Wifely Submission

[Argent]

It is the husband's/father's responsibility to keep the family in the Lord's will. The wife/mother is not accountable to God in this regard. And woe to the husband/father who doesn't take into very serious consideration his wife's counsel in the matters of keeping the family in God's will, but the final decision is his, and he is accountable to God for that decision.

Now, does this mean that when he's lying in bed reading the newspaper and wants another cup of coffee, all he has to do is yell "Coffee!" and his wife is suppose to drop whatever she's doing and run and get him another cup? No.

 

[christalee4]

My preference in this matter would be one who has opinions of her own, freely discussing things with me, to the point of criticizing me when she feels like it. Who won't hold back her feelings. But who will submit to me in the end, after being convinced of my leadership being for the best. That'd be the best of both worlds.

I keep seeing a repeat of the same kind of double-speak logic being used over and over again by those who believe that the husband has an "authority" over the wife. The wife is "permitted" to have her opinions, to voice them, but in the end, who still has to submit to the husband's authority and leadership in terms of decisions. The term of the "best of both worlds" argues that the wife may experience some satisfaction at being listened to, like the way a parent may "listen to the child's side of the story". Therefore there is false scenario in which the wife is described as being an equal partner, but more or less, she is not. She is like an employee of the business, whose opinions may be solicited, but who will have little or no power in the management. Her opinion does not count in the end. And that, no matter how you slice it, is not an equal partnership; it's an boss/employee relationship, parent/child, king/servant, at whichever level the particular couple takes it to.

The insistence that only husbands are accountable to God has been debated over the years, by traditionalists who cite the judgement of Eve over the fall, Ephesians and Titus, as absolute truth that men are primary and women are secondary (I think many side-step that issue by saying that women are just "different"). These more conservative interpretations of Scripture had influence on women's social status in earlier history, up until the last century, in which women were denied the right to vote or have an equal place in society in which they were granted civil rights to achieve higher learning, and work in professions once exclusive to men.

Galatians 3:24 "For you are all children of God, through faith in Christ Jesus.

For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

As Jesus made clear in his teachings, we are all held accountable, as we are all God's children.

 

[christalee4]

Now, does this mean that when he's lying in bed reading the newspaper and wants another cup of coffee, all he has to do is yell "Coffee!" and his wife is suppose to drop whatever she's doing and run and get him another cup? No.

Of course, she is, if she is truly submissive. And she'll get it in double-time too, with a loopy smile on her face, with cream and sugar. No wonder so many housewives in the 1950's had prescriptions for Valium and methedrine.

 

[Futuwwa]

@christalee:

Well, I just stated my preference. It's funny, I'm allowed and accepted to have absolutely any possible partner(s) preference... except for a submissive wife, which is unacceptable, misogynistic, evil, etc etc.

Seems like there's no such thing as real tolerance. Norms have just changed, with new things getting acceptable while old things have become unacceptable.

 

[Argent]

@christalee:

Well, I just stated my preference. It's funny, I'm allowed and accepted to have absolutely any possible partner(s) preference... except for a submissive wife, which is unacceptable, misogynistic, evil, etc etc.

Seems like there's no such thing as real tolerance. Norms have just changed, with new things getting acceptable while old things have become unacceptable.

Very good point!

 

[Argent]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Janissary again.

 

[Lithium Hobo]

Wives are forced to submit to their husbands and it states that in the bible, hm? that's ridiculous. >.< Thank you oh so wise bible for your continued tolerant and message of equality.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Norms have just changed, with new things getting acceptable while old things have become unacceptable.

So goes the march of history!

When Bill Griffith predicted the underwear outside the clothes phenomenon in 1975 people thought he was stupid. The other day I went through the drive thru at Popeye's Chicken and the guy behind the counter had his blue boxers all but completely visible and his pants belted at mid-thigh level. And in the crowd at New Year's Eve in Times Square there was some 200# chick with black tights with a red thong worn over them.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Of course, she is, if she is truly submissive. And she'll get it in double-time too, with a loopy smile on her face, with cream and sugar. No wonder so many housewives in the 1950's had prescriptions for Valium and methedrine.

Or, she could be topping from the bottom ala Lainie Kazan in My Big Fat Greek Wedding: "The man may be the head of the house, but the woman is the neck. And the neck can turn the head anywhere she wants."

 

[christalee4]

@christalee:

Well, I just stated my preference. It's funny, I'm allowed and accepted to have absolutely any possible partner(s) preference... except for a submissive wife, which is unacceptable, misogynistic, evil, etc etc.

Seems like there's no such thing as real tolerance. Norms have just changed, with new things getting acceptable while old things have become unacceptable.

Thank God.

However, our president has made statements that freedoms and democracy (not just for men, or those in charge) are on the march. So our American traditions of striving for quality and civil rights have indeed changed things; hopefully it will change worldwide, and not just in our own country. Tolerance for non-tolerance, can't be allowed in a true democracy. Otherwise, you would have a theocracy, or fascism.

 

[Robinsegg]

Tolerance for non-tolerance, can't be allowed in a true democracy.

Actually, the US is not a "true democracy", as is evidenced by the fact you don't have to go vote on every little thing. What we have is a "representative democracy".

Otherwise, you would have a theocracy, or fascism.

So, tolerating non-tolerance is the halmark of all facist societies? Well, I suppose if it's taken to the extreme, that's the case. However, I'll make two points:
1. Not tolerating other's behavior is the hallmark of a law-abiding society (wherein we do not tolerate breaking the law or one person's behavior hurting another).
2. Much depends on your definition of "tolerance". The current connotation seems to be "embrace and accept everything I do, so I don't feel bad", instead of "allowing something abhorant to you to exist w/o trying to stamp it out".

Rachel

 

[The_Horses_Boy]

Tolerance for non-tolerance, can't be allowed in a true democracy. Otherwise, you would have a theocracy, or fascism.

1. "I pledge allegiance... and to the Republic..."
2.a. refusing to tolerate is not wrong. Do you tolerate rape, murder, theft...
b. How did "non-tolerance" get into this discussion about marriage?
3. Um, no, otherwise you would have common sense. Non-tolerance is no more an absolute evil than tolerance is.

 

[flicka]

My preference in this matter would be one who has opinions of her own, freely discussing things with me, to the point of criticizing me when she feels like it. Who won't hold back her feelings. But who will submit to me in the end, after being convinced of my leadership being for the best. That'd be the best of both worlds.

Supposing you are in error in your analysis of the situation though or your wife has more knowledge and insight to a particular issue. I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree that it's always going to be the wife being convinced to submit. The husband must be willing to submit as well, otherwise any of that input you say you want from your wife is just alot of blah blah blah that doesn't matter anyway.

However, I think if a couple, together, wants a relationship where one or the other has the final say in certain situations it's probably going to work well for them. It's just a matter of finding someone who will go along with it and agreeing to it before marrying .

 

[ReverendDG]

Wow, you guys really are twisted.

Am I the spiritual leader of my household? Yes I am. Does this mean I force my wife to believe what I want her to? Nope, it does not. Same for any others who think that just because a man happens to be in charge of a household these days, does not mean the women is secondary or she isn't important.

No wonder you reject Christianity; you refuse to understand it.

This is what it comes down to "Spiritual leader of the household" i agree with others this whole idea is outdated and imbalanced tward one gender, the fact is that when the bible was written women WERE secondary and unimportant, why should a sex based leadership role remain in existance if we want equality in this century
becides the fact that paul is not god or jesus even if this is in the bible

 

[Yusuf Evans]

This is what it comes down to "Spiritual leader of the household" i agree with others this whole idea is outdated and imbalanced tward one gender, the fact is that when the bible was written women WERE secondary and unimportant, why should a sex based leadership role remain in existance if we want equality in this century
becides the fact that paul is not god or jesus even if this is in the bible

So, what your saying is that we should never submit to authority nor respect it, we should never listen to our parents, we should always be allowed to steal, kill and pretty much do what we want? I mean, because if the Bible is so outdated then why do we have to obey the rules?

 

[TheMissus]

Laws concerning theft and murder are established beyond the Bible. Saying the Bible's laws are outdated doesn't necessarily require a slippery slope assertion that we can do whatever we want.

 

[Futuwwa]

Supposing you are in error in your analysis of the situation though or your wife has more knowledge and insight to a particular issue. I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree that it's always going to be the wife being convinced to submit. The husband must be willing to submit as well, otherwise any of that input you say you want from your wife is just alot of blah blah blah that doesn't matter anyway.

However, I think if a couple, together, wants a relationship where one or the other has the final say in certain situations it's probably going to work well for them. It's just a matter of finding someone who will go along with it and agreeing to it before marrying .

Well, of course I can admit myself to be wrong. Of course I can be convinced. Why would I listen to her in the first place if I couldn't admit that? There is a difference between authority and being always right.

 

[kopilo]

Not really. It's just men need women more than women need men.

"All animals are equal but some animals are more equal then others." - animal farm

 

[Lanakila]

Supposing you are in error in your analysis of the situation though or your wife has more knowledge and insight to a particular issue. I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree that it's always going to be the wife being convinced to submit. The husband must be willing to submit as well, otherwise any of that input you say you want from your wife is just alot of blah blah blah that doesn't matter anyway.

However, I think if a couple, together, wants a relationship where one or the other has the final say in certain situations it's probably going to work well for them. It's just a matter of finding someone who will go along with it and agreeing to it before marrying .

Even when the couple agrees to it before marrying, its not healthy for the relationship and is an archaic family structure based on a male dominated society that we don't live in in the west any longer. As a former submissive wife whose submission destroyed my marriage I have lots to say on this subject. Being submissive makes the relationship into a parent/child instead of a husband/wife and being in love with your father is unhealthy.

We have come so far in this culture in making society equal, but until we get rid of the ancient patriarchal societal struction in marriage we women will never achieve true freedom. Men in these kind of homes have a hard time taking orders from a woman boss, if not find it impossible.

 

[Lanakila]

So, what your saying is that we should never submit to authority nor respect it, we should never listen to our parents, we should always be allowed to steal, kill and pretty much do what we want? I mean, because if the Bible is so outdated then why do we have to obey the rules?

No that isn't what is being said at all. There is no reason that the husband should be the authority in the home beyond an archiac religious or societal standard. No reason what so ever for the man to be in charge.