Are Wives to Husbands as Children to Parents?

I’ve moved this discussion to its own thread, since it may be of interest to people not interested in the original thread. Here’s the rerun – all about the roles of men and women in marriage (so far)…

# ravingpente:

I’m not a ’secular feminist’, but I am grateful for the work they did combatting stereotypes about women, their abilities and their roles.

Personally, I think that women have been ruled by their husbands as a result of the Fall, and it’s one of the things we are redeemed from through Christ. But some people don’t want this part of redemption!

I completely disagree with anything that introduces hatred towards or domination of men! Neither men nor women are meant to be dominated by eachother. Unity is the key, and I believe this is what Adam and Eve were created to live in. An easy to read (relatively) book on the subject is ‘10 Lies the Church Teaches About Women’, by J Lee Grady, editor of Charisma magazine.

cpig :

“Personally, I think that women have been ruled by their husbands as a result of the Fall, and it’s one of the things we are redeemed from through Christ. But some people don’t want this part of redemption!”- ravingpente

In other words ravingpente you don’t want to obey the biblical command to submit to your husband and you have come up with a rational for why you don’t have to. I don’t think your position lines up with scripture though, I think it just reflects your own wishful thinking. In particular I say your take on the matter does not line up with the following New Testament verses which were written after Jesus died on the cross and redeemed us

Eph 5:22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.

Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Eph 5:24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

1Cr 11:3 Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

1Cr 11:8-10 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.

1Pe 3:1 Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives,

1Ti 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.

Ravingpente why not just be honest and say “I refuse to obey scripture when it comes to obeying my husband”…instead of coming up with false indignation?

# FaceLift:

cpig, what does the ‘c’ stand for? Chauvinist?

‘As Christ loves the Church and gave himself for her’ That is the criteria for submission. It is qualified. First we all have to be submitted to God and his will, and then submitted to one another in the fear of the Lord. You know, men submitted to women included.

# wazza2 :

Very liberal interpretation of the scriptures Facelift, which takes into account current social thinking and attitudes. I’m impressed!!

# ravingpente:

An understanding of submission is important so that submission in any context is not abused. Submission whether in church or in a marriage is not supposed to be interpreted as a situation where the powerful dominate the weak.

Jesus did not dominate us. Neither should we dominate others.

It is highly desirable that we obey Christ, but it is still voluntary. We all have trouble with it – or I would be suspicious of anyone who denies that they do at times.

My comment re the rule of men over their wives – very briefly, it began in Genesis 3, as part of the fall.

First, particular enmity was created between women and satan in Gen 3:15:

” 15And I will put (O)enmity Between you and the woman,And between your seed and her seed; (P)He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel.”

Then women were given pain in childbirth and placed under the dominating rule of their husbands:

” 16To the woman He said, “I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will (Q)bring forth children; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And (R)he will rule over you”

This domination was not God’s original intention for the relationship between a husband and wife. While Eve was a helper, companion and complement to Adam, she was not created as his slave, to have no input or just to do as she was told.

Now that Christ has come, we who are born again have the opportunity to be renewed as God originally intended us to be. While we live with our physical limitations, in our characters we are to grow more and more into the likeness of Christ. Christ was more perfect than Adam (since He had no sin). Even Adam did not originally ‘rule’ over his wife. So Christian husbands can become likewise as redeemed by Jesus.

Gen 2:24 says: ” 24Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and shall become united and cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.(E)”

That is why unity is so important. It is God’s original intention for a man and a woman. It is not merely about sexual unity. Domination by either partner is sinful, and in contradiction to the verse that Facelift quoted.

There is no justification for a woman to do as she pleases with no reference to her husband. That does not result in unity either.

Interestingly, the relationship between Christ and His Bride, the church, parallels marriage. We are to abide in Him. That is – unity with Him.

So if our marriage is a reflection of that, we are to be in unity with one another there also, and with Christ. “A cord of 3 strands is not easily broken.”

Hence of course I will submit to my husband but that will not be a result of him dominating me. We seek unity. We will pray on matters until we find unity.

My personal experience is that initially in my marriage, at times when we disagreed on major things, I did simply submit. When things then went wrong, I felt that I had not exercised my responsibility as his partner/helper. We had not really achieved unity.

Now we have agreed to proceed with nothing unless we have reached that point of unity. We can be united and wrong – but then at least we are there together, without blaming one another. We have found we are more blessed when we do act in unity, and in the process of achieving that we have both learnt much from the other. There is a mutual submission when things go well, because to listen and learn from the other requires humility which is a part of submission.

So this is something I have studied repeatedly over the years. I don’t expect others to agree with me, however, I would say that I have not reached this position overnight, and not without carefully studying scripture.

As I pointed out above, J Lee Grady has written an excellent book on the subject, ‘10 Lies the Church Teaches About Women’ (some churches are very extreme), and I won’t rewrite the book here! But I’d recommend anyone who is serious about the subject pick it up, because it explores the scriptures fairly thoroughly while remaining readable.

God bless!

cpig :

The man is head of his wife, the leader of his wife. This is for his wifes benefit and done out of love, very similar to the relation between a mother and her young child. It has absolutley nothing to do with domination. The verses do not imply domination nor have I even hinted as such.

ravingpente:

Where does it say in scripture that the relationship between a husband and wife is similar to the relation between a mother and young child?

I would have thought they were quite different relationships. Particularly since while in Eph 5:22 Paul said “Wives be subject to your own husbands” (a voluntary submission in the context of mutual submission where the husband has ‘given himself up’ for his wife as per Eph 5:25) – he later in Eph 6:1 said ‘Children obey your parents’ – a different concept.

But that could just be my feminine lack of ability to comprehend. (Rather like a young child) 🙂


32 thoughts on “Are Wives to Husbands as Children to Parents?

  1. Ravingpente you are taking the “wives are to husbands as children are to parents” comparison too far and beyond what I intended (I guess I suspected you would hence this clarifying post).

    The point is that the (ideal) parent-child relation is an example of that type of relation where one party has authority over the other but for the benefit (security, protection, care, provision for etc) the party being lead and not the leader. That is, it is an example of a relationship where the one being lead is not (in an ideal world) being exploited or dominated.

    I wanted to point out that such a relatin can exist, by refering to a relationship which you likely concured involved authority of one over the other but did not involve exploitation or dominance.

    That is the example was given so that you might recognize that one family member can have authority over another without it being the case that they are dominating or oppressing or otherwise harming the one being lead. That was the only point being made.

    Obviously there are many other facets in which the parent-child relation is not a good example of the husband-wife relation.

    Of course women can be as smart or smarter than their husbands. That does not change the scriptural requirement for the woman to honour her husband as the family head.

    If one is a woman then your husband is you leader (after Christ). If one must have a leader (and is free to choose that leader) then it is probably a good idea for a woman to choose a mate who is smarter than herself (and who she can respect and submit too). If she makes a bad choice though she still has to submit (that her tough luck).

    Note that single women don’t have to submit to any husband. Those that do get married actualy choose who gets to be their head (a point that certainly doesn’t leave them powerless either before or after marriage).

    Incidentally most women do make a point of marrying a man smarter than themselves (at least smart women i.e. those of the Myers Briggs intuitive Thinker personality type do make a point of only marrying a man of at least equal and preferably greater intelligence).

    From my limited reading of Raving Pentee’s posts, I get the impression she is quite smart (I’ll be honest and admit I was a bit taken back when I discovered she was female as I invariably agreed with most of what she wrote – hence she must be smart – but that’s just the chauvinist in me – and no I don’t think chauvinism is good).

    As smart as she may be though Raving Pentee still is required (by scripture) to submit to her husband (in her own way – she has to work out what that means in the context of her own relationship but somehow she has to acknowledge her husband as head).

    Also precisely because she is smart Raving Pentee is most likely of the NT personality type (which would also explain her difficulty submitting to authority as NTs are the most autonomy seeking type). This means that ironically as per standard NT female practice (which they impose on themselves no one forces them to do it) she has almost certainly (if only unconsciously) chosen a husband smarter than herself (despite her feminism).

    Pysychobable (and my personal chauvanism aside) the fact remains that according to scripture RavingPentee is under the authority of her husband who (whether she acknowledges it or not ) in the sight of God is her head in the chain of command (after Jesus Christ).

  2. “Raving Pentee is most likely of the NT personality type”

    Are you a follower of Carl Jung? 🙂

    “RavingPentee is under the authority of her husband who (whether she acknowledges it or not ) in the sight of God is her head in the chain of command”

    So what is this chain of command cpig? Is it Jesus -> Husband -> Wife -> Kids or is there more to it?

  3. “she has almost certainly (if only unconsciously) chosen a husband smarter than herself”

    You are obviously a man of great intellect 🙂

  4. One other thing, going back to the previous thread

    “Personally, I think that women have been ruled by their husbands as a result of the Fall, and it’s one of the things we are redeemed from through Christ. But some people don’t want this part of redemption!”- ravingpente

    There is a sense in which this is right. Namely to the degree that a husband is “ruling” a wife in a self centred, domineering, unloving manner, then hopefully Christian couples are set free not to do this.

    However one thing that Christians on this earth haven’t been released from (despite their being redeemed from the result of the fall) is the need to submit to various authorities.

    For example should you be unfortunate to find yourself a Christian and a slave you still have to submit to your earthly masters. By implication I would suggest that employees should also submit (in context) to their employers.

    1Pe 2:18 – “Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh”.

    Likewise if you are a Christian child and you have parents then you need to submit to them (Christ’s death on the cross doesn’t release children from that obligation).

    Eph 6:1 – “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right”.

    Younger Christian men have to submit to older Christian men

    1Pe 5:5 “ Young men, in the same way be submissive to those who are older. All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because, ‘God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble’.”

    Christians (despite Jesus redeeming us from sin and its consequences) still have to submit to the governing authorities which for us in Australia, includes the police, the courts, the state government, the commonwealth government etc.

    Even Christians living in governments which persecute Christians (Communist China, Soviet Union back in the day, Nero in ancient Rome etc) still have to submit to those governments lead by evil men.

    Rom 13:1 – “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God”.

    Rom 13:4 – “For he is God’s servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God’s servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer”.

    Church members have to submit to church leaders (contrary to popular WoF preacher opinion I can only find one verse – albeit I can’t find it right now – which is unquestionably talking about submitting to Christian church leaders but it is there. I believe the often quoted Rom 13:1-4 verse above i sclearly talking about one who bears the sword i.e. the secular government authorities not the Christian church).
    The point of all this is that us Christians clearly do still have a lot of submitting to do despite being redeemed from the curse of the fall.

    …Oh but when it comes to a Christian woman submitting to the man she loves…all hell breaks loose, oh no the bible verses couldn’t possibly mean what they say when it comes to a wife submitting to her husband who loves her, that’s a bit beyond the pale.

    Eph 5:22 – “Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord”.

    Col 3:18 – “Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord”.

  5. David your last sentence would tend to indicate that you’re not terribly well qualified to discuss the finer points of this matter

  6. “You are obviously a man of great intellect” – Heretic

    and your point is?

    Actually I can’t help but feeling that that is supposed to be a putdown (and not a compliment) in which case I guess it’s supposed to be sarcastic. An appropriate Christian response on your part of course (yes that sarcastic too).

    The wanker in me is tempted to reply –

    Well I do have a doctorate in theoretical micro-photonics and have recently published in nature as lead author. Your claim to great intellect status is?

    I’ve solved a fundamental physics problem that has had the world’s greatest minds (in physical optics) baffled for the last ten years. I’ve lectured in advanced math’s and physics at university. I could rattle of a whole list of achievements…….I did this IQ test, and that and scored this and that……..but I’d just look like a wanker, so I won’t.

    Damn I just did. This site isn’t bringing out the best in me (maybe it’s the company).

    Does that mean shit though? No it doesn’t. Just saying that if your reply was supposed to be sarcastic – it wasn’t in my perception.

  7. cpig Says:
    May 18, 2008 at 1:29 pm

    “You are obviously a man of great intellect” – Heretic

    and your point is?

    Actually I can’t help but feeling that that is supposed to be a putdown (and not a compliment) in which case I guess it’s supposed to be sarcastic. An appropriate Christian response on your part of course (yes that sarcastic too).

    Actually I know Heretic. I laughed when he said that. He wasn’t being sarcastic or putting you down. In fact he was actually complimenting you and (and #!M$3|F).
    He was in no way putting you down.

    Love ya heretic!

  8. “Are you a follower of Carl Jung”?

    I am a follower of Jesus Christ.

    Carl Jung was a gnostic and hence not the sort of guy to follow.

    Carl Jung did discover some truths about human psychology though.

    As a physicist I am not going to reject a physical theory that I otherwise believe to be true (as true as anything is in science) simply because the author is not a Christian but rather an atheist, Muslim, Buddhist or even a Gnostic.

    By the way the personality profiling scheme I was referring to is actually by Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers. Carl Jung thought people where either extraverted thinkers, introverted thinkers, extraverted feelers, introverted sensors etc. Myers Briggs were the ones who came up with the idea that people could actually be a mixture of all these personality functions with each function having a different level of development and preference .. hence giving rise to the 16 personality types of the Myers/Briggs scheme (the most widely used personality profiling scheme used today) which they describe in amazing accuracy (in my experience).

    Jung is really only distantly related to the Myers Briggs personality scheme.
    I can see I won’t get past your “it had something to do with Jung so it must be evil” knee jerk reaction though.

    By the way I am the one quoting scripture and claiming that what it appears to say on face value is what it actually does mean. Does that make me evil? What you are offended by is that I am going against the religion of the day “political correctness” that’s what’s really got your goat.

    Anyway why am I hanging around here? Not sure I can really help any of you…..I’ve said my bit…bye.

  9. “Actually I know Heretic. I laughed when he said that. He wasn’t being sarcastic or putting you down. In fact he was actually complimenting you”-specksandplanks

    Oh OK then, so he was being humorous? Sorry i am supposedly aspergic and not good on picking up things like that. I’m a complete moron on some activites – clerical work, socialising etc Guess you only have so many brains cells and mine are all doing physics (or writing posts to oppress women and keep the patriachy in power).

  10. “Anyway why am I hanging around here? Not sure I can really help any of you…..I’ve said my bit…bye.”

    C’mon. You know you can’t help us. We’re all deluded, twisted and sick, wanting to take over the world, make everyone Christian and make everyone submit to our ways of thinking! MWAHAHA!

    You can’t leave. You actually really love Signposts, now. DON’T YOU?!?
    You will come back. I know. You will come back. This is how we work… Ha!

  11. “So what is this chain of command cpig? Is it Jesus -> Husband -> Wife -> Kids or is there more to it”? – heretic

    Of course we are not talking about a military organisation but family members who love each other (rather than bark orders at each other) but to the degree that there is a chain of command yes that would be it I believe.

    By the way I think my (as far as I know non-Christian) PhD supervisor, when I was a PhD student, is one of the best examples of modelling how the Christian type authority structure should work.

    In general he is a very humble man (though held the post of Physics dept head while I was there) I never felt like I was inferior to him, on many occasions he deferred to me and would acknowledge my greater knowledge in a particular area (my PhD topic), I felt greatly respected by him, and a person listening in on our conversations could be forgiven for thinking at times that I was the research leader and he was the follower.

    Yet there were times when we just could not agree or I just could not sway him around to my point of view and at the end of the day he had final say in what I did and I had to do things his way. Point is if we couldn’t reach agreement we did things his way not mine, even when he was dead wrong. I had to waste time and humour him sometimes till he saw that I was right.

    I am not married but I think the marriage authority relationship should be similar to that.

  12. “C’mon. You know you can’t help us. We’re all deluded, twisted and sick, wanting to take over the world, make everyone Christian and make everyone submit to our ways of thinking! MWAHAHA!” – specksandplanks

    Sorry I was just having a hissy fit.

    I’ve got to get some work down though so i may not be back a while but yes I will be drawn back again I’m sure.

  13. Cpig – I’m glad you are joining in. You are clearly a Christian man explaining your understanding of scripture, and I think where we differ is the nuances rather than the absolutes. Sometimes the nuances are rather important though – I think you’d probably agree there too.

    In case you missed it (it was a longish post), I did say the following:
    “Hence of course I will submit to my husband but that will not be a result of him dominating me. ”

    I also explained how I believe the Bible teaches the importance of unity. True unity cannot be achieved in a relationship that is based on command and control.

    I think where we perhaps see things differently may be in our understanding of the nature of headship and exercise of authority and submission. (It may also be that we actually agree, but our use of language has not made this apparent.)

    Jesus turned the world’s view of leadership upside down. He said that to lead is to serve, and that the greatest among you will be the slave of all. The authority a husband has to be head is in the sense that Jesus is head. He did not give men authority to lead in the sense that they ‘rule’ their wives like a king. Rather, he gave them an example to follow where they lay down their lives for her. This is the opposite of how kings traditionally behaved. She is then able to submit to this wonderful man who has led by his example and whose words demonstrate that understanding. After all, she could take advantage of it and dominate him – much as Christ was killed by men. Clearly that is not what Christian women should do!

    Leaders in a church have authority in the same sense. They have no license to ‘command’, rather they have a license to serve, to teach and to persuade. In fact they are to equip us for works of service, not necessarily order us around and tell us what those acts of service should be. We who submit are to ‘allow ourselves to be persuaded’ or to ‘voluntarily yield’. It is not a response to force or coercion.

    If we ‘allow ourselves to be persuaded’, unity can be achieved, in both a marriage and the body of Christ. However, we are not called to allow ourselves to be persuaded into falsehood whether in church or in marriage. We are called to exercise discernment. We are called to think and to question. Jesus did not get angry with Thomas for questioning. Paul was pretty upset when early Christians allowed themselves to be influenced by false teachers. (Perhaps they thought they were submitting!) He did not then order people to obey him. Rather, he asked them to look at his behaviour and character, as opposed to that of the false teachers, and appealed to them – he tried to persuade them that his instruction was worth following.

    My husband does not order me to obey him. I am redeemed from that type of rulership. My husband is a godly man who knows that is not how scripture teaches him to behave. In fact, following that road of worldy rulership (where the strong rule the weak) is following the easy, wide road – that ultimately leads to broken, miserable relationships.

    The narrow road includes taking the time to persuade – since this way we achieve unity and are both stronger and happier as a couple. I listen to him and am persuaded by him – but he also listens to me and is persuaded by me. After all, I am his complement and helper, and I cannot act in that role if I am ignored, or refuse to contribute, or misguidedly ‘submit’ and keep my misgivings about something to myself.

    When all is said and done, the Christian marriage, when both people are transformed by Christ, should be a wonderful place. Transformation is not easy, and can mean dying to yourself. But the end result ideally would be a couple united – not only ‘one flesh’ but pretty much of one mind, and also being in one spirit with the Lord.

  14. Re submission to an employer, the government or a uni supervisor – I would suggest that while there is an arrangement there where you submit for the sake of order and function, there is no suggestion that you are to achieve unity or oneness with these entities in the way a husband and wife do in marriage.

    That is a critical difference in the environment, and quite a different relationship.

    To run a marriage that way would be disastrous!

  15. I don’t think that running a marriage the way God intended is ever going to be disastrous. Quite the reverse.

    If your position contradicts the scripture guess whose wrong.

    I would personaly put the very high rate of divorce as well as children born out of wedlock in our society down to the denigration of the position of father as head of the house.

    Marriages used to last a lot longer back in the day when women acknowledge their husband as the head of the house and didn’t resent them for supposedly opprseing them.

    Feminism has a lot to answer for.

    Speaking of which .. a futher sign of the times

    http://www.smh.com.au/news/parenting/father-off-birth-certificates/2008/05/17/1210765258007.html

  16. By the way with the employer bit you are again taking the analogy past the point it was trying to make. I can’t be bothered explaining though sorry.

  17. Seriously though, you feminists have got what you want in terms of turning the west into a matriarchal society, like never before.

    And as a result divorce is rampant like never before, children are being born to single mothers like never before, the youth (despite attempts to turn them into girls at kindergarten and school) are violent like never before (including the females) .

    We live in one of the most socially dysfunctional societies in history (albeit the most technologically advanced) thanks to the rebellion of women against God’s ordained order for the family.

    I don’t blame you though ravingpente I believe you are just a product of your culture.

  18. One other thing ravingpente, for your own edification (not that anything compares to the bible) I have heard positive reviews of this book

    http://www.surrenderedwife.com/

    You might want to check it out so you can have a more balanced view on marriage (not trying to be critical of you either, just trying to free you from the shackles of feminism to which I perceive you to be bound).

  19. Once again, I did not deny submission or the headship of the husband. I have just put them in their scriptural context. It appears from your reaction that my interpretation of it angers you, despite my references to the concepts in Ephesians 5.

    You have not addressed the issue of unity, present in both Genesis pre-fall, and Ephesians 5. Perhaps this is because you disagree that it is what God wants between men and women united in marriage, or else that you disagree on how it is achieved. Maybe you feel that unity is achieved by doing as one is told, without working through differences in opinion or hearing one another. But I can only speculate.

    Peace to you, cpig.

  20. I’m not angry at you personally but feminism as a movement because of the destruction it causes.

    I am glad that you do not deny the headship of the husband.

    I’ll agree that barking orders is not the way to go, and there is mutual submission etc.

    I still suspect you probably still underestimate what submission means, it does mean real authority it is not just a figure head position I think

    Here is an interesting link

    http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-au&brand=ninemsn&tab=m163&mediaid=103147&from=39&vid=44e8f2bd-5da6-484c-9a48-69f0224ca077&playlist=videoByTag:mk:en-AU:vs:0:tag:aunews_au60minutes:ns:MSNVideo_Top_Cat:ps:10:sd:-1:ind:1:ff:8A

    but hey I’ll let you get on with your own life now

  21. Here are some excerpts from “The Surrendered Wife”, quoted from http://spiritledwoman.com/display_cms.php?id=1499

    “**Doyle tells women not to worry if their husbands are looking at pornography. (“It’s none of your business,” she says.)

    **She advises wives not to offer opinions of any sort, since this is just nagging. (“By telling him what you think,” Doyle writes, “you risk contradicting him.”)

    **If your husband risks breaking his neck by standing on a shaky ladder, you shouldn’t criticize him, Doyle says. She advises wives to just ignore their husbands’ mistakes.

    **The more a wife relinquishes control to her husband, “the more powerful and masculine he will feel,” Doyle says.

  22. Had a look at that link… Have you been pulling my leg all this time, cpig? Some of that link is just LOL material! No way is the extent of what is shown there a scriptural ideal of submission – unless both members of the couple truly want a dominator/submissive or master/slave relationship. 🙂

    BTW, Laura Doyle is not Christian, but seems to believe in a ‘higher power’. She’s a self help author. I agree with her that you can’t change anyone but yourself. So there’s no point in trying to change your husband – or anyone else. A complementarian vs egalitarian debate is probably a more scriptural one.

  23. raving pente take a look at this site http://eaandfaith.blogspot.com/ it shows how so many women (in particular) struggle with submission as recommended by the church. And for those of you who think women should submit end of story where do you draw the line? And can you not see the hurt that is caused? Yes it is a fallen world but Jesus had no time for those who argues dogma he went to the hurting like the woman at the well and met her where she was at. Can I ask with all sincereity don’t force dogma to cover all things for all people. Surely the Bible is evience that God does not treat everyone the same. He met Jacob when Jacob was ready, he spoke to David when David was ready to hear, he showed his love to Hosea’s wife through Hosea.

  24. Heretic said to cpig: “You are obviously a man of great intellect”

    Well … you called me intelligent … and you were right.

  25. No I haven’t been pulling your leg all this time (but maybe a little bit with that last link).

    The guy writing the list on the 60 minutes thing is abit beyond the pale (but I can see it working for some people though, i.e. two SJs maried to each other, would never go down in an NT-NT marriage though).

    OK scratch that last link. I stand by rest of what I said though.

    The bible is our guide not Doyle. That being said I do think she is on to something.
    In an effort to not throw the baby out with the bath water, I’ll try to make some sense
    of these points – as I can see what she is getting at and I think she is onto something.

    **Doyle tells women not to worry if their husbands are looking at pornography. (”It’s none of your business,” she says.)

    I wouldn’t say it was none of your business. But I think the husband answers to God (and if he realy is the head) not his wife. In that sense its the husbands call. If he sins its his business and between him and God. I think the wife should inform her husband how lusting after pictures of someone other than her makes her feel though (that sort of communication is legit I think).

    **She advises wives not to offer opinions of any sort, since this is just nagging. (”By telling him what you think,” Doyle writes, “you risk contradicting him.” 😉

    I’ll resist the chauvianist in me and say, yeah thats going too far. I don’t want a mindless zombie for a wife either.

    **If your husband risks breaking his neck by standing on a shaky ladder, you shouldn’t criticize him, Doyle says. She advises wives to just ignore their husbands’ mistakes.

    Have to agree there. Broken bones heal, in the long run I think its better not to nag – you can make an excpetion if he really is risking his life.

    **The more a wife relinquishes control to her husband, “the more powerful and masculine he will feel,” Doyle says.

    Oh very true I think. Have to agree there.

  26. Really I do think Doyle is onto something, namely making marriage relationships prosper by obeying biblical principles (even if she is a non Christian). We can think for ourselves though and where she goes of the rails because she is not a Christian, we don’t have to do that, but I did think it was interesting food for thought.

    And let me reiterate that I do stand by all that I have said (albeit if I could of been bothered I could have said it more diplomatically).

    Yes there is mutual submission between husband and wife (due to mutual love) but I think Doyles take is probably closer to the truth of what God intends than you likely think and for that matter me. (I’ll admit the attorney guy in that 60 minutes video does make me cringe, but that probably my own cultural upbringing and personality type).

  27. Smiley thing to you too heretic (sorry don’t know how to do that – as embarrassing as that is to admit being a man of great intellect and all).

  28. If you’d seen me today after my visit to the dentist, you might have thought I was a mindless zombie of the bloodsucking variety. Not pretty! (Sorry to everyone out there who just ate dinner.)

    I agree about not nagging. No one wants anyone to nag them. Plus, nagging is more likely to get someone to dig their heels in rather than imbue a desire to change in some way. To me, not nagging is not a submission issue – its just common sense!

    Re the shaky ladder example… I must admit that I wasn’t too keen on my husband endangering himself by cycling to work in Sydney traffic. I did in fact let him know my opinion – that you only get one chance and cars are bigger than cyclists. However, when he insisted he would nonetheless prefer to cycle, having let him know my concern, I said no more about it. (Except of course for this post which he will now read – ha ha!) I have even taken an admiring interest in his new cycling gear, which does in fact look rather good in my opinion.

    Well, if thats a submissive approach, I don’t have a problem with it. 😉 But I don’t find it possible to say nothing when I think someone is risking their life and limb.

    As for ‘relinquishing control’ – that kind of assumes that there was control to relinquish in the first place. I don’t ‘control’ my husband! Why would I want control him? He also doesn’t try to ‘control’ me. There’s really no need. We are a team. We have common goals and are united in most of our thinking, or working towards it. So if submission is a matter of relinquishing control, its kind of hard to relinquish something which you didn’t think was necessary in the first place.

  29. Well thats good to here. I guess we can all live happily ever after now.

    PS: I can believe you on that last bit as you probably are an NT and NTs tend not to nag, rather they tend to give the autonomy to others as they expect people to give to them. (At least thats true of ENTPs and INTPs, maybe les so of the Field Marshall ENTJ type). It would be a good point to be making to many SJ wives out there though.

  30. isn’t it crazy how everyone has an opinion on this subject. i just posted about this on my blog and i had over 70 people visit my blog in 3 hours. CRAZY!!!!

    submission means to surrender or give something over to someone. if you are in a godly marriage then you will openly surrender to your husband and it will be a none issue. you will submit with love and he will tenderly lead you. i think it is beautiful and i think it is sad that people are so scared of the word.

    now if you are in a ungodly marriage i could see how this word could scare you. God does not want our sisters to be treated like door mats or to be wimpy wives. but if you are not a believer in Christ or the Bible then all of these words from God don’t pertane to you.

Comments are closed.