HOW AND WHY DOES A WIFE SUBMIT TO HER HUSBAND?

marriageWhen we try to solve the problems of this world, we quite naturally preoccupy ourselves with what others are doing wrong, but that is the way of the world. That is not the way of the Christian. The Good News is Jesus Christ has saved us, not that we know how to save others. Therefore, we point to His work, not our own.

So how did I get to this thought? What is the cause of this post? When I commented on insanitybytes22 post (here), The Apostle Paul loved women…, OKRickety replied. Thus, we all began in a little debate.

What did have to say? Well, there is much more, but here is how he started. He begins by quoting from my comment.

  • OKRickety said:                                          June 23, 2016 at 12:45 pm

    Tom,

    “What is the supposed problem? Paul tells wives to submit to their husbands as to the Lord. Then Paul tells husbands to love their wives as they love their own bodies, to love their wives as Christ loved the church.

    Wives, in other words, should love their husbands because their husbands love them so much that they would die for them. “

    First, the passage says nothing about wives loving their husbands. It only refers to husbands loving their wives. Yes, it is Biblical that women should love their husbands (all Christians are to love one another), and you would expect that wives would love their husbands if their husbands are loving them so much that they would die for them. But your last sentence above is not a correct restatement of the concepts in the passage. For that matter, there are no requirements or preconditions (that is, there is no “because”) for wives submitting or husbands loving. Each spouse is given their own action to take regardless of the other’s action or inaction.

    As to the “supposed problem”, consider the concept that husbands are to love their wives. Search the internet and you will find almost no one who complains about this concept. If you find otherwise, please let me know. I’d be very interested to see it.

    On the other hand, search the internet regarding wives submitting to husbands, and you will quickly find extreme furore at this concept. This is the real, not “supposed” problem.

    Why the difference in response to these two behaviors? The problem is that many, perhaps most, women (and many men) consider wives submitting to their husbands to be unacceptable. At least one reason for rejecting submission is the feminist concept that women are completely equal to men. There are probably others. Whatever the reason(s), wives failing to submit to their husbands is contrary to Paul’s admonition (and, yes, husbands failing to love their wives is also contrary to Paul’s admonition. I feel obliged to emphasize this statement to counter the common objection “But what about the husbands?”).

‘s complaint is understandable, but casting blame does not solve problems. Often, casting blame just adds to our problems. So it is that and I also had much more to say. I think the following is the crux of my argument.

  •   Citizen Tom said:                                                June 25, 2016 at 6:06 am

    OKRickety

    The only thing each of us can control is our attitude. We cannot control the attitude of another. Why do I say that? Complaining about the fact women (Christian women, apparently. Why worry about non-Christians obeying the Bible?) don’t submit appropriately to their husbands is futile. Complaints will not fix this problem. We lead our families by example.

    What does it mean for a woman to submit to her husband? Does it mean that she surrenders her will to him? No. Submission is itself an act of will. A woman submits to husband because she loves and she trusts him. She submits by loving and trusting him.

    Genesis 2:21-25 Amplified Bible (AMP)

    21 So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam; and while he slept, He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22 And the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man He made (fashioned, formed) into a woman, and He brought her and presented her to the man. 23 Then Adam said,

    “This is now bone of my bones,
    And flesh of my flesh;
    She shall be called Woman,
    Because she was taken out of Man.”

    24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. 25 And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed or embarrassed.

    The woman submits because she knows she is one with her man. She submits because they are so joined as to be one and the same.

    If a man wants his wife to love and to trust him as a Godly woman should, then he must strive each day earn her love and her trust. He must love her. He must do what Jesus did for us, set an example. He must love and trust our Lord. He must submit to the will of God in all things.

    How does a woman submit to her husband? She loves. She trusts. She teaches his children to love, trust, and follow the example of their father. She sets the example for his children by following the example of their father.

    Husbands earn authority by being worthy of it. Husbands set a Godly example their ladies want to follow. There is no other way.

Much is made of wives submitting to their husband, but we forget that Jesus used marriage as an analogy for His relationship to the church. No analogy is perfect. Unlike Man and God, man and woman are equal. However, nature requires from woman love of the sort Man should give to God, and nature requires from man love of the sort Jesus Christ gave to us.

For the sake of her children, the woman must love, trust and respect her man. Similarly, for the sake salvation, Man man must have faith in Jesus Christ.

The man must love his woman as Jesus loves us, selflessly. The man must be worthy of the trust the woman gives him. Jesus Christ is worthy of our trust. He was something no man can be. He was and is perfectly worthy. Because He lived the perfect life, His sacrifice upon the cross paid the price for our sins. All we can do is strive to follow His example and be grateful for His sacrifice.

If a man could his wife perfectly, he would not need Jesus. If a woman could submit to her husband perfectly she would not need Jesus. It is because of our imperfections, our inability to love God as we should that we sin, that we need a savior. Yet each of us should seek to love our spouses as much as we can. That our Lord commanded to do. Moreover, in this life only giving and receiving such love can bring us close to heaven.

32 thoughts on “HOW AND WHY DOES A WIFE SUBMIT TO HER HUSBAND?

  1. Reblogged this on The Missal and commented:
    I’m all for wives submitting to their husbands. Assuming of course the husband is in the Right. I am all for wives revolting against their husbands, assuming the husband is in the wrong and the wife is in the Right.

    Whoever is in the Right, that is who the other should be submitting to. And both should be submitting to the Right and both revolting against the wrong. That is how it should always be in every possible case.

    Both should be operating at all times to discover what is the Highest Right and who is best representing it at any given moment. And what is the most common wrong and both should be revolting and repenting of that.

    As for Love between both husband and wife that should just be naturally assumed and subsumed in both partners.

    As for Paul, he was only a man and only a Saint. He was not the Lord, nor was he God. And even Jesus never talked (in the Bible at least) exhaustively on all subjects, or even on any subject. That is both the glory of language (that some measure of real Truth can be transmitted by it to some degree) and the failure and limitation of language (that words are only words and can only transmit small measures of the actual and complete Truth). No word ever encompasses the True and Complete definition of a thing, and no group of Words ever details the entire Truth. If it did then it wouldn’t be a word or language, it would be Truth itself. But it isn’t, it’s just language.

    So in his defense I have read enough of the Bible, even in the original languages (such as Hebrew and Greek) to know that no man (Paul, for instance, or Moses, or Ezekiel, or Enoch, or whomever) will ever say everything about all subjects in just the perfect way to satisfy everyone. All Biblical writers state some things outright and assume (given their audience) the reader will assume others – in context. And taking specific verses from the Bible or from a book of the Bible without reading the entire book or line of argument (or even remembering that most people in the world only read a translation of the original, which in itself is problematic) is equivalent to taking a couple of lines from the Odyssey and trying to deduce what route Odysseus will eventually take to sail home.

    Like

    1. Jack

      About the only thing I get out of your comment is that you don’t think a wife should submit to her husband. Considering how I described submission (and how the Bible describes it), I am uncertain of your complaint. Men and women have different roles. Which sex we are has both behavioral and physiological implications. We can waive those differences away, but that does not change the fact they exist.

      It also appears that you don’t believe the Bible is the Word of God. That substantially changes the subject of the debate. If I say the Bible says something, you have already established that the fact the Bible says something is not especially relevant to you. Hence, I do not know what rules you use to establish the difference between right and wrong. What people consider Right is not always evident. What is Right is not always obvious.

      Like

      1. I said none of those things, and I’m sorry you cannot think beyond your own narrow assumptions. Then again that’s not really my problem now, is it? And yes, Right is always obvious. Everyone knows that. It is only un or did or in or counter-obvious to modern men aswim in the soup of their own self-doubts and overly complicated theorems.

        You’re more philosopher and mind-reader than theologian I suspect (assuming you were not being facetious), and that’s fine by me but you don’t make assumptions about what I think I think. I don’t think what I think, I know what I think. As a matter of fact I know what I know, and know what I don’t know.

        But let’s play the game your way. So here goes. What you think I think is obviously incorrect. But your Gordian knots of reason (which you could easily cut by the way) are of no interest to me.

        I merely used your post to state my own position. Because you brought it up. I did not insist you agree with me, nor do I care. I made not a single comment about your position. I know that’s awful hard for modern men to imagine, that what they think is not the automatic axis of the summary orbit of all thought (especially when trying to appear as a pseudo-intellectual cum theological and biological expert), but, there ya go…

        But what you assume or don’t assume from my comments is not my problem. Nor my philosophical or theological conundrum.

        I’m no more interested in your confused and self-conflicted philosophies and distorted deductions of reason than I am in your theological mish-mash (what ever that happens to be) and critical self-doubt.

        You did get this much right though. Yes, the sexes are different. But lately, not so much.

        That is to say when I read the kind of modern crap that comes out of the fragile and confused thoughts of modern men I often have a distinct difficulty in differentiating it from the confused and fragile thinking of modern women.

        By the way if you still confused about what I meant go back and reread what I said. It’s obvious. I always say precisely what I mean, even if language is only a partial conductor of the Truth. And it is only that.

        But if you really don’t know the difference between Right and wrong (and that seems to be one helluvah big problem with modern people), what will it matter?

        What, really, will anything matter?

        Now if my reply offended you, then good, I did my job. If it made you think about how quick you are to make erroneous assumptions about what other people think, then even better. (Assuming of course, you weren’t being facetious in your initial response.)

        If you were being facetious or you take my response in a light-hearted or joking manner, then great even, I think we could even be friends.

        But I got a lotta friends Tom, and all of them know this about me – nobody XXXXXX tells me what I think or what to think. Or what I really mean. Or should mean.

        Except God alone. And that’s because he’s had a helluvah lot more experience at thinking than you or I will ever have Tom. As a matter of fact he’s had a lot more experience at everything than we will ever have.

        A lot more experience at understanding Truth, and language, and men, and women, and life, and death, and knowing the difference between Right and wrong. I don’t think it confuses God at all, this Right or wrong thing.

        Doesn’t confuse me much either. Now that’s not to say I haven’t or won’t do wrong, it’s invariably because I’m stubborn about it and won’t admit the Truth. Not at first anyways.

        So sometime I will do wrong, like making assumptions about people or trying to twist what they say to satisfy myself and my own assumptions.

        Oh well, I’m only human I guess.

        But that’s not a xxxxxx excuse in my favor, it’s just a cheap justification.

        See I still easily know the difference between Right and wrong, even when “I’m confused” by the whole thing, or to be far more honest, when I’m not and still seeking m own advantage.

        Take that for what it is worth, or not.

        Either way we’re both only men.

        Isn’t that something? The way that works out…

        Like

        1. Jack

          I apologize. Since your comment contained a little foul language, I would not have been surprised if had gotten stuck in the spam bucket. Instead, it found its way to the trash bin. My guess is that I accidentally deleted it (when I was deleting links back to earlier posts). Anyway, when I was emptying the trash bin, I found your comment.

          I XXXX over the cuss words. If you want to post a comment here, would cleaning up your language it be too much to ask?

          Was I annoyed with your first comment? Yes. Consider.

          I merely used your post to state my own position. Because you brought it up. I did not insist you agree with me, nor do I care. I made not a single comment about your position. I know that’s awful hard for modern men to imagine, that what they think is not the automatic axis of the summary orbit of all thought (especially when trying to appear as a pseudo-intellectual cum theological and biological expert), but, there ya go…

          Given what you just said, when you wrote your first comment, you did not care what I thought of it. You just wanted you broadcast your own opinion. Perhaps that is why I was so confused by your comment. If we want to be understood, we have to take the time to understand our audience. Would it surprise you to know that I am the primary reader of the comments on this blog? If you don’t care if I agree with you, then you don’t care what I think. If you don’t care what I think, don’t waste your time here. I don’t have that big an audience, and I doubt many of them would be interested in reading the comments of someone who doesn’t care what they think.

          insanitybytes22 sort of liked what you said, and I did not disagree. I was not trying to pick a fight. I like debates, but I have no interest in exchanging juvenile insults. Pointless.

          Like

        2. @Jack

          Your latest comment got caught by the spam filter. If you cannot clean up your language, then that is where your comments belong. I am not going to clean up your comments. You don’t appear to want to do anything except insult me, anyway. So it is pointless to respond to you, and I won’t anymore.

          Liked by 1 person

      2. I kind of like what Jack said, Tom. “And both should be submitting to the Right and both revolting against the wrong.”

        Often those who speak of “wives submit” put all the burden on women as if to say, the husband right or wrong. This is true to a degree, but never spoken of is, are they even pursuing what is right? Women submit all to assorted thugs, drug dealers, abusive men all the time, but is that what God calls women to do? Is that right, is that good? This is the problem we encounter when “wives submit” becomes a bit of absolute truth, a literal translation of a few words, now rendered devoid of all common sense.

        Like

  2. Well said,Tom. This is perfect, the recipe for all that ails us, “If a man could his wife perfectly, he would not need Jesus. If a woman could submit to her husband perfectly she would not need Jesus.” We need Jesus! Proceed from that truth and everything else will just pan out. 🙂

    Scripture tells us, “But seek you first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.”

    I’ve been involved in this on going discussion about how you can’t really teach women how to submit anymore than you can teach men how to love. These are heart conditions.There just isn’t a set of behaviors that you can imitate, it isn’t like a set of instructions for putting together a bookshelf or something. It’s a bit like wisdom, we can provide information, education, advice, but wisdom is simply something you have to develop yourself. Common sense is another one.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Tom, you and I agree. I would tweak one thought. I don’t believe that Jesus used marriage as an analogy of his love for the Church. I think his love is the rock-steady reality and marriage is the analogy. Because we are sinners, our marriages fall short of perfection, but his love is perfect–and he gives his life for the Church.
    Someday I will write a post about this thought: wives are commanded to submit because they find it easy to love men but harder not to try to run men’s lives because of their love. Husbands are commanded to love because they easily stray from faithfulness and are also willing to sit back and let the women run things. Just a thought… J.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I like your comment.

      It seems to me that something is missing from all of these discussions of love and submission: Respect. Understanding that aspect is, I think, the key to a successful marriage.

      I had tremendous respect for my Lady Anne. This was not just professional respect for her skills and abilities, but respect for her as a person and as the love of my life. As a result, I never told jokes at her expense, never complained about her to friends or associates, never laughed at her (but oh so frequently with her!), never commented to others about a behavior of hers that seemed to irritate me.

      She did the same for me. The result of this combination of love and respect produced exactly the sort of cross-submission being discussed here, and the absolute richest of marriages.

      I only had her in my life for thirty years; this week would have marked our thirtieth anniversary.

      To give you a feel for this relationship, here is how she would correct behaviors of mine: She would tell friends, in my earshot, how wonderful I was in that exact area. This motivated me to set about correcting my problem quickly, to try to live up to the high ideals she held of me. An example would be that if I was getting a bit sloppy in my arrival times, she would brag to a friend how careful I was about punctuality. You can bet that I redoubled my efforts to be punctual, but never felt the sting of a criticism, and knew that my Lady was not off complaining to others about me.

      I don’t know if this same technique would have worked in reverse; there was nothing about her for me to fix. But I bragged about her all the time.

      I was a fortunate man indeed, and will treasure my time with her so long as my mind and memory continue to function properly.

      Best wishes,

      ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

      Liked by 1 person

  4. I have no idea how you derive anything regarding submission from Genesis 2:21-25.

    “we forget that Jesus used marriage as an analogy for His relationship to the church.”

    We can’t forget something that never happened. It wasn’t Jesus who did this, but Paul in Ephesians 5.

    “However, nature requires from woman love of the sort Man should give to God, and nature requires from man love of the sort Jesus Christ gave to us.”

    I don’t understand why you would refer to nature. Are you implying that the desires of our carnal nature should supersede God’s plan when it comes to the relationship of husband and wife?

    “If a man could (love, I presume) his wife perfectly, he would not need Jesus. If a woman could submit to her husband perfectly she would not need Jesus. It is because of our imperfections, our inability to love God as we should that we sin, that we need a savior.”

    If a man loved his wife perfectly, she would not need Jesus to meet the needs that were unmet by her husband. If a woman submitted to her husband perfectly, he would not need Jesus to meet the needs that were unmet by her.

    “Yet each of us should seek to love our spouses as much as we can. That our Lord commanded to do. Moreover, in this life only giving and receiving such love can bring us close to heaven.”

    It sounds like those who are unmarried have a disadvantage.

    Like

    1. OKRickety

      Why is Genesis 2:21-25 relevant? When the Bible first defined marriage, it did not include submission. Submission does not define a marriage. Love does. When a man and a woman see themselves as one, they are married.

      I suppose Jesus did not directly use marriage as an analogy for His relationship to the church, but Jesus did refer to Himself as “the bridegroom”. Since the church did not exist at those times He used the analogy, He made no reference to it. The Gospel records Him speaking of those who go to Heaven instead (See Matthew 22:1-14, Luke 5:33-35, and Matthew 25:1-13). Revelation 19:6-10 makes it absolutely clear that He is the bridegroom of the redeemed. Note also that John the Baptist (John 3:22-36) also spoke of Jesus as the bridegroom. Thus, this analogy was used at the very start of Jesus’ ministry.

      Why would I speak of nature? Even the Declaration of Independence speaks of the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God. If those Godly men could speak of God and nature together, why can’t I do so? What God made He made good, but what He made good we can either use wrongly or rightly.

      Why do we need Jesus? Didn’t Jesus summarize the Old Testament into two commandments: love God and love your neighbor (Matthew 22:36-40)? If we could love each other perfectly, I presume, perhaps a bit too much, we could love God perfectly. Yet when we are married, we are expected to love each intensely, approaching the way we should love God, with all our strength, heart, mind and soul. If we could love God with all our strength, heart, mind and soul, then we could be obedient to the whole Law and the [writings of the] Prophets. Then we could do what Jesus did for us for ourselves.

      And yes I do think those who are unmarried have a disadvantage, particularly if they are having sex outside of marriage.

      Like

    2. OKRickety

      It seems to me that you are claiming the Bible should be interpreted differently because culture today is different

      One of the things I have learned from Bible expositors is that the Bible was not written to us. The people to whom the Bible was written sleep now. God intended that we read the Bible, but the people He chose to write down His Words wrote for their contemporaries. Therefore, we must figure out how the Bible applies to us. That’s why Bible expositors always address the application of a passage.

      Here is an example. In Ephesians 6:5, Paul tells slaves to be obedient to their masters. In Colossians 3:22 – Colossians 4:1, Paul again tells slaves to be obedient to their masters, and he tells masters to be obedient to their slaves. 1 Timothy 6:1-2 offers similar words, and even Peter gets into this subject in 1 Peter 2:18-20. Therefore, I wonder. Do you think we should we bring back slavery so we can practice the teachings of the Bible just the way 1st Century Christians did? I hope not.

      Thanks to the teachings of Jesus, the apostles led a movement that has reshaped our world. They even said things that must have shocked their contemporaries.

      In 1 Peter 3:1-7, Peter makes it quite clear that that he did not think women inferior. Jesus had taught the apostles that it is what is inside, not the outer appearance, that matters. What Paul and Peter and the rest of the apostles expected is that those held in slavery and forced into submission would patiently lead their masters and their husbands respectively to the foot of the Cross of Jesus Christ.

      Just as we don’t enslave the people we love. We don’t hound them with demands for submission. Instead, we accept the service of others gratefully. We don’t deserve it. We acknowledge the truth of our Savior’s words.

      Matthew 23:11 Amplified Bible (AMP)

      But the greatest among you will be your servant.

      Like

      1. “In 1 Peter 3:1-7, Peter makes it quite clear that that he did not think women inferior.
        […]
        Just as we don’t enslave the people we love. We don’t hound them with demands for submission.”

        First, note that the wife is commanded to submit to her husband in the Bible. Regularly teaching and stating this fact in a loving fashion is appropriate, even if it is uncomfortable for the wives and other listeners.

        This comment, like others you have made before, strongly implies that you still think that I believe the Bible says that women are inferior and that submission can be demanded by the authority to whom it is due. I am not one of those who believe this. Instead, I believe that women are equal in value as Christians, and recognize that a wife’s submission to her husband is her choice.

        I challenge you to show where I have said otherwise. If you cannot find evidence, then I ask you to please desist from commenting as if I do.

        Like

        1. OKRickety

          I had intended to post my reply (the one previous to this) to your comment (here => https://insanitybytes2.wordpress.com/2016/06/16/the-apostle-paul-loved-women/comment-page-1/#comment-36623) on IB’s blog, but I selected the wrong comment in the activity list. So my reply ended up on my blog. Sigh. I hope that was not too confusing.

          Whether or not you think women are inferior I don’t know. Instead of trying to send women on a guilt trip, I just think men should be far more concerned about doing their part, loving their wives.

          There are various reasons for the breakdown of families in this nation, but the unwillingness of some women to submit to their husbands has almost nothing to do with it.

          If a man and a woman love each other, and they conscientiously accept responsibility for their choices, then they have the capacity to make a marriage work. They have the capacity to make the necessary sacrifices needed to sustain their relationship. You want to call that submitting to each other. That is fine with me.

          Like

        2. Tom,

          “Whether or not you think women are inferior I don’t know. Instead of trying to send women on a guilt trip, I just think men should be far more concerned about doing their part, loving their wives.”

          Your bias shows when you refer to teaching that wives are to submit to their husbands as “trying to send women on a guilt trip”. Would you describe the complementary teaching that husbands are to love their wives like Christ loved the church as trying to send men on a guilt trip?

          Instead of guilt trip, let us consider shame (distress caused by realizing one’s own behavior is wrong). It is appropriate for someone who hears correct Biblical teaching and realizes their sin to feel shame. This shame is from God, and should be motivation to correct one’s own behavior. You will find in the New Testament that the writers of the epistles often referred to shame in a positive manner.

          Based on your own observations and experience, do you think that Christians generally or your church specifically are more concerned with husbands loving wives, or wives submitting to their husbands?

          I note your certainty that “some women” not submitting to their husbands has “almost nothing” to do with the breakdown of families in this nation. I disagree.

          I don’t think I said that husbands and wives are to submit to each other. I can only think of one situation where a husband submits to his wife. It is a rather convoluted understanding of submission. It is the case where the husband accepts the will of his wife when the husband has no contradictory will on the topic. In other words, she definitely wants something and he has no disagreement, so he submits to her will. Personally, I don’t consider that submission, but, if someone wants to argue that it is, I won’t bother to argue otherwise.

          Like

        3. OKRickety

          What are doing is repeating the same argument over and over. The Bible says…..

          When was the Bible was written? Who wrote the Bible? Who did the authors write to? Does the context matter at all to you?

          The Bible says slaves should obey their masters? Yet devout Christians ended slavery? They did that in spite of that command? Would you like to explain why we should not accept slavery as normal, but the subjugation of wives is necessary?

          You say you are only talking about voluntary submission? 2,000 years ago the law supported slavery and required wives to submit to their lawful husbands. In fact, the law supported both slavery and the submission of wives until less than just a couple of hundred years ago. I recall reading about a law in Louisiana that limited how much a husband could beat his wife. He was not allowed to use a rod thicker than his thumb.

          Would you like to have had a job as one of the rod inspectors? It would have been a Biblical position, no doubt. After all, the Bible would not allow loving husbands to beat their disobedient wives toooooo much.

          Like

        4. Tom,

          [2 Tim. 3:16-17 NASB] 16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

          The New Testament was written almost 2000 years ago by men inspired by God, addressed to Jews, Gentiles, and mixtures of these.

          Yes, the cultural context matters, as it is necessary to understand the godly principles it contains. A principle is a fundamental truth that exists regardless of the culture at the time of writing or at the time of reading.

          “Thanks to the teachings of Jesus, the apostles led a movement that has reshaped our world. They even said things that must have shocked their contemporaries.”

          Apparently, some of the teachings of the New Testament still shock many in the world today. For example, wives submitting to their husbands.

          “The Bible says slaves should obey their masters? Yet devout Christians ended slavery? They did that in spite of that command? Would you like to explain why we should not accept slavery as normal, but the subjugation of wives is necessary?”

          Yes, the Bible says slaves should obey their masters. This is where understanding the culture matters. Slavery was legal in the Roman Empire. Many Christians were either masters or slaves, thus it was important to address their relationship as fellow Christians.

          Devout Christians and others were involved in the abolition of the slave trade and slavery in Britain and the USA.

          If you do not understand that the existence of a command to slaves to obey their masters is not the same as stating that slavery is commended by God and thus should exist, then there is no point in continuing this discussion.

          As I understand it, slavery is not desirable from the Christian perspective because God made all men and women in the image of God. All people have equal value and thus no one should be forced by another human to act against their free will.

          I object to your use of “subjugation of wives” as it means to compel wives to be dominated. Submission of Christian wives to husbands is a voluntary action by the wife, not forced by the husband. Yes, it is voluntary submission.

          The fact that civil law allowed slavery and required submission of wives to husbands is culturally important. We are to obey the government unless it is specifically contrary to God’s commands for us.

          I would not have liked to be a rod inspector. I think the concept of a husband physically beating his wife is inconsistent with treating her like his own body.

          I find your attitude to be disrespectful as well as patronizing. You do not answer many of my questions. You also continue to presume that submission of wives is equivalent to subjugation and abuse. It appears that you will not accept the idea that the Biblical teaching on wives submitting to husbands is God’s desire. It was taught by the Apostles Peter and Paul, who I believe were divinely inspired. If you don’t agree with it, then you are the one who will be responsible to answer to God.

          I will not reply to any further comments by you on this post.

          Like

        5. OKRickety

          If you do not understand that the existence of a command to slaves to obey their masters is not the same as stating that slavery is commended by God and thus should exist, then there is no point in continuing this discussion.

          Does that mean you want me to write another post on this subject? I suppose I could.
          😀

          Observe. The Bible provides directions for slaves to obey their masters in the same context as direction for women to obey their husbands. For example, 1 Peter 2 ends by directing slaves to obey their masters and 1 Peter 3 begins by directing wives to obey their husbands.

          What about the cultural context? We have little reason to believe that the people who lived in the 1st Century had any serious moral objections to slavery. Most probably just wanted to masters, not slaves. Similarly, both masters and slaves thought wives should obey their husbands. That, they thought, was just the way things were supposed to be. Hence, instead obeying with a surly attitude, the Bible instructed slaves and wives to obey their masters in love.

          God apparently wants Christians to exhibit the mind of Christ. His first concern is the salvation of souls.

          Proverbs 10:12 New King James Version (NKJV)

          Hatred stirs up strife,
          But love covers all sins.

          When we consider our spouses, what should be our first concern? Should it not be the salvation of the soul the person we love? Then what difference does it make who submits? Should we not seek instead to do our best to lead each other to Jesus Christ?

          Like

  5. I prefer to explain this subject using this explanation because some women become very defensive when they hear or read ‘submit to their husbands.’.

    It is commonly observed that the woman was not made from the superior part of man, that she might not be thought to be above him, and have power over him; nor from any inferior part, as being below him, and to be trampled on by him; but out of his side, and from one of his ribs, that she might appear to be equal to him; and from a part near his heart, and under his arms, to show that she should be affectionately loved by him, and be always under his care and protection.

    Regards and goodwill blogging.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Your acceptable explanation (so we don’t offend anyone’s sensitivities) says nothing about submission, only that the wife is to be loved by her husband and under his care and protection. So, of course, no woman is going to be defensive about that statement.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Sometimes, a spoonful of sugar helps make the sugar go down.

        In my experience with bosses, the best boss in my opinion, never had to state “I am the boss.”

        Regards and good will blogging.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. Love what Scatterwisdom said here, “In my experience with bosses, the best boss in my opinion, never had to state “I am the boss.” Amen to that. 🙂

    Tom, Salvageable wrote a charming post on submission too:

    https://salvageable04.wordpress.com/2016/06/30/love-her-submit-unto-him/

    While the worldy world may well be shocked by the very idea, there seems to be quite a few of us Christians rather pleased with the concept of submission and not at all afraid to talk about it at all.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

SGM

Faithful servants never retire. You can retire from your career, but you will never retire from serving God. – Rick Warren

The Latin Community

"You will be my witnesses." Acts 1:8

All Along the Watchtower

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you ... John 13:34

The Sheriff of Nottingham in Prince William County

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

The Derecho

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

The Bull Elephant

Conservative and libertarian news, analysis, and entertainment

Always On Watch: Semper Vigilans

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

The Family Foundation Blog - The Family Foundation

Welcome to Conservative commentary and Christian prayers from Gainesville, Virginia. That's OUTSIDE the Beltway.

Cry and Howl

Let not him that girdeth on his harness boast himself as he that putteth it off. I Kings 20:11

Twenty First Summer

Thoughtful. Positive. Relevant.

Dr. Luis C. Almeida

Christian College Professor

Settled In Heaven Blog

A text & video blog striving to honor Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ through Bible lessons, devotionals, Sunday School studies and small group studies.

praythroughhistory

Heal the past. Free the present. Bless the future.

Dr. Lloyd Stebbins

Deliberate Joy

I Refuse To Follow Your Blog

Stop being a follower!!!

Lillie-Put

The place where you can find out what Lillie thinks

He Hath Said

is the source of all wisdom, and the fountain of all comfort; let it dwell in you richly, as a well of living water, springing up unto everlasting life

partneringwitheagles

WHENEVER ANY FORM OF GOVERNMENT BECOMES DESTRUCTIVE OF THESE ENDS (LIFE,LIBERTY,AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS) IT IS THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO ALTER OR ABOLISH IT, AND TO INSTITUTE A NEW GOVERNMENT...

Defining the Narrative

Discussing the Soul of America

PUMABydesign001's Blog

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: as government expands, liberty contracts.” Ronald Reagan.

nebraskaenergyobserver

The view from the Anglosphere

Freedom Through Empowerment

Taking ownership of your life brings power to make needed changes. True freedom begins with reliance on God to guide this process and provide what you need.

Necessary and Proper

Returning to common sense in America

bluebird of bitterness

The opinions expressed are those of the author. You go get your own opinions.

Pacific Paratrooper

This WordPress.com site is Pacific War era information

The Isaiah 53:5 Project

Life: the time God gives you to determine how you spend eternity

altruistico

People Healing People

THE RIVER WALK

Daily Thoughts and Meditations as we journey together with our Lord.

The Ancients

Awakening From Adam's Sleep

Silence of Mind

Where God Speaks and Creation Listens

My Daily Musing

With God we will gain the victory, and he will trample our enemies. Psalms 109:13

atimetoshare.me

My Walk, His Way - daily inspiration

Nickel Boy Graphics

Comic Strips (Some Funny, Some Serious)

Rudy u Martinka

What the world needs now in addition to love is wisdom

Truth in Palmyra

By Wally Fry

Kingdom Pastor

Living Freely In God's Kingdom

The Life Project

Finding Clear and Simple Faith

In My Father's House

"...that where I am you may be also." Jn.14:3

cookiecrumbstoliveby

Life through the eyes of "cookie"

The Lions Den

"Blending the colorful issues of life with the unapologetic truth of scripture." ColorStorm

Deo Vindice

The Great Commission, The Great Experiment, Virginia and my musings

%d bloggers like this: