Wifely Submission

EnemyPartyII said:

No.

Neither should "submit"... they should DISCUSS and come to a suitable compromise and understanding.

Click to expand...

What if the husband wife just said No, to the partner....should there be submission.

If not what would a possible solution be. Say yourn partner wanted to leave you at home and go party with drunken porn stars at a sex party?

NeTrips said:

in your opinion it is such. So a man should never coach a female sports team, that is an example of a man having authority over women becuase of gender....

Click to expand...

No it's not having authority because of gender, it's having "authority" as the coach of a team.

Savage78 said:

What if the husband wife just said No, to the partner....should there be submission.

If not what would a possible solution be. Say yourn partner wanted to leave you at home and go party with drunken porn stars at a sex party?

Click to expand...

If a partner wants to behave immorally, then all bets are off.

In our house, decisions are mutual. If we can't decide, are without clear objective criteria with which to decide, or simply are at an impass, then the person who is more gifted and/or experienced in the subject gets to make the call.

gengwall said:

If a partner wants to behave immorally, then all bets are off.

In our house, decisions are mutual. If we can't decide, are without clear objective criteria with which to decide, or simply are at an impass, then the person who is more gifted and/or experienced in the subject gets to make the call.

Click to expand...

Same here.

gengwall said:

If a partner wants to behave immorally, then all bets are off.

In our house, decisions are mutual. If we can't decide, are without clear objective criteria with which to decide, or simply are at an impass, then the person who is more gifted and/or experienced in the subject gets to make the call.

Click to expand...

Having said that, my wife "submits" to me as head of the house and spiritual leader of the family. And I try as best I can to love and serve her as Christ did so for the church. Of course for us, "submit" doesn't mean "obey" and being "head" doesn't give me any special rights or priviledges or subject her to (or grant to me) any particular roles or duties.

gengwall said:

Having said that, my wife "submits" to me as head of the house and spiritual leader of the family. And I try as best I can to love and serve her as Christ did so for the church. Of course for us, "submit" doesn't mean "obey" and being "head" doesn't give me any special rights or priviledges or subject her to (or grant to me) any particular roles or duties.

Click to expand...

So what does "submit" mean for you?
If one person submits to another person as her spiritual leader and head of the house I would expect this to exactly point to particular roles or duties. Else I wouldn´t even know what it could possibly mean.
What, for example, does "head of the house" practically mean?

quatona said:

So what does "submit" mean for you?
If one person submits to another person as her spiritual leader and head of the house I would expect this to exactly point to particular roles or duties. Else I wouldn´t even know what it could possibly mean.
What, for example, does "head of the house" practically mean?

Click to expand...

I outlined my position (and the biblical definition) in post 483 and post 485. In summary, submission is a "voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden"

gengwall said:

I outlined my position (and the biblical definition) in post 483 and post 485. In summary, submission is a "voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden"

Click to expand...

If submission is the part of the wife, but not of the husband, and if submission is the "voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperation, assuming responsibility and carrying a burden" I have to conclude that the husband does not display a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperation, assuming responsibility and carrying a burden.
IOW: Either your definition does not tell the whole story, or your statement sheds a very strange light on how you understand your attitude.

quatona said:

If submission is the part of the wife, but not of the husband, and if submission is the "voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperation, assuming responsibility and carrying a burden" I have to conclude that the husband does not display a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperation, assuming responsibility and carrying a burden.
IOW: Either your definition does not tell the whole story, or your statement sheds a very strange light on how you understand your attitude.

Click to expand...

You don't understand Christian marriage very well then.

gengwall said:

You don't understand Christian marriage very well then.

Click to expand...

All I have is your explanations. I tried my best to address them.

quatona said:

All I have is your explanations. I tried my best to address them.

Click to expand...

You have 1/100th of the teaching on God's design for marriage exhibited in this thread. Don't draw conclusions until you study the other 99%.

gengwall said:

You don't understand Christian marriage very well then.

Click to expand...

eh... I don't understand either, and I'm christian. You say you are the head of the house, but you seem to practice mutual submission, or see your wife as equal. Could you please explain what the concrete difference is between you and your wife, in this department? Because you said

gengwall said:

In our house, decisions are mutual. If we can't decide, are without clear objective criteria with which to decide, or simply are at an impass, then the person who is more gifted and/or experienced in the subject gets to make the call.

Click to expand...

and I don't see where the (wifely) submission (or male headship) comes in.

gengwall said:

You have 1/100th of the teaching on God's design for marriage exhibited in this thread. Don't draw conclusions until you study the other 99%.

Click to expand...

If anything I drew conclusions about what has been said in this thread (and didn´t even mention "God´s design for marriage"). If you give me only 1% of what you feel is relevant, I can only consider 1%.
I spotted an inconsistency in your description, and I told you about it.
Respond to it or not - but please don´t sidetrack.

FOr me I am the absolute authourity in my hosuehold (more cultural than religious), my word is law and the household is run as I see fit.

The way I choose to do it is to meet with the rest of the family, listen to all there views and then make a descision afte I have given it some thought. I am not always right, but I give it my best shot.

RebekkaH said:

eh... I don't understand either, and I'm christian. You say you are the head of the house, but you seem to practice mutual submission, or see your wife as equal. Could you please explain what the concrete difference is between you and your wife, in this department? Because you said


and I don't see where the (wifely) submission (or male headship) comes in.

Click to expand...

That's because you are analysing marriage based on cultural definitions of submission and headship instead of Godly ones. What I am trying to say is that we define submission and headship differently than those things have been portrayed and exercised throughout human history. "Head" does not mean "boss" in God's design, and "submit" does not mean "obey".

I have given the the definition of hupotasso before. There is nothing in the non-military definition that grants authority in the relationship or creates a hierarchy. In fact, the same word is used for Christians in our relationship to one another. None of us have authority over any other, and none of us are higher in rank than any other. We all are to "display a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperation, assuming responsibility and carrying a burden" with each other. No one is higher or better than another.

The "headship" role is one of resonsibility, not authority. We are to model Christ, who was a servant leader, not an authoritarian leader. Jesus modeled what our responsibilities are by serving the church, interceding for her both in the world and with the Father, and being accountable before God (even onto death). In a nutshell, Jesus succeeded in all of the responsibilities Adam failed in. Jesus, even now, is in heaven serving and interceeding on our behalf.

NONE of this has anything to do making family decisions or outlining specific roles and duties between the spouses. Such heirarchy and role distribution NEVER occurs in the biblical teaching about marriage (although it certainly occurs in biblical history, a very different thing and opposite thing from biblical teaching). Adam and Eve were eqaul partners in the garden until the fall. When that happened, the curse spells out how men and women would behave towards one another. But the curse is not God's design, it is our inclination because of sin. Even still, we can strive to work toawrd the Godly design instead of the cursed wordly design. The entire record of biblical teaching on marriage all points us in the direction back to God's original design of equality.

quatona said:

If anything I drew conclusions about what has been said in this thread (and didn´t even mention "God´s design for marriage"). If you give me only 1% of what you feel is relevant, I can only consider 1%.
I spotted an inconsistency in your description, and I told you about it.
Respond to it or not - but please don´t sidetrack.

Click to expand...

We were only talking about one aspect so I restricted my comments to that one thing. We were talking about wives submitting.

gengwall said:

We were only talking about one aspect so I restricted my comments to that one thing. We were talking about wives submitting.

Click to expand...

Exactly, so did I. And what was the reason you mentioned the 99% we weren´t discussing, out of a sudden?

quatona said:

Exactly, so did I. And what was the reason you mentioned the 99% we weren´t discussing, out of a sudden?

Click to expand...

I think you are wrong on this one. It was a good point that he made. We are limited by the OP to a discussion on a small aspect of Christian marriage. To say that you do not understand Christian marriage because the topic is only covering 1% of the subject is fair. You cannot judge Christian marriage by this one aspect of it.

Lisa

Lisa0315 said:

I think you are wrong on this one. It was a good point that he made. We are limited by the OP to a discussion on a small aspect of Christian marriage. To say that you do not understand Christian marriage because the topic is only covering 1% of the subject is fair. You cannot judge Christian marriage by this one aspect of it.

Click to expand...

It may be fair (it may even be correct), but irrelevant in response to my question. I didn´t mean nor claim to understand or even discuss Christian marriage. I merely asked a question concerning the logic of the definition of wifely "submission", as provided by the poster. It appeared to be incomplete or banal, because it consisted merely of attitudes that - if I am not missing anything - he would ask from the husband just the same.

gengwall said:

We were only talking about one aspect so I restricted my comments to that one thing. We were talking about wives submitting.

Click to expand...

I think Quotona caught you out here...you said your wife voluntarily submits to you as head ofthe household...then you said she didnt. Its either you are the head and she submits, you are the puppet head (for the benefit of apperances, ego etc) and she doesnt submit....or she is completely your equal.