Wives role in marriage

[firehill]

Eph 5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

How do we get around this verse?

Well we can't ignore it.

But getting to the practicalities Christ draws people voluntarily, not once does He order us to follow Him does He? In marriage we must work together in love, however there will be issues of family disagreement, in those cases I think this verse is saying that the man should make the final decision, to lead in this way.

However, once again this is really open for abuse if the man is not imitating Christ in His leadership. See the above post. Was Christ a brute, did He enjoy bossing people around? Think about His model of leadership, He was gentle, kind, and peaceful, never raised a threat or a hand against anyone (except the devil). He wanted and wants the best for us, just as men we must want the best for our wives. What did He do when the Roman Soldiers physically attacked him?

Yet people chose to follow Him to the death. So as husbands if we find ourselves enforcing leadership by having to order a women around, we have already gone astray. If we find ourselves ever having to say well the bible says you MUST do this, well no that is not the way either. Our wives should want to be with us, not out of compulsion, Christ never lead by compulsion.

But you know this should all be settled BEFORE the wedding, which is why I am such a big proponent of pre-marital Christian counseling.

Hummm... I agree with most of what you have said, not all. Christlikeness though funny thing is for all christians whether husband or wife.

But getting to the practicalities Christ draws people voluntarily, not once does He order us to follow Him does He? In marriage we must work together in love, however there will be issues of family disagreement, in those cases I think this verse is saying that the man should make the final decision, to lead in this way.

The phrase 'as the church submit's to Christ' is very telling. The word is 'Christ' not 'the Lord', or "Master' which Christ was refered to as many times in the NT and is defined as 'the Messiah'. As the Messiah, Christ is King of the Jews and a messiah is a deliverer or liberator, not an authority! Also husbands are not equated with Christ as liberators or deliverers anyhow.

Had the phrase been 'as the church submits to the Master (katheegeetees) for example we could have quite a different picture.

[apothanein kerdos]

Eph 5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

How do we get around this verse?

Well we can't ignore it.

But getting to the practicalities Christ draws people voluntarily, not once does He order us to follow Him does He? In marriage we must work together in love, however there will be issues of family disagreement, in those cases I think this verse is saying that the man should make the final decision, to lead in this way.

However, once again this is really open for abuse if the man is not imitating Christ in His leadership. See the above post. Was Christ a brute, did He enjoy bossing people around? Think about His model of leadership, He was gentle, kind, and peaceful, never raised a threat or a hand against anyone (except the devil). He wanted and wants the best for us, just as men we must want the best for our wives. What did He do when the Roman Soldiers physically attacked him?

Yet people chose to follow Him to the death. So as husbands if we find ourselves enforcing leadership by having to order a women around, we have already gone astray. If we find ourselves ever having to say well the bible says you MUST do this, well no that is not the way either. Our wives should want to be with us, not out of compulsion, Christ never lead by compulsion.

But you know this should all be settled BEFORE the wedding, which is why I am such a big proponent of pre-marital Christian counseling.

Hummm... I agree with most of what you have said, not all. Christlikeness though funny thing is for all christians whether husband or wife.

But getting to the practicalities Christ draws people voluntarily, not once does He order us to follow Him does He? In marriage we must work together in love, however there will be issues of family disagreement, in those cases I think this verse is saying that the man should make the final decision, to lead in this way.

The phrase 'as the church submit's to Christ' is very telling. The word is 'Christ' not 'the Lord', or "Master' which Christ was refered to as many times in the NT and is defined as 'the Messiah'. As the Messiah, Christ is King of the Jews and a messiah is a deliverer or liberator, not an authority! Also husbands are not equated with Christ as liberators or deliverers anyhow.

Had the phrase been 'as the church submits to the Master (katheegeetees) for example we could have quite a different picture.

The Greek word Christos still carries with it authority, that's the problem. To be the Messiah means to be the ultimate annointed one...i.e. have all authority and power under heaven. In other words, "Lord," "Master," "Savior," or any other description of Jesus is captured in "Christ." Furthermore, you're ignoring the entire Greek interpretation...if you looked at the entire passage then the name "Christ" would not matter because "submit" simply means to submit.

[Ovedya]

Of course we are physically weaker, but not in any other way. We are not discussing physical equality here.

Actually weker physically and psychologically, as the verse implies. It was the woman who first gave in to the serpent's temptation in the garden. This is one of the two reasons that Paul gives, that a woman should not teach a man or assert authority over him, according to 1 Tim. 2:13-14.

[Floatingaxe]

Of course we are physically weaker, but not in any other way. We are not discussing physical equality here.

Actually weker physically and psychologically, as the verse implies. It was the woman who first gave in to the serpent's temptation in the garden. This is one of the two reasons that Paul gives, that a woman should not teach a man or assert authority over him, according to 1 Tim. 2:13-14.

No. Untrue. Adam was a willful sinner, and that also reveals a psychological weakness! We are both equally weak in that area.

"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression."

Absolutely Eve was deceived (first), while Adam was also deceived (by virtue of the fact that all sinfulness is due to deception) and also decidedly disobedient and neglectful of his wife before the Lord. He equally shares in that weakness! Do not extrapolate that woman is weak psychologically moreso than man before God Almighty. We are all weak. We all are deceived equally.

[apothanein kerdos]

Of course we are physically weaker, but not in any other way. We are not discussing physical equality here.

Actually weker physically and psychologically, as the verse implies. It was the woman who first gave in to the serpent's temptation in the garden. This is one of the two reasons that Paul gives, that a woman should not teach a man or assert authority over him, according to 1 Tim. 2:13-14.

No. Untrue. Adam was a willful sinner, and that also reveals a psychological weakness! We are both equally weak in that area.

"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression."

Absolutely Eve was deceived (first), while Adam was also deceived (by virtue of the fact that all sinfulness is due to deception) and also decidedly disobedient and neglectful of his wife before the Lord. He equally shares in that weakness! Do not extrapolate that woman is weak psychologically moreso than man before God Almighty. We are all weak. We all are deceived equally.

True, but it still doesn't fit into scripture. It seems to be implying that women are more likely to be decieved in certain areas of truth. The thing is, you can't say one thing when scripture says another. That is, in fact, what you, firehill, and others have been doing this entire thread. It's called "reading into scripture," where you have an idea of what scripture should say and then read scripture and scripture then appears to support this idea. One way to defeat it is to look at scripture with an opposite thought in mind and try to prove your idea wrong via scripture. I have done that with wives submitting to husbands, I sought to prove myself wrong on this issue. I looked through various commentaries, looked at the cultural arguments, and at the original language in an attempt to prove myself wrong and be able to state we are all equal. After the study, I was unable to do so...

That is how you defeat a bias that you might have. Seek to prove yourself wrong through deep study...you will claim you have done this I'm sure, but I highly doubt it because the Greek is being ignored (no one who has done a deep study on either side would ever claim that "submit" does not mean submit in the Greek, considering it's military and secular use).

[billie]

Of course we are physically weaker, but not in any other way. We are not discussing physical equality here.

Actually weker physically and psychologically, as the verse implies. It was the woman who first gave in to the serpent's temptation in the garden. This is one of the two reasons that Paul gives, that a woman should not teach a man or assert authority over him, according to 1 Tim. 2:13-14.

No. Untrue. Adam was a willful sinner, and that also reveals a psychological weakness! We are both equally weak in that area.

"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression."

Absolutely Eve was deceived (first), while Adam was also deceived (by virtue of the fact that all sinfulness is due to deception) and also decidedly disobedient and neglectful of his wife before the Lord. He equally shares in that weakness! Do not extrapolate that woman is weak psychologically moreso than man before God Almighty. We are all weak. We all are deceived equally.

True, but it still doesn't fit into scripture. It seems to be implying that women are more likely to be decieved in certain areas of truth. The thing is, you can't say one thing when scripture says another. That is, in fact, what you, firehill, and others have been doing this entire thread. It's called "reading into scripture," where you have an idea of what scripture should say and then read scripture and scripture then appears to support this idea. One way to defeat it is to look at scripture with an opposite thought in mind and try to prove your idea wrong via scripture. I have done that with wives submitting to husbands, I sought to prove myself wrong on this issue. I looked through various commentaries, looked at the cultural arguments, and at the original language in an attempt to prove myself wrong and be able to state we are all equal. After the study, I was unable to do so...

That is how you defeat a bias that you might have. Seek to prove yourself wrong through deep study...you will claim you have done this I'm sure, but I highly doubt it because the Greek is being ignored (no one who has done a deep study on either side would ever claim that "submit" does not mean submit in the Greek, considering it's military and secular use).

That's quite a good idea, AK. You have to have an open mind to do this....

[Floatingaxe]

Of course we are physically weaker, but not in any other way. We are not discussing physical equality here.

Actually weker physically and psychologically, as the verse implies. It was the woman who first gave in to the serpent's temptation in the garden. This is one of the two reasons that Paul gives, that a woman should not teach a man or assert authority over him, according to 1 Tim. 2:13-14.

No. Untrue. Adam was a willful sinner, and that also reveals a psychological weakness! We are both equally weak in that area.

"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression."

Absolutely Eve was deceived (first), while Adam was also deceived (by virtue of the fact that all sinfulness is due to deception) and also decidedly disobedient and neglectful of his wife before the Lord. He equally shares in that weakness! Do not extrapolate that woman is weak psychologically moreso than man before God Almighty. We are all weak. We all are deceived equally.

True, but it still doesn't fit into scripture. It seems to be implying that women are more likely to be decieved in certain areas of truth. The thing is, you can't say one thing when scripture says another. That is, in fact, what you, firehill, and others have been doing this entire thread. It's called "reading into scripture," where you have an idea of what scripture should say and then read scripture and scripture then appears to support this idea. One way to defeat it is to look at scripture with an opposite thought in mind and try to prove your idea wrong via scripture. I have done that with wives submitting to husbands, I sought to prove myself wrong on this issue. I looked through various commentaries, looked at the cultural arguments, and at the original language in an attempt to prove myself wrong and be able to state we are all equal. After the study, I was unable to do so...

That is how you defeat a bias that you might have. Seek to prove yourself wrong through deep study...you will claim you have done this I'm sure, but I highly doubt it because the Greek is being ignored (no one who has done a deep study on either side would ever claim that "submit" does not mean submit in the Greek, considering it's military and secular use).

That is all well and good, but I wish you could research more about what it was like in Jesus' and Paul's day. This is the key. Women were not allowed to learn about God--do you know how many thousands of women have been precluded from knowing God and gone on to an eternity without Him because of foolish laws of men? My heart breaks for these women who were considered less than animals by Jewish law (not God's Law). Jesus came to change that by actually eye-balling women (that was forbidden as well). Men (rabbis, I believe) were not allowed to look upon a woman in public. Men would literally cover their eyes or shut them if they encountered a woman on the street, bumping into walls and bloodying themselves. (I think they were called the "Bleeding Rabbis" or something similar!) Jesus came and began teaching women---in public and private--and one-on-one! Wow--that was anti-law too! He gave them place among His followers! He gave them ministry as well. He spoke to them all to go out and proclaim the message of the gospel. He came to them in the Upper Room and gave them utterance to preach and teach alongside the men. He called a crippled woman forward in the synagogue and spoke with her before the men! Unheard of! Women were not to be found in there! He healed her before them! Wow! He elevated women! Paul continued this inclusion that Jesus started!

I will always defend what the Lord has shown me in this area. We need a true understanding of how women were hated by the Greek and Roman culture and all writings and laws of those early times reflect it. We are still dealing with countless holdovers to those times.

I am praying for you that as you have shown yourself to be knowledgeable in many areas, that He will open your heart and mind to the truth of these things.

Blessings

[FailedChristian]

Its funny how people pick and choose what they want from the OT when it is needful to back up their own positions. Otherwise they want to throw it out and call it fulfilled.

McArthurs views are incorrect.

In Christ there is no longer male, female, Jew, Greek, Slave, Free. Gal 3:28

Mutual submission, mutual love and care, mutual concern, is what is NT taught.

If one looks at the physical condition of a man as making him superior.... muscles etc.... then one must also look at the woman who in general has a higher quality of mind as men cannot multi-fuction as women do. Women are superior when it comes to leadership as a real leader has a quality of mind, spirit, and emotions that most men fail in. Women tend to also be more sensitive to the Holy Spirit where as men are program orientated therefore man-centered... therefore the church is in trouble because too many men run it.

Those who put up these kind of things only hurt women and hurt the body of Christ. This is not edifying. This is one-sided and mis-guided.

This is not what love is between a husband and wife.

Rather, read 1 Cor 13.

If Paul were to write this today, under our conditions of life, he would have said something different.... guaranteed.

The words of Paul are culturally dictated for that time, not necessarily for all time, for all people, in every situation.

The original writer and original reader need to come into focus when reading the Bible.

Couldn't agree more heartily Lawyer..

Pauline scriptures are notrious for the "cultural" problem.

We no longer own slaves, yet we are assumed to have them according to Paul.

According to Paul, women are not to wear makeup, jewelry, heels, stockings, mixed linens or walk without a man (can be and has been interpreted).

Remember that it was for freedom that Christ has set us FREE!

The law is death, but the spirit brings LIFE.

Praise your LORD, Jesus the son of God.

Edited August 14, 2006 by FailedChristian

[apothanein kerdos]

Of course we are physically weaker, but not in any other way. We are not discussing physical equality here.

Actually weker physically and psychologically, as the verse implies. It was the woman who first gave in to the serpent's temptation in the garden. This is one of the two reasons that Paul gives, that a woman should not teach a man or assert authority over him, according to 1 Tim. 2:13-14.

No. Untrue. Adam was a willful sinner, and that also reveals a psychological weakness! We are both equally weak in that area.

"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression."

Absolutely Eve was deceived (first), while Adam was also deceived (by virtue of the fact that all sinfulness is due to deception) and also decidedly disobedient and neglectful of his wife before the Lord. He equally shares in that weakness! Do not extrapolate that woman is weak psychologically moreso than man before God Almighty. We are all weak. We all are deceived equally.

True, but it still doesn't fit into scripture. It seems to be implying that women are more likely to be decieved in certain areas of truth. The thing is, you can't say one thing when scripture says another. That is, in fact, what you, firehill, and others have been doing this entire thread. It's called "reading into scripture," where you have an idea of what scripture should say and then read scripture and scripture then appears to support this idea. One way to defeat it is to look at scripture with an opposite thought in mind and try to prove your idea wrong via scripture. I have done that with wives submitting to husbands, I sought to prove myself wrong on this issue. I looked through various commentaries, looked at the cultural arguments, and at the original language in an attempt to prove myself wrong and be able to state we are all equal. After the study, I was unable to do so...

That is how you defeat a bias that you might have. Seek to prove yourself wrong through deep study...you will claim you have done this I'm sure, but I highly doubt it because the Greek is being ignored (no one who has done a deep study on either side would ever claim that "submit" does not mean submit in the Greek, considering it's military and secular use).

That is all well and good, but I wish you could research more about what it was like in Jesus' and Paul's day. This is the key. Women were not allowed to learn about God--do you know how many thousands of women have been precluded from knowing God and gone on to an eternity without Him because of foolish laws of men? My heart breaks for these women who were considered less than animals by Jewish law (not God's Law). Jesus came to change that by actually eye-balling women (that was forbidden as well). Men (rabbis, I believe) were not allowed to look upon a woman in public. Men would literally cover their eyes or shut them if they encountered a woman on the street, bumping into walls and bloodying themselves. (I think they were called the "Bleeding Rabbis" or something similar!) Jesus came and began teaching women---in public and private--and one-on-one! Wow--that was anti-law too! He gave them place among His followers! He gave them ministry as well. He spoke to them all to go out and proclaim the message of the gospel. He came to them in the Upper Room and gave them utterance to preach and teach alongside the men. He called a crippled woman forward in the synagogue and spoke with her before the men! Unheard of! Women were not to be found in there! He healed her before them! Wow! He elevated women! Paul continued this inclusion that Jesus started!

I will always defend what the Lord has shown me in this area. We need a true understanding of how women were hated by the Greek and Roman culture and all writings and laws of those early times reflect it. We are still dealing with countless holdovers to those times.

I am praying for you that as you have shown yourself to be knowledgeable in many areas, that He will open your heart and mind to the truth of these things.

Blessings

Which only proves the point further that when Paul spoke of submission it was free of cultural bearings.

I have studied the history Floatingaxe...I used to be a biblical history major and have read through volumes on the culture. I can also tell you that you are wrong on certain points about the culture and it's mainly Christian urban legend...where there is no historical documentation to back up certain ideas (such as not being able to look at a woman in public).

Regardless, you've dropped the debate on everything and still have no evidence to back up your position. Flattering me isn't going to help with my continuous call for evidence, of which you have supplied nill.

[Smalcald]

Hmmm,

I voluntarily submit to the spiritual authority of my pastor. At the same time if my pastor goes astray, I will still take and recognize communion from him and still recognize his baptisms, but would also work to fire him through the church council.

Here is the thing. Scriptural I agree with apo on this in general. But it is a spiritual leadership and authority modeled on Christ, and I don't think it is an absolute leadership for a husband, only Christ has that for a human being. But it is voluntarily entered into. I don't want my daughters marrying some control freak who likes being in charge in his family and ordering his "women" who he considers both weaker physically and mentally, around. No father, no parent wants that for his or her children. So, it obviously is not what is meant from the passages that we are discussing, I think it is much subtler.

Also for context I have seen domestic violence, which is all about control and power it is horrible, and I have seen men abuse these versus who like to control their women. But think about it, Christ was the inverse of that, Christ was not about control and power, true humility is the inverse of power and control, look at how He lived, we are to imitate that, both women and men.