Submissiveness

[I Am Blessed 24]

I think both genders should be responsible enough to exercise the privilege and the right we have to vote.

A little different perspective...

God tells us to obey the laws of the land. There was a law passed that gave women the right to vote.

I do not believe exercising that right is being in rebellion against a spouse OR God and it has nothing to do with feminism...

(I am not angry. I am not a feminist and I do not have a husband that would presume to make 'demands' on me and certainly would never tell me NOT to vote.)

Me thinks some of us on this thread need the "joy of our salvation" restored...

§ue

 

[Marcia]

Posted by Timtoolman
Not disagreeing with you here that women are to submit but that does include obey. Yes the husbands can be wrong and not living for the Lord but where does it say not to submit to a husband who is not. No in fact it says she should submit so that he could be won by her actions not the word.
I am 46 my wife and have raised two great kids. One grad. from Bob Jones last year with a music major and has a great voice. I just sent my youngest son there this fall. He is also majoring in music and has won the solo and preaching in the MAC compition there for christian schools last year. God a scholarship too. My wife and I have not had an issue with submissiveness that I can remember. She is very involved in church, playing paino, sec, teaching. Both kids, Justin and Kristin love the Lord and are looking to go into some kind of full time ministry. God has been good. Our family is blessed. My wife and I do disagree on this but when it is appropreate she does submit, and I do love her. I think these post make me out to be a tyrant but you can ask her if that is so. Right now she is a Bob Jones playing for some of the church kids who are competing in different areas of music and bible.

I am not sure what the point of all this is. I am happy your family is blessed but this does not prove anything. Are you trying to impress us?

As to submission and obedience, when we are told to submit to one another (in the body of Christ), does that mean obey one another? If someone in your church told you to sell your house, would you submit to him by doing it? Submission means a spirit of humility and service. I think obedience can be a part of that in a husband-wife relationship but not necessarily to be expected.

 

[Marcia]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Marcia:
That's not from the Bible. The Bible does not tell the wife to love or to obey her husband.

Marcia, I beg to differ.

Titus 2: 3 the older women likewise, that they be reverent in behavior, not slanderers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things-- 4 that they admonish the young women to LOVE their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, OBEDIENT to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed.

ad·mon·ish

To reprove gently but earnestly.
To counsel (another) against something to be avoided; caution.
To remind of something forgotten or disregarded, as an obligation or a responsibility. </font>[/QUOTE]I stand corrected on the love part, though it is NOT commanded in Eph 5 for wives to love their husbands.

As far as to obey, it depends on the translation. The word here in Titus is the same word translated "submit" in Ephesians and in some translations, it's "be subject to" the husband.

That word is not the same word as the word in Eph 6.1 used for "obey" in telling children to obey their parents. This word (in 6.1) is a different word from the word used in Eph 5 and Titus 2 for wives. So there is a difference, subtle though it might be.

 

[Timtoolman]

[/QUOTE]I am not sure what the point of all this is. I am happy your family is blessed but this does not prove anything. Are you trying to impress us?

No I was just sharing as others have done by way of personal testimoney. As I said this subject makes me look like a control freak I guess. However as easy as it would be to say, yeah women do not have to submit to the head of the house, I cannot. Sure it is the easy route but would not be bible. And it is by the grace of God not anything that I can lay claim too.

As to submission and obedience, when we are told to submit to one another (in the body of Christ), does that mean obey one another? If someone in your church told you to sell your house, would you submit to him by doing it?

Well what would be the verse or reference for me to submit to that person. when it says submit to one another then gives examples, starting with wife to husband no where does it mention to other strangers etc. YOu see it says to submit in verse 21 I believe then tells us how too. who to who. Not everyone to everyone.

Submission means a spirit of humility and service. I think obedience can be a part of that in a husband-wife relationship but not necessarily to be expected. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Well if you can tell me where it says to submit only if you think its fair or if your husband is a good man then I could agree with you.

 

[KeithS]

Originally posted by Scrapper:
Hypothetical situation....A Christian husband tells his Christian wife that she can't vote in this year's election because he says neither of the candidates are worth voting for. She disagrees and would like to vote, but feels that if she does vote, she would be disobeying her husband's wishes. Does the husband have the authority biblically to tell her this?

And now back to our original program...

I must admit I have not read every word of every post - so maybe I missed some of this, but:

Does he have "bibilical authority" to tell her she cannot vote? Yes. Why? Because his request or demand does not violate Scripture.

This is separate from the secondary issue of his own obedience to God. His obedience or disobedience to God never negates his wife's responsibility to obey God's command to her. Some of you seem to indicate the wife does not have to submit to "unreasonable" requests. Loving your wife would normally eliminate the "unreasonable", but not always. Paul never says to only submit to reasonable requests made by a loving husband. [edit: added "only" to above]

Paul addressed this issue in my mind when he discussed the believing wife and unbelieving husband. By her submission to her unbelieving husband - despite his abuse of "biblical authority" and unreasonable requests - he might be saved when he sees her submission to him. Kind of sounds like "Taming of the Shrew", although it was high school when I last read it and may not remember all the details correctly. Perhaps in this case the Christian husband would learn how to properly express love for his wife by giving her the right to make some of her own decisions, even if he disagrees with them, as long as they do not violate Scripture. Any thoughts?

 

[dianetavegia]

Any Thoughts Keith? Yep... EXCELLENT REPLY!

 

[Elnora]

KeithS

Another opinion without one scripture to back up an assertion as has been admitted. How about God's thoughts.

Conform your thinking to God's word, not try to add to His word to make it fit your ideas to justify sin.

What you posted violates a lot of scripture. Christ taught it and Paul himself admonished his followers not to lord their position over one another. Husbands aren't exempt from that admonition as if to love by a lower standard. If anything it should be higher.

A wife is a gift from the Lord so we should say it is right to abuse it? No, would you beat yourself up? Thanks Lord for the gift, I will show you my gratitute by slapping her into what you want her to be. After all it is my right. I know you will extend me the same grace. To address the unbelieveing spouses, they are not only under God's law (judgment) but the authority of their Government. Abuse is wrong and against both.

Believers, we are not to abuse our bodies nor lord a position over a spouse and when we become one flesh that includes the wife. Abuse is a sin and we are not required to submit to it, but rebuke it.

I am amazed that people will take one word "obey" and try to make a whole doctrine out of it, ignoring all the rest. That is how false doctrine starts. What is the motivation for the strong advocation to misrepresent scripture. The scripture is consistent.

By the way "The taming of The Shrew" was an interesting example. Hmmm..

 

[KeithS]

Elnora,

I never said the husband was in obedience to God. I never said he was right or wrong for his actions. The question I answered was the OP's question - does the husband have "biblical authority". The question was not "does he show love to his wife by doing this".

I said that even if he is in disobedience, the wife has an obligation to God to be in submission to her husband (except where that submission would put her in direct disobedience to the Word of God).

Two things. First, I don't see a lot of Scripture to back up your assertion that I am misrepresenting the Word of God. Second, I don't see what I posted "violates a lot of scripture". Perhaps you could reference just ONE.

Do you really think that when Paul wrote to the believing wives telling them to submit to their unbelieving husbands that said unbelieving husbands "loved" them in a proper sense? Pagans of the 1st century? Or that these unbelievers did not lord over their wives?

Paul's "femenism" was radical in the 1st century. He gave "rights" to women they never had before. I feel confident that these believing women lived through a lot of abuse to see their husbands come to Christ.

I completely agree that a loving Christian husband does not make uneccessary demands on his wife. I have never done so with my wife. And, I have never slapped her. Also never lorded my position over her. However, this is not about me.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Timtoolman:
... should a husband stop loving a wife because she is not submissive? According the Bible?

No. But, should the husband refuse to submit to his spouse just because she is not loving? Again, both the husband and wife are to love each other, and submit to each other. The call for husbands loving their wives, and wives submitting to their husbands, are specific spousal roles, but not exclusinve spousal roles.

 

[KeithS]

Elnora,

By the way - it has been a long time since I read the story. I thought the husband in "Taming of the Shrew" learned to love his new wife, instead of dominating her. She learned how to submit to him instead of being argumentative. They both started off rather badly. Perhaps I have this wrong, and if so I apologize for the possible bad analogy.

Any Shakespeare critics out there who can clarify the story? Knowing Shakespeare and the social mores of the 17th century, I probably have it wrong.

 

[Elnora]

Keith,

I was referring to all the previous posts. People have tried to justify an unscriptural idea by one word or one scripture. This is not sound doctrine. I guess you need to read all the posts I addressed. As I mentioned many times we have to take the entire bible and align our belief with that. I did a study on works vs. faith when advocates of headcovering were trying to force it on others.

If I could find it I would send it to you. Too long to post. It is lengthy. Those advocating (forced submission) which is totally against scripture agreed with me me on that issue. I find it convenient if they don't want to cover their heads (women) but not consistent with the submission issue.

I can take the clothing and hair and jewelery issue and twist it to say women are in rebellion if they wear pants, or jewelery or cut their hair. That still doesn't make it scriptural. The same with this issue.

"The taming of the Shrew" I just thought was insinuating women are shrews and therefore sounded like you might think a woman is a shrew if she doesn't agree with the views about forced submission. I have heard insuations (not just in this instance, there have been many discussions) but suggesting people are in rebellion, un-Christian, or beneath others. Misinterepting scripture causes all kinds of division.

Again I must say, the word of God does not give anyone the right to demand anything, especially a spouse we are to give of our total being. It violates the teaching of love which is to put others (even your spouse) above yourself. It does not seek it's own.

 

[dianetavegia]

In a scriptural marriage, a husband shouldn't HAVE to demand anything.

 

[Timtoolman]

Originally posted by Johnv:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Timtoolman:
... should a husband stop loving a wife because she is not submissive? According the Bible?

No. But, should the husband refuse to submit to his spouse just because she is not loving? Again, both the husband and wife are to love each other, and submit to each other. The call for husbands loving their wives, and wives submitting to their husbands, are specific spousal roles, but not exclusinve spousal roles. </font>[/QUOTE]I am saying John that we have responsablities to obey God's word. It is evident that when the world doesn't follow God's word we are still too follow it. If someone does not follow the word of God, be it government, wife, husband, children does that release the other from thier responsibility to follow the teachings and principles of God's word?

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by dianetavegia:
In a scriptural marriage, a husband shouldn't HAVE to demand anything.

In a scriptural marriage, neither spouse should have to demand anything.

Originally posted by Timtoolman:
I am saying John that we have responsablities to obey God's word.

Axactly. WE have responsibilities to obey God's word. We DON'T have the licence to be the "God's word" police in regards to other people. Husbands don't have scriptural authority to force their wives to do, well, anything.

[ October 28, 2004, 04:39 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

[Timtoolman]

Originally posted by Elnora:
Keith,


Again I must say, the word of God does not give anyone the right to demand anything, especially a spouse we are to give of our total being. It violates the teaching of love which is to put others (even your spouse) above yourself. It does not seek it's own.

And some including myself has used and showed scripture that we are to fulfill our responsibilty as unto the Lord, RATHER or not the rest of the world does. The government has a law allowing abortion, do we disobey the government because thy are wrong here. In all things. Keith has given you scripture as I have to the fact that there is a principle here that Christians are to follow God's word and if the world, unsaved or backslidden do not, that does not negate our responsibilty too follow what the Lord says. Now we have already gone over the fact that the wife is too submit to the husband, saved or unsaved unless it goes strictly against the word of God. Daine has shared the responisbility lies on the authority who it was given to by God. Government leaders, preachers, teachers, and husbands who are given that authority will be held accountable. There are many many examples of unfairness in the Bible but those that stayed faithful to God where used of God and His name was glorified. Again where is the scripture that says if a husband does not love his wife that that negates her responsiblity to him?!!!! You won't find it but instead you will see it is not for the husband but for the Lord. Have given you scripture for all of this so I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[Timtoolman]

Originally posted by KeithS:
[ Any thoughts? [/QB]

Well said.

It really would be easier to agree with john. Too make it sound like everything works out just and fair in OUR minds. To not stand up for what I believe the scriptures plainly teach. Actually I have to apply these standards to my life as I tell us what the Bible says I must show them. So when times get tuff and I don't want to submit to my boss or pastor in church issues I am reminded that I have said these words to others in life and on this board that I am too submit too .....to God's word. Its not about me, its about Him and His glory! How easy it is to obey when we think things are going our way, are fair, and just in our minds. There are many principles here that I think mature christians understand. About obeying because it honors God and His word. Anyways I agree with your post.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Timtoolman:
Now we have already gone over the fact that the wife is too submit to the husband, saved or unsaved unless it goes strictly against the word of God.

Again, I'm concerned that you, a husband, are spending copious amounts of time being concerned with the wife's role, yet you have hardly said squat about the husband's role. You have a specific duty to love your wife, and that's what you as a husband should be focusing in on. If you did that, the submission issue would be, well, not an issue at all, since loving husbands don't make such expectations upon their wives.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by KeithS:
Does he have "bibilical authority" to tell her she cannot vote? Yes. Why? Because his request or demand does not violate Scripture.

Which leads to question 2: If a husband demands that his wife cannot vote, does that mean she is scripturally required to obey? No. The scriptural role of wives submitting to their husbands does not equate to the wife doing whaever the husband tells her to do. This is an abuse of the husband's scriptural headship. Abuse of scriptural headship is sin. If the wife complies, she is becoming an accessory to the husband's sin. Her refusal to comply does not violate her scriptural requirement to submit to her husband.

 

[I Am Blessed 24]

I feel confident that these believing women lived through a lot of abuse to see their husbands come to Christ.

And a lot of them died due to a lot of abuse and did NOT see their husbands come to Christ.

Some of these posts make me think of the way women are thought of and treated in Iraq...

 

[Elnora]

Diane,
Especially in a scriptural marriage, a husband, has no right to according to God's word.

KeithS,

If you are comparing righteous law of man with unrighteous law of man. We are not to murder either. We are to stand for righteousness law whether it is man's law or God's. Not to condone unrighteous law.

I can see why your are getting confused. And to call good evil and evil good is also wrong. God can turn evil to good for those that love him. That does not give us the right to condone evil, thinking that is the way to see Him work. You are condoning sin by advocating unscriptual demands.