Actscelerate.com

Golf Cart Mafia Consigliere Posts: 3145 **10/28/15 10:18 pm**

Off Topic Post Alert!

Carolyn Smith

Re: Question to Aaron

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 5919 **10/28/15 10:43 pm**

Aaron Scott

Carolyn...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6039 **10/29/15 4:40 am**

I took it as a joke, too. But I also realized he was trying to make a point (namely, that one would not hold such a position publicly). I had to acknowledge that, indeed, if I'm getting such flak here, among our group, I'd sure have a lot of 'splaining to do on FB, which is connected to many non-Christians.

You are also correct that using one's real name need not chill the conversation. But there are things you will not discuss under your real name, for the most part. It's too personal, embarrassing, etc. Further, using your real name and saying something like "My aunt's sister's husband has come out as gay," is to invade the privacy of that family or person, since they can be connected to you because of your true identity.

Old Time Country Preacher

Re: Carolyn...

Acts-pert Poster Posts: 15570 **10/29/15 7:32 am**

bonnie knox

Link, if your intention was to generate discussion,

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 14803 **10/29/15 9:53 am**

I'd say pat yourself on the back; this thread is on its fourth page.
When you ask if pastors neglect the topic of wives submitting to husbands, I infer that you are concerned that it is being neglected. If you want folks to weigh in on whether they have heard pastors deal with this topic, my personal experience is that yes, they do, and they don't do a very good job of it. Outside my personal experience in Pentecostal and Southern Baptist churches (such as things I read on the internet), it seems the Reformed Church and Fundamental Baptists focus heavily on it and do a horrible job of it with people like Mark Driscoll using it to berate as a sinner a woman who was reluctant to give her husband oral sex or people like John Piper suggesting that an abused wife perhaps should endure the abuse for a season. It seems to me there are a few reasons the pastors who do address the issue, do so. First, there seems to be a desire to protect a system in which men can dominate their wives or have their own selfish will served. (Don't choke on that, I'm moving on to a couple of other reasons.) Second, it seems sometimes to be a knee-jerk reaction to problems in the church or in the marriages within the church. Third, some try to cover whatever topics are in scripture.
I think you would like to tell yourself that your concern is that because it is in scripture, it should be taught; however, I don't think I've noticed such angst about whether some of Paul's (or Peter's) other admonitions are followed such as greeting one another with a holy kiss or women wearing head coverings while praying or women not wearing braids.
Perhaps your concern is the high rate of divorce. Do you think that hammering away at women being submissive will solve the problem? Are you trying to blame the state of marriage on one gender? If you found that marriages in which the husband and wife practiced mutual submission were actually better, stronger, and less likely to end in divorce would you concede that is a viable way to conduct a marriage? If your concern is the state of marriage, is it possible that trying to inject a hierarchy that is not a Biblical requirement is actually counterproductive? If submission within marriage is all one way, what about the whole concept of Christian humility? Must we throw out the verses such as Philippians 2:3 which says
"Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves." and Romans 12:10 which says "Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another;"? Or do we say that husbands are exempt from behaving that way toward their wives? (Presumably because she is not really an equal, but like a child who must be disciplined??)
Do you think preaching on wives submitting to their husbands will solve marriage problems when Paul himself said that people who are married will have trouble in the flesh? If indeed divorce rates could be drastically lowered by the complete subjugation of women, even if it meant men will be enabled to be dominating and self-centered, would you be for it?
Your second question was how neglecting the topic of wifely submission affected marriages. Again, I infer that you think marriages would be better if this topic was hammered on. My take is that if the topic is handled well, it could improve things, but I RARELY HEAR THE TOPIC HANDLED WELL, and it would be better to not address it at all than botch it. Again, I can feel so much resistance to the thought that a pastor would not address this topic, but, again, where is the angst about other topics that are left out? And why is the angst about this topic so disproportionate? I honestly think people who are so sure that rebellious wives are the single most important factor causing the degradation of marriage in our culture are just not out there in the trenches actually dealing with people or else have a blind spot about women being actual enfranchised adults who are capable of handling themselves.
Now, to the sticky question: what does a wife submitting to her husband look like? To which, I might add, does it do scripture a disservice to think it might look different in the United States of America in the 21st century than in the Greco-Roman culture of 1st century Ephesus? Again, I anticipate a strong push back to the suggestion that scripture could have different implication for different cultures, but again, I've never seen anyone on Acts lamenting that women are not praying with their heads covered. Basically, it seems to me, that submission does entail a person suppressing his or her own will for the betterment of another, or, in the case of marriage, for the betterment of the marriage itself. It is a Christian virtue, the sacrificing of one's will. Interestingly, Christ's love for the church compelled him to sacrifice his own will.

John Jett

Re: Link, if your intention was to generate discussion,

Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia Posts: 4955 **10/29/15 10:26 am**

Aaron Scott

John Jett...the problem is this:

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6039 **10/29/15 1:30 pm**

Yes, Christ laid it all down to save the world.

But too many people interpret this as "Jesus would allow the Church to do whatever it wanted and not discipline, etc."

Yes, Christ laid down His life, but Revelation and plenty of other passages let us know that He does NOT TOLERATE rebellion, sin, etc.

"That Jezebel" was in the church. Apparently she used to have been in good standing. But at some point, Jesus lets the church know NO MORE.

If I didn't know better, I'd almost think there was a feminist conspiracy to make men lay down their roles as head of the home and just surrender to everything the wife wants...after all, Jesus loved the church so much that He gave EVERYTHING for it....

The man is the head of the home, PERIOD. If he forfeits that right, that's on him. But to hear some put it, if you would even think to enforce your authority, you're out of line with Jesus!

Man, that is CRAZY. Jesus loves the church, He is patient with it, He keep reaching out, but at some point, He's going to act. He's going to chasten.

And right there is when the "feminist conspiracy" (that I know better than exists, but so help me...) changes it's tune! "We'll, yes, you should always follow Jesus when it's in the WIFE'S interest, but if it would ever make her unhappy, you must relent and make sure that at all costs she is happy."

I reject it outright.

Aaron Scott

John, is the argument...?

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6039 **10/29/15 1:34 pm**

Is the argument that a man can do NOTHING as leader of the home until he is as perfect as Christ?

That until the husband is perfect, it's a case of beam-in-the-eye?

Well, how's that work for you as a pastor? Do we have to NOT preach on anything until we're perfect? Or can we, as Paul say, "I've not yet attained," and still keep on preaching? (Aren't you glad it didn't stop Paul?)

And should we not discipline our children until we've got everything perfect in our lives?

Maybe cops should not ever pull over anyone unless they NEVER speed?

Old Time Country Preacher

Acts-pert Poster Posts: 15570 **10/29/15 1:55 pm**

Aaron, again let the old timer ast ya, if a womans husband comes outta the closet an says he is gay, should she continue to be submissive to a gay husband? Is this biblical?

Old Time Country Preacher

Acts-pert Poster Posts: 15570 **10/29/15 1:57 pm**

Oops, double post.

Aaron Scott

OTCP...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6039 **10/29/15 2:04 pm**

I don't know. And, frankly, I'm not interested in the rabbit trail that leads away from the plain and central question: What is a man to do if his wife is not submissive?

Of course, there are plenty of other things to ask, like:

What does submission look like?

Is submission for today?

Was it only a cultural thing that has been done away with?

Cojak

Re: Link, if your intention was to generate discussion,

01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011 Posts: 24282 **10/29/15 2:11 pm**

bonnie knox

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 14803 **10/29/15 2:17 pm**

Aaron, you actually ARE on a rabbit trail--the OP is not about what a man is to do with an unsubmissive wife.
The 3 questions Link asked were
Do many preachers neglect this topic?
How does doing so effect marriages?
What does a wife submitting to her husband look like?

Aaron Scott

Bonnie...

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6039 **10/29/15 2:21 pm**

I stand corrected.

bonnie knox

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 14803 **10/29/15 2:29 pm**

What "authority" are you referring to, Aaron? Where does scripture say a husband has authority over his wife (other than the reciprocal authority mentioned in 1 Corinthians 7 with respect to the marital bed)?
Where does the Bible say a man is the head of the home? (Hint, it says "head of wife," not "head of home.") Why do you think head means authority unless you are just reading your own prejudices into it?
I'm always a little taken aback by your stance on this issue, and I can never tell if you are being quite serious with statements like "enforcing your authority over your wife."
What does a wife do if she has a husband who is out of control? Are you saying the God-ordained dynamics mean she puts up with all the foolishness that you are appalled at imagining a man putting up with?
Do you really see your marriage as a hierarchy with Aaron Scott IN AUTHORITY?

Quiet Wyatt

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 12809 **10/29/15 2:30 pm**

I suppose it depends on what you mean by submissive. I purposely married a redheaded woman with the personality to match. Her assertiveness and spunk are what I perhaps love most about her. I've always found mousy, timid women completely unattractive. We talk together about everything, whether big or small decisions. Parenting, church leadership, doctrine, politics (She's GOP and I'm an Independent with very little respect for the GOP anymore), etc. I never would expect her to just unthinkingly bow before my opinions on anything. If I am wrong, I expect her to show me I'm wrong. If I'm right, I believe she will see I am right if I'm able to give her enough light on the question.

I could never see my wife as basically a slave or a child needing a "Daddy" to tell her what to do, nor could I imagine ever finding that sort of relationship in any way fulfilling. But then again, I don't own slaves, either and don't see slavery as a good way of relating to one's fellow man. But apparently Paul felt it was permissible in the social context of his day.

John Jett

Re: Bonnie...

Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia Posts: 4955 **10/29/15 2:32 pm**

Aaron Scott

Seriously?

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6039 **10/29/15 4:18 pm**

You're not yanking my chain? You think that by "head" a man has no authority over his wife?

Aaron Scott

Back on Topic!

Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology Posts: 6039 **10/29/15 5:22 pm**

Here is Link's original questions:

bonnie knox

[Insert Acts Pun Here] Posts: 14803 **10/29/15 5:37 pm**

It has worked for 6000 years? All the abuse and oppression that has been heaped upon women, and you call that a system that works?
As far as 1 Timothy 2:12, yes there was a particular situation in Ephesus that Paul was addressing to Timothy. Usurp means to take something that doesn't belong to you. You are projecting your prejudices on this passage to mean that no wife anywhere is to have authority. That is not what the passage said. It was a corrective passage of things that were wrong in Ephesus (where the cult of Artemis was a big problem). Obviously God did not mean for all women of all time to always be silent or have no authority because there are plenty of examples in scriptures of women doing so. Why do you see this passage as addressing husbands and wives? How do you extrapolate all men having authority over their wives from this passage?
Now, the passage in 1 Corinthians 11:3-- You are reading a hierarchy into it even though it is not ordered as a hierarchy. You ask if Christ has authority over man. Of course, but why do you assume that is the characteristic being discussed here? Yes, I'm making a distinction between "head of home" (which is an idiom we use on our tax forms) and "head of wife." If it means something OTHER than "authority over," in this passage, it doesn't make sense to say "head of home." Surely you are aware of the discussion of the meaning of "kephale." The evidence for it meaning "authority" is not convincing (except to those whose egos seem to need it to be). Of course, I don't want to get into a discussion of your views of the trinity here, but in order for this to be an hierarchical ordering, you HAVE to subordinate Christ to the Father. Some seem willing to make the Son eternally subordinate to the Father if that is what it takes to "keep the woman in her place." Here is a blog post I came across that might shed some light on this verse. (He concludes that kephale means "origin," which I'm not sure is accurate either, but it is a starting point to understanding this passage.)
http://krusekronicle.typepad.com/kruse_kronicle/2007/10/household-hea-2.html#.VjKa_ThdGmF
I think I'm going to skip your points about control and manipulation. I'm not arguing for manipulative women any more than I would argue for controlling men. The fact that you use the terminology "emasculated" shows me that you have your identity bound up in being the one in control. Again, the wife is not the only one called to submission. As I mentioned before, Paul instructs all Christians to submit or prefer others. Jesus said the Gentiles exercised authority over one another, but that Christians are supposed to be different.