Wives' submission to husbands

[Guest]

Steve
It seems to me you are unwilling to look at the fruit of these hierarchical relationships in the Church and your own marriage. You avoided that point with arguments about how your view of Greek words is better than those who hold differing views. I sure others have tried to help you with these issues but failed, so not surprised that I am unable , sorry I could not measure up to your expectations of scholarship. Blame Great Commission School class of 1984 (only kidding)
May I recommend reading “families where grace is in place” by Jeff VanVonderen. A better understanding of grace in relationships will help us. We don’t need any more “oughtful” information but Graceful interaction. Jeff Vanvonderens book “Spiritual Abuse” is also a great read.
I have lived in a hierarchical relationship in Church and Marriage and they only created hurt and discouragement. Legalism in relationships is such a destructive force; Christ Life is liberating not binding. Today I enjoy with my gracious and forgiving wife of 19 years a healthy mutual exchange of Christ love. And a grace based church life. Years of living in a legalist Church which imposed its good intentioned but false doctrines on the congregation , left us with much unlearning to embrace. I know not all hierarchical systems are legalistic but you must agree there is much abuse in marriage and church and these extremist views are used.
Steve you keep referring to the bible as though it is the source of life and it is not. What kind of salvation can be effected by trusting in the Bible? It is true that "the traditions of men cannot save," but neither can the tradition of "trusting in the Bible." Scripturally speaking, we are only encouraged to trust in Jesus Christ for salvation for He is our Savior, not the Bible. The personal indwelling life of Jesus Christ alone is effective for salvation. We receive Him (Jesus) by faith, not by "trusting in the Bible."
Paul indicates that "Christ Jesus...is our hope" (I Timothy 1:1). Luke records Peter's telling the Jewish leaders that "there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12), other than "the name of Jesus Christ" (Acts 4:10) Christian obedience is obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ (I Peter 1:2), not obedience to a book. Nowhere in scripture is a Christian encouraged to obey some"thing" such as a book. What kind of a "blessing" does one get from a book? Paul indicates that "God...has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ" (Ephesians 1:3).
The early Christians were not propogating a belief-system. They were not dispensers of theological information about God. They were not Book-bearers. They were bearers of the Living Word, the Life, the Person, the Power of Jesus, "who is the Spirit" (II Corinthians 3:18).
This is true of marriage as well. To impose obedience on wives because the bibles says man is the “head” (which is source not authority) and not from a responsive expression of Christ our life will only have a negative effect on the relation. But Christ is our Life and where life is expressed liberation is experienced. Jesus did not say, "I am the object of Bible information, and you shall know it most thoroughly and accurately." Rather, He said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life" (John 14:6); "I came that you might have Life and have it most abundantly" (John 10:10).
The Life of Jesus Christ who is the Living expression of God, the Living Word, is to be expressed in gospel proclamation that shares the "word of truth," the "word of life," the "word of salvation." II Timothy 3:16 indicates that "all scripture/writings are profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be adequately equipped for every good work" (which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them - Ephesians 2:10). It is true that the Bible is to be taught, and that God has gifted some as teachers; you are one of these gifted teachers Steve (Ephesians 4:11; I Corinthians 12:28; But the process of Biblical instruction (teaching), and the product of the instruction (Bible-knowledge) must not become ends in themselves. It appears to me that there has been the upholding of a poisonous and counter-productive "teaching model" that perpetuates book-religion, Bible knowledge, and getting "fed" through Scripture instruction. This creates dysfunctional Christianity, mere Christian-religion, which does not issue forth in the outworking expression of Christ's life.
Steve I do agree with you they is extremist egalitarian as there are in hierarchical structures eg The egalitarian premises of socialistic communism and radical democratization are equally unworkable. Identity, value and worth are not found in gender-function, but in a personal Being beyond ourselves. Because of sin, there will always be the abuses of male-chauvinism and clamoring feminism
Ontological equality and Operational order are not mutually exclusive or logically incoherent. New creation grace provides the dynamic of Christ in us.
Every Blessing
John

[Guest]

I have not been a christian a real long time but I must say
Aussie I am a put off by your last note............I dont feel bible is legalism but truth that sets free I was raised in a very immoral house as a child
and did not see a bible until I was 25. I paid a price to walk with CHRIST
leaving family angry at me, many laid lives down all thru history for CHRIST and HIS words.....Im offended at you and your words to Steve
and the rest reading.

[_Steve]

Hi John,
I am sorry that you have narrowed your life so severely as to exclude obedience to the written Word of God in the years since we saw each other last. Everything you have said about a dynamic life in Christ has been my experience since 1970. I came to know this life in a major revival in California (which eventually caught up with you in Australia), which happened to be a Bible-teaching revival. Hundreds of thousands of hippie youth were delivered from bondages to drugs and sin by a dynamic encounter with Christ, mediated through the teaching of the Word of God taught on a daily basis at Calvary Chapel, Costa Mesa. It never occurred to any of us that placing ourselves under the Lordship of Christ (obeying His Word) placed us in a legalistic bondage. In fact, it didn't! It set us free, just as Jesus said it would (John 8:31-32).

In the nearly 34 years since that time, I have seldom drifted toward legalism (in the mid-seventies there was something of that tendency when the shepherding movement came along), because I have always detested it. Legalism always has the following factors:
1. A performance-oriented relationship with God;
2. Servile fear of failure to measure-up, and fear of being rejected by God and others;
3. Imposition on self and others of made-made rules and standards;
4. A condemning criticism of those who do not agree or comply with the standards.

Whatever else may be invoved in legalism, these things are never absent. These have never been a part of my life or ministry. You have mistaken devotion to Christ, and eagerness to do what He wishes out of love for Him, for legalism. Love for truth is not legalism...it is what sets us free (John 8:31-32/ 2 Tim.2:25-26/ Prov.23:23).

I am not sure how any of the many scriptures you just shared impact the question of legalism, or of deficiencies in my life or in the position I presented about the role of the wife in marriage. One thing that I do find interesting is that you bothered to quote scriptures at all to make your point. Isn't it legalistic of you to expect me to submit to the testimony of the scriptures you presented? How is this different from my presenting scriptures to make my point? The only difference that I can see in your presentation of scripture and my own is that you make no attempt to show that your passages are relevant to your point (and it is far from obvious that they are), whereas I am at pains to demonstrate that my presentation agrees with actual meaning of the text, based on consideration of original language and context. Is it this latter discipline that renders me the legalist and you something else?

I am sorry that you did not attempt to interact with any of my points, and simply repeated the old canard, "Head means source," (an error of which I gave you sufficient information to disabuse yourself--but from which you don't seem to want to be liberated).

As a brother interested in the integrity of your ministry, I must inform you that the love of truth is not evident in your discussion of this topic. Ironically, neither is love for Christ nor for the brethren evident (I may be wrong, but I get no sense of either from your posts). Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandments," and "Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and you do not do what I say?" I can't help thinking that you might accuse Jesus of being a legalist for making these statements.

I am not offended, but a bit surprised (given the fact that you are married to a psychiatrist) that you would use my wife's mental instability (with which she was afflicted before she was a Christian) as an argument against my position. For the record, my dear wife was not made miserable by her submission to the biblical teachings on this subject. The period of her embracing them were the happiest years of her life, as her parents (who don't embrace these truths) often noted. My wife embraced her biblical role as wife and mother with all her heart for almost two decades, and took delight in it. In the end, she made some friends who taught what you teach. Out of enjoyment of their company, she gradually began to entertain their philosophy and eventually became convinced that feminism may be the more enlightened view. As a result, she left her loving husband, her four beautiful children, the church and the faith. Today her life has nothing left of Christianity in it. She is restless and essentially homeless, and seems devoid of any sense of identity. Those closest to her question her sanity.

My dear wife was most happy when she embraced God's truths with all her heart. When she embraced your ideas, coincidentally, she fell away from God and family, as so many others have done. Yes, I am interested in examining the fruit of a teaching, as well as Greek words. I guess she would be a statistic on the other side of the studies you alluded to. I still love my wife, my children and God. My beliefs have borne good fruit in my life, and did so in the life of my wife, when she embraced them.

Lest you think that my experience of marital failure has made me more adamant about these doctrines, you should know better. You went through our school in 1984. I have taught these truths with conviction for as long as I have taught the Bible, and have seen the fruit that one would expect to see from the embracing of the truth--there are hundreds of couples known to me who would say that the teachings they received along these lines at the school transformed their families for the better. Just a few days ago, one of them, a medical doctor with ten children, reminded me of this very thing. He and his wife, and many that he knows, testify that being taught these truths at the Great Commission School over twenty years ago turned their family lives around and made them take the course that they have never since regretted.

You and I must both face God someday for what we teach. You apparently choose not to teach the Word of God (for fear of becoming a legalist). I choose to teach the Word of God, not because it is popular or will make me popular, but because it is true. We may not agree here, but someday we shall both be confronted by the one who assigned us our duties, and we will both know then.

[Guest]

I will not answer anymore to this,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I hope Steve you are not offended for me in this!


Aussie,
I PRAY daily that my precious children NEVER attend a church thats liberal
because I raised them a bit strict.

I was raised in "new age" garbage and when CHRIST came into my life
I loved the boundaries and knowing what he loved and hated.
Legalism? NO freedom.

Steve, thank you for being steadfast at times when it would of been easier
to comprimise...................

I wont say anymore because I am a bit angry.

[_Steve]

No offense taken...from any party! God bless you.

[Guest]

I can almost see the stones. I can almost feel the tar and feathers...
I know that I am at great risk of being misunderstood and misconstrued. Some will likely misrepresent what I am saying in trumped up charges of treason and by black-listing me for blatant blasphemy. but I trust that you will understand what I am saying.
With declaring that "Christianity is not a Book-religion." Many have said that "Christianity is not a religion" that binds us to something. I am simply amplifying that statement by declaring that "Christianity is not a Book-religion." Nor is Christianity the "religion of the Bible" as many have declared.
What is the Bible? The Bible is a book. The word "Bible" is derived from the Greek word biblion which means "book," or more accurately "papyrus scroll" as this was the material used for writing in ancient times. The Bible is a book which is in one sense like every other book in the world, but in another sense is unlike any other book in the world. It is like other books in that it is black printing (sometimes red and other colors) on white paper, and it is a tangible, perishable object. It is unlike other books in that it represents and enscripturates the revelation of God, and is the only book in the world where you have to know the Author to understand the book.
Do you see the distinction I am trying to make? I am attempting to exalt Jesus Christ over the Bible. Frankly, that is a dangerous thing to do these days in contemporary Christian circles, for you begin to smash people's idols.
Abraham Lincoln said, 'I believe the Bible is the best gift that God has ever given to man.'"
The best gift that God has given to man is His Son, Jesus Christ. "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son..." (John 3:16). "The gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 6:23).
A bestselling book by John MacArthur, Jr. contains what is perhaps the classic defence of reverence for the Bible. The following quotations are but a few of his assertions:
"God's Word (the Bible) is true and absolutely comprehensive."
Only God is absolutely comprehensive. The attributes of God are non-transferrable and we cannot attribute an attribute of God to a book.
"its (the Bible's) truthfulness produces a comprehensive righteousness in those who accept it."
The Bible does not produce righteousness. Righteousness is only produced in the behavior of mankind when the Righteous One, Jesus Christ (I John 2:1) dwells in man and the Righteous character of God is expressed in man's behavior as we walk by faith.
"There is no substitute for submission to Scripture."
James admonishes us to "submit to God" (James 4:7), but we are never admonished to submit to scripture
Robert Brinsmead of Australia writes,
"The written record became absolutized. The gospel became a new law. Faith was confounded with orthodoxy. The Church ceased to be a charismatic community and became an institution. Instead of the Spirit there were rules. Instead of the priesthood of all believers, there was wretched clericalism. Instead of the Spirit and presence of the living Christ there were religious canned goods. Instead of the living gospel there was dead ideology. Instead of freedom there was bondage. Yet, like the Pharisees, we have desperately tried to substitute an incredible devotion to the letter of Scripture for the prophetic spirit."
Hope you understand what I am attempting to say!
Steve I thank you for your contribution into my life. The Great Commission School was a pivotal point in my life. I returned back to Australia with a deeper understanding of the scriptures and a desire to study them. (Which I still do) I also return with one of my fellow students, in love and planning to marry on our return (although no special relationships were allowed in study term or at home in Australia without permission from pastor. We disobeyed the authority of the church) I will not a this point discuss the behaviors of that church but to say lots of cult worship and study the bible too.
I am saddened by the breakup of your marriage and we do pray for you all. My raising these issues is not to condemn (Grace teacher) but to explore what other evangelical Christ in dwelt bible teachers and Christian marriage counselors have to say. God’s will in not for agonizing marriages. I believe Christian marriage can be much more rewarding because of the mutual expression of Christ Love “which is shed abroad in our hearts”. But formula and structural based marriages have not liberated us or produced the fruit of the Spirit. We all need to stop and look at our life’s including our doctrines and behaviors, do they spring from The indwelling Holy Spirit or “how to” law driven based responses.
Every Blessing
John
ps friend we are not a "church thats liberal:" but evangelical pentecostal

[_Steve]

Hi John,

I am surprised that you think anyone here would wish to cast stones at you for your views. In the hundreds of posts at this forum that I have read, I have only seen two or three that seemed less than tolerant and charitable. This is a pretty open-minded bunch...at least open to discussion. Your views are as welcome here as are anyone else's, but, like everyone else's, they are subject to "peer review" and criticism. You mustn't assume that those who take your views to task have any interest in attacking you personally. The assumption is that we all desire the truth, and the one who corrects us (especially us teachers, who will receive the stricter judgment) is blessing us immensely.

What you have said about the credalization and the institutionalizing of the church is very much in agreement with my own sympathies (you can hear my series on this subject in the series "Some Assembly Required" at the "tape download" page of my website, www.thenarrowpath.com). However, you do not appear to have room in your thinking for the full spectrum of Christian living...only for the spontaneous, "Spirit-led," dynamic aspects.

My dynamic relationship is with Christ, not just with a book. However, the Bible is not "just a book." It is a book that contains the living and inspired words breathed from the mouth of the Living God (2 Tim.3:16). God's words carry as much authority, whether spoken audibly, recorded on CD, written, or photocopied--because the authority inheres in the Author. An instruction given by you to your son is as binding whether you tell it to him face to face or leave it in a note for him on the kitchen table. If it is from you, it possesses your authority.

There is no dichotomy between the authority of the Spirit and that of the letter. The distinction made between the letter and the Spirit by the Apostle was the contrast between the Old Covenant ("the letter") and the New Covenant ("the Spirit"). Paul did not suggest that the Old is inferior to the other for its having been reduced to writing. His argument is that the New is better because it is not MERELY written on external tablets, but ALSO is written by the Spirit on our hearts (see Paul's treatment of this subject in Rom.7:6ff and 2 Cor.3:3ff).

This means that the Spirit has wrought a change in our hearts, creating that which was lacking in the Old Covenant era, namely, a heartfelt desire to obey God, rather than a mere "have to" or "ought to" imposed on an unchanged, rebellious heart. We now "obey from the heart that form of teaching to which we were delivered" (Rom.6:17).

However, the obligation to obey God is a constant in both covenants, and obedience is still defined by what He has communicated through His holy Apostles and Prophets. This information is preserved in our Bible. The difference between the unchanged, "Old Covenant" heart and the regenerated, "New Covenant" heart is that the former did not want to obey God's instructions, and the latter delights in doing so.

I am concerned, from reading your discussions above, that, to you, the idea of a woman delighting in the revealed role that God has given her (contrary to her natural, fallen tendencies) is entirely inconceivable. To me, it is just as normal as for a man (contrary to his fallen nature) to delight in laying down his life for his wife, or submitting to a difficult boss, or loving the person who slanders and persecutes him. The New Covenant heart renders none of these things particularly difficult. Now, loving the person who drives nails into your hands and feet is a few notches beyond those examples, but still to be aspired to.

The normal Christian bears always in his/her body the dying of the Lord Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may be manifest in his/her body (2 Cor.4:10). To say that Christian marriages are unhappy or impermanent in our day because husbands or wives think it an unsavory thing to die to self is to speak a language that I have never understood since being filled with the Spirit, thirty-five years ago. It is another way of saying that Christian marriages break up because the people in them are required to be normal Christians.

If being Christ's slave is thought to be degrading, it must be viewed so by one who has not yet received the regenerated heart. That heart desires only to find more ways to please the Beloved, and glories in every sacrifice that he/she is able to make in fulfilling His will. He who would balk at being Christ's slave must be forgetting that he is not his own and has been bought with a price (1 Cor.6:19-20).

It is for lack of teaching this truth in an uncompromised manner, and reducing the message to that which is more palatable to unchanged hearts, that the modern church is filled with "converts" who have no inkling of what it even means to be a disciple of Jesus (Luke 14:25-33), and who prove this by divorcing their spouses or modifying the sacred paradigms of marriage to suit their fancies.

Your experience with the cultic "shepherding movement" at the Mulumbimby community in the eighties has apparently left a bad taste in your mouth for words like "authority" and "submission." In this understandable reaction, the devil got great advantage out of that misguided movement. The pendulum has swung. Legalism and antinomianism are the two heretical poles of this continuum, and neither is healthier than the other. For the sake of the integrity of your ministry in a land very lacking in balanced models of Christianity, I beseech you to rethink your position. I would be happy to come see you sometime, as I have been invited to return to your part of the world in recent months. Greet Jill and the brethren there who know me. God bless.

[Guest]

I have not ocmmented at all yet and I just read all this today I hope you will forgive my long post



Regarding Liberal/Conservative the various emphasis on other subjects or if your church is more run off of "victory" of Christ. I'm not sure. But I would like to say to the lady that commented about the liberal church. There is only sound doctrine. Either a church is commited to sound doctrine or its not. it is a biblical church or it is not. Its easy to say that a church may be liberal or be hyper-conservative [both in many cases being undoctrinal]. But aslong as a church confides to the doctrine and basic tenets of Christianity.

Sorry its just.. People do that so uncritically they say "this college is liberal" or "these people have overly conservative views" I think we need to stray away from that mindset and ask "does your philosophical worldview correspond to that of Truth and to CHRIST who is Truth"

I do agree with you that it seems the hermuneutical interpretation of marriage and functionality is not scriptural.

But.. before I say anything else to anyone.

I am newly 18, I am not married, and I am not dating/courting anyone at the moment. Do not exuse my ignorance but I hope that you can understand it does not take someone to completely experience. I base my views on marriage with what I've read in the bible.

Secondly its easy to get overly scholarly I hope I do not become the same and its easy for other people to do it even Steve who I'm sure is not perfect. To condescendly suggest things during a discussion, "you know i suggest you read this, it'll explain alot" I know MOST people do it out of general love of the other person on the forum [thus so far I have read they do] but in many cases people can get into a fit of naming as many books as they can. It can sometimes come across as very condescending and MOST of the time when somebody does it in a self-promoting fashion it is for the purpose of diverting the attention away from the actual discussion.

Third I know we can get caught in a flurry of ancedotes and scholars and I don't think these things in of themselves are wrong but Truth is unbending, unrelenting and forever real and CANNOT be changed with emotional support. Truth must be validated with evidence not real-life-circumstances. I could tell you a story of a girl who was rejected at the abortion clinique in some place and was raped and had to do this or that and this might change the way you would LIKE to view abortion but it does not change the truth that abortion is not scripturally based. Same goes for homosexual acts. The emotional appeal of an arguement will never change the truth of it. So... we must stop ourselves from giving as many situational useages of these things.

Now the same could be said for this argument right here. You may know of many marriages that exist on the principle of equal functionality. That not only are you equal under Gods eyes in terms of how you were made, and everything else but that your purpose and functionality in the relationship of marriage now exists to be the same. But if this does not coincide with what truth is, God is, reality is, or however you'd like to put it. Then it is not overally beneficial to the growth of Christ. Do you understand what i'm saying? The point is to discern truth. phil 1:9 tells us very clearly to use the WISDOM we gain to further discern RIGHT OR WRONG.


Now lets get to the nature of Love and Truth. To quote G. K. Chesterton "They have invented a new phrase that is a black-and-white contradiction in two words-- "Free love." As if a lover had been, or ever could be, free. It is the nature of love to bind itself, and the instituition of mariage merely paid the average man the compliment of taking him at his word"

The nature of love is not some "free flowing spirit" in this disposable hippy society. I know its real fun and peachy to say "God is love" and those vague ambiguous terms but in all truth Love is a very binding thing.

Gods will in not for agonizing marriages. I believe Christian marriage can be much more rewarding because of the mutual expression of Christ Love ?which is shed abroad in our hearts?. But formula and structural based marriages have not liberated us or produced the fruit of the Spirit. We all need to stop and look at our life?s including our doctrines and behaviors, do they spring from The indwelling Holy Spirit or ?how to? law driven based responses.

I agree God does not want us to suffer in marriage but if you had to weigh the overall importance of our own happiness in marriage or Gods glory [by keeping the covenant of a true marriage] we must chose Gods glory.

Also to quote Ravi Zacharias on the nature of love "The care and impartation of love can only be communictated to our children if we teach them that it is the nature of love to honor its commitments--to bind itself" I want to be completely honest with you. I do not like that quote at all, infact i do not LIKE the idea of love being a binding thing. It sounds so sticky so rotten so terrible, it sounds so shovanistic. How dare God tell me what to do I mean come on who does he think he is God?

Yes! thats the entire point. There are plenty of things in the bible I don't particularlly like for two reasons emotion and my natural desires. I naturally have the tendency to want to be held out of submission in every possible function and I also naturally desire to be equal with everybody. So people seem to hate this so much. The point i'm making is this. The FUNCTIONALITY of the HUSBAND AND WIFE may not be liked by the contemporary Christian Scholars and it may not be endorsed by the current society. But the fact that people have so misconscrewed the idea of love doing "whatever it pleases" because "God wants to reward us" is the same kind of attitude worldly people have. Do People of this world believe marriage and Women and Men to have specific functionality? No! How can they? People of this age have deemed Men and Women equal in every way to be politically correct in every possible fashion.

But before I say anything else I want to make something clear. There is a huge differences in being equal in funtionality and being equal under God.

Now let me sidetrack if you will permit to do so. To demonstrate this I would like to show you in other relationships. As a MINISTRY and a CHURCH we operate with relationships under many times various functions. This same attitude of "same functionality all the time" is also what destroys many churches. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 12

28And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues. 29Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues[1] ? Do all interpret?

In the body of Christ though we are all saved under his remeption because of his death on the cross we are not all equal in AUTHORITY and FUNCTIONALITY in the church. Some are called to be Sheperds while others are called to do other things. Do I like this NATURALLY? No! I want to be the head hancho! I want to be God. But in truth of the bible does God call hte church to exist with various PARTS? Yes! Paul makes it clear earlier

"12The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ."

Ok So we are one body, and in marriage we become one "flesh" I see the resemblance, but why do we have different functions? Well

4Now the body is not made up of one part but of many. 15If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," it would not for that reason cease to be part of the body. 16And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," it would not for that reason cease to be part of the body. 17If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be? 18But in fact God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. 19If they were all one part, where would the body be? 20As it is, there are many parts, but one body.



Now you may believe I am making a huge leap but I am not. We are trying to discern the nature of love and truth. Simlarily the church is a relationship built upon Christ so I also believe it shows alot of ways for marriage.

Some may not disagree with the various "Parts of marriage" But "If they were all one part, where would teh body be?" YES! there is ONE body! but many parts.

Isn't that how a household functions? How could you have a family if everyone had the same funtionality? That is not how a Christian household was built up to be! It is meant to have various functions and many parts. The Wife and the Father do not have the same authority as the child and the father do not have the same authority or function.

Do I like that? Am I pleased? Am I [being a man] thinking "oh yes, lets dramatically alter these verses to make women by down to us".

No way! naturally i do not like that

But the truth is the functionality of a marriage is not based on the condition of the two people engaged. Marriage is a covenant set aside by God to function in a certain way if it wishes to entirely and completely honor God. Marriage is not about the overall happiness of the two people in it it is about the establishing the commitment and [as Chesterton mentioned earlier] binding yourselves to one another.


So now that we have that established do you understand what I mean when I say functionality in equality and equality under Christ is different?

We are equal under God in every way but not equal in funtionality.

The world has so cleverly made christians believe that the "submissive wife" has fallen prey to the cleverly derived schemes of Christian fundamental legalist who use the bible as a way of controlling there wives. Has this happened in the past and before? Yes. people have used the bible to perpeuate there lies and deceit.

But this does not exuse you. We are not of the world. In many cases people have used religion and christianity to put people to death and to do horrible things but this does not invalidate the truth of Christ [who is truth]. In the same way just because some people have used the bible to take out of context the love of a marriage does not mean we should stop doing what is right.

I am very skeptical of anyone who denies seperate functionality.

For instance I think its rather coincidental that certain charismatic teachers of christianity preach something called "prosperity theology" that makes people believe that God wants you to be healthy wealthy and wise. Because you know what? This HAPPENS to suit the natural desires of our hearts hmmmm...... weird. I find that they have denied sound doctrine to transform the gospel ot suit there own desires and they have now made the doctrine and the bible justify there itching ears.

Do not do this with marriage do not deny sound doctrine to satisfy your own itching desires.

2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

Please do not do this with your own act of honoring God!

I am a man of 18. PLease give me some hope that there is still marriages that show proper submission of wives and proper sacrifice of men.

I know this verse has already been used but lets use it again. Christ said "I tell you the truth" 76 times for emphasis I think it is ok if I repeat something twice in a forum.

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

Lets say the greek word for submit actually means something else. I really don't care.

AS TO THE LORD. is very clear.

Aslong as you have a proper understanding of what "Lord" means i think you have a proper understanding of what the word in that sentence submit means.

also eph 5:24 col3:18


"But formula and structural based marriages have not liberated us or produced the fruit of the Spirit. We all need to stop and look at our life?s including our doctrines and behaviors, do they spring from The indwelling Holy Spirit or ?how to? law driven based responses."

To that response let me just say this

James 1:25
But the man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it?he will be blessed in what he does.

Understanding Gods truth and "Doctrine" of something is in fact VERY liberating. James says "the perfect law that gives freedom" Jesus says "you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free". It is very clear that truth and being obedient to Christ you possess alot of freedom.

Do not insist this are "lawful condemnations" they are "Gods perfect law" which gives freedom.


I hope this may of be of any help, i am sorry it is so long but i just all of this today.

In Christ,
Steven.

and I realize its rater fragmented I apologize. I'm really tired and I need some sleep [its 6:30 am]




2 john 1:12

[Guest]

no time at the moment to post a reply,
found this

We know that God does not approve of discrimination. Yet discrimination against women is inherent in patriarchy. The system that I encountered was patriarchal to the core. “Any espousal of patriarchy is an espousal of male domination. The very definition of patriarchy presents a male-dominated and male-controlled society and therefore means a philosophy of male supremacy.” (1)

With these thoughts in mind, let’s look at the Biblical record. To start with, we need to remember that the Bible is full of violence, betrayal, selfishness, immorality, idolatry, and unbelief--a seemingly endless list of sinful acts It also presents the thoughts and philosophies of our fallen nature along with His truth. We must learn to discern the difference. We need to realize that scripture includes true records of false ideas. Just because it is in the Bible does not mean that God approves.

A limited look at the Old Testament record shows that, in general, women were under the control of their father or husband who considered them as their possessions. They were denied education, and they could not inherit. Women's lives were expendable in order to protect men, and polygamy was acceptable. Only men had the right to divorce, and women were mainly valued for producing male heirs.

In contrast, when the Holy Spirit came to Mary, there is no record that He asked her father or Joseph first. The mere fact that Jesus spoke to women broke with the tradition of His day. Jesus taught the Samaritan woman and commended Mary for ‘sitting at His feet’ to learn, an expression that indicates that she was a disciple! In Luke 11:27-8, He rejected the idea that women were baby machines. In Mathew 19, Jesus opposed the double standard for divorce. He pointed out from Genesis 2 that divorce was not God’s plan but a concession that He had allowed Moses to make because of their sin. Then, Mark 10:12 adds, “and if she herself divorces her husband…” which overrode the Jewish tradition that a woman couldn’t institute a divorce since she was the man’s possession along with the concept that women were property and that polygamy was acceptable. (2)

After His resurrection, He could have appeared to one of His male disciples at the tomb. However, He chose to appear first to a woman, Mary Magdalene, instructing her specifically to go and tell “my brothers.” His actions forever proclaim to her and to Christian women after her that their commission is not limited to a women’s ministry.

The early church did not embrace patriarchy, teaching that both male and female are created in the image of God. The scripture shows men and women moving together to spread the gospel. The few scriptures that seem to limit the ministry of women stand in stark contrast to the whole of the record. In the last few years, traditional understanding of a woman’s “place” has become even more suspect as scholarship has provided accurate translation and interpretation of these passages. (3).

So what went wrong? As Christianity spread through the Gentile world and a second generation of Christians emerged, equality and freedom slowly faded. Replaced by the traditional male domination that filled secular society, Greek philosophy and pagan customs made their way into Christianity. The church adopted the secular governmental structure of the Roman Empire. Clergy separated from laity, and women were barred from this new ministerial class. (4) The supernatural gifts of the Spirit, so present in the early church, were stifled; and the Dark Ages fell on the church.

The attitudes of the early church fathers were molded by pagan ideas that women are evil, inferior, unequal and unclean. (5) These concepts along with Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy influenced how they interpreted Scriptures as they applied to women and male/female relationships. Their writings birthed traditional theology, which generally displaced Jesus' teaching about women. (6)

While the reformation began the return to Christ’s doctrine, it remained patriarchal. Biblical interpretation “continued to be skewed by misogyny, hierarchical worldview and the perennial influence of Greek philosophy.”(7) It is interesting to note that in revivals sprinkled through the last two thousand years, the status of women is consistently elevated. (8) Could this be the leading of God’s Holy Spirit? Cultural norms around the world today are definitely patriarchal, particularly in developing nations. Even in developed countries, male primacy, while not as blatant as it was even twenty-five years ago, is still clearly present in society and in the home. The results are devastating.

As for the church, “the traditional theology of womanhood is unequivocally patriarchal, ascribing to women an inferior condition, a secondary importance, and a subordinate status. Consequently, under authoritative male headship, ‘covering’ and control, women have at the best of times been "honored’ as second-class citizens. They have been dominated, marginalized and occasionally patronized while men have been elevated.”(9)

There is no place for patriarchy in the kingdom of God. It is a human institution based on a fallen sin nature. Patriarchy's fruit is deplorable and can never be part of the kingdom. It’s time to acknowledge it as sin and throw it out. Christ has restored access to God for all who will come to God through Him. We know we "all are sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise,”(10) and the promise does not discriminate.

[Guest]

John ~ when you have another moment, would you please cite the source of that article? Also, is all that history summed up for you in the word submission?

Thanks,
Michelle