WooHoo Submission

[Psalm63]

That's right. Those of us who hold to the NT church seeing the message of Jesus (the Kingdom of God) as a radical reversal of the existing social norms of fallen societies see a male dominated hierarchical structure as unbiblical. My own posts on this thread are an attempt to outline what can be seen as an accurate NT position. Thus, I don't take the stance of some others who just 'brush aside' the scriptures they don't agree with. Paul was just as opposed to slavery too, contrary to those who chide him on that topic as well as his attitudes towards women. Paul was a great liberator - of women, from social class, from power structures, from racial domination, from relkiious rule keeping. For Paul. Jesus changed everything.

John
NZ

I Totally Agree!

Bugs me when people want to throw Paul out. He is so deep and his material is so life giving (understood correctly).

 

[mkgal1]

We must never ignore our fallenness. That's why any authority given to another must be subject to some check at some time, and why I so oppose unilateral submission as a fixed role. The NT pattern of church leadership as far as I can see consists of servants, mutually submitting to each other as they seek to discern God's will amongst a highly participative community. That's why Paul wrote to the whole church in most of his letters, not just its recognised leaders, even though there were some pretty heavy issues going on amongst them.

John
NZ

I agree. Jesus DID change everything, as you said in another post. When we are one with Him (and our spouse is included in that oneness) and allowing the Holy Spirit to lead us........IMO..THAT is what the letter to the Ephesians is about.....God's ideal for us (the church).

 

[Psalm63]

See here's a huge difference in how things are handled. When it's a scripture that is twisted in a way that harms women, the validitiy or meaning of the Scripture itself is attacked. When it's one that is twisted to harm men, one you don't say anything at all about it and two, the usual response is "well that's just an extreme interpreation, there's no problem with the Scripture itself."

Are you characterizing MY biblical research and findings as "attacking the validity and meaning of Scripture"???

I don't question the VALIDITY of scripture AT ALL!

To the contrary, I hold the Scripture in EXTREMELY HIGH REGARD! And I believe God has rewarded my diligent seeking with some very significant and freeing insights which have changed my life inexpressibly for the better and for which I will be eternally grateful.

For the first time, I understand the GOOD News!

As far as the passages addressing men, you can open a blog and spend 4 years investigating those if you want. That is not my calling! Actually, based on my interaction with men here and even with my husband, there is no interest and an awful lot of resistance to seriously considering my findings so I wouldn't even WANT to try to speak to men about their responsibilities in marriage.

But, I would LOVE to come read about your findings and observe you discipling men about what it means to be Christ-like and correcting them when they are self centered and abusive toward the women on the forum and/or in their lives. It would warm my heart, truly!

 

[McScribe]

I Totally Agree!

Bugs me when people want to throw Paul out. He is so deep and his material is so life giving (understood correctly).

I would tend to agree, especially if you understand him as explaining how to live according to the example of Christ. If you see that then you can see how in a sense Ephesians 5 shouldn't be anything more than what it starts out as...an exhortation to be kind and loving towards one another with the end goal in mind of being as much like Jesus as possible. But obviously we will start from different positions in life, not as a form of deliberate planned hierarchy but simply because that is how it is.

I think that either Christ is our saviour or he is not..,if he is then his example is there to be followed. I've tried a number of times to explain my point of view but it keeps seeming to be lost in arguments with one poster who sounded (but perhaps was not) literal about Eph 5.

 

[mkgal1]

If I were to summarize the entire 5th chapter of Ephesians, I would say it is the HOW of being Christlike.....how to be "wise as serpents, yet innocent as doves."

 

[Psalm63]

I would tend to agree, especially if you understand him as explaining how to live according to the example of Christ. If you see that then you can see how in a sense Ephesians 5 shouldn't be anything more than what it starts out as...an exhortation to be kind and loving towards one another with the end goal in mind of being as much like Jesus as possible. But obviously we will start from different positions in life, not as a form of deliberate planned hierarchy but simply because that is how it is.

For many years, I have prayed the Prayers of Paul over my 8 children, and some of the ones which I use most frequently are from the early chapters of Ephesians:

[FONT=Verdana,Arial]Eph.1:16 I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, 18 having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, 19 and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Arial][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Arial]Eph.3:14 ¶ For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, 15 from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, 16 that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with might through his Spirit in the inner man, 17 and that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 may have power to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, 19 and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fulness of God. 20 Now to him who by the power at work within us is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, 21 to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, for ever and ever. Amen.[/FONT]

​

Tonight I am going to pray these for you, McScribe.

 

[Psalm63]

I think that either Christ is our saviour or he is not..,if he is then his example is there to be followed.

I agree. His example is there to be followed. And I have seen your sincerity about doing so.

 

[McScribe]

I agree. His example is there to be followed. And I have seen your sincerity about doing so.

Thank you for this and your prayers.

We've seen what you interpret scripture saying husbands are to be towards wives... How do you see wives towards husbands?

 

[Conservativation]

I think Cons misunderstands my position about mutual reassurance.

To use a comparative analogy, imagine hat we were, say, talking about the rights of States versus the United States as a whole, and someone brought up what they felt was the right of the Confederacy to split. It should not come as a surprise for someone to bring up the issue of slavery. Saying, "Surely you don't believe in slavery!" would under the circumstances be a fair question. What I was saying was this: when the parties asked the question reply "Of course not" then we should accept a little discussion of it and then move on. This is simply a reassurance of goodwill.

In the same way, some of these discussions that go down lots of bunny trails or get too heated could be kept on track and more civil if people on both sides didn't feel outraged by requests for such reassurance. For example I think some of the women here simply want to know that we are not advocating the man dominating the woman. If we said that simply and went on to explain how we see it, then we might have a good discussion.

At the same time, I would also like reassurance from the women who have a feminist position that they genuinely believe in equality and believe both spouses are equally capable of doing wrong and equally capable of being responsible for marital improvement.

To ask for these reassurances is simply a necessary reminder of integrity and good faith in a conversation.

Yes I would, but there is not an analogous thing to that precipitating what happened here. The bottom line was that what came back at me had nothing to do with the topic at hand, or even the micro topic that we were on about that stupid book, but rather about me personally. To continue with you analogy it would be like someone in the conversation saying, "Oh then I worry about you that you may be inclined to enslave people "

Then you compared to things that were so utterly not in the same level topically, in appropriateness, etc.

I have never once seen people need these assurances in a conversation. MAYBE I could see it written into a fictional conversation in a novel and think, er, ok, awkward, but ok.

You have past trauma, I have past trauma, and no one has ever felt the need to address in advance some feeling that may be resurgent.

In fact there are only a handful, 4 I think, topics that steer off this way that you could apply your theory to, and I do understand you, I just disagree, and I believe its a strategic is subconsciousness tactic to add muscle to an argument where 2 sides are a millimeter apart, and wedge in and make it seem they are a mile apart.

Besides, I honestly dont think any of the men posting have any opinion about the women here and their marriages and how they comport them. If what they are doing works.....GREAT. I dont evangelize my view on this....so its even more odd that when chaz or I share (and it happens to you too) we just say what we believe, and actually discussing beliefs from my side is not to change anyone, in fact my beliefs on this issue are by design "do what works for you" and that marriages find some equilibrium in which that equilibrium is peaceful and works...what can be extreme about that? Why come against that so hard?

You know why....because there ARE evangelists on this topic, some youd think that the Bible cover to cover 66 books that all it talks about it making sure men arent dominating women, and setting women free....and I happen to see a LOT more than that in my copy.

 

[Conservativation]

Here is an interesting quote from an article about Michelle Bachman and what she said about submission.....this question and my post have nothing to do with the candidate, but the writer of the article says some things I think are accurate:

The part I bolded is where I believe we mostly live, the male headship (pick your word i dont care to go down the path that that word isnt in scripture its its irrelevant to the point of this post) really is equal partnership with a thin veneer over it. This is the absolute truth about the vast majority. AND as she rightly states, the oppressive male dominance way is very rare, so those on a crusade about this HAVE TO lump those who DO have an equal partnership but this "veneer". in with those who are being wrongly dominated, in order to "keep the cause alive", and one must wonder what is the REAL goal of "the cause"

"""submission is simply "respect"; it is merely a method for dealing with the tough issues in marriage that require a "tie-breaker". That certainly is one way of understanding biblical submission: it can mean almost anything, in practice. The concept of submission is very slippery and covers a wide spectrum of marriages, from rigid and oppressive patriarchy (which I think is rare) to equal partnerships covered with a thin veneer of male headship theology."""

Read more: Michele Bachmann raises the question: can a submissive wife be a commanding president?
​

 

[Psalm63]

I agree with McQuilken completely and totally. Here's the thing though. If i saw or knew of a situation where a couple believed as he and his wife did, and the decision making authority was being used often, I'd definitely call him on it. I wouldn't sit there and think "hey he's got a womderfully submissive wife" I'd say to him "hey do you really think this is what God meant."

OK, now we are getting somewhere.

You "agree with McQuilken completely and totally" Here is where Wolfgate expressed McQuilken's view that in an unresolvable conflict the HUSBAND has FINAL DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY.

QUOTE WOLFGATE:
In his book Biblical Ethics, he stated clearly "it is difficult from today's vantage point to see how the oppression and subjugation of women could have been universal for so long, often justified on the basis of (miunderstoon) scripture".

He then goes on to directly address three objections to those who challenge the understanding of "scripture as making the husband head of the home" - incorrect interpretation, faulty application to comtemporary society, and some scriptural authors not being reliable guides on cultural issues.

He works through that and ultimately concludes "The bible assigns the husband the role of loving leader and the wife the role of loyal completer. The root problem in marriage is an unwillingness of each to accept the role for which he was designed...if one chooses to marry in the Lord, he is choosing a specific role."

In fairness, on the purely practical side, Robertson was also impatient with people who tried to misuse their role to their advantage. During one of our retreats, a man almost tried to paint him into the corner about what being head of the household looked like - asking who made the call if husband and wife couldn't agree on something - isn't it the man?

It was interesting that while Robertson was firm in his agreement that would be the case, he also stated there were only a couple of times things got to that point in his marriage - so few he could remember each in detail. In those cases it was where, after much prayer and working hard to really understand the others position, they were at an impasse on an issue where no decision was a decision. (Him going to Columbia Bible was one of those. Muriel felt they were to stay, he felt they were to go. A deadline was in play). So when they couldn't agree, they did what he believed was right.

He concluded by telling us if that was happening daily, weekly, monthly, even yearly in your marriage, then something was very wrong - and somebody (could be either husband or wife) were failing to correctly fulfill their role.

SO McQuilken admits to using his presumed male trump card only "a couple times" during his marriage and IIRC, you, Chaz, have never used your trump card at all in your marriage? (Not sure why you need to hang onto the trump card ...)

I would ask you to put yourself into a woman's shoes. Now, certainly at your job, you have to go along with the "final decision making authority" of your boss, but IF it gets intolerable- you are not a slave and you have an out, you can quit and find another job. Being a woman in a marriage is NOT like an employee. While in this day and age, we are no longer trapped, we CAN quit and find another husband, it is much more traumatic to all parties involved to do so, and we will have a LOT of finger wagging from Church people about how we have "caved into feminism" and aren't a very good Christian because we don't want to suffer in our marriage any more. So, put yourself in a woman's shoes. I don't know if you can grasp how emotionally involved a woman is with the person she has sex with? It's entirely different than your relationship with your BOSS. It's a deeply intimate and connected relationship- Paul's illustration of a head connected to a body is a metaphor for how connected a wife is to her husband- she is his BODY.

Can you understand this the idea that the HUSBAND is more like a "boss" who always always always HAS "Final Decision Making Authority" EVEN IF he doesn't use it is disrespectful to women? Plus- despite what McQuilken and tradition say- this idea that "THE HUSBAND IS THE LEADER OF THE WIFE" is just not in scripture.

Show me the passage that says a husband is his wife's leader? Show me the passage that gives him "final decision making authority"?

The husband is the HEAD of the wife (not "the household") which is an intimacy metaphor not a "boss" metaphor. And Jesus is my only "Leader"; I cannot serve TWO Masters.

 

[Psalm63]

To CHAZ (continued)

Lastly, if a h and wife are both seemingly seeking the Lord's will and as yet coming up with different ideas as to how a certain problem should be handled (this is not uncommon), it apparently must be presumed at some point that the h is right....or the wife wasn't seeking the Lord's will...or her will would have aligned with the h's. That's just insulting to women, TBH.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]QUOTE WILLARD HARLEY of marriagebuilders.com:
Throughout human history, however, their physical and mental differences have led to widespread discrimination by men against women. We should not be surprised at that tragic result because whenever there have been differences among us, we have tended to discriminate. And since there are no greater differences than there are between a man and a woman, we should expect sexual discrimination. It's been less than 100 years that women have even had the right to vote here in America because they were judged to be intellectually inferior. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Instead of seeing women as an essential complement to their lives, men have tended to view them as personal property that were to serve them throughout life, much like slaves. Men viewed themselves as superior in every way, and felt that the judgment of women was inadequate to make final decisions, even when it came to voting. - Willard Harley [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Why are the differences between a man and a woman so valuable in marriage?[/FONT]

So, dreamer, Willard Harley, and I all think this "final decision making authority" reserved to husbands (AKA "the male trump card") is insulting and disrespectful to women/wives.

You can tell me all you want that YOU don't think it's disrespectful. That doesn't help. You might want to tell me that GOD made up the rule (which IMO makes Him sound insulting and disrespectful BTW and I know better than that because I FEEL his love and respect, honoring, nourishing, cherishing).

Chaz, I want to know if you understand how this assumption about husband "leadership" feels insulting and disrespectful to (some of us) wives/women???

 

[Psalm63]

How do you see wives towards husbands?

I see that as my emphasis, what I have posted about all along: about a WIFE in relationship to her husband. About what life is like in WIFE skin. See my tag line.

I desire my husband and he rules! Gen 3:16
I am subject to him in everything! Eph 5:24
But I do NOT submit to him in everything! Gal 5:1

I think if you look on one thread where I posted recently in an effort to help a wife, you will see that I think a wife needs to quit waiting around for her husband to "lead" and take up her GOD GIVEN mantle of being "MEET Help".

 

[dallasapple]

I will be witty here...

From my Big Fat Greek Wedding"

" Man might be the head ....but woman is the neck...." hehehe....

All in all I think that like Faithprevails said we voice out we discuss we do not agree ...eh...we give it to prayer. I think though most of the times we as women have the responsibility to be careful how to advice too. We cannot sit back and say "okie just decid hun"... We need to help them with the decision making and if we know that something is not thought out on our spouses part through prayer and some thought we have to insist on going through that route

I remember in my seminary years we would take time to pray together...We need to go back to it for sure instead of individually praying. That is my whole harmony thing... They say families who pray together stay together

My 0.2 cents

Just a note..in the movie my Big Fat Greek wedding the woman(women) contrived a plan to manipulate the dad to belieivng he WAS making the decision...that it was HIS idea(it wasnt his idea it was THEIRS)..the reality is the women were in the drivers seat including playing on his need to believe he was the head honcho solving a problem for his sister by offering up his daughter to work in her computer store.They played him like an instrument(including a set up..with a pre-planned script with acting involved ("whoa is me I dont know what I'm going to do")..coddling to his sensitivities to "feel like' (believe he was)the man/authority...to get what they wanted.

Its a game.Its silly...all devised to give the appearance he was totally in control of the decision.And everybody laughed because it was funny how easily manipulated he was to do exactly what they planned on ..

Dallas

 

[dallasapple]

I don't know if you can grasp how emotionally involved a woman is with the person she has sex with?

Just a side note....a wife having unwatned sex with her husband is compared in fact to him going to work when he doesnt feel like it..So for some I dont think they can grasp AT ALL how emotionally involved a woman is with the person she has sex with.(and children which is often the case..they didnt incubate their "bosses" child in their womb and bring it into the world painfully out of a body oraface nor did they nourish thier bosses off spring with thier body )

Dallas

 

[Psalm63]

Just a side note....a wife having unwatned sex with her husband is compared in fact to him going to work when he doesnt feel like it..

Their loss!

Nowadays I never ever have sex unless I FEEL LIKE IT
That can take some persuasion from my husband and he is a better man for it, just like Gary Thomas says in Sacred Marriage

[FONT=Verdana,Arial]quote:[/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial] quoted from Sacred Marriage by Gary Thomas
I remember talking frankly to two Christian men once about the ideals of Christian marriage. I cracked them up when I freely confessed, “You bet I’ve swallow arguments because I wanted something from my wife later that night.” They both admitted, somewhat sheepishly, that they too had done the same thing. I’m not proud of the fact that I’m less willing to stand up for my beliefs when I feel “the urge”- and I particularly don’t like the fact that what feels like a physical need directly my spiritual attitudes- but I can learn to use that physical need for spiritual benefit.

Let me put this succinctly: We can learn to use the sex drive to groom our character. Out of a need to be intimate with their wives, husbands may learn to show tenderness and empathy.

[/FONT]​

NOTE: JFTR To abort projection and false assumptions, he makes the effort to connect on every level at least twice a week unless business takes him out of town

[FONT=Verdana,Arial] [/FONT]​

 

[McScribe]

Hm. I'm not sure that this belongs in this part of the discussion...for this reason. Its one thing for a wife to perhaps have a submissive sexual personality, another for one spouse to expect the other to submit to sexual advances. I don't think this is what the submission part refers to.

 

[McScribe]

I see that as my emphasis, what I have posted about all along: about a WIFE in relationship to her husband. About what life is like in WIFE skin. See my tag line.

I desire my husband and he rules! Gen 3:16
I am subject to him in everything! Eph 5:24
But I do NOT submit to him in everything! Gal 5:1

I think if you look on one thread where I posted recently in an effort to help a wife, you will see that I think a wife needs to quit waiting around for her husband to "lead" and take up her GOD GIVEN mantle of being "MEET Help".

What I meant, actually was that you had earlier referred to how husbands ought to be acting protectively towards their wives, is that not true? So could you sum up in a similar way how wives are to act towards their husbands?

 

[JaneFW]

Besides, I honestly dont think any of the men posting have any opinion about the women here and their marriages and how they comport them. If what they are doing works.....GREAT. I dont evangelize my view on this....so its even more odd that when chaz or I share (and it happens to you too) we just say what we believe, and actually discussing beliefs from my side is not to change anyone, in fact my beliefs on this issue are by design "do what works for you" and that marriages find some equilibrium in which that equilibrium is peaceful and works...what can be extreme about that? Why come against that so hard?

People aren't "coming so hard against" those who are saying "whatever works" it's those who are saying it is sinful not to submit that are a problem or stating that it is wrong not to obey this scripture, or that husbands who don't are failing. I really think what I said elsewhere - who amongst us is going to stand up and say, hand on heart, that they follow every scripture in the Bible. I would like to hear from that person. That person, and that person alone can point their finger and say wrong/sinful/failure, and even then I would hope that the person who is following every scripture in the Bible would be too far above calling names, because they would know better, because they are following every scripture in the Bible.

Not to cons but general: for those of you who have that "whatever works" attitude, why do you continue to support submission or argue the validity of the scripture? If you don't honor that scripture, why does it matter to you that others do? Doesn't it seem a little hypocritical to say don't do as I do, do as I say?

Just a question!

 

[Chaplain David]

People aren't "coming so hard against" those who are saying "whatever works" it's those who are saying it is sinful not to submit that are a problem or stating that it is wrong not to obey this scripture, or that husbands who don't are failing. I really think what I said elsewhere - who amongst us is going to stand up and say, hand on heart, that they follow every scripture in the Bible. I would like to hear from that person. That person, and that person alone can point their finger and say wrong/sinful/failure, and even then I would hope that the person who is following every scripture in the Bible would be too far above calling names, because they would know better, because they are following every scripture in the Bible.

Not to cons but general: for those of you who have that "whatever works" attitude, why do you continue to support submission or argue the validity of the scripture? If you don't honor that scripture, why does it matter to you that others do? Doesn't it seem a little hypocritical to say don't do as I do, do as I say?

Just a question!

I had difficulty understanding this post as it is very general and addresses generalities. What exactly is being asked and to whom - specifically?