What does "having dominion" over women really mean?

[Flames of Liberty]

Yes, I am very sure.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+5%3A9-12&version=NKJV

[Guest Butero]

if a man is loving and treating his wife as Jesus does the church, why in the world would a woman not let him alone and let him be the head/leader of their relationship/home.

I can answer that for you, O.O.  Some men are simply poor decision makers, poor authoritarians and poor stewards of resources.  Some women are all of those things too, of course.  But my point is that sometimes a husband may be a good man but be unable or unwilling to make good decisions for a family and the wife has no option except to take on those things herself.

I think compromise is in order here.There should not be a partner in a marriage that wants to put their thumb on the other spouse.It is a 50/50 partnership with God #1 in your marriage.Most marriages will survive if they genuinely have God in the driver's seat of their relationship.

It is not a 50-50 partnership according to scripture, and I gave a lot to back up my position.  The husband is the ruler in his home, period.  That even applies to husbands who may be doing a poor job.  Certainly he can delegate authority to the wife, and if he is wise and is weak in areas she is strong, it makes good sense to do so, but he doesn't have to.  I do think it is smart to try to reach agreement wherever possible, but if it cannot be reached, the husband has the final say.  The only exceptions would be if he is demanding his wife sin.  The reason why he doesn't have the authority to do that is because Christ is over the husband, and we have Biblical examples of where someone was told to sin and they refused to obey decrees from their authorities.  Daniel and the three Hebrew children come to mind, as well as the disciples who were warned not to preach in Jesus' name.  They all obeyed those who had the rule over them until there was a conflict with God's laws.  That is how I can say the wives are to obey their husbands in everything, as scripture states, but not to commit sin if that is what he asks her to do. 

I am sure glad you are not my husband .

I wouldn't want to be.  I happen to believe the Bible, while you apparently don't.  I would be unequally yoked. 

I want to know what makes you think that you know everything and all the rest of us if we do not agree with you are unbelievers? As smart as I think that I am, I will admit that there is always more for me to learn. But you seem to have learn all there is to learn. The reason you get under my skin is because anyone who happens to disagree with you, you judge them as an unbeliever.  Then again what does it matter what you think of me. It only matters what God thinks of me and you are not Him. 

 

Lets clear this up.  I didn't say she was an unbeliever in God.   I said she was an unbeliever when it comes to not believing scripture.  I would be unequally yoked to someone who doesn't believe the Bible.  As for my issues with you, never once did you provide any scripture to back up anything you said, which is usually the case.  You didn't attempt to show how I got anything wrong.  You just claimed I got it wrong, but never said how.  Had you actually taken the time to show how I misinterpreted it, I would have dealt with you different.  You get under my skin because you are full of opinions, but rarely are they in line with scripture.  If they are, you can't show how. 

[Guest Butero]

It means exactly what it says.  The husband is the authority in the home under Christ.  Whatever he says goes.  The modern church has perverted that and created the false teaching of mutual submission making the teachings in scripture null and void, much as the Pharisees used to take liberties with the teachings on honoring Father and Mother.  There are many who think that man being the head of the woman is just because of the curse, but that is not entirely true.  If you go back to Genesis, the Bible tells us why God created woman to begin with.

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone:  I will make him an help meet for him.  Genesis 2:18

That means that she was created for the purpose of not only being a companion to her husband, but she was created to assist him in life.  We may have questions over why God created man, but the Bible is clear about why God created woman. 

For the man is not of the woman:  but the woman of the man.  Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.  1 Corinthians 11:9

What of the fall, and how it effected things?  I believe what happened as a result of the fall is not that God changed his original order or plan for man and woman, but that there was no longer unity of purpose, and because of sin, the woman was no longer going to automatically be on the same page as her husband.  Strife would now exist that didn't before the fall, so God had to lay down the order.

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception, in sorrow thou shall bring forth children, and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.  Genesis 3:16

There is no way to misunderstand this.  Rule means just what it says.  The husband is the supreme authority in his home.  Whatever he says goes.  After God pronounced the judgment on Eve, he went on to give Adam his punishment for his transgression.

And unto Adam he said, Because thou has hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it, cursed is the ground for thy sake, in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life.  Thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee, and thou shalt eat the herb of the field.  In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground, for out of it wast thou taken, for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.  Genesis 3:17-19

The curse on the man would require him to do labor if he wanted to eat, and he became responsible for providing for his family.  In reality, when women are made to feel like they have to work a job in addition to being a housewife and Mother, they are actually willingly taking on the curse placed on the man.  It is not really their responsibility.  Feminism is responsible for messing up the original order of things.  This scripture goes hand in hand with the following scripture.

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.  But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.  For Adam was first formed, then Eve.  And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.  1 Timothy 2:11-13

Women are not to take the leadership in the home.  The husband is the head of his household.  In the first recorded sin, the first man chose to obey his wife over God.  The Lord doesn't want that repeated, so the woman is not to be the spiritual leader in the home, but the man is.  Christ is his head, and he is to learn from him through his Word, and instruct his wife and children. 

Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.  For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church:  and he is the savior of the body.  Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.  Ephesians 5:22-24

Wives are commanded to obey their husbands in the same way the church is commanded to be subject to Jesus Christ.  How are we to obey Christ?  Think about that, and then consider that wives are to obey their husbands in the same manner. 

Let your women keep silence in the churches:  for it is not permitted unto them to speak:  but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.  And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home:  for it is a shame for women to speak in church. 1 Corinthians 14:34,35

But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ:  and the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God.  1 Corinthians 11:3

What of women who are married to men who are not following Christ?  The order remains the same.  Wives are to be an example by their behavior.

LIKEWISE, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands:  that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;  While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.  1 Peter 3:1,2

A lot of people try to get around God's order by claiming the husband isn't following Christ so the wife isn't obligated to obey her husband.  That is clearly not the case.  It continues:

Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold or of putting on of apparel.  But let it be the hidden man of the heart; in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.  For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands.  Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.  1 Peter 3:3-6

The example is given of how Sara obeyed her husband Abraham, and it goes so far as to say she called him lord.  That represents he fact he was the supreme authority in his home.  The husband is lord in his home, and Jesus Christ is his Lord.  This is the order God set up.  Mankind has rebelled against it, and we see the results in how things have turned out.  The church won't teach this for a variety of reasons.  First of all, there is the cultural changes that have taken place.  We are so used to it, we can't really believe this is what the Bible is teaching, so we make it fit in with our pre-conceived beliefs.  There is the influence of women in the church who reject God's order.  There is the matter of false teachings being passed down from one teacher to another, and the church has accepted what they are saying as true and passed it on.  Finally, there is the matter of not actually taking the time to study it out and put all the scriptures together. 

 

 

 

I think a lot of what Paul wrote was letters meant for the men and women he was dealing with at the time he wrote them. Perhaps there was something going on some kind of argument going among the newly formed Christians that Paul, being their leader felt the need to give them this bit of instruction. (I do not think Paul was ever married by the way) Anyway, it seems to me from reading the stories about Jesus, that Jesus treated men and women as equals. Whenever I read the parts of the Bible written by Paul, I keep in mind that he lived in a different time and in a different place then I do. That the customs of his time were much different then the ones of my time. And I feel this needs to be consider for true understanding.

 

My 2 cents thank you very much!

 

 

 

 

To those who are claiming that I misinterpreted something, how about looking at what I actually posted and explain how I misinterpreted it?  LadyKay, you said you know a lot about the Word, yet you didn't post a single scripture to show me wrong.  You didn't go through my post and show how I got it wrong.  You bragged about being married 17 years, and I have been married almost twice that long.  How many times have you read your Bible straight through from Genesis to Revelation?  I can tell you that I have at least 15 times, and the New Testament many more times than that, and I listen to it on cd in my truck.  It is possible I may at times misinterpret things, but this is so thorough, there is nothing to misinterpret.  If you don't believe what I said, you are denying scripture.  That is really what you did when you wrote it off as just for the people of Paul's time.  The problem is that I posted scripture from Genesis, epistles of Paul, and Peter, and all of this is God's Word. 

 

I didn't just quote Paul's letters.  I went all the way back to Genesis.  BTW, your view means you see the Bible as a collection of letters rather than the Word of God.  If it were the Word of God, it wouldn't just be meant for the men and women he was dealing with at the time.  If it was as you claim, we could use that argument to defend disobedience to any scripture. 

Just what is your issue Burtero? Read what I wrote. I do not see anywhere where I told you were wrong! I The topic was "what do you think it means" and so I replay with what I think it means. I wrote about love. I wrote why I thought Paul said what he said. In no part did I ever say "I am right and everyone else is wrong." So again I ask just what is your issue? Not everything I post is about you or against you! Just for your info I did not even read what you wrote. I just gave my own thoughts on the matter and for some reason you attacked me for that.

You mentioned me by name in a reply to Ezra asking what made me an expert.  Do you agree with what I posted or not?  If you do, then we have no issue.  If you don't, I would like to know where you think I got it wrong? 

[Guest Butero]

BTW, your view means you see the Bible as a collection of letters rather than the Word of God.

 

For your info, the books that Paul wrote were indeed letters to the churches and to the groups of new believers. I did not say the whole Bible was a collection of letters. So stop twisting what I say. 

If what Paul wrote was not intended for us today, and was only for the early church, then it is just a collection of letters.  If it is the Word of God, it applies to us today.  We are all part of the Christian church at large, and his letters to those churches include us.  While he did at times mention certain individuals, the applications would be the same as if it was my actual church and a brother or sister who sits on the pew next to me.  Something written to the church at Corinth doesn't just apply to that church.  It applies to the church as a whole. 

[Guest Butero]

I wonder if this guy and his church deny any charity to widows under 60?

The answer is yes.  I actually ran into a situation like that when I was a Pastor. 

[LadyKay]

To Butero, What I said has nothing to do with you. I gave my thoughts on what I felt the verse meant and you somehow see that as me trying to tell you you are wrong. What is that you want me to prove. That Paul wrote letters to the churches? That the Bible is about love? Because that is what I wrote.

[Guest Butero]

Yes, I am very sure.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+5%3A9-12&version=NKJV

What that means is that they will take the charity from the church for a while and be completely devoted to Christ for a time, but then will desire to marry again and leave the service of the Lord.  That is why we aren't to count them among the widows who receive charity from the church.  The Bible actually encourages the young widows to re-marry.

[Guest Butero]

To Butero, What I said has nothing to do with you. I gave my thoughts on what I felt the verse meant and you somehow see that as me trying to tell you you are wrong. What is that you want me to prove. That Paul wrote letters to the churches? That the Bible is about love? Because that is what I wrote.

If you read what I wrote, I am just trying to determine if you disagree with what I said, and if so, how? 

[LadyKay]

You mentioned me by name in a reply to Ezra asking what made me an expert.  Do you agree with what I posted or not?  If you do, then we have no issue.  If you don't, I would like to know where you think I got it wrong?

That was a light hearted joke. 

[Guest Butero]

 

I am sure glad you are not my husband

Since butero has given the correct interpretation of Scripture regarding this matter, what you are saying is that you reject the biblical teaching on headship and submission, and you would impose your own personal ideas by suggesting a 50-50 partnership.  "Faith" means believing God even though your flesh rebels against His principles.

Okay who says that butero is correct? What makes him the expert on scripture? I think I know a thing or two about scripture and a thing or two about being married. (17 years last week by the way thank you very much) Love my friend! Love is the answer. I do for my husband because I love him. Not because I am order to do so. But because I love him. And he loves me as well. All of the Bible is about love.

You challenged me directly here, and it clearly appears you are disagreeing with me.  If that is not the case, so be it, but that is how it comes across.