Christian Wives and Obediance

[Falvlun]

Last summer I went to my sister's best friend's wedding. They were highschool sweethearts, and pretty traditional Bible believing Christians.

A major part of the service was this passage. The pastor told "Jane" to submit to her husband, even when she didn't want to or was feeling rebellious; and that she needed to rely on his strength in making decisions. Then the pastor told "Jake" that he needed to just love Jane, even when she was being moody or overly-emotional or irrational; he told him to be strong and "protect" her.

It all just left a really sour taste in my mouth. Everything seemed to be placed on Jane-- if she didn't want to submit, it was her fault; if there was a time that Jake might not want to love her, it was because of something she was doing wrong.

On top of that, there was this grinding in of the notion that the female was fragile, and weak, and needed the strength of a man to make her decisions.

It really bothered me, not least because Jane's such a sweet person, who always just wants to please people; she is exactly the sort that can get trampled on in an ideology such as this.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Is there instruction, then, that a wife in these teachings is allowed the capacity to veto her husband's authority - based on her judgement of the morality of her husband's behavior or rules and whether or not his behavior is in accordance to the Bible? I'm curious if there are any doctrinal support for a wife to have the responsibility to show assertiveness within a marriage if her husband isn't caring for her properly.

My criticism of the NT's instructions to both husband and wife is that they are far more specific and defined for the wife to follow, and that the husband's expectations are more vague in comparison. IMO, this leaves the expectations open to personal interpretation and abuse. And given that in these situations where not only is the husband considered the authoritative position with the decision-making power but the spiritual leader as well, it can very easily fall into a trap where a wife has no ability to defend herself or her integrity if she needs to.

Have we not heard the phrase "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts" before?

 

[Beaudreaux]

The pastor told "Jane" to submit to her husband, even when she didn't want to or was feeling rebellious; and that she needed to rely on his strength in making decisions. Then the pastor told "Jake" that he needed to just love Jane, even when she was being moody or overly-emotional or irrational;

LOL!!!! This reminds me of something a friend of mine once told me. He was talking to his 6 year old daughter and she said:

Daddy, when you yell at mommy.....I don' t like you very much. And when mommy yells at you.....I don't like you very much.
​

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

What do you think of Bill Fields' PeaceMakers?

Bill FieldseaceMaker,Jesus Christ's Peace,Justice,reconciliation,counseling,bible study and Christian dispute-conflict management

Here is Bill's version of the wife's responsiblity according to Christianity.

From The Christian Home by Shirley Rice-Bill FieldseaceMaker,Jesus Christ's Peace,Justice,reconciliation,counseling,bible study and Christian dispute-conflict management

III. THE WIFE'S RESPONSIBILITY IN THIS RELATIONSHIP Ephesians 5:22 23 (Read in Phillips' translation.)

The wife's love must resemble her love for Christ. Draw a parallel between the two relationships. Whatever can be applied to your relationship to Christ can be applied to your relationship to your husband:

1. Love for Christ must grow. As we walk with the Lord we love Him more. Love for our husbands must grow we walk together. Your love for Christ has a direct influence on your love for your husband. The more you love the Lord, the more you love your husband.

2. We must seek to know the Lord. Philippians 3:8 (Amplified) Do you seek to know your husband?

3. We must submit ourselves to the Lord. We must submit ourselves to our husbands, lovingly, willingly, from the heart.

4.We must allow nothing to come between us. Verse 31 —one flesh. Genesis 2:35—nakedness of soul before the Lords, nakedness of soul before husband.

5.We must reverence our husbands. Verse 33 (Amplified)

 

[Falvlun]

3. We must submit ourselves to the Lord. We must submit ourselves to our husbands, lovingly, willingly, from the heart.

I just don't understand the rational for making such a blanket statement. Why do the wives have to submit to their husbands? Why don't the husbands have to submit to their wives, as they submit to the Lord? What purpose does it serve to make one half of a partnership subservient to another half?

Why does anyone have to be submissive? Shouldn't the couple themselves be the best people to decide who is best at what aspect, and to let that person take the lead in that particular area? Or when no one is clearly the best at a particular "subject", then wouldn't it make sense for them to both jointly come to a decision?

It just makes no sense to say that wives must submit to their husbands. What is the purpose?

 

[Beaudreaux]

It just makes no sense to say that wives must submit to their husbands. What is the purpose?

All I know is that it definitely makes no sense to MY wife...

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I understand the major religions were formed in a time of extreme patriarchy, and the religions reflect that, but it always amazes me how many women in progressive societies today still willingly take part in mysogynistic religions.

I certainly understand the psychological components behind it, but it still blows me away when I see it.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

it always amazes me how many women in progressive societies today still willingly take part in mysogynistic religions.

Me too, but I also don't understand those that stay in an abusive relationship either.

 

[Beaudreaux]

What do you think of Bill Fields' PeaceMakers?

Bill FieldseaceMaker,Jesus Christ's Peace,Justice,reconciliation,counseling,bible study and Christian dispute-conflict management

Here is Bill's version of the wife's responsiblity according to Christianity.

From The Christian Home by Shirley Rice-Bill FieldseaceMaker,Jesus Christ's Peace,Justice,reconciliation,counseling,bible study and Christian dispute-conflict management

III. THE WIFE'S RESPONSIBILITY IN THIS RELATIONSHIP Ephesians 5:22 23 (Read in Phillips' translation.)

The wife's love must resemble her love for Christ. Draw a parallel between the two relationships. Whatever can be applied to your relationship to Christ can be applied to your relationship to your husband:

1. Love for Christ must grow. As we walk with the Lord we love Him more. Love for our husbands must grow we walk together. Your love for Christ has a direct influence on your love for your husband. The more you love the Lord, the more you love your husband.

2. We must seek to know the Lord. Philippians 3:8 (Amplified) Do you seek to know your husband?

3. We must submit ourselves to the Lord. We must submit ourselves to our husbands, lovingly, willingly, from the heart.

4.We must allow nothing to come between us. Verse 31 —one flesh. Genesis 2:35—nakedness of soul before the Lords, nakedness of soul before husband.

5.We must reverence our husbands. Verse 33 (Amplified)

Man! You Christian wives are the BEST! "Honey? Did you remember to revere me today?" I gotta get me one of those!

 

[Lindsey-Loo]

Thing is, you may marry a man who starts out respecting your wishes and then goes all uber religious on you. I had a friend I had known since before kindergarten and on until after high school before we lost touch eventually. Before we lost touch though she had married her high school sweetheart. After a couple years of marriage he got involved in a new church and got "transformed". He got on this kick about wives obeying and submitting to their husbands in ALL things. One day in the middle of winter, amidst much snow, they were at the mall and he was done and ready to go and she wanted to look at how much a particular dress would cost before they left. While she was in one of the stores he took their son and left her there. Since he carried all their money she didn't have cab or even bus fare. She had to walk, in the blustery snow, to a particular grocery store to get a friend to give her a ride home.

That certainly wasn't the worst of it though. There was also the time she came home sick from one of her two jobs and was in bed sleeping when he came home and decided to "teach her a lesson about who was boss". Over-powered her, stripped her down, and when she finally stopped struggling and gave up, right before he started the "act" he got up and threw her clothes to her and told her "Just wanted to show you...you don't have a choice." When she called me up crying and telling me about this...well...let's just say he was damn lucky I was in California at the time.

Gratefully that was the last straw for her and she left him. It does go to show you though just how serious some of these guys can go over.

What a jerk. I would get my daddy to come kick his butt if it were me. But this man was obviously not loving and cherishing his wife, as he is commanded to. In all his super-religiousness, I guess he never realized that. Or chose to ignore it.

Personally, I don't intend on ever getting married so that I'll never have to worry about these types of problems. If there's no husband to submit to...well, there you go. I can be both a Christian and an independent woman who relies on no man. I've never really seen the point of husbands, except to produce cute babies, but you can adopt those. :yes:

 

[Beaudreaux]

What a jerk. I would get my daddy to come kick his butt if it were me. But this man was obviously not loving and cherishing his wife, as he is commanded to. In all his super-religiousness, I guess he never realized that. Or chose to ignore it.

Personally, I don't intend on ever getting married so that I'll never have to worry about these types of problems. If there's no husband to submit to...well, there you go. I can be both a Christian and an independent woman who relies on no man. I've never really seen the point of husbands, except to produce cute babies, but you can adopt those. :yes:

There's an old saying. "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Would you say that a religion that insists on a womans submission and obediance is abusive? I have heard that religion is a relationship between the believer and God but what if that relationship is an abusive one? Should the religion be held accountable?

 

[Kathryn]

It sounds like you have a very nice situation. I must say, though, that it sounds like you are willing to submit to his will as long as it is something you would not mind doing anyway. Submitting to another's will means putting your own will in the back seat and doing something that you do not want (will) to do. Have you done this?

I absolutely have done this - on some pretty big issues too. For instance, I wanted to sell our house YEARS ago - the very key to our financial independence and strength lies in the equity in our house. I had to allow him time to evaluate the whole situation - without pushing him, even though I firmly believed I was right and he was basically wrong in this decision.

Not only that - and here's the submissive part ESPECIALLY - I had to let go of my desire to sell this house. It had to become OK with me if we stayed here forever. I couldn't fake that - I had to absolutely accept his decision. When I reached that understanding, the pressure was off of him. He KNEW I was fine with whatever he decided. HE knew I wasn't faking acceptance in order to lull him into a false sense of security either.

What would be the point of nagging and pushing him? Even reasoning with him repeatedly began to feel like nagging to him. I knew that if I pushed him into something like this, he would resent me - and if anything went wrong with the transaction, he would think, "I didn't want to do this anyway!" Recipe for disaster.

Now our house is up for sale and he's genuinely excited about moving and looking at properties, etc. It was worth waiting a year or so in exchange for his enthusiasm now. And he doesn't feel like I pressured him at all - he knows I respect his decisions - and that's why he listens to my advice.

 

[invisible chzbrgr]

I do not deny that some of you women who are in marriages and submit to your husbands, might be quite happy. It seems to me that you are lucky in that. Whether you call it submission or whether you call it just a relationship that works regardless, is neither here nor there for me.

"I'm so happy you're happy." - Bette Davis in All About Eve (only I'm not being sarcastic! hehe)

I question whether some women, brought up from birth to expect to submit eventually, might be more inclined to stay in an abusive marriage because of this command--or strongly-worded suggestion, I guess--from god. That perhaps their opinions do not matter in the long run, as it will be their husbands making decisions, so their opinions about their own happiness may not matter either.

This is speculation on my part.

 

[IF_u_knew]

I know that any wise person, whether man or woman, will take wise/godly advice given and apply it. I am by no means a fan of the modern femi-natzi movement.. It seems if a woman wants equal rights, then they should truly be subjected to EQUAL rights.. no special treatment. Example: a woman wants to be a firefighter, she MUST be subject to the same tests that a man is subject to, for it is lives that could be hanging on the line. If a woman wants a career.. fine; but if she wants a family, then that is her choice and an employer should not be forced to pay her for starting that family. PERIOD!!

However, I have my suspicions as to why Paul put that flat statement into his writings and my suspicions arise from the following:

Jeremiah 31:
22How long wilt thou go about, O thou backsliding daughter? for the LORD hath created a new thing in the earth, A woman shall compass a man.

By the way, I am not a Christian.. only grew up in the doctrine(s); just don't want to mislead anyone concerning what it is I subscribe to.

 

[Beaudreaux]

I absolutely have done this - on some pretty big issues too.

Cool!

For instance, I wanted to sell our house YEARS ago - the very key to our financial independence and strength lies in the equity in our house. I had to allow him time to evaluate the whole situation - without pushing him,...Now our house is up for sale and he's genuinely excited about moving and looking at properties, etc. It was worth waiting a year or so in exchange for his enthusiasm now.

You know, I'm the LAST peson in the world to try and start something between a man and his wife, but....do you have any idea how much money you lost by waiting until the housing market hit rock bottom? You must reeeeeaaaaally love this man.

What would be the point of nagging and pushing him?

Oh my God, I'm in love! WHY do you have to be already married?!!!? :hearts:

Would you recommend that all women submit to their husbands as a marital best practice?

 

[Beaudreaux]

I question whether some women, brought up from birth to expect to submit eventually, might be more inclined to stay in an abusive marriage because of this command--or strongly-worded suggestion, I

Only the ones who really believe in the Bible as God's holy Word. And it's not that they'd be "more inclined". They'd have to do it if they wanted to obey God.

 

[DallasApple]

I absolutely have done this - on some pretty big issues too. For instance, I wanted to sell our house YEARS ago - the very key to our financial independence and strength lies in the equity in our house. I had to allow him time to evaluate the whole situation - without pushing him, even though I firmly believed I was right and he was basically wrong in this decision.

Not only that - and here's the submissive part ESPECIALLY - I had to let go of my desire to sell this house. It had to become OK with me if we stayed here forever. I couldn't fake that - I had to absolutely accept his decision. When I reached that understanding, the pressure was off of him. He KNEW I was fine with whatever he decided. HE knew I wasn't faking acceptance in order to lull him into a false sense of security either.

What would be the point of nagging and pushing him? Even reasoning with him repeatedly began to feel like nagging to him. I knew that if I pushed him into something like this, he would resent me - and if anything went wrong with the transaction, he would think, "I didn't want to do this anyway!" Recipe for disaster.

Now our house is up for sale and he's genuinely excited about moving and looking at properties, etc. It was worth waiting a year or so in exchange for his enthusiasm now. And he doesn't feel like I pressured him at all - he knows I respect his decisions - and that's why he listens to my advice.

I do not consider this an example of submission.Any two people that jointly own property have to both agree to sell.You didnt have a choice to submit or not submit.You couldnt sell the house without him period.Not nagging..and accepting that he wasnt ready to sell was good and healthy for yours and his peace of mind.But the decision to sell the house without him in agreement wasnt even an option for you..therefore you submitted to nothing.

Had your example been the other way around..it would have been submisson.Had he decided it was time to sell..and you were adamently opposed to it for your own good reasons..but consciously decided to agree to it against your better judgment soley to be in "obedience" to the command to submit to your husband in "all things"..That would be an example of submission.Because see here..you had an option to refuse to sign..you had the option to not follow his will.You had the power to go against his decision by refusing to go along with it.In your example you had not the ability to go against his will.

Love

Dallas

 

[invisible chzbrgr]

Only the ones who really believe in the Bible as God's holy Word. And it's not that they'd be "more inclined". They'd have to do it if they wanted to obey God.

Agreed. It may happen to work for some, but overall, not a good lesson from the Good Book.

 

[sojourner]

The "out of context" charge is used by many Christians with whom I talk as a sort of silver bullet that they somehow feel will make the bad scripture go away. So, here's a little context for you, Sojourner:

The book of Ephesians is a letter to the church at Ephesus. The predominant theory is that Saint Paul wrote this letter while he was in prison in Rome around 62 AD, though some scholars feel that it could have been written as late as 170 AD.

The sociohistorical context of the letter is that the Church at Ephesus was multicultural. Jews and Hellenists were the primary populations in the church and there was much division between them. Paul's letter focuses strongly on behavior that is Godly and will keep the peace between the factions.
​

So, can you explain how my presentation of Paul's admonition for wives to submit to their husbands is somehow "out of context"? If not, you'd better start doing what your husband says.

First of all, I'd take a closer look at Sojourner's information, if I were you. You will discover a small blue circle with an arrow pointing Northeast, clearly indicating that I am male and, therefore, do not have a husband.:flirt:

Secondly, there are several problems with your analysis. You have the "silver bullet" aimed at the wrong target.

The book of Ephesians is a letter to the Church at Ephesus. that much is correct. The rest is abysmally sad. I don't know where you got your "predominant theory," but you need to find better theorists...
"Whereas Paul's authorship of Colossians is seriously doubted, the claim that he wrote Ephesians is almost universally repudiated. Although it closely resembles Colossians (the style and theology of which also seem untypical of Paul), Ephesians differs from the undisputed Pauline letters in (1) vocabulary (containing over ninety words not found elsewhere in Paul's writings), (2) literary style (written in extremely long and convoluted sentences, in contrast to Paul's usually direct, forceful statements), and (3) theology (lacking typically Pauline doctrines such as justification by faith and the nearness of Christ's return). (Harris, The New Testament, 4th edition; 2002, McGraw Hill; pg. 363)

Going on:
"The insulting estimate of women's innate character found in I timothy is but one reason almost all scholars do not think that Paul wrote it. In Paul's genuine letters, he emphasizes the spiritual equality of all believers: 'There is no such thing as Jew and Greek,...male and female, for you are all one person in Christ Jesus' (Gal. 3:28). Besides recognizing women such as Prisca, Euodia, and Sytyche as his co-workeres, the historical Paul also refers to a Roman woman, Junia, as 'eminent among the apostles' (Rom. 16:7).
"Scholars have long believed that [the diatribe in I Cor] forbidding women to speak in church (I Cor. 14:34-35),...was inserted into manuscripts of I Cor. by scribes who wanted to harmonize Paul's authentic writings with the restrictions of women later imposed by the author of I Tim.
"Early believers, eagerly awayting the Parousia, could form a subculture in which the kingdom values prevailed, incorporating the least and 'last' of osociety's member -- including women -- into full community participation (Gol. 3:28). But after belief in an imminent divind kingdom waned and the church accepted an indefinitely delayed Parousia, the Christian community increasingly adapted itself to the larger Greco-Roman world. The adaptation seems to have included almost wholesale acceptance of Roman society's view of male-female relationships, a view that the author of I Tim. uncritically endorses." (ibid.; pp. 324, 325)

Does that explain it for you? Proper context, including sound literary and redaction criticism, as well as authorship, is essential in understanding what the Bible is really telling us. That's why this sort of loose-cannon-on-deck approach to moral-behavior-as-presented-in-the-Bible is so dangerous. This bogus thinking has kept women beat down for centuries, and it's high time it STOPPED.