What marriage looks like:

Nomes · 03-23-2006, 03:24 PM

I didn't know where to post this. I didn't want to post in Theology because I don't want to start a full blown "you're a heretic" argument, so here it is

I'm getting married in 86 days. That's less than 3 months. WOW!

Do you ever find yourself feeling a bit ripped off about being a woman? (If indeed you are a woman)

I was reading in Corinthians this morning about how Christ is the head of the man and man is the head of the woman. Purely feminist thoughts come to my mind, I can't help it and I'm not quite sure what to do with them.

I know it's not saying women will be slaves to men. We should serve eachother in love as the bible says. But I can't help but think it's a bit funny-perculiar:
Christ has God as a head
Man has Christ as a head
Woman has Man as the head?
God=perfect head
Christ=perfect head
Man=imperfect head!!!

Man has to submit to perfect Christ, women are further down the food chain, submitting to their husbands who are only human and imperfect.

I have been thinking a lot about what the bible says about women in ministry in the church etc. And also, given that I'm getting married very soon, about what the structure of that looks like. Brad would never force anything like that on me. We work as a team and talk things out and he's never needed to assert himself as the "head of the home" even though we don't quite have a home together yet.

But you know what I mean.

I guess I'm having a slight identity crisis. Not crisis...it's not that serious

It's just something that I'm pondering.

Does anyone have any thoughts?

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 03-23-2006, 03:51 PM

I have a bit of a unique view here, taken straight from scripture... Ill post it later though if thats ok. I need to sort it out, because a ton of people will shred me for it.

Living Proof · 03-23-2006, 04:45 PM

I am waiting for this answer.

Oh yeah, and I have never thought about it that way. You do make a good point whether you be right or wrong.

Nomes · 03-23-2006, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

I have a bit of a unique view here, taken straight from scripture... Ill post it later though if thats ok. I need to sort it out, because a ton of people will shred me for it.

Looking forward to it Bill

Nomes · 03-27-2006, 11:34 PM

Still looking forward to it Bill

KFBobInsanesMom · 03-27-2006, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomes

Do you ever find yourself feeling a bit ripped off about being a woman? (If indeed you are a woman)

I was reading in Corinthians this morning about how Christ is the head of the man and man is the head of the woman. Purely feminist thoughts come to my mind, I can't help it and I'm not quite sure what to do with them.

Does anyone have any thoughts?

Truthfully, I think the men have more reason to feel like they are being ripped off. It is the man who is commanded to love his wife as Christ loved the church. So if we look at how Christ actually loved the church, it will give us an idea of what man is actually commanded to do. Christ gave everything for the church; the church always came first in His thoughts and actions; He denied Himself everything, even His life, for her, etc. Men are commanded to do the same thing. Their wife should always come before them, should always be thought of in every decision, should always be loved and cherished (even when she is unlovable), etc. I can't even imagine trying to live up to this command, even the thought of it is overwhelming.

**redbaron** · 03-28-2006, 12:00 AM

the wife is commanded to submit (as in the final decision) to the husband, and the husband is commanded to love his wife- to the point of laying his life down for her.

Submitting is hard for most women.

Loving someone more than yourself is hard for most men (and most humans).

If a man is truly following the commandment, and loving his wife as christ loved the church, submitting should not be a problem for her, as he has her best interests in mind even more than she does. It is not a sick submissive/dominant relationship, but rather a relationship where love is meant to guard the woman.

crap, I lost my train of thought. If I remember, I'll return.

Planet Bass · 03-28-2006, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redbaron

the wife is commanded to submit (as in the final decision) to the husband, and the husband is commanded to love his wife- to the point of laying his life down for her.

Submitting is hard for most women.

Loving someone more than yourself is hard for most men (and most humans).

If a man is truly following the commandment, and loving his wife as christ loved the church, submitting should not be a problem for her, as he has her best interests in mind even more than she does. It is not a sick submissive/dominant relationship, but rather a relationship where love is meant to guard the woman.

crap, I lost my train of thought. If I remember, I'll return.

Awesomely good comment....

**Gustin** · 03-28-2006, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redbaron

the wife is commanded to submit (as in the final decision) to the husband, and the husband is commanded to love his wife- to the point of laying his life down for her.

Submitting is hard for most women.

Loving someone more than yourself is hard for most men (and most humans).

If a man is truly following the commandment, and loving his wife as christ loved the church, submitting should not be a problem for her, as he has her best interests in mind even more than she does. It is not a sick submissive/dominant relationship, but rather a relationship where love is meant to guard the woman.

crap, I lost my train of thought. If I remember, I'll return.

I was gonna say something along those lines, but you covered it better than I could've. Good post.

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 03-28-2006, 10:58 AM

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

Lets lay down the ground rules basically, and then go to scripture to see how it applies.

If a command is given to a group of kids in which there are 12 kids to sit down, all are to sit down. Right? Now if the boys misbehave and I say "Boys, sit down!" That does not mean the girls are to stand up. Correct?

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.

Mara's Mom · 03-28-2006, 12:00 PM

I completely agree with Bill on this one. I think for emphasis, Paul spoke directly to husbands and women, maybe knowing that there is a particular struggle for each. Who knows. The curses in the Garden may give us a clue. I know that in MY marriage, it is easier for me to love Mr. D than it is for me to submit to him and vice versa.

However, no one is released from either of these commands when it is not reciprocated in their marriage. We can't forget the dual nature of marriage. Mr. D and I are one flesh, but we are also brothers and sisters in Christ. And we are called to love and submit to basically everyone regardless of how deserving that person might or might not be.

Relationships are meant to lead us to holiness, not happiness. It is icing on the cake when we get both.

BelovedOne · 03-28-2006, 12:34 PM

I definitely agree that there is a level of submissiveness for both husband and wife. Though I also believe that the man is ultimately the head of the household and that the final authority on major decisions does rest with him. Even though it's hard for me to submit, (cause like every woman, I always think I'm right

), I don't really think we are getting the short end of the stick in the deal. Honestly (assuming that the husband does have the final authority and that wives must submit to their leadership... which is up for debate, but just assume with me for a minute

) I think in some ways it's easier on us... just for an example, lets say the husband feels God may be leading him to a new career or something. The wife may not be crazy about the idea but at least she doesn't really have the pressure of second guessing whether or not it's really a God thing. If the final authority rests with the man, then so does final responsibility... I don't know, maybe that doesn't make sense. I've never been married so I'll let the married people be the experts on this issue.

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 03-28-2006, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BelovedOne

I definitely agree that there is a level of submissiveness for both husband and wife. Though I also believe that the man is ultimately the head of the household and that the final authority on major decisions does rest with him. Even though it's hard for me to submit, (cause like every woman, I always think I'm right

), I don't really think we are getting the short end of the stick in the deal. Honestly (assuming that the husband does have the final authority and that wives must submit to their leadership... which is up for debate, but just assume with me for a minute

) I think in some ways it's easier on us... just for an example, lets say the husband feels God may be leading him to a new career or something. The wife may not be crazy about the idea but at least she doesn't really have the pressure of second guessing whether or not it's really a God thing. If the final authority rests with the man, then so does final responsibility... I don't know, maybe that doesn't make sense. I've never been married so I'll let the married people be the experts on this issue.

I think you will find that if a husband is deciding to make plans over his wife's wants, that isn't putting anothers interest's ahead of your own on the part of the husband. And that does not come into line with Phillipians.

And scripture places a high level of importance on family. The one case where scripture says someone has denied the faith and is worse than an infidel is when someone does not provide for the needs of their own household.

Where do we get from the text of scripture, degrees of submissiveness?

BelovedOne · 03-28-2006, 02:36 PM

Bill,

I think you may have misunderstood what I was trying to say. I don't think it's okay or Biblical for the man to make all the decisions and do whatever he wants without regard to the impact on his wife and family. But I believe that if our husbands are following the leading of God, we women need to be willing to trust that and follow. There are times when we should be submissive and trust our husbands... I think they are supposed to be the spiritual leaders of the family. I'm not a Bible expert, I can't prove it or back it up off the top of my head with scriptures... but I do think that in Paul's instructions to the church, men are clearly placed in more of a leadership role (e.g. Paul did not allow women to teach men, etc). If women are to allow men to be the spiritual leaders of the church, it seems natural to me that men should be the spiritual leaders of the family as well. Also, isn't there a reference in 1 or 2 Timothy (under the qualifications for elders) that they should be able to lead their family well?

so anyway, my point is that I definitely don't think it's right or okay for the husband to live however he wants or put his interests above his wife's. But as the spiritual leader, as he seeks to follow God's will for the ENTIRE FAMILY, the wife should trust him and submit to that and not make his job even harder.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

Where do we get from the text of scripture, degrees of submissiveness?

I don't know, I didn't actually say anything about "degrees of submissiveness".

But if you're talking about when I said something about levels of submissiveness... I was just agreeing that both the husband and wife are to be submissive to eachother to a certain extent. I said levels because I don't think that a spouse should have to "submit" and stay in an abusive relationship, or "submit" and allow the other spouse to hurt their children or cheat on them or etc etc etc.

***BillSPrestonEsq*** · 03-28-2006, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BelovedOne

Bill,

I think you may have misunderstood what I was trying to say. I don't think it's okay or Biblical for the man to make all the decisions and do whatever he wants without regard to the impact on his wife and family. But I believe that if our husbands are following the leading of God, we women need to be willing to trust that and follow. There are times when we should be submissive and trust our husbands... I think they are supposed to be the spiritual leaders of the family. I'm not a Bible expert, I can't prove it or back it up off the top of my head with scriptures... but I do think that in Paul's instructions to the church, men are clearly placed in more of a leadership role (e.g. Paul did not allow women to teach men, etc). If women are to allow men to be the spiritual leaders of the church, it seems natural to me that men should be the spiritual leaders of the family as well. Also, isn't there a reference in 1 or 2 Timothy (under the qualifications for elders) that they should be able to lead their family well?

so anyway, my point is that I definitely don't think it's right or okay for the husband to live however he wants or put his interests above his wife's. But as the spiritual leader, as he seeks to follow God's will for the ENTIRE FAMILY, the wife should trust him and submit to that and not make his job even harder.

I don't know, I didn't actually say anything about "degrees of submissiveness".

But if you're talking about when I said something about levels of submissiveness... I was just agreeing that both the husband and wife are to be submissive to eachother to a certain extent. I said levels because I don't think that a spouse should have to "submit" and stay in an abusive relationship, or "submit" and allow the other spouse to hurt their children or cheat on them or etc etc etc.

Paul says women are not to teach or hold authority in the church. The reason for this as you will note does not have anything to do with the spiritual life of the home really. That does not say anything about any other position in marriage. Submission is not an option for husbands. And is Biblical submission applicable in abuse? I think not. Its not about being a doormat. Thats a big problem. This is a hot button issue for me because its a text thats been abused for a very long time. Just read it, while looking at the verse prior, it becomes apparent that both parties are to submit to each other. That does not grant the option of submission. Putting others interests ahead of your own would give reason for an abused woman to leave, or to protect her children. It would also dictate how to deal with infidelity.

But overall the church has rather unceremoniously diced up this passage. In every Bible I have seen except the Greek, the 2 verses on submission are split. There is no logical reason for this in the text. The apparent reason I would conclude is someone did not like the implications.