# Husbands/Wives of Eph 5, 1Cor 11:3 1Pet 3



## D. Paul (Nov 3, 2009)

There was a discussion recently regarding the roles of husbands/wives and these passages were stated as though they were somehow in opposition to the OT and the way women in general were treated e.g. second class citizens, "property" of the husband etc.

Though never stated as explicitly as Paul, God's command to Adam and Eve surely implied the structure of a Godly home, yes? The discussion made it almost a purely NT concept of marriage. How can I address this in the coming class?


----------



## lynnie (Nov 3, 2009)

Speaking as a woman.....

I would start with a discussion of what the relationship of Jesus was to the father. Was he equal to God? Yes. Was he God? Yes. Did he submit to the father? Yes.

Maybe bring in Phillipians 2 and how Jesus was equal to God but humbled himself and made himself nothing, becoming a servant. 

Then when you move on to those gender difference verses, you are talking about something Jesus did himself. A woman is equal to a man in essence but humbles herself in submission. ( It's worse being a guy, they have to represent being crucified!).

I wouldn't just jump right in with the controversy, the average stubborn girl won't agree at all. I'd start with the general command to be like Jesus, and work your way in slowly. Give the humility of Jesus a good 10 or 15 minutes before you get to male authority. ( worked for me  )


----------



## Scott1 (Nov 3, 2009)

God established order so that all might live peaceable lives- men, women and children.


----------



## TeachingTulip (Nov 3, 2009)

lynnie said:


> Speaking as a woman.....
> 
> I would start with a discussion of what the relationship of Jesus was to the father. Was he equal to God? Yes. Was he God? Yes. Did he submit to the father? Yes.
> 
> ...



Lynnie,

This is a most excellent observation and answer . . .the submission of women to men is reflection of the submission of the Son to the Father . . . which perfect submission was founded upon perfect love, and the Son's desire to volitionally exhibit the sovereign will of God.




> ( It's worse being a guy, they have to represent being crucified!).



Men are responsible to exhibit sacrificial love for their wives as Christ did for His church. I would agree, that sacrifice of life is harder than submission of will. Might all ladies keep this in mind, as they live under the authoritative headship of their husbands! 



> I wouldn't just jump right in with the controversy, the average stubborn girl won't agree at all. I'd start with the general command to be like Jesus, and work your way in slowly. Give the humility of Jesus a good 10 or 15 minutes before you get to male authority. ( worked for me  )



Good advice. Good attitude. Good answer, sister.


----------



## MW (Nov 3, 2009)

lynnie said:


> Maybe bring in Phillipians 2 and how Jesus was equal to God but humbled himself and made himself nothing, becoming a servant.



I know I've already registered a thankyou, but this is exceptional, and deserves repeating.


----------



## Megan Mozart (Nov 3, 2009)

To expand upon what you said, Lynnie, I've read Wayne Grudem making the exact same argument, explaining the wrongness of mutual submission using the Trinity. Submitting to your husband doesn't mean you are of lesser worth. Our feminist world thinks that being a servant means you are worth less than the person you are serving. This is simply not true. Is Jesus less God than the Father? NO! The Holy Spirit less God than the Son or the Father? NO!

Those who would argue for mutual submission who are actually *consistent* about it actually go so far as to say that the members of the Trinity submit to each other! This, at the very least, borderlines heresy, I think. Nowhere in all of Scripture does the Father submit to Jesus or the Holy Spirit! No where does Jesus tell the Father what to do!


----------



## Andres (Nov 4, 2009)

God established roles for men and women. He gave us each, male and female, roles that are to be fulfilled and I see it as having nothing to do with status. Status is man-made. THis is why some say, "oh women can't pastor, no fair!" or "the husband is head of the household, no fair!" they are looking at status and equating leadership in those positions as higher status symbols or positions of greater importance. Again, this is learned, man-made opinions and that is why some people are frustrated because they use man's standard rather than God's.


----------



## TimV (Nov 4, 2009)

Great work, Lynnie.


----------



## D. Paul (Nov 4, 2009)

Thanks for all the posts, but the issue wasn't really over the roles and submission, it was that _this concept was not understood in the OT and therefore not practiced as such_. Women in the OT "submitted" simply by nature of being women and men only "used" their wives. I would maintain that Paul did not _change the structure_, so to speak, of marriage and the home, but recognized and reaffirmed the basis for *all* covenant people in marriage throughout history since in Eph 5:31 he quotes Gen 2:24


----------



## lynnie (Nov 4, 2009)

I am sorry I distracted from your intended question (but I appreciated the kind replies).

I think the mentality you encountered is common. I've heard it said many times in conversations ( some online with nominal Christians) that in the OT men were polygamous and got away with concubines and God didn't really care, not even with leaders, but after Jesus, God finally set a new system. One man one woman. No extra concubines.

So I agree with you that yes, God intended it to be a man's wife from his side in unity, and only one wife, from the start. And God also did intend from the start to have Godly order with male leadership in the home and society.

But is your class correct that women were "used" in the OT Covenant mentality? I'd have to say that often they were, by great leaders. I have heard it said that the plural wives and concubines were glad just to be provided with a food and a roof. True? I sure can't imagine being one and not feeling used. But I wasn't living back then where no man might equal no provision. 

I'll look forward to other replies. Very interesting question.


----------



## Mushroom (Nov 4, 2009)

Sarah called Abraham lord.


----------



## TimV (Nov 4, 2009)

> Thanks for all the posts, but the issue wasn't really over the roles and submission, it was that this concept was not understood in the OT and therefore not practiced as such. Women in the OT "submitted" simply by nature of being women and men only "used" their wives.



I don't know how anyone could come to that conclusion and be familiar with the OT. What about David's daring rescue, and the whole book of the Song of Songs? The man weeping, following his wife who was ordered away from him?


----------



## Confessor (Nov 4, 2009)

TimV said:


> > Thanks for all the posts, but the issue wasn't really over the roles and submission, it was that this concept was not understood in the OT and therefore not practiced as such. Women in the OT "submitted" simply by nature of being women and men only "used" their wives.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know how anyone could come to that conclusion and be familiar with the OT. What about David's daring rescue, and the whole book of the Song of Songs? The man weeping, following his wife who was ordered away from him?





While there might be more OT examples of wife mistreatment, I think the OT still provides principles for how husbands ought to treat their wives. Nowhere in the OT is there approbation of wife-mistreatment.


----------

