What marriage looks like:

BelovedOne · 03-28-2006, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

And is Biblical submission applicable in abuse? I think not. Its not about being a doormat. Thats a big problem.

I think that's one of the points I was trying to make

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 03-28-2006, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BelovedOne

I think that's one of the points I was trying to make

but would it be submissive to be a doormat?

KFBobInsanesMom · 03-28-2006, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

I am going to disagree here and say this is perpetuation of a myth in some ways.

21Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Looking at this, you see a general moving to the specific. Husbands as well, need to submit to their wives out of reverance for Christ.

Husbands are to love their wives, but the book of first John makes it clear that love is a mark of a believer, of either gender.

Love and submission are for both genders. If this sounds heretical, look at how we are commanded elsewhere to live.

Phillipians 2:3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves.

(What is submission except living this way?)

This is key in a marriage and the current emphasis (either by demanding or fighting of submission) misses this spirit entirely.

When coupled with the prior verse, it appears Paul was telling everybody to submit, but singling out a group as well. That makes it a husband's business to submit as well.

It is both parties job to submit and to love.

Would you not be saying then (although indirectly) that Christ is to submit to the church? If the husband is the head of the wife and you say the two are to submit to each other, would not the following statement where it says that Christ is the head of the church be saying that Christ should also submit to the church?

Perhaps I'm simply not following what you are saying.

KFBobInsanesMom · 03-28-2006, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

but would it be submissive to be a doormat?

Well, is it right to stop submitting because the other party isn't doing the right thing? Is our obedience to God's word dependent on if someone else obeys?

passinthru · 03-28-2006, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KFBobInsanesMom

Well, is it right to stop submitting because the other party isn't doing the right thing? Is our obedience to God's word dependent on if someone else obeys?

So then where is the line? At what point does it constitute emotional abuse?

No our obedience to the word shouldn't be based on the actions of those around us, however at what point is enough enough?

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 03-28-2006, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KFBobInsanesMom

Would you not be saying then (although indirectly) that Christ is to submit to the church? If the husband is the head of the wife and you say the two are to submit to each other, would not the following statement where it says that Christ is the head of the church be saying that Christ should also submit to the church?

Perhaps I'm simply not following what you are saying.

are we not universally commanded to submit to each other? If we are, then the problem is merely that you are carrying an analogy too far. And the text very plainly says we are to in the preceding verse.

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 03-28-2006, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KFBobInsanesMom

Well, is it right to stop submitting because the other party isn't doing the right thing? Is our obedience to God's word dependent on if someone else obeys?

Is being submissive being a doormat? Or is it more akin to the Phillipians model? If it is the latter, then putting someones interest ahead of your own might trump defference and blind obedience.

BelovedOne · 03-28-2006, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

but would it be submissive to be a doormat?

turn the other cheek? that's Biblical, right..?

Look, in no way am I suggesting that the Bible commands women in abusive situations to stay in those situations. Nor am I suggesting that men should treat their wives like doormats. Men have responsibility in this to love their wives as Christ loved the church... laying down his life for her in selfless love. That's their job (and the wife should love selflessly as well, I'm not saying she's not supposed to do that).

As far as the instructions for the church having nothing to do with the family... no offense, but you can't really discount that since you used the same logic in your argument. (e.g. if you tell the boys to sit down, it doesn't mean that the girls don't have to... moving from general to a specific). It's basically the same thing. I think that men having leadership in the church is a specific that applies to the family too.

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 03-28-2006, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BelovedOne

turn the other cheek? that's Biblical, right..?

In response to civil punishment... ...yes

Quote:

Look, in no way am I suggesting that the Bible commands women in abusive situations to stay in those situations. Nor am I suggesting that men should treat their wives like doormats. Men have responsibility in this to love their wives as Christ loved the church... laying down his life for her in selfless love. That's their job (and the wife should love selflessly as well, I'm not saying she's not supposed to do that).

But how does your position deviate from that?

Quote:

As far as the instructions for the church having nothing to do with the family... no offense, but you can't really discount that since you used the same logic in your argument. (e.g. if you tell the boys to sit down, it doesn't mean that the girls don't have to... moving from general to a specific). It's basically the same thing. I think that men having leadership in the church is a specific that applies to the family too.

But the commands to the church are a specific. You can move general to specific, but not specific to general as you are doing. All rottweilers are dogs, but not all dogs are rottweilers. It does not work both ways.

fallinguprawks · 03-28-2006, 04:12 PM

Make sure you marry a man who's a good, caring leader and will listen to you and view you as an equal.

BelovedOne · 03-28-2006, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by passinthru

So then where is the line? At what point does it constitute emotional abuse?

No our obedience to the word shouldn't be based on the actions of those around us, however at what point is enough enough?

It depends on whose example you are following... when did Christ say it was enough? When did He stop following God's leadership because of what He was going through?

But again, I would NEVER say that women should stay in abusive relationships. I'm sooo not saying that, nor do I believe it.

But the issue of abuse isn't even where this topic started.

I'm going to be married in a few months and I believe with all my heart that I am to submit to my husband's leadership, that he is the spiritual head of our relationship. And I have to say, even though I'm not married to him yet... when I *have* submitted to him I have been so blessed by it. For example, there are some things I used to do that I do not believe are wrong... but he felt weren't good for me. He never tried to force me to stop, just gently expressed his concern and then dropped it. At first I was kind of irritated because I didn't feel like he had a right to tell me how to live. And then I listened to him... and even though I still don't think what I was doing was wrong, I have to say that I've been really blessed by listening to him and I'm so glad I did. Men aren't perfect, they make mistakes, and they aren't always right. But if your husband is earnestly seeking God's will and trying to be a good husband to you, it will bless you both if you trust him and follow his leadership.

To the original poster... if you're still reading this. lol. like I said before, I'm not married yet. But I've seen in practical ways how this topic plays out in real life. My mom is not submissive at all. And honestly it's caused them some marriage problems... because 1. my dad is hurt by the fact that she never listens to him, and 2. he has no credibility with the kids because mom never respects his leadership, so they think they don't have to either. While you don't have to let yourself be a doormat or be abused, allowing your husband to be the leader will (I believe) bless you and your marriage and your family.

BelovedOne · 03-28-2006, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

But the commands to the church are a specific. You can move general to specific, but not specific to general as you are doing. All rottweilers are dogs, but not all dogs are rottweilers. It does not work both ways.

Specific: "wives are to submit to their husbands" (from the Bible)

General: "both spouses are to submit to eachother" (your view)

So how did you move from a general to a specific? Because it appears to me that you did the same thing I did... take a specific and generalize it.

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 03-28-2006, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BelovedOne

Specific: "wives are to submit to their husbands" (from the Bible)

General: "both spouses are to submit to eachother" (your view)

So how did you move from a general to a specific? Because it appears to me that you did the same thing I did... take a specific and generalize it.

you didn't read the text. That would be a bad argument.

My argument is pul explicitly states a general command in Ephesians 5:21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

Then he goes more specifically, but the specific in no way overrules the general command immediately preceeding.

22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

Wives submitting does not negate the fact that husbands are a part of everybody and as such are commanded to submit in verse 21.

You completely misread my argument, and had apparently not read the passage in question enough to see 21's existence..

* · 03-28-2006, 05:17 PM

In that case, there isn't essentially a spiritual head of the household? According to your interpretation, that is.

And on a somewhat different note, what reason is there for the church to be that way and not the family? I'm simply curious.