Submission Of The Wife: How Serious A Matter Is It?

[Grailhunter]

Would the Holy Spirit have the audacity to object to Christ's support of slavery?
Would the Holy Spirit have the audacity to object to Paul's views on women?

So you shall not show pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, and foot for foot. Deuteronomy 19:21

“When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out from his house.....

Would Christ have the audacity to object and correct the Word of God that was written in Laws.
Here are two Mosaic Laws that Christ objected to and made corrections.

This is where we divide the fundamentalists.......the part time fundamentalists.....and dynamic Christianity.

It is hard to be a true Bible only fundamentalist.
True Bible only people do not believe in anything outside of the Bible....so they believe the world is flat.

True Bible only do not believe in anything outside of the Bible.....so they do not believe in science or any product thereof.....so they live in a house with no electricity or electrical appliances. Live in a house made with an axe and saw do their laundry down at the creek. No refrigerator or canned goods....

Mode of transportation....horse or ox.

Read the Bible and pray if they are ill....never see a doctor or hospital.

This is for the ones that think science is wrong or a scam. And if they say any of that and do not do the things listed above they are hypocrites.

But on the other side of the coin they can have as many wives and concubines as they want....and do not have to worry about wedding ceremonies for any of them and play lord and master over all of them. And they can make money selling their daughters off as sex slaves....concubinage.

Then you have the part time Bible only kind. They can pick and choose pretty much anything they want and make imaginary alterations to the scriptures. They look over that Bible only fence and see things that they like and pull them back over the fence and say to each other, that it was always in the Bible!

The part time Bible only folks can pick and choose what parts of science they believe in. So they can live in the modern era and do a juggling act on what to believe and enjoy the luxuries of science while denying it. LOL Kind of like biting the hand that feeds ya.

But either kind of the Bible only can change the perspective of the scriptures....the Bible says one thing and they believe another.

Aww, Christ was not really talking about slavery.

And Christ was not talking to the Jews who could have had ten wives about divorce....He was talking about divorce with Christians.

And don't cha know that the Bible say Christians cannot practice polygamy or concubinage.

Don't cha know that the Bible says you must have a wedding to be married and has complete descriptions what a Jewish and Christian wedding is like.

Dynamic Christians do not believe in any of that. I would like to say they believe in common sense....but accurately that is not true. It was as it was....It is what it is.... and it will be what it will be.....God did not tell Adam about the book of Revelation. So God lets us know what He wants us to know, when He wants us to know it. And the conduit for that is the Holy Spirit. “I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now." John 16:12

It makes no sense to criticize the past....you cannot change it, just learn from it.

Christian men of today can be better husbands and better fathers. Because the Holy Spirit can speak to their heart and they can be real men. No reason to conform to the template of the Bible on such things. Do what is right! And beating women and lord and mastering over women is not right.

I run into it every once in a while.....The husband is in church listening to the Word, but when his wife and children look at him they have fear in their expressions. And they they recoil in fear every time he raises his hand. Some people get off on that.

Be good and do good!

 

[Hidden In Him]

Would the Holy Spirit have the audacity to object to Christ's support of slavery?
Would the Holy Spirit have the audacity to object to Paul's views on women?

Strange set of leading questions. All scripture is God-breathed, and Paul's writings are scripture.

Why would the Holy Spirit have the audacity to object to teachings He Himself breathed into existence? I don't follow your argument.

 

[Grailhunter]

Strange set of leading questions. All scripture is God-breathed, and Paul's writings are scripture.

I will go with inspired.

Why would the Holy Spirit have the audacity to object to teachings He Himself breathed into existence? I don't follow your argument.

The answer is mostly in the question. Why wouldn't He or the Apostles address these issues? You can even ask why Christ did not explain the truth?

Christ's relationship with the Jews had a few hurdles. He had enough on His plate without trying to turn their world upside down.
Most of red letters you see in the Gospels....is about Christ talking to the Jews.
Christ was not going to walk up to the Jews during His ministry and proclaim Himself the Son of God...but that was the truth...but He was not going to tell it at the time.
Christ was not going to walk up to the Jews during His ministry and proclaim Himself their Messiah....But that was the truth....but He was not going to tell it at the time.
He certainly would not say to them.... When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. And that the Mosaic Laws were not going to pertain to the New Covenant.

The Gods reserve the right to control information and when it is told. It is a matter of the timeline and existing circumstances.....Why didn't Christ and Apostles address slavery? Suggesting that slavery be stopped would have turned the world against Christianity....even the Jews....Even if they were partially successful it would have caused a total collapse of the economic system ...starvation and disease. It was not the time....so God addressed it later.

Same thing with Polygamy and concubinage......the Jews had practiced this for how many millenniums and God addressed it and regulated it in the Mosaic Laws. In there culture the number of wives you had and the number of children you had were directly proportional to how much God favored you and blessed you. If Christ would have spoke against this He would have lost all hope of Jewish interest ...In fact they would have probably ran after Him and tried to stone Him every where He went and every time He brought the topic up.

Do you remember the time Christ was taking to the Jews and brought up the topic of divorce.....do you remember His own Apostle's reaction....they were pretty much laughing at Him

It was not the time to address the topics of polygamy and concubinage and arranged marriage....bride price and dowry. The Holy Spirit would address that later. The reason he probably addressed divorce with the Jews was due to its cruelty. A divorced Jewish woman did not get her children or her property and could not remarry, so it was nearly a death sentence. The husband could have had ten wives....what Christ said just meant he could not marry another one.

Then you have women's rights and how many scriptures and status ques speaks against women's rights.
The scriptures describe the fall of man as being the fault of the woman!.....What, Adam to stupid to say no? When was Eve created - made? A few days or months before the temptation of the fruit....LOL I still think that what got them kicked out was Adam accusing God of giving him a faulty woman....or at least partially. LOL

The Judeo-Christian religions were definitely male dominated and focused and still are mostly. So the biblical era was not the time to address the status of women or women's rights.....And in our time the churches were so caught up with the lord over and master thing, maybe even the God thing.....But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. 1st Corinthians 11:3.....Was this placing the Husband as a god over the woman?

So the Holy Spirit could not use the churches for this. It had to go through a Christian society....so they were drug kicking and screaming into the modern age.

Maybe it is because it is the way my brain works? Or the number of divine events that occurred in my life? I do not know, but the thought that women are not socially or religiously equal would not occur to me. Oh gosh! All these guys throughout history....had mothers!....What The Heck! It is just sad!

I had my own personal biases....I believe that women are socially and religiously equal....eligible for any position in society or the church. But at one time I did not believe they should not be evolved with actual battle situations....That was until I stood with one.... a woman marine and we fought together. She kept up with me at every turn....incredible bravery and skills. After the Warthogs came through we sat down looking for something to drink. I pointed at her pants...she had pee'd her pants. I chuckled and she was embarrassed and apologized. And I said, You don't understand! That is the most accurate example of courage and bravery....scared to death, but you stood and fought. And I explained to her what I have told a lot of people over the years....I do not have a fear bone....so what I do is not courage. Most call it crazy!

Off track.....For more than one reason, some topics were not addressed in the Bible and some scriptures perpetuated a cruel and unfair status quo. So it was addressed later by the Holy Spirit.

And I have heard the explaination that women should be honored to be subordinate....LOL....I watch a lot of westerns....there are a few lines in The Outlaw Josey Wales that I like.....Telling women that they should be honored to be subordinate and submissive to their husbands is like "pissing down their backs and telling them that it is raining!"

 

[Hidden In Him]

I will go with inspired.

I was quoting a verse. You know, if you make up a Christianity that takes what it wants and leaves what it wants, that can be an awfully dangerous approach to take, yes?

It was not the time to address the topics of polygamy and concubinage and arranged marriage....bride price and dowry. The Holy Spirit would address that later.

Actually, it's more that it was not the right people yet. A race of men in the flesh can only hear so much, as opposed to a truly spiritual people. A race of men in the flesh and a spiritual race are two entirely different audiences, with two different capacities to receive spiritual teaching.

Off track.....For more than one reason, some topics were not addressed in the Bible and some scriptures perpetuated a cruel and unfair status quo. So it was addressed later by the Holy Spirit.

If you are referring to the teachings of Paul as perpetuating an unfair status quo, that's where we disagree. His teaching was that the institution of marriage was created by God from the outset as a prophetic reflection of what was to come with Christ and His bride; of two becoming one flesh, and how we would become the body of Christ in Him. I could address the issue of slavery in light of what you are arguing, but even aside from that the institution of marriage and the creation of man and woman to have sexual intercourse and become one flesh together was ordained from the beginning the way it was for a reason. Paul was not perpetuating anything cruel, he was teaching on a very deep spiritual reality.

 

[Grailhunter]

I was quoting a verse. You know, if you make up a Christianity that takes what it wants and leaves what it wants, that can be an awfully dangerous approach to take, yes?

It is dangerous. Life is dangerous. The world is dangerous....Ask Christ He was nailed to piece of wood.

But the alternative is God was silenced after the bibleical era and someone with the authority forbid God to speak again...Did they tie Him in a corner, maybe slap Him around a little and threaten Him if He spoke again. LOL

The concept of the Bible only was to rid Christianity of all the Catholic attempts to claim authority over Christianity and all the sacraments and rituals and salvation and all that. And that was the right thing to do at the time....at the time....and then after a time they needed to reassess where Christianity was heading.

Any desire to live in the past is wrong thinking. And again I have to say that the effect of this static religion thing is unworkable.....a constant tap dance to explain reality with false beliefs and attitudes. And in the end we are losing our youth because they are thinking you are a silly superstitious people and if that is a reflection of your religion than it is wrong too.

Actually, it's more that it was not the right people yet. A race of men in the flesh can only hear so much, as opposed to a truly spiritual people. A race of men in the flesh and a spiritual race are two entirely different audiences, with two different capacities to receive spiritual teaching.

I disagree. The early Christians were not advanced spiritual people with spiritual experence. They were a primitive people given a simple message of salvation.....Don't forget that there were no Bibles in the biblical era.

If you are referring to the teachings of Paul as perpetuating an unfair status quo, that's where we disagree. His teaching was that the institution of marriage was created by God from the outset as a prophetic reflection of what was to come with Christ and His bride; of two becoming one flesh, and how we would become the body of Christ in Him.

Well that is mouthful. But it sound like you are stretching it there a little....I think you have added a little to that interpretation.....But what is a little exaggerating among friends. So I will humor you and you tell me how that relates.

Paul was not perpetuating anything cruel, he was teaching on a very deep spiritual reality.

Again I disagree....Paul's concepts lead to the worst atrocities known to man.....at the hands of the Church.
Second rate status that effected their lives and their children's lives for two millenniums .... Millions and millions living second rate lives full of Sadness, sorrow, misery, and deaths. At every level, even medicine and health care. Women's health care was centuries behind. How do you deal with a woman with anxieties....split her tongue in half....if that does not work wrap her up and dip her in freezing water until her brain is so damaged that she cannot talk.....

We can walk it through the centuries if you want?

 

[Hidden In Him]

Again I disagree....Paul's concepts lead to the worst atrocities known to man.....at the hands of the Church.
Second rate status that effected their lives and their children's lives for two millenniums .... Millions and millions living second rate lives full of Sadness, sorrow, misery, and deaths. At every level, even medicine and health care. Women's health care was centuries behind. How do you deal with a woman with anxieties....split her tongue in half....if that does not work wrap her up and dip her in freezing water until her brain is so damaged that she cannot talk.....

You are laying all that at the feet of Paul?

I suppose you lay a certain amount of it at the feet of those who uphold him then as well. That's something he and I would just have to live with, but I think you are placing blame where it doesn't belong.

 

[Grailhunter]

You are laying all that at the feet of Paul?

Not entirely. Although it is nothing that Christ suggested....Paul had a strong Jewish back ground and old habits die hard. Then again there is a certain amount of female subjugation in the overall time period...the difference in Christianity is that it is not only the second rate status but also the misogyny. The desire to blame everything on the females and to connect them to the devil. Christianity, even in the Bible started a negative view of Sexuality and women. It stands to reason....if sex is dirty, nasty, and sinful and of the Devil....and Christianity is a male dominant religion and men like sex....but looking to blame it on somebody else....females are the demonic temptresses that lead good men to perdition. LOL

I suppose you lay a certain amount of it at the feet of those who uphold him then as well.

Yes I do. And part of that is maybe just the way I think....
BLM riots....scum of the earth. Those that supported the BLM riots....scum of the earth. Those that did not condemn the BLM riots...about the same.

Moslem terrorists....scum of the earth....those that support terrorists....scum of the earth.

But none of this holds a candle to the pain and misery this misogyny of women has caused.

 

[L.A.M.B.]

I'm not sure why there seems to be a bias towards the former. Maybe it's because more men are preachers and teachers; maybe it's because it provides a ready excuse for some Christian men to blame their wives for their marital problems...

I think if the subject were taught in a different manner, after a spiritual rather than carnal manner, some might see how the husband's responsibility is actually greater, much like how James said teachers will receive the greater condemnation if they lead improperly. One has to get their fleshly and self-serving desires out of the way or it corrupts the decision-making.

It's why I let my wife do whatever she wishes, quite honestly. She wants to cook, she cooks. She wants to clean, she cleans. If she wants to do neither, I regard her as the ruler over her own mind, and there is likely a reason. Maybe she's tired; maybe she's got things on her mind. But whatever it is, I trust her that she knows her situation better than me, and will make the smarter choice on what she needs to do and when she needs to do it. But she's not self-serving, and has proven that throughout the marriage. I've proven the same to her. I'm not a perfect man, but I have been 100% up front honest with her since day 1, through the good and through the bad, and she knows I'm never trying to subjugate her, or take advantage of her, or do anything behind her back because I see her as somehow inferior and don't need to know. So I think seeing each other as equals is very important, even though I bear the responsibility of leading. I think it's because I see her as a compete equal that I regard the things she does (cooking, cleaning, laundry, etc) as acts of love. Who wants to do anything when they feel they have to, as a non-equal? That's kinda disgusting frankly. But if they are not required to do so unless and when they want to, then they do it out the goodness of their heart and with joy.

I feel sorry for women trapped in abusive marriages. Like I said, married to the wrong man, it makes the Biblical teaching on submission a nightmare instead of a blessing. The one thing I will say, however, is this: There is one thing Christian women need to guard against, and that is questioning the authority of a strong Christian husband in the home, or in public. A good man wants her to be happy, and will make life as easy as he can for her, and will think over decisions that concern her very carefully. But after doing all that, if she still throws things in his face and insists on having things her way, that's a problem. Mild objections, yes. But getting obstinate? No. I have great respect for my wife. She's smart, she's funny, she's constantly being a blessing, and she is no toy. But likewise neither am I. I think if there is genuine respect on both sides, both sides will be very guarded and careful with their words and actions with each other, especially when there is a divisive issue at hand, and it's never just "my way or the highway." They have to have respect for one another, while nevertheless accepting the fact that the husband is running the ship. If it sinks, the responsibility was his.

Lol, do you have an old brother with the same principles I can meet?

Lol

 

[David H.]

How serious an issue is it with God if a Christian wife doesn't submit to her husband?

My two cents on this subject.... Husbands love your wives, wives submit to the Love of the Husband. For a Godly Husband this is not a matter of control and submission in the sense of enslavement, and subservience, but of one of love and receiving that love and drawing near to one another. The Husband is the first actor in a marriage he begins by loving, the wife is the recipient of that love, she draws nearer by receiving the love of the husband.... It is a beautiful way God designed the relationship between husband and wife. This is How Christ loved us, In that while we were yet sinners he died for us. He is the first actor of that Love we respond as the church and bride to that love, by drawing near Him.

God Bless, and Good post, which we need to speak of more in this day and age, Women submitting to love is not a bad thing as the feminist mentality in this day and age make it out to be.

 

[Grailhunter]

My two cents on this subject.... Husbands love your wives, wives submit to the Love of the Husband. For a Godly Husband this is not a matter of control and submission in the sense of enslavement, and subservience, but of one of love and receiving that love and drawing near to one another. The Husband is the first actor in a marriage he begins by loving, the wife is the recipient of that love, she draws nearer by receiving the love of the husband.... It is a beautiful way God designed the relationship between husband and wife. This is How Christ loved us, In that while we were yet sinners he died for us. He is the first actor of that Love we respond as the church and bride to that love, by drawing near Him.

God Bless, and Good post, which we need to speak of more in this day and age, Women submitting to love is not a bad thing as the feminist mentality in this day and age make it out to be.

It is a good discussion. But what do you think.....what is the difference between having due respect for women and feminism?

 

[David H.]

It is a good discussion. But what do you think.....what is the difference between having due respect for women and feminism?

A man's love for a woman is full of respect, they are the first actor in that love, she can either submit to that advance or reject it by refusing to submit to it. One action draws the woman and man closer to one another, the other is a woman playing hard to get and manipulating and using the love of the man which is the sign of a toxic woman/relationship. Feminism is toxicity in a woman justified and institutionalized, giving credence to this lifestyle where the relationship between man and wife always remains shallow and in carnal terms of conquest and shacking up. Woman thus hurt themselves because all they have are boy toys and not men in their lives. They never know what real love is.

 

[Mink57]

A man's love for a woman is full of respect, they are the first actor in that love, she can either submit to that advance or reject it by refusing to submit to it. One action draws the woman and man closer to one another, the other is a woman playing hard to get and manipulating and using the love of the man which is the sign of a toxic woman/relationship. Feminism is toxicity in a woman justified and institutionalized, giving credence to this lifestyle where the relationship between man and wife always remains shallow and in carnal terms of conquest and shacking up. Woman thus hurt themselves because all they have are boy toys and not men in their lives. They never know what real love is.

That's a dangerous way to think, David. Just because a man claims to "love" a woman doesn't obligate her to "love" him back.

Relationship forums are FILLED with men claiming to "love" a woman, or have "strong feelings" for a woman...who they never even met! And even if he's lucky enough to finally meet her, and he still feels the same way, what if she ... doesn't? She's not necessarily 'playing hard to get', or 'manipulating' him. Quite often, she just not interested.

Plus, how does she know that what he "feels" as "love" isn't only lust?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

This thread makes me grateful to God that He took away any desire from me to ever marry again!

 

[Grailhunter]

A man's love for a woman is full of respect, they are the first actor in that love, she can either submit to that advance or reject it by refusing to submit to it. One action draws the woman and man closer to one another, the other is a woman playing hard to get and manipulating and using the love of the man which is the sign of a toxic woman/relationship. Feminism is toxicity in a woman justified and institutionalized, giving credence to this lifestyle where the relationship between man and wife always remains shallow and in carnal terms of conquest and shacking up. Woman thus hurt themselves because all they have are boy toys and not men in their lives. They never know what real love is.

I do not want to respond to this too negatively.

Let me just say that romantic love is what God intended and the normal sequence of that is glorious and there is no sin in that.

Feminism is more or less a perversion of that. An attack on Christian morals and character...even love and respect itself. Even respect for life itself...the whole abortion issue.

 

[David H.]

This thread makes me grateful to God that He took away any desire from me to ever marry again!

Yes, there are numerous men that use this topic as a means to rule over their women. Gives Women a bad taste in their mouth for marriage. Rightly understood it is about loving and submitting to that love, and this is how God ordered it, men are the first actors.

Feminism is more or less a perversion of that.

I agree

 

[marks]

My two cents on this subject.... Husbands love your wives, wives submit to the Love of the Husband. For a Godly Husband this is not a matter of control and submission in the sense of enslavement, and subservience, but of one of love and receiving that love and drawing near to one another. The Husband is the first actor in a marriage he begins by loving, the wife is the recipient of that love, she draws nearer by receiving the love of the husband.... It is a beautiful way God designed the relationship between husband and wife. This is How Christ loved us, In that while we were yet sinners he died for us. He is the first actor of that Love we respond as the church and bride to that love, by drawing near Him.

God Bless, and Good post, which we need to speak of more in this day and age, Women submitting to love is not a bad thing as the feminist mentality in this day and age make it out to be.

Good words!

A Godly marriage shows itself in the natural development of this very relationship.

Ephesians 5:32-33 KJV
32) This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
33) Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

Much love!

 

[Hidden In Him]

Not entirely. Although it is nothing that Christ suggested....Paul had a strong Jewish back ground and old habits die hard.

You are implying that Christ Jesus didn't have a Jewish background.

The problem with positions like yours, Grailhunter, is that you assume the Holy Spirit was not speaking and teaching through the church. If He was not teaching through the apostles, why are we to assume He is teaching through you now?

 

[Hidden In Him]

Lol, do you have an old brother with the same principles I can meet?

Lol

Only child, LoL.

 

[marks]

This thread makes me grateful to God that He took away any desire from me to ever marry again!

I have opportunity to appreciate the good woman God has given to be my wife! And to meditate on my Godly responsibility towards her.

Much love!

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Yes, there are numerous men that use this topic as a means to rule over their women. Gives Women a bad taste in their mouth for marriage. Rightly understood it is about loving and submitting to that love, and this is how God ordered it, men are the first actors.
I agree

Admittedly, neither of my husbands knew God, and neither did I until close to the end of my second marriage. It’s funny when you think about it that when I finally came to God, any desire for remarriage just left me. Just…poof gone! I sometimes think any man I could meet that I would ever, ever entertain thoughts of marriage about would be so spiritually mature and crucified that he would so obviously be like me and not desire to remarry!