What is hard about submission?

mbams said:

Although I do not think it belongs to “radical feminism”, it is a radical deviation from the world’s view of women. Look around the world, and how women are often mistreated. In Paul’s time, women were treated as sub-human. I think that attitude toward the inferiority of women has been read into scripture. People read these passages with their cultural bias that women are to play a “lesser role”. I believe Paul was very radical in telling husbands to love their wives in the context of mutual submission. It was so radcical, in fact, that I think many of the men had no idea how to love a wife. So, Paul reminds them of how Christ loves us, and says, there -- live out that example of love.

Click to expand...

I do agree with you about Paul's radical changes.. he's probably one of the most misunderstood apostles.

Bliz,
Is the bible our guide to how we should live or not? If the passage in Ephesians says that the husband is head of the wife just as Christ is head of the church why do we have a problem with that?

Headship is leadership, divine leadership is love. I am not saying for one minute that marriage is not a partnership where both people are equal before God as individuals. But in family order is is like this: Husbands, wives, children. What happens when a decision has to be made and the parties disagree. Is no decision made or does one person make a decision? Some wives have gift or talents that exceed her husbands in some areas and he would be wise to draw on those giftings. Do we argue that children in the family have the decsion making responsibilty above the parents? No but we love them enough to consult them and have their best interests in mind when we make decisons that affect them.

Prior to Paul's writings to the early church we see a radical portrayal of wives who like Sarah called their husband master so to the person who asked what happened in the 300 years before the bible the answer is the Torah. Paul was not a misogynist by any means although his teaching is probably more twisted than any other writer.

In my opinion a husband who is not leading his family like Christ leads the church, being prepared to lay down his very life for her is not operating in the leadership Paul is talking about. Women are not second best in marriage, they are equal but in position the husband is the head. There is a tremendous freedom in submission. The husband is called to lead and the wife supports him and enables him to lead well.

Most women hate the word head because of it's negative worldly meaning. In my job, I may have 100 people reporting into me and I have overall responsibility. Do I see myself as more importnat than they because of position? No. Do I consult people in my team when making a decision? Yes. Do I encourage them to take responsibility in areas I delegate? Yes. DO I recognoise they are more equipped than me in some areas than other? absolutely. But when things go wrong, I am accountable as the person who leads that team of people. I am also extremely conscious that any decison I make effects all those in my reporting line and this is a responsibility I take very seriously and an honour and a privilage for me to be entrusted with this role.

Bliz,
I follow the bible, yes and I am blessed. I am not condemning those who do different to me in the same way that we may hold different interpretations of tithing, quiver full in respect of children, contraception, drinking or whatever. We can debate all of these things. The key for me is that we love one another enough to respect what people say and sometimes learn a different perspective from others posts. I know I learn a lot from reading others opinions and viewpoints whilst I may not agree with all they have said.

For those who were offended by the word radical feminist, I notice none jumped on the word male supremecists! The writer was looking at 2 extreme views using parts of the scripture in Ephesians. The way I read it it did not label any one he was talking about the views these two groups hold and the scriptures they use to reinforce their belief.

Bliz,
Is the bible our guide to how we should live or not? If the passage in Ephesians says that the husband is head of the wife just as Christ is head of the church why do we have a problem with that?

Click to expand...

My problem is not with what the Word says, but with figuring out what that means. Remember that in the same letter Paul tells us to all submit one ot another - so how does that all work together? And what is the proper meaning of "head"? Source? Having power over? Leader?

Headship is leadership, divine leadership is love. I am not saying for one minute that marriage is not a partnership where both people are equal before God as individuals.

Click to expand...

First, I am unaware of any passage in the Bible that calls on men to be leaders in marriage. Do you now of any? And I do not know why one of two people needs to be the leader of the two. If this is a partnership of equals, why is one always the leader? Sorry, I don't think you can have it both ways.

But in family order is is like this: Husbands, wives, children.

Click to expand...

Do you have scripture to support this theory? I know of none. The family is not a hierarchy. God can and does speak directly to all members of the family, all members of the family can teach one another.

What happens when a decision has to be made and the parties disagree. Is no decision made or does one person make a decision?

Click to expand...

When husband and wife do not agree, they have to work it out. working at it together, looking for other options and praying for open hearts and minds and God's leading. To be sure, that requires more work than always doing things the husband's way (or the wife's way) but that is what we are called upon to do with the body.Perhaps the decision is left to the person who will be most impacted, or theone who is more knowledgable, or the one who cares more about the decision. Perhaps the issue is reexamined and other options are sought. There are many, many ways to come to a decision together other than always having the husband make the final decision.

Some wives have gift or talents that exceed her husbands in some areas and he would be wise to draw on those giftings. Do we argue that children in the family have the decsion making responsibilty above the parents? No but we love them enough to consult them and have their best interests in mind when we make decisons that affect them.

Click to expand...

Why is the specially equipped husband you mentioned in earlier posts, the man who is the head and leader, why should he consult anyone? If God has made him the head, there is no need for him to consult anyone else.

Prior to Paul's writings to the early church we see a radical portrayal of wives who like Sarah called their husband master so to the person who asked what happened in the 300 years before the bible the answer is the Torah.

Click to expand...

We also have the radical portrayal of Abigail who defied her husband's decision and ordered the members of the household to do the exact opposit of what he chose to do, and in so doing saved all of their lives and was blessed by God.

Paul was not a misogynist by any means although his teaching is probably more twisted than any other writer.

Click to expand...

I have never said that Pauyl was a misogynist. I think we have badly translated some of Paul's writings and have not undertstood what he wrote correctly.

In my opinion a husband who is not leading his family like Christ leads the church, being prepared to lay down his very life for her is not operating in the leadership Paul is talking about. Women are not second best in marriage, they are equal but in position the husband is the head. There is a tremendous freedom in submission. The husband is called to lead and the wife supports him and enables him to lead well.

Click to expand...

Despite your earlier portests, you are saying that those whose marriages do not function as your marriage does, they way you believe the Bible teaches, are not following the Biblical model for marriage. Did I get that wrong? Candy coat it anyway you like, you are saying that what you are doing is right... and therefore if I am doing it differently, I am wrong. At least have the courage of your convictions to say "Yes, that is what I believe!"

Most women hate the word head because of it's negative worldly meaning.

Click to expand...

Worldly meaning? What worldly meaning? I had no idea I hated the word head...

In my job, I may have 100 people reporting into me and I have overall responsibility. Do I see myself as more importnat than they because of position? No. Do I consult people in my team when making a decision? Yes. Do I encourage them to take responsibility in areas I delegate? Yes. DO I recognoise they are more equipped than me in some areas than other? absolutely. But when things go wrong, I am accountable as the person who leads that team of people. I am also extremely conscious that any decison I make effects all those in my reporting line and this is a responsibility I take very seriously and an honour and a privilage for me to be entrusted with this role.

Click to expand...

If you don't think that you and your ability to make good decisions are more important than the 100 people who report to you, you are a fool, and so is your company to have put you in such a position.

But what does that have to do with marriage? 100 people need a leader or there will be chaos. But 2 people who have chosen to commit to one another - why do those 2 people need to have one of them the leader? I think human leadership is shared, but that the leader of a marriage, of a family, is God.

For those who were offended by the word radical feminist, I notice none jumped on the word male supremecists! The writer was looking at 2 extreme views using parts of the scripture in Ephesians. The way I read it it did not label any one he was talking about the views these two groups hold and the scriptures they use to reinforce their belief.

Click to expand...

And who is the still unidentified writer? By choosing to quote him, were you saying that those positions you do not agree with are those of radica feminists?

bliz said:

My problem is not with what the Word says, but with figuring out what that means. Remember that in the same letter Paul tells us to all submit one ot another - so how does that all work together? And what is the proper meaning of "head"? Source? Having power over? Leader? In the body we are all to submit to one another but Paul gives rules for marriage, the family and those in slavery as well as this general command. The correct meaning of head is leadership or authority over, since the same word is used to show Christ as head of the church, it does not mean source as it would not make sense to the latter part of the verse. Do your own study though if you wish.

First, I am unaware of any passage in the Bible that calls on men to be leaders in marriage. Do you now of any? And I do not know why one of two people needs to be the leader of the two. If this is a partnership of equals, why is one always the leader? Sorry, I don't think you can have it both ways. In any institution of which marriage is one there is a leader. Look up the scripture in the passage below which state that husbands are to lead their families. There are many OT references too.


Do you have scripture to support this theory? I know of none. The family is not a hierarchy. God can and does speak directly to all members of the family, all members of the family can teach one another. Yes they can teach one another but children are required to obey their parents and submit to their authoriy in the home. Wives are called to submit to their husbands (in all things the word says)


When husband and wife do not agree, they have to work it out. working at it together, looking for other options and praying for open hearts and minds and God's leading. To be sure, that requires more work than always doing things the husband's way (or the wife's way) but that is what we are called upon to do with the body.Perhaps the decision is left to the person who will be most impacted, or theone who is more knowledgable, or the one who cares more about the decision. Perhaps the issue is reexamined and other options are sought. There are many, many ways to come to a decision together other than always having the husband make the final decision. In my opinion these should all be done before the husband makes a final decision


Why is the specially equipped husband you mentioned in earlier posts, the man who is the head and leader, why should he consult anyone? If God has made him the head, there is no need for him to consult anyone else. Read proverbs, a wise man consults many advisors, headship is not a stand alone position.

We also have the radical portrayal of Abigail who defied her husband's decision and ordered the members of the household to do the exact opposit of what he chose to do, and in so doing saved all of their lives and was blessed by God. Likewise Paul requests that this submission is as fitting to the Lord, if your husband asks you to do something that is wrong, you do not have to submit, God's word come first. incidently Abigail's husband did not consult with her, he was a drunk and a fool and had put his whole family in danger of death, Abigailas warned by a servant and rushed to out things right. She told her husband what she had done when he sobered up and he dropped dead not long after, David declared that the Lord had punished in for his wrong doing. Not the best example to gift therefore .


I have never said that Pauyl was a misogynist. I think we have badly translated some of Paul's writings and have not undertstood what he wrote correctly.
I never said you did,some do though. I believe Paul had a great respect for women and he commended many publicly for their work in the word.


Despite your earlier portests, you are saying that those whose marriages do not function as your marriage does, they way you believe the Bible teaches, are not following the Biblical model for marriage. Did I get that wrong? Candy coat it anyway you like, you are saying that what you are doing is right... and therefore if I am doing it differently, I am wrong. At least have the courage of your convictions to say "Yes, that is what I believe!" Judge for yourself, either the word says the husband is the head or it doesn't. I choose to beleive it does and i follow that in my life I never once said you were wrong in how you conduct yor marriage, I smply stated that headship is biblical and I choose to follow it. I don't need to candy coat anything. If you don't agree, fine that is your right and I respect that, I don't need to have your agreement to justify my understanding of the verse.

Worldly meaning? What worldly meaning? I had no idea I hated the word head... The world understands headship and submission in an negative way, I never said you hated the word 'head' how can you since you deny it is in the passage at all!

If you don't think that you and your ability to make good decisions are more important than the 100 people who report to you, you are a fool, and so is your company to have put you in such a position. Again reads proverbs, a man who is wise iis own eyes is a fool. I consult the people who work for me because I respect their talents, skills and opinions. My decsions affect them so I care very much. My company's values reflect my leadership values and they are a multibillion pound successful banking corporation. The proof is in the fruit as they say. I am not into positional leadership or dictatorship

But what does that have to do with marriage? 100 people need a leader or there will be chaos. But 2 people who have chosen to commit to one another - why do those 2 people need to have one of them the leader? I think human leadership is shared, but that the leader of a marriage, of a family, is God.You miss the point! The wife leads alongside the husband but the overall authority was given to him


And who is the still unidentified writer? By choosing to quote him, were you saying that those positions you do not agree with are those of radica feminists? After posting the first time, I revisited it and addded the writer's name as I realised I had omitted it in error and amended it when you pointed it out. I disagree wth feminism, yes but the writer used two extremes to show how scripture was used by those groups not to label anyone who has similar beliefs to belong to those groupings

Click to expand...

Here is a synopsis from Baker's Evangelical Dictionary
of Biblical Theology. It is easier to post in it's entirety as what is written fits what we speak of.


The husband is to assume headship/leadership (1 Cor 11:3; Eph 5:23). The normal meaning of biblical headship is leadership with authority, as exemplified in Christ (cf. 1 Cor 11:1-10; Eph 1:22; 4:15; 5:23). Headship is a benevolent responsibility without disdaining condescension and patronizing of the woman (cf. Matt 7:12; Luke 22:26; 1 Peter 3:7). Although the husband leads as Christ leads the church, the husband does not have all the rights and authority of Christ. He leads his wife toward dependence upon Christ, not upon himself, for all human leaders are fallible. The husband leads like Christ, being considerate of his wife with respect and knowledge. He considers the ideas of those he leads, because they may be better than his own. Leadership's goal is not to show the leader's superiority, but to elicit all the strengths of people for the desired objective. Headship is not male domination, harshness, oppression, and reactionary negativism (cf. 2 Cor 1:24; Eph 5:29; Col 3:19), for "no one ever hated his own body."

Leadership assumes the responsibility to initiate and implement spiritual and moral planning for a family. Others, however, should also think, plan, initiate, and give input. The husband, however, must accept the burden of making the final choice in times of disagreement, although seldom should this be needed.

The husband's leadership and its authority is a God-given responsibility to be carried out in humility. Inappropriate use of leadership should be curbed by the unique intimacy and union implied in the phrases "one flesh, " "no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, " and "joint heirs of the grace of life" (Eph 5:29-31; 1 Peter 3:7).

The husband leads with an attitude of love. Christ's love for the church provides the model (Eph 5:25-33; Col 3:19). The husband loves his wife as he would his own body (Eph 5:25), nourishing and cherishing her (v. 29). He gives himself sacrificially for her benefit as Christ sacrificially loved the church. Such love rules out treating his wife like a child or servant; rather he assists her to be a "fellow-heir."

Biblical love thinks first of the other person (cf. 1 Cor 13). It is a mental decision and commitment. God also gave emotions of love that should follow the mental act of love else the emotional aspect becomes infatuation or lust. Love protects, cares, trusts, and delights in the best for the other. The husband initiates love (Eph 5:25; 1 Peter 3:7). He who loves his wife surely loves himself.

The husband is to treat his wife with respect and considerateness (1 Peter 3:7). The husband bestows honor upon his wife. He always shows respect for her privately and in public.

The husband appropriately provides for and protects his wife. This does not mean that the wife cannot assist in supporting the family, for Proverbs 31 demonstrates that a godly wife may surely do so. The husband should always be willing to suffer for her safety.

The wife submits to her husband's headship (Eph 5:21-24; Col 3:18; 1 Peter 3:1-6). Submission's basic meaning is "to submit or subordinate to a higher authority." It is a predisposition to yield to the husband's leadership and a willingness to follow his authority. The husband does not command the wife to do this. The verb implies that she does this voluntarily. Submission does not imply that the wife is inferior, less intelligent, or less competent. Christ submitted to the Father but was not inferior or less God than the Father (1 Cor 11:3; 15:28). Submission does not indicate that the wife puts her husband in the place of Christ. Christ is supreme in all things! The submissive wife does not give up independent thought. Believing wives with unbelieving husbands think independently, while still submitting to their husbands (1 Cor 7:13-14). She might seek to influence her husband for right and to guide him in righteousness (1 Peter 3:1-2). Submission never signifies that a wife gives in to her husband's every demand. If demands are unrighteous, she submits to her higher authority, Jesus.

A wife submits to her own husband. Relationships with other men are different in areas of submission and leadership.

Some feel that Ephesians 5:21 argues that the husband and wife are equally submissive. In its context the best understanding sees this verse as an introduction to three particular areas where people are submissive to one another: wives to husbands (vv. 22-33); children to parents (6:1-4); and servants to masters (6:5-9). Mutual submissiveness does not fit the latter two categories.

A wife should submit with an attitude of honor, reverence, and respect (Psalm 45:11; Eph 5:33). A wife affirms and nurtures her husband's leadership. She submits in the same manner that she and the church submit to Christ (1 Peter 3:6). This analogy provides a good gauge. The wife demonstrates a gentle and quiet spirit (1 Peter 3:4), not demanding her own way or insisting on her rights. A wife's respect is primarily for the role of leadership that her husband occupies, not necessarily for his merits, though that would be the ideal. She recognizes the God-given leadership with regard and deference.

Effect of the Fall on Marriage. The fall made human hearts hard toward God and toward each other. The relational aspect of God's image became marred. Rebellion against submission to male leadership was Satan's initial temptation (Gen 3:1-6, 17; contra. Eph 5:33; 1 Peter 3:1). Male domination and harshness crept into leadership (cf. Col 3:19; 1 Peter 3:7). Sin caused polygamy, concubinage, incest, adultery, rape, prostitution, and all kinds of immorality (cf. Lev. 18, 20; Rom 1:26-32) to damage or destroy the marriage relationship. Marriage commitments are violated. Divorce, premarital sex, and couples living together out of wedlock would never have occurred had not sin entered the world. The fall severely damaged the marriage relationship

The debate continues. Great.

That head =boss. Why? There were many terms available to Paul to indicate rulership over - the Greek words used in the NT for ruler, authority, master, governor, tetrach etc - all taken from the ruling class or the military. Paul used none of them.

'Head' as 'boss' or 'leader'. There was a Greek word for leader. It is used in reference to the church only 4 times, 3 in Hebrews. That word is also translated esteemed, to suppose, and counted. Thus, it is the translators, themselves influenced by their cultural backgrounds who have utilised the word to mean 'leader' in those few instances.

Most commentaries have not caught up with more recent scholarly work. I was discussing this with the principal of our local bible college recently. He is a recognised NT scholar. He was lamenting that many existing interpretations did not adequately reflect the NT text as we are now seeing it with studies into the NT world coming into print.

With regard to your comments about living by the Bible I echo Bliz's statement. Until we know what the words meant when first written to the audience that first heard them we must never assume that our understanding over 2000 years later is the 'right' one.

For an excellent review of the usage of the word 'head' read the extensive appendix to Gilbert Bilezekian's book "Beyond Sex Roles". That will at least show you that those of us who don't automatically attach the word 'boss' to the word 'head' are not just people who have been radicalised by feminism. "Paul, Women & Wives" by Craig Keener, a Pentecostal scholar is also a very good summary of various exegetical approaches. It seems to come as quite a surprise to many 'bible believing christians' that there are different interpretations of many NT scriptures within the christian community. It is helpful to at least be aware of them and the basis for them. It's wrong to just blithely assume error when someone disagrees with you.

I too work in business. The study of management and power has been a lifelong interest to me. You are referring to the traditional and dominant pyramid structure that exists in society. Two comments. Within the business world there are alternative models of more co-operative and less authority centred businesses. The easiest to read and perhaps the most radical business model is contained in the two books by Ricardo Semler - 'Maverick' and the 'Seven Day Weekend' (or something like this). 'Servanthood ' by P K Greenleaf is another interesting book.

Secondly, what I see as a great tragedy is that the church has modelled the pyramidal structure for most of its history, instead of presenting a radically different model of servant leadership that maximises individual contribution and redistributes the power of decision over another. I see Semler's books as being nearer a model for the church than most of what I read from Christian leaders!

The NT teaches that there is only one head for the church - Jesus. He did not institute a hierarchy of offices and roles that intervened between each one of us and God. Paul was an apostle. Yet, in his letters he most often refers to himself as a servant of Jesus Christ. A servant had the lowest rank amongst free people in the Roman Empire. It was a term of contempt, of virtual insignificance, and the ultimate rejection of any status and personal authority that a person could carry. No-one would ever refer to themselves as a servant, unless it were true. It wasn't really that different from referring to yourself as a prostitute in terms of social acceptance.

John
NZ

First, I am not going to comment on the passage you copied. It is not the final word on anything. I can quote from other sources passages by Biblical scholars that will support my position.

In the body we are all to submit to one another but Paul gives rules for marriage, the family and those in slavery as well as this general command.

So, the command to submit to other belivers is overruled by the command to submit to husbands? How do you determine which passage of Scripture trumps other passages?

The correct meaning of head is leadership or authority over, since the same word is used to show Christ as head of the church, it does not mean source as it would not make sense to the latter part of the verse. Do your own study though if you wish.

I have done my own study and I find I am unable to conclude exactly what the word means. There are "authorities" who argue reasonably for different understandings of the word and it's use. Plus, it is not at all uncommon to use the same word but with slightly different, or rather different meanings in a single passage. Since none of those opinning on the passage were alive and speaking the language as it was used 2000 + years ago, I find it hard to accept your decleration concerning the meaning of the word.

In any institution of which marriage is one there is a leader. Look up the scripture in the passage below which state that husbands are to lead their families. There are many OT references too.

Nonsense. We are talking about marriage here - two people. Tell me where in the Bible it says that husbands are to lead their wives. Every other institution having leaders is not an argument for why a marriage has to have a leader. What other institutions have 2 people in them? What other indstitutions have 2 people who are to become one?

Do you have scripture to support this theory? I know of none. The family is not a hierarchy. God can and does speak directly to all members of the family, all members of the family can teach one another. Yes they can teach one another but children are required to obey their parents and submit to their authoriy in the home. Wives are called to submit to their husbands (in all things the word says)

This does not address a Biblical source for your heirarchy theory of husband - wife - children. Do you have one?

When husband and wife do not agree, they have to work it out. working at it together, looking for other options and praying for open hearts and minds and God's leading. To be sure, that requires more work than always doing things the husband's way (or the wife's way) but that is what we are called upon to do with the body.Perhaps the decision is left to the person who will be most impacted, or theone who is more knowledgable, or the one who cares more about the decision. Perhaps the issue is reexamined and other options are sought. There are many, many ways to come to a decision together other than always having the husband make the final decision. In my opinion these should all be done before the husband makes a final decision


Why is the specially equipped husband you mentioned in earlier posts, the man who is the head and leader, why should he consult anyone? If God has made him the head, there is no need for him to consult anyone else. Read proverbs, a wise man consults many advisors, headship is not a stand alone position.

So if there is all this consulting and discussion and prayer, why is there a need to predetermine who will make the final decission on every issue for the duration of the marriage?

We also have the radical portrayal of Abigail who defied her husband's decision and ordered the members of the household to do the exact opposit of what he chose to do, and in so doing saved all of their lives and was blessed by God. Likewise Paul requests that this submission is as fitting to the Lord, if your husband asks you to do something that is wrong, you do not have to submit, God's word come first. incidently Abigail's husband did not consult with her, he was a drunk and a fool and had put his whole family in danger of death, Abigailas warned by a servant and rushed to out things right. She told her husband what she had done when he sobered up and he dropped dead not long after, David declared that the Lord had punished in for his wrong doing. Not the best example to gift therefore .

On the contrary - an excellent example. You gave the example of Sarah who caller her husband Lord, and she was blessed for doing so. I gave the example of Abigail who did not follow her husband's wishes, and was blessed for doing so. Hmmmmm. Obeying gets blessed - not obeying gets blessed.

Worldly meaning? What worldly meaning? I had no idea I hated the word head... The world understands headship and submission in an negative way, I never said you hated the word 'head' how can you since you deny it is in the passage at all!

Now that is a clear distortion of what I have said. I don't deny the word 'head' is there. I do not agree with your understanding of what it means, a very different position.


But what does that have to do with marriage? 100 people need a leader or there will be chaos. But 2 people who have chosen to commit to one another - why do those 2 people need to have one of them the leader? I think human leadership is shared, but that the leader of a marriage, of a family, is God.You miss the point! The wife leads alongside the husband but the overall authority was given to him

Another theory! The wife also leads... leads whom? The husband? God? We are talking about marriage - two people - is the husband leading the wife while the wife leads the husband?

bliz and johnz, I am thankful for your words here. I sometimes get too frustrated to be coherent in debates, so I count you guys as speaking for me.

I would like to go directly to the issue of the wife's submission for a moment. There are obviously differing opinions as to whether the husband is supposed to be the head of the home or not. But what I would like to do is table that issue for a moment and focus back on the wife.

Does anyone here feel she should not have to submit to her husband? I'm talking only about the wife's responsibility here, not the issue of what kind of husband she has or what kind of role he takes. What does everyone feel is our responsibility to our husbands as wives? Should we only submit based on whether our husbands first submit to us?

desmalia said:

I would like to go directly to the issue of the wife's submission for a moment. There are obviously differing opinions as to whether the husband is supposed to be the head of the home or not. But what I would like to do is table that issue for a moment and focus back on the wife.

Does anyone here feel she should not have to submit to her husband? I'm talking only about the wife's responsibility here, not the issue of what kind of husband she has or what kind of role he takes. What does everyone feel is our responsibility to our husbands as wives? Should we only submit based on whether our husbands first submit to us?

Click to expand...

"Wives, likewise, be submissive to your own husbands, that even if some do not obey the word, they, without a word, may be won by the conduct of their wives, When they observe your chaste conduct accompanied by fear." NKJV 1 Peter 3:1-2.

Enough said. =)

desmalia said:

I would like to go directly to the issue of the wife's submission for a moment. There are obviously differing opinions as to whether the husband is supposed to be the head of the home or not. But what I would like to do is table that issue for a moment and focus back on the wife.

Does anyone here feel she should not have to submit to her husband? I'm talking only about the wife's responsibility here, not the issue of what kind of husband she has or what kind of role he takes. What does everyone feel is our responsibility to our husbands as wives? Should we only submit based on whether our husbands first submit to us?

Click to expand...

We should do things for each other because we love each other NOT because laws tell us we are to submit, or not because someone does something for us.
If my husband did things for me out of duty I wouldnt want that, Id rather he did things out of Love.

united4Peace said:

We should do things for each other because we love each other NOT because laws tell us we are to submit, or not because someone does something for us.
If my husband did things for me out of duty I wouldnt want that, Id rather he did things out of Love.

Click to expand...

Very interesting response. I guess my next question to that is this. Which is more important:
expressing love for your spouse, or
obedience to God?
(And yes, I realize that in this case the two are in agreement already. But what I'm asking is which should be the priority in a marriage.)

Priority would be obedience to God, which in turn means submitting to your husband. It takes love to do this.

That all depends....
My husband doesnt believe in God so to him expressing his love to me is more important of course...

Myself...I believe that by loving others we are being obedient to God so they are therefore on equal ground.

Or are you asking who do I love more...God or my husband?
If that is the question I dont think that is a fair question as it is a whole different type of love that I have for God vs my Husband, just as the love I have for my children are different from each other. I dont love one more than the other, or I dont love them more than their father or my husband more than my mother, I love them all differently.

I was reading another forum once about this subject and one man had examples like, "If I like the blue bathmat and my wife likes the teal bathmat then blue it is!" There were several men that agreed with him. Men that behave that way put everything in a bad light. I'm pretty sure that Christ doesn't much mind blue or teal bathmats. I also think that with those trivial matters Christ would let the other person have whichever they wanted.
Too many men use the verse to justify being self centered and often times the selfishness is supported by pastors and other men.
It really isn't any wonder that many women want no part of that whatsoever.

likestocook said:

I was reading another forum once about this subject and one man had examples like, "If I like the blue bathmat and my wife likes the teal bathmat then blue it is!" There were several men that agreed with him. Men that behave that way put everything in a bad light. I'm pretty sure that Christ doesn't much mind blue or teal bathmats. I also think that with those trivial matters Christ would let the other person have whichever they wanted.
Too many men use the verse to justify being self centered and often times the selfishness is supported by pastors and other men.
It really isn't any wonder that many women want no part of that whatsoever.

Click to expand...

I have little doubt that most such men live in a heavy state of denial and have no clue that they really have far less control than they believe.

The mere fact that the guy even knows what teal is, and that it's different from blue, shows that his wife has already got more sway over him than he realizes.

united4Peace said:

That all depends....
My husband doesnt believe in God so to him expressing his love to me is more important of course...

Myself...I believe that by loving others we are being obedient to God so they are therefore on equal ground.

Or are you asking who do I love more...God or my husband?
If that is the question I dont think that is a fair question as it is a whole different type of love that I have for God vs my Husband, just as the love I have for my children are different from each other. I dont love one more than the other, or I dont love them more than their father or my husband more than my mother, I love them all differently.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your honesty. And I admire you for staying the course with an unbelieving husband. That is a very difficult road, I know. I witnessed this in my own family growing up with a Christian mother and unsaved father. It was only in the last few years of his life that he became a Christian. So for most of their marriage, my mother was 'on her own' when it came to spiritual leadership and growth in our home. But her obedience to God and spiritual growth over the years was one of the tools God used to work in my father's heart. I admire her steadfastness in this ministry. I know it was heatbreaking for her much of the time. Sometimes she had to choose between serving God and serving her husband, because the two were not in agreement. It was vital for her to learn the difference, and how to handle it gracefully so that she could still minister to him.

This is just my opinion, nothing more. I do understand what you are saying about different kinds of love for different family members, etc. But I would be very concerned about putting my love for my husband on the same level as my love for God. When all is said and done God is still God, ruler, creater, mighty king, heavenly father, judge, savior, etc. While my life here on earth is committed to loving and honouring my husband, that will not be true in heaven and I don't think we should ever lose sight of that fact. We will be brother and sister in Christ, and the marriage will cease to exist. As much as I adore my husband, in the grand scheme of things I cannot put him on the same priority level as God because he does not belong there. Yes certainly showing love to our husbands can be a way of serving God. How do we know what is the best and truest way to actually show love? God is love, and he has left us a detailed blueprint of how to show love to each other.

If we love God, do we not desire to keep His commands above all else? You mentioned that we do things for our husbands out of love, not requirement. Do we not obey God because we love Him as well? After all, He did give us these commands out of love and the deepest desire for the best possible life for us, right?

I hope you don't take this as a judgement on your personal beliefs. That is not my goal. How you serve God is between you and Him. Just sharing my take on things, is all.

Too many men use the verse to justify being self centered and often times the selfishness is supported by pastors and other men.
It really isn't any wonder that many women want no part of that whatsoever.

Click to expand...

Yup, I think you hit the nail on the head. That is probably the biggest reason women resist submission to their husbands. The real question is whether it is a good enough excuse to disobey God. We are only responsible for our own actions. And I believe God will honour us for our faithfulness, regardless of whether our husbands are "loving us as Christ loves the Church" or not.

The mere fact that the guy even knows what teal is, and that it's different from blue, shows that his wife has already got more sway over him than he realizes.

Click to expand...

ROFL!!!!

No problem...
Im very liberal so I look at God differntly.
I dont look at my husband as being unsaved. I believe that God is always with him and all others who are and are not Christian and always will be.
But that is what I believe...
Peace to you.

RealityCheck said:

The mere fact that the guy even knows what teal is, and that it's different from blue, shows that his wife has already got more sway over him than he realizes.

Click to expand...

I forgot to add that the guy is picking out bathmats. This also indicates that his wife has her hooks in him far deeper than he will ever realize.

RealityCheck said:

I forgot to add that the guy is picking out bathmats. This also indicates that his wife has her hooks in him far deeper than he will ever realize.

Click to expand...

I dunno about that... My husband is very style and colour conscious when it comes to decorating our home... moreso than I am sometimes! He was like that even as a confirmed bachelor.

desmalia said:

Does anyone here feel she should not have to submit to her husband? I'm talking only about the wife's responsibility here, not the issue of what kind of husband she has or what kind of role he takes. What does everyone feel is our responsibility to our husbands as wives? Should we only submit based on whether our husbands first submit to us?

Click to expand...

I tend to work with the translation of 'submission' as 'dwell down with'. To me, that speaks about working for the long haul, focusing on being someone who's fun to live with, but also someone who has my spouse's best interests firmly in mind. It means that I try to work not for what I want, but what is best for the two of us. It means that I try to bless my husband daily whether or not I feel up to it. It means that when I have a problem with my husband's behaviour, I'll try to spend a good amount of time thinking through a) whether it's something that needs addressing and b) how best to address it (usually after careful thought, I don't get to b). It means that when I feel unloved, I look at my own behaviour first and see what changes God wants ME to make. It means that I try to support and encourage my husband in his hobbies and endeavours. It means that I focus always on what I'm doing or failing to do, rather than simply reacting to hubby's behaviour (ie, being loving when I feel loved, being nasty when I feel attacked).