I'm not sure what page the message where I responded to someone commenting on wives being as submissive as slaves, by saying I didn't see it as a problem if a wife was that submissive. I don't know if I added the part that I didn't believe husbands should treat wives as slaves. I don't have any first-hand knowledge, but I don't think slaves were always 'yes, master.' I'm thinking of depictions of certain slaves in film, like Mammie in Gone with the Wind who certainly spoke her mind, or certain depictions of slaves in the Roman era. Be that as it may, it is good for a wife to be submissive. But it isn't good for a husband to be domineering toward his wife.
question about submission
- Thread starter JFSurvivor
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
To bad the passage is in Greek and not Hebrew.
The word 'hupotasso' means to come in order under. It was used for soldiers falling into ranks below higher ranking officers in Greek. There are articles online on Greek studies on the meaning of the word. There are also people who don't know Greek who are uncomfortable with the meaning of the word who just redefine it based on their whims (Joel and Kathy come to mind.)
The Bible gives us some insight into the Greek word in I Peter 3, where Peter tells wives to be in submission to their husbands 'even as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord.' Clearly the meaning is hierarchical. It's related to the concept of obedience.
The word 'hupotasso' means to come in order under. It was used for soldiers falling into ranks below higher ranking officers in Greek. There are articles online on Greek studies on the meaning of the word. There are also people who don't know Greek who are uncomfortable with the meaning of the word who just redefine it based on their whims (Joel and Kathy come to mind.)
The Bible gives us some insight into the Greek word in I Peter 3, where Peter tells wives to be in submission to their husbands 'even as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord.' Clearly the meaning is hierarchical. It's related to the concept of obedience.
We speak of servitude like this is a bad thing. Think about what Christ said of himself likened to a servant. I never post with a heart of malice I think it's important if everyone cools off. I see that there must be post history here sorry about advising you to speak in love where obviously after reading the toxic posts in here there seems to be a love exemption for all who post herein. I suppose it's not my business anyway. God bless you all 
I agree there's nothing wrong with disagreeing. Hearing what other people have to say and being open minded about things is part of what makes us grow. It's the belittling people and putting them down, acting like they're high and mighty because they've spent years reading the Bible, is what bothers me. It's a reason why I very rarely start a thread myself when trying to find answers about a certain topic. Even more bothersome when I see it on something like the family thread, when my own family was dysfunctional and I'm recovering to this day from it. You're right in the sense that we all can learn how to be better from it. It's a whole lot easier said than done, but I think we should just go away from the keyboard (or keypad, if you use a phone like I do) if we're in the heat of the moment and about to post something mean or hurtful to a brother or sister on here. Then come back when we thought it through and cooled off.
K
This seems to me a somewhat paradoxical approach. Husbands are not to treat their wives in an overbearing and domineering manner, biblically speaking ... and agreed. But if ... or rather when some women do find themselves in this unfortunate predicament (and many do), you hold fast that the wife should still remain in submission to it ? This manner of thinking allows for a supposedly biblical/principled application to be enforced and binding whether the husband complies with God's expectations or not ... and where an unbiblical and even disjointed reality exists for many women. And this is what many are objecting to. If I were them, I would to. Again presidente, I am not seeking to be confrontational. I'm merely pointing out what appears to me, at least, an inconsistency in biblical rationale. Perhaps I am reading too much into your words as written. But it seems to me an offer of little comfort for those affected women for us to say : don't worry, .. God will recompense those men who abuse so great a trust. I'm feeling the need to withdraw myself from this thread as well. God bless all who participated
it's not just for wives. servants, slaves, oppressed even, under a cruel task master/owner, under a government like the ..... well,,
read what the Scripture says to those .... it is not 'normal', not 'worldly' , not 'of this world', any more than Yahshua Hamashiach - God Messiah King born in the flesh as a man is "of this world"...
and
it is not possible for human beings to do what God requires...... unless they recognize God and allow HIM to accomplish their life (which ALMOST
NO ONE in the world does.... it is written).... so almost NO ONE in the world is saved.... ever....
remember in the days of NOAH, only 8 persons out of the whole world were saved. ANYONE could have been --- presumably all they had to do was
get
in the ark. ...... but no one in the whole world did except 8, and only 8 were saved.....
so those who truly trust God, who God shows mercy on and softens their hearts, are different from all the rest of the world,
and do not 'react' nor 'act' like the world..... but entirely different and unexpected.... and rare..... few are saved, remember ?
read what the Scripture says to those .... it is not 'normal', not 'worldly' , not 'of this world', any more than Yahshua Hamashiach - God Messiah King born in the flesh as a man is "of this world"...
and
it is not possible for human beings to do what God requires...... unless they recognize God and allow HIM to accomplish their life (which ALMOST
NO ONE in the world does.... it is written).... so almost NO ONE in the world is saved.... ever....
remember in the days of NOAH, only 8 persons out of the whole world were saved. ANYONE could have been --- presumably all they had to do was
get
in the ark. ...... but no one in the whole world did except 8, and only 8 were saved.....
so those who truly trust God, who God shows mercy on and softens their hearts, are different from all the rest of the world,
and do not 'react' nor 'act' like the world..... but entirely different and unexpected.... and rare..... few are saved, remember ?
This seems to me a somewhat paradoxical approach. Husbands are not to treat their wives in an overbearing and domineering manner, biblically speaking ... and agreed. But if ... or rather when some women do find themselves in this unfortunate predicament (and many do), you hold fast that the wife should still remain in submission to it ? This manner of thinking allows for a supposedly biblical/principled application to be enforced and binding whether the husband complies with God's expectations or not ... and where an unbiblical and even disjointed reality exists for many women. And this is what many are objecting to. If I were them, I would to. Again presidente, I am not seeking to be confrontational. I'm merely pointing out what appears to me, at least, an inconsistency in biblical rationale. Perhaps I am reading too much into your words as written. But it seems to me an offer of little comfort for those affected women for us to say : don't worry, .. God will recompense those men who abuse so great a trust. I'm feeling the need to withdraw myself from this thread as well. God bless all who participated
All that to say, I do actually think it's possible to hold to an idea of women submitting in some form in marriage while utterly rejecting any form of abuse or compulsion in marriage.
The major problem, to me, seems that we are quick to champion submission, but we don't champion Christ-like dying to the same degree, which ends up making the demands very lop sided. Complementarians need to repent of that, because there has been plenty of abuse of the Bible hat has happened on its watch. But I don't think the solution to a failing on one side is not to chuck out the whole thing.
I've seen a lot of the opposite. I heard a preacher preach on Ephesians 5. His approach was to deal briefly with the wives submitting to husbands verses and say something like, "We've all heard a lot about that" then focus for a long time on men's responsibilities in marriage in the subsequent verses, followed by a lot of time on the topic of communication. It's like he skirted over the controversial part and hardly addressed it except to read it. There are churches where submission in marriage is emphasized, but other churches where it is basically ignored or the verses are explained away. Sometimes the topic is ignored but other comments the preacher makes about marriage contradict the idea that a wife should submit to her husband.
Well, it is not mine to disagree with the word of God.
These instructions are for positions of leadership in the assembly of believers, under the leadership of elders, not for outside the assembly of believers.
I am not in an assembly, nor in a position of leadership here.
The NT presents men learning from women outside the assembly.
These instructions are for positions of leadership in the assembly of believers, under the leadership of elders, not for outside the assembly of believers.
I am not in an assembly, nor in a position of leadership here.
The NT presents men learning from women outside the assembly.
D
Didnt Elijah stay with a widow who was commanded to take care of him?
Jesus spoken to his earlier disciples going into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence.
Shows staying at a womans house here in the OT
But unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto Sarepta, a city of Sidon, unto a woman that was a widow.
And it does say that Lydia was a worshipper of God also
And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us.
And again, Jesus told them
into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence.
And they went out of the prison, and entered into the house of Lydia: and when they had seen the brethren, they comforted them, and departed.
Sometimes a woman can make a choice without her husband because he safetly trusts in her, and she does according to what has been long established between them.
Jesus spoken to his earlier disciples going into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence.
Shows staying at a womans house here in the OT
But unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto Sarepta, a city of Sidon, unto a woman that was a widow.
And it does say that Lydia was a worshipper of God also
And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us.
And again, Jesus told them
into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence.
And they went out of the prison, and entered into the house of Lydia: and when they had seen the brethren, they comforted them, and departed.
Sometimes a woman can make a choice without her husband because he safetly trusts in her, and she does according to what has been long established between them.