw an old post you dug up about castration or something along those lines, and you made a comment about that being when you were going through a rough time. But I still notice these comments about a good wife making life difficult for her husband, and I really don't see that as the ideal, certainly not if he is walking with the Lord.

The noble/beautiful woman "brings him good, not harm, all the days of her life." The quarrelsome woman is the one who makes him want to sleep on the rooftop or run out into the desert. Wives of husbands who are disobedient to the word are to win them through submission, meekness, and quietness.

The Bible tells older women to teach younger women.
Titus 2
4 Then they can urge the younger women to love their husbands and children, 5 to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.
(NIV)

I don't want to stick the 'older woman' label on you, but you are younger than some of the women here. How much of your time do you spend teaching women to be difficult to their husbands and to make decisions their husbands don't like, and how much time do you spend teaching them to be kind and subject to their husbands?

 

[Romanseight2005]

Funny, the Bible is full of analogies, Jesus uses them all the time. You picture sometimes some people saying, "People aren't branches." or "What wineskin? I don't get it."

His analogies were relevant. I use analogies all of the time. They have to be of the same measure though. Analogies only make a point when they really give you the picture of depth, which is why the analogy that you use, matters greatly. It lets the people that you are communicating with, know of the depth of which you perceive the scenario to be. For example,Proverbs 26:11
1 "As a dog returns to its vomit, so a fool repeats his folly." There is a purposeful use of the word dog and the foolishness of eating his own vomit. There is supposed to be a sting in those words to remind us that a fool is like a dog. If the word fog was pointless, and wasn't part of the point, then the whole analogy loses it's richness in it's meaning. So, when people compare a common chore, in fact a distasteful, dirty, chore, like cleaning a toilet, to something sacred and beautiful like intimate sex, than there is either no specific purpose in the choice of words, which makes it meaningless, or worse, it shows that the person saying it, thinks very cheaply of sex.

 

[Created2Write]

If that's the case..then after a person accepts Christ...why do they still remain here on earth, if all that's necessary is our Bible to gauge our progress and maturity?

Did Jesus say that our only goal in life was to accept Him? Did He say our lives were over at that point? No, He also commissioned us to spread His word to all the nations and, while doing so, to try and be more like Him. We remain here on earth after we accept Christ for that purpose. I mean, if we all just went to heaven after salvation, very few of us would be saved because there would be no one here to spread the News.

That seems kind of like a no-brainer to me...Maybe I'm misunderstanding you...

What's the purpose of the entire body of Christ? (Which really is the bigger "mirror"...IMO).

Imo, the purpose of the Body of Christ is to help in spreading the Word of God to those who need it, and for fellowship and encouragement among believers. Of course we all can help others grow through that fellowship, but I do not that a single imperfect human being, or a group of imperfect beings, is going to accurately be a mirror to my own personal walk with God. 1) They can't see my heart, so how could they ever aspire to mirror it? God does see my heart and through His Word He can accurately mirror what is in my heart. 2) People aren't perfect so any "mirroring" that is given is not guaranteed to be accurate. People have prejudices, they have selfish motives. God is perfect, and His motives are always pure and meant to be good for us. Not necessairly easy, but always the best choice. 3) Not everyone believes the same thing in regards to certain scriptures. If I believe one thing, and another Christian believes something else, how can they act as my mirror? "How can two walk together unless they are agreed?"

The Word of God is pure, it is holy, it is true. It is the only thing that could act as our mirror in which the reflection would be guaranteed to be accurate and right. The Body of Christ is certainly there to help others, I believe. But I don't believe that another person can act as my mirror, nor that I could act as a mirror for someone else. I am far from perfect and don't aspire to a position that should be left to God.

 

[mkgal1]

And...? What's wrong with that? My husband IS the priest and prophet of the home and he knows this and I know it.

The Word is our mirror.

Do you not see the imbalance in this?

Have you never been hurt by something your husband has said or done, and when you mention it...he responded with, "I never thought of it that way....I am sorry. I didn't realize that was hurtful."? That's what I mean about "mirror".

 

[mkgal1]

Did Jesus say that our only goal in life was to accept Him? Did He say our lives were over at that point? No, He also commissioned us to spread His word to all the nations and, while doing so, to try and be more like Him. We remain here on earth after we accept Christ for that purpose. I mean, if we all just went to heaven after salvation, very few of us would be saved because there would be no one here to spread the News.

That seems kind of like a no-brainer to me...Maybe I'm misunderstanding you...



Imo, the purpose of the Body of Christ is to help in spreading the Word of God to those who need it, and for fellowship and encouragement among believers. Of course we all can help others grow through that fellowship, but I do not that a single imperfect human being, or a group of imperfect beings, is going to accurately be a mirror to my own personal walk with God. 1) They can't see my heart, so how could they ever aspire to mirror it? God does see my heart and through His Word He can accurately mirror what is in my heart. 2) People aren't perfect so any "mirroring" that is given is not guaranteed to be accurate. People have prejudices, they have selfish motives. God is perfect, and His motives are always pure and meant to be good for us. Not necessairly easy, but always the best choice. 3) Not everyone believes the same thing in regards to certain scriptures. If I believe one thing, and another Christian believes something else, how can they act as my mirror? "How can two walk together unless they are agreed?"

The Word of God is pure, it is holy, it is true. It is the only thing that could act as our mirror in which the reflection would be guaranteed to be accurate and right. The Body of Christ is certainly there to help others, I believe. But I don't believe that another person can act as my mirror, nor that I could act as a mirror for someone else. I am far from perfect and don't aspire to a position that should be left to God.

Well...we disagree, but it would be too far off topic to say anything more about it here, in this thread.

 

[MessianicMommy]

Submission is an attitude of the heart first and foremost. It doesn't require a long conversation with a spouse. I wouldn't expect my husband to say "Hey, I'm gonna start being loving". I'd rather him just show it. Same goes for women, just make the change and
see how God blesses the marriage even further.

And if you've read between the lines of most the other female posters in this thread, they've all implied that they're in mutually submissive households. Whether or not that irks you or causes your back hair to bristle is of no concern. That is THEIR marriage, and THEIR marriage is accountable to G-d and not you.

Simply saying "OK, but I don't agree" or "I see it differently" is plenty fine. Not all marriages are equal, the same, or even have similar dynamics. Each has to be seen for what they are and where they stand and their unique qualities and fallacies.

See the thing is, for families, for nations, for morality - God does have a standard. It's not every man for himself and to each his own. Scriptures even warn against that attitude multiple times when you see the mention of "And they did what was right in their own eyes" verses "They did right in the sight of the Lord".

While G-d does have a standard, what you are saying here comes off as very judgemental and lashon hara. If we are to give each of these posters the benefit of the doubt, especially those who are our brothers and sisters in the faith - the last 3/4ths of your statement comes off very icky..

While many did "what was right in their own eyes" - much of the discussion here about submission is actually nothing more than a difference in interpretation, and whether the individuals involved are looking at fallible translations or the original language and intent of the passages being now discussed as far as their application is concerned.

If you and other posters would go into it from that perspective, I think there would be a lot less argumentative response.

Also, this is where you and Created2Write are butting heads with the ladies who are older than you. You might find with a change of perspective, the exchange changes a bit between you all.

Was Moses a demi-God? Was Abraham? Were the judges of Israel? Was Paul? No certainly not, but yet when the idea of submission to husbands is suggested, its a huge deal.

No, but you see - there is a unique quality unseen now in our modern English that is readily seen in other cultures, especially Hebrew and Aramaic. When someone call their husband "lord" as it is mentioned that the Matriarchs of Israel did, you forget that is the actual term for HUSBAND in the language. While someone is "My husband" - the overall meaning behind that is "lord" as in Hebrew's "Baal" or loving "Ba'ali".

It is not an indication on how the man runs his house, or how submissive the relationship is with his wife. It is simply a term. So it's like Paul says about respecting her husband and instead of saying some derogatory term or referencing the husband in a way that is less than respectful of him as a person, that Sarah referred to her husband as "Ba'ali" which is a sweet term of "my dear husband".


Most Orthodox Jewish households do practice mutual submission, with the final decision resting somewhere between both parties once a consensus has been made. Neither person is seen as better, holier, or lesser. Both are seen as a reflection of the other, and as their bashert (soul mate) - the person that is intended to bring their soul that much closer to G-d.

When you find submission discussed in that context within Judaism, you find that it is more about relinquishing the childish idea of "it's mine and I want to do it MY WAY!!" - and thinking more along the respectful adult taking others into consideration, as well as your own self.

Moreover, no one here has suggested that we make our husbands demi-gods. That such an idea is even seen shows just how little is really understood when we advocate submission.

Actually, for those arguing this point ^^ it shows how little you know of congregations who advocate just that as equaling submission. Shows that a little more benevolence and respect is due to other posters who have lived through just that, and learned that it creates a shell of a woman who is often uneducated and not allowed to branch out and use herself as G-d directs her.

We do not have a G-d's-eye-view of each marriage. We do not know where G-d has called the individuals in any given marriage to be. While one woman may be studying physics and her husband might be a computer engineer - the overall is that both of them have agreed to this arrangement, and under the vows not only of marriage. The Scripture protecting them dictates that no one else has a say in how that goes, even if we disagree. We can offer advice, we can lend an ear - but we have no say how either party preforms their marriage.

This deserves its own thread, I suppose. But I hear people say the husband is the priest of the home, the prophet of the home, and a couple of posters have commented on it. Aside from the Lord making saints a kingdom of priests (or kings and priests as some translations render it) and similar verses that apply to the whole church, I can't find any scripture that describes the husband as the priest of the home.

Head of the wife, yes. Ruling his own house well-- ideally yes, at least those who would be overseers in the church. I can understand how one might describe the Christian father's role as somewhat priestly, but I can't find specific scripture to back up the 'priest of the home' thing. Maybe someone can help me out.

You won't find it. It is a teaching rather popular in the last 30 or so years in evangelical circles.

Truth be told, while Scripture does say that we saints are a kingdom of priests and kings (or the other way around), that He never supplanted the Levitical priesthood or said that we will return to the way things were before He instituted that Priesthood where the man of the house WAS The actual priest of his home.

Many will bring out the Melkizedek priesthood, but they forget that this priestly line operated within the Levitical line together.

 

[LinkH]

No, but you see - there is a unique quality unseen now in our modern English that is readily seen in other cultures, especially Hebrew and Aramaic. When someone call their husband "lord" as it is mentioned that the Matriarchs of Israel did, you forget that is the actual term for HUSBAND in the language. While someone is "My husband" - the overall meaning behind that is "lord" as in Hebrew's "Baal" or loving "Ba'ali".

It is not an indication on how the man runs his house, or how submissive the relationship is with his wife. It is simply a term. So it's like Paul says about respecting her husband and instead of saying some derogatory term or referencing the husband in a way that is less than respectful of him as a person, that Sarah referred to her husband as "Ba'ali" which is a sweet term of "my dear husband"

But in the context of I Peter 3, Peter is pointing out that Sarah called Abraham 'lord' to underscore her obedience and subjection to him. He doesn't mention it in passing. He doesn't transliterate 'Baali' into Greek.

5 For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to adorn themselves. They submitted themselves to their own husbands, 6 like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear.
(NIV) (emphasis mine)

This is in a passage that tells wives to submit to their husbands.

 

[LinkH]

There is sin, however, in putting another human being up as a sort of demi-God on earth. It's idolitry and THAT is spoken to as a sin in the Bible.

Submitting to, even obeying, another person the Bible commands us to submit to and obey is not idolatry. Do you have any evidence that anyone on the forum is turning their husband into a false god? Peter told wives to submit to their husbands. Was he advocating idolatry? Of course not. Submitting to a human authority is not the same as idolatry.

How is an individualistic obsession with doing whatever oneself wants to do all the time any less idolatrous than submitting oneself to another person in authority and trying to please that person? Submitting to another person is not idolatrous if God has His rightful place. God desires wives to submit to husbands, children to parents, etc. Wives are to submit to their husbands as unto the Lord, not instead of the Lord.

Which is closer to idolatry, setting oneself up as the authority on determing the will of God based on one's opinions and the philosophies of the world, or trying diligently to follow what God has revealed in the Bible?

Then it becomes some sort of weird one-upsmanship as to who is worshipping their husband the "best". Do you can your own veggies? -- Nope. Well I do. Dinner is never late on the table. My husband gets sex whenever he wants it. I never raise my voice. I bow and scrape and he makes every important decision in our lives. He *allowed* me to have pain medication during childbirth, but I told him I could do it without it and he was so proud of me. Are submission enough? What's enough?

Who is being competitive about submission? I don't see that. Do you dislike very diligent housewives who can vegetables?

I do see a few people seeing the problem that certain posters have for some straightforward, repeated commands of scripture regarding wives submitting to husbands, and perhaps bringing up the topic because it appears to be a need. I haven't seen any evidence of people bragging about how submitted they are.

If a woman's consciense is such that she feels she must ask her husband befor taking pain medication and she always tries to have a meal on the table for him when he gets home, that is not evidence of idolatry. The Bible says whatever you put your hand to do, do it with all your might. the Bible teaches us to be faithful. If a woman is a homemaker and does her work with all her might, then she may well can vegetables and do some of these other things. That doesn't make her an idolator.

 

[hijklmnop]

No one's answered my questions and I'm very curious.....???

PS. Great post Messianic Mommy!

 

[JaneFW]

It troubles me when a Christian considers an area of obedience to the Lord not to be important because it is "not a salvation issue." Isn't obedience a fruit of our salvation.

Isn't that better than building a lifestyle around no scripture?

There are at least four passages of scripture on it in the New Testament alone. Are there any passages with specific instructions to wives that don't say anything about submitting? Maybe the deacon's wife passage if that is talking about deacon's wives instead of deaconesses.

It sounds like you are trying to interact with your husband the way he wants you to. That sounds 'submissive'. Why not embrace the idea of submission? You don't have to meet your husband at the door with an apron and say 'Yes sir' when he tells you to do something. What do you think submission looks like?

HE DOESN'T WANT ME TO!!! Good heavens, I am so tired of saying it.

Also - meet him at the door with an apron on?? LOL!! I work full time Link, and go to school full time. My husband stays home. Please. He should be meeting me at the door wearing an apron. And I would never "sir" him unless in jest.

I know what submission looks like, and he doesn't want it. How many more times?

And I'm sorry it troubles you, but don't say that I build my life around NO scripture because I don't follow this ONE scripture. That's just deliberately intending to offend.

 

[hijklmnop]

I know this post was directed specifically at me but I found parts of it interesting and wanted to comment personally:

But the Bible does say what it says on this issue. Ephesians 5 isn't the only passage, and the words are not always in the same mood and tense. From context, we see that the Bible teaches wives to submit to their husbands.

It also teaches mutual submission. If it's supposed to be one-way in the way being advocated in this thread by certain posters then how do you rectify that with the Biblical call to mutual submission?

It also brought a stronger sense of peace and unity to our marriage. Has your change in your belief system brought more unity?

Speaking for myself, YES!!!! In a big, miraculous way! Our marriage has gone from a zero to a 9.999 in terms of intimacy, mutual satisfaction, peace and harmony!

I saw an old post you dug up about castration or something along those lines, and you made a comment about that being when you were going through a rough time. But I still notice these comments about a good wife making life difficult for her husband, and I really don't see that as the ideal, certainly not if he is walking with the Lord.

I'll let Psalms speak for herself re. the Bible study she posted if she wants, but re. your last sentence....it has been repeated many times that wives are supposed to submit even if their h is NOT a follower of the Lord. This makes no sense to me. I can understand treating him with respect no matter what as he's another human being worthy of respect (see my thread about the different kinds of respect)...but obedience in the way being advocated on this thread no matter how askew his leadership might be? So he's a "prophet" of the home no matter where his standing with the Lord? And we are supposed to follow him no matter what (unless he tells us to smoke crack or something else so insanely obviously sinful?) What of the Scriptures about the need to avoid following false prophets? I'm sorry, but IMO a good wife who is following the LORD first and foremost is not necessarily going to be able to be as "easy" to live with if her h is NOT. If she is ("easy" for him to live with and lead no matter what his standing with the Lord and behaviour as I strove to be for many years), could it be that a form of idolatry (must obey the prophet/h) may have crept into the marriage where her obedience to her h has been allowed to trump her obedience to the Lord? That's how it went with me. When too much emphasis is placed on obedience, grace can be lost. Focus on the Lord can be lost in favour of focus on another person. Because who is she listening to first and foremost? Who is she more afraid to ignore? What happens if the voice she's hearing from the Lord is guiding her in a different direction regarding major decisions than what her h is leading her in? Why bother listening to the Lord re. decisions like finances, moving, etc if it's assumed the Lord will speak and be interpreted correctly by the h (prophet)? Then what? It just doesn't add up to me, and didn't work in my marriage except to enable my h's sin and drive us further and further apart. Sometimes love calls us, male or female, to stand UP to someone withOUT fear!!! That may not be "easy" for either party, but doesn't mean it's WRONG.

The noble/beautiful woman "brings him good, not harm, all the days of her life." The quarrelsome woman is the one who makes him want to sleep on the rooftop or run out into the desert. Wives of husbands who are disobedient to the word are to win them through submission, meekness, and quietness.

I brought my h good when I stood up to him and refused to submit any longer to a lost man. There is a difference between quarrelsome for the sake of quarrelsome (bickering over unimportant issues, and that goes both ways), and courageous enough to say what needs to be said re. the direction of a household. Was Jesus "meek" and "quiet" when it came to speaking the truth? HE is my role model! My quietness did nothing to win my h closer to the Lord. My decision to stand up for ME and my HOUSEHOLD did.

The Bible tells older women to teach younger women.
Titus 2
4 Then they can urge the younger women to love their husbands and children, 5 to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.
(NIV)

I don't want to stick the 'older woman' label on you, but you are younger than some of the women here. How much of your time do you spend teaching women to be difficult to their husbands and to make decisions their husbands don't like, and how much time do you spend teaching them to be kind and subject to their husbands?

Her teachings ARE Biblically accurate IMO Link, and my h and I changing the way we interpret certain Scriptures (no, not ignoring them as people here accuse) has allowed the Lord to work a miracle for my family. Understanding the "be subject to" part of Scripture differently than you does not automatically = disobedience as is accused in this thread. I don't mind if other people want to run their households in the way you describe; whatever floats their boat, really; but the judgementalism being displayed in this thread towards the mutual submission advocates is really not cool IMO. Do I throw Judgement Day in other people's faces as a way to convince them I'm right and they're disobedient? What about judge not lest you be judged? There are so many ways we can snatch verses out of context and throw them at each other (see, I just did it ) but what of the message of the gospel being taken more as a WHOLE? I think the issue is more "grey" than black and white when ALL Scriptures are considered, not just a few snatched out of context. I speak out to defend my position, not attack others. I don't see the same courtesy being extended back.

 

[Nilla]

Mod Hat On

Thread has gone through a clean up
Mod Hat Off​

 

[Psalm63]

I can't really comment on the details of your marriage. I am not a dictatorial husband, and I seek to please my wife and not make her oppressed.

But the Bible does say what it says on this issue. Ephesians 5 isn't the only passage, and the words are not always in the same mood and tense. From context, we see that the Bible teaches wives to submit to their husbands.
...

I don't want to stick the 'older woman' label on you, but you are younger than some of the women here. How much of your time do you spend teaching women to be difficult to their husbands and to make decisions their husbands don't like, and how much time do you spend teaching them to be kind and subject to their husbands?

The Bible teaches that wives ARE SUBJECT to our husbands IN EVERYTHING. Eph 5:24
Every wife
of every culture
for all time
God pronounced it in Gen 3:16 and its been that way ever since

doesn't matter if a wife does not have a submissive bone in her body and NEVER "submits".
she remains SUBJECT TO her husband.
The Bible says the husband IS the head of the wife (another "state of being"). When they marry, they are glued/cleaved together like a head is cleaved to a body. And they are interdependent and subject to one another like a head and body.

I wrote a fairly well trafficked blog teaching women what I have learned

And (like you on another Greek matter) I too wrote to a retired Greek professor too, to confirm that hupotasso in the passive voice can be understood as "subject to" without will or intention on the part of the one who is "subject to".

Wife submission in the NT is stated in the Passive voice with the exception of Col 3:18 which has a HUGE litmus test! Wives submit AS IS FITTING IN THE LORD.

A wife is SUBJECT TO her husband IN EVERYTHING (Eph 5:24)
EVERYTHING means EVERYTHING!
There are NO exceptions!

in abuse? IN EVERYTHING
in addictions? IN EVERYTHING
in kindness? IN EVERYTHING
in Christlikeness? IN EVERYTHING
in sickness? IN EVERYTHING
in health? IN EVERYTHING
in poverty? IN EVERYTHING

much like we are subject to gravity
much like a human heart is subject to a human head
there is no "decision"
there is no "choice"
it it just the way it IS!
it is a state of being

So, I feel I have done my Titus 2 part to inform the younger women as to how to best phileo love (Titus 2) their husband and children. She needs to exercise her authority as her husband's MEET help so that he may grow in every way to resemble Christ. She needs to be a daughter of Sarah who grew in maturity as her life unfolded. God changed her name from Sarai (contentious) to Sarah (ruler) and she spoke with AUTHORITY to her husband to get the slave woman out of the house. And GOD HIMSELF backed her up!

"God said to Abraham, 'Be not displeased because of the boy and because of your slave woman. Whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you" Gen 21:12

 

[Romanseight2005]

Levitical priesthood or said that we will return to the way things were before He instituted that Priesthood where the man of the house WAS The actual priest of his home.
[/B]
Many will bring out the Melkizedek priesthood, but they forget that this priestly line operated within the Levitical line together.

This interests me. I don't know about them existing together, but what I do know is that Christ is in the order of Melchizedek, and not the Levitical Priesthood. And we are to emulate Christ, so as saints and priests, as coheirs, we are of the order of Melchizadek.
Hebrews 7:11-19

11 If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come — one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? 12 For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law. 13 He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. 14 For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15 And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, 16 one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is declared:

"You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek."

18 The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19(for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.
NIV