Do you personally know of a man who became a better husband as a result of his wife's

[Sasha]

I didn't vote. The "evil myth" one would be closest to mine but I hate to make judgements on what works for others. I can say this, however, I would be submissive to my husband the same day I sprout wings from my behind.

 

(but I'm an atheist, so take it for what its worth)

[Joanne]

"Good news! It's really about *mutual* submission!" Mutual submission makes no sense to me. If we both have equal responsibility to submit, then nobody has the responsibility to lead. If dh thinks we should buy a peice of property and I disagree, mutual submission has us standing there going, "Well, I'm not submitting on this. I submitted about the car thing and now it's your turn." Which is not submission, obviously.

 

 

I do believe in the need for a heirarchy and I do believe the Bible endorses it. I know that is another dirty word. I do not believe two people can simultaneously be the head. Most things with two heads are monsterous.

 

The concept of mutual submission as it is usually meant would not have changed my marriage for the better. It would have left me in my certainty that I was right about things, therefore, no need to humble myself, give up power intentionally, respect my husband. I would have sat there, convinced of my right position, waiting for him to come around and submit to me, since I obviously had the better idea(s).

 

What you describe as mutual is not what the Christian shared respect, shared leading, equally submissive marriages *I* know look or function like.

 

You mention clear scripture: the scripture on mutual submission seem clear to me. *shrug*

 

I do not have doubts about the Bible or tenents of my faith. I have doubts about the some of the culture that has grown around it.

[Sasha]

:iagree:

 

I think fragments of the fem movement (I'M NOT SAYING THE ENTIRE FEMINIST MOVEMENT) has perverted the meaning and many people over the past 50ish years have bought into that.

 

I actually think it's many evangelicals who have perverted the meaning. What I've seen taught as "Biblical submission" in churches has been, well, what those here seem to be against.

[Erica in PA]

I voted for the last option, even though I do accept the Bible's teaching on the marriage relationship, and try to live out that kind of relationship together with my dh. The problem is with how the question words it-- trying to make your husband a better man by submitting... that is not the purpose of the concept, any more than the command for the husband to love his wife is to make her better. I think it's a little twisted and possibly manipulative to behave in a particular way because you think it will change someone else, especially your own spouse.

 

I also think there is waaaaaaaaayyyyy too much emphasis in Christian circles on the woman's submission part of the relationship. I don't (ever?) hear anyone telling men how much their wives will change, and their marriages will change, once he finally loves his wife sacrificially the way he should. For some reason, that burden is put only on the women, which is odd because it is the husband who is supposed to be the leader of the home!! Why shouldn't it start with him, showing love like he's supposed to? Why do these speakers and writers always assume that it must start with the woman? It's almost like telling a mistreated worker that if he will just work harder and show more politeness and respect to his master, he won't be so mistreated any more, instead of going directly to the master and telling him to stop mistreating his worker! There's something twisted about it.

 

I also think it's possible for a woman to be so much of a doormat that she can actually encourage unloving and disrespectful feelings from her husband. Some men really struggle with being domineering and overbearing, and I think it might actually benefit them more if their godly wife would stand up for what's right and tell him where he's sinning, rather than quietly smiling and agreeing with it all.

 

My husband is our spiritual leader in the home, and I am more than willing to submit to his final decisions because he loves and respects me. One of the ways he shows this is by listening to my thoughts on everything, and considering them carefully. He acknowledges that there are things that I know more about than he does, and defers to my opinion on those matters. He trusts me to handle most things without running them past him, because he trusts my judgment.

 

Have I made him a better person by respecting him and deferring to him as the final authority in our home? No way. The Lord by His work in our lives helps us to grow spiritually, and our relationship with each other is a reflection of that, it's not the cause.

 

ETA, one last thought-- I also think overemphasizing women's submission can give fuel to unhealthy relationships. Some women tend to be weak, indecisive, and uninformed about important issues, while some men can be controlling, selfish, and irresponsible, and I have observed women in these types of relationships gravitate toward this kind of thinking. It does make things "easier" on them, because it plays to the weaknesses on both sides, and prevents outward conflict. That could *look* like spiritual growth (i.e. We don't fight about money anymore! Now my husband does all of our finances and tells me if I am allowed to spend any money each month.), but imo, it's far from it because it simply allows both spouses to continue on in their sinful ways more comfortably.

Edited November 17, 2009 by Erica in PA

[8circles]

I have been following this whole thread being pulled from one side to the other as I read the differing opinions & agreed with so many of them. Erica, your post explains my POV pretty accurately. I voted "evil myth" because of how the question was worded. Thank you Erica.

 

I also think there is waaaaaaaaayyyyy too much emphasis in Christian circles on the woman's submission part of the relationship. I don't (ever?) hear anyone telling men how much their wives will change, and their marriages will change, once he finally loves his wife sacrificially the way he should. For some reason, that burden is put only on the women, which is odd because it is the husband who is supposed to be the leader of the home!! Why shouldn't it start with him, showing love like he's supposed to? Why do these speakers and writers always assume that it must start with the woman? It's almost like telling a mistreated worker that if he will just work harder and show more politeness and respect to his master, he won't be so mistreated any more, instead of going directly to the master and telling him to stop mistreating his worker! There's something twisted about it.

 

I also think it's possible for a woman to be so much of a doormat that she can actually encourage unloving and disrespectful feelings from her husband. Some men really struggle with being domineering and overbearing, and I think it might actually benefit them more if their godly wife would stand up for what's right and tell him where he's sinning, rather than quietly smiling and agreeing with it all.

 

My husband is our spiritual leader in the home, and I am more than willing to submit to his final decisions because he loves and respects me. One of the ways he shows this is by listening to my thoughts on everything, and considering them carefully. He acknowledges that there are things that I know more about than he does, and defers to my opinion on those matters. He trusts me to handle most things without running them past him, because he trusts my judgment.

 

Have I made him a better person by respecting him and deferring to him as the final authority in our home? No way. The Lord by His work in our lives helps us to grow spiritually, and our relationship with each other is a reflection of that, it's not the cause.

[Joanne]

My husband is our spiritual leader in the home, and I am more than willing to submit to his final decisions because he loves and respects me. One of the ways he shows this is by listening to my thoughts on everything, and considering them carefully. He acknowledges that there are things that I know more about than he does, and defers to my opinion on those matters. He trusts me to handle most things without running them past him, because he trusts my judgment.

 

IMO, healthy marriages work in this way (the bolded part) going both directions and *that* is what I see scripture and practical life experience to support.

 

Although I don't completely agree with some parts of your post, I understand how your marriage functions and liked your post very much.

[Jugglin'5]

I voted for the last option, even though I do accept the Bible's teaching on the marriage relationship, and try to live out that kind of relationship together with my dh. The problem is with how the question words it-- trying to make your husband a better man by submitting... that is not the purpose of the concept, any more than the command for the husband to love his wife is to make her better. I think it's a little twisted and possibly manipulative to behave in a particular way because you think it will change someone else, especially your own spouse.

 

I also think there is waaaaaaaaayyyyy too much emphasis in Christian circles on the woman's submission part of the relationship. I don't (ever?) hear anyone telling men how much their wives will change, and their marriages will change, once he finally loves his wife sacrificially the way he should. For some reason, that burden is put only on the women, which is odd because it is the husband who is supposed to be the leader of the home!! Why shouldn't it start with him, showing love like he's supposed to? Why do these speakers and writers always assume that it must start with the woman? It's almost like telling a mistreated worker that if he will just work harder and show more politeness and respect to his master, he won't be so mistreated any more, instead of going directly to the master and telling him to stop mistreating his worker! There's something twisted about it.

 

I also think it's possible for a woman to be so much of a doormat that she can actually encourage unloving and disrespectful feelings from her husband. Some men really struggle with being domineering and overbearing, and I think it might actually benefit them more if their godly wife would stand up for what's right and tell him where he's sinning, rather than quietly smiling and agreeing with it all.

 

My husband is our spiritual leader in the home, and I am more than willing to submit to his final decisions because he loves and respects me. One of the ways he shows this is by listening to my thoughts on everything, and considering them carefully. He acknowledges that there are things that I know more about than he does, and defers to my opinion on those matters. He trusts me to handle most things without running them past him, because he trusts my judgment.

 

Have I made him a better person by respecting him and deferring to him as the final authority in our home? No way. The Lord by His work in our lives helps us to grow spiritually, and our relationship with each other is a reflection of that, it's not the cause.

 

ETA, one last thought-- I also think overemphasizing women's submission can give fuel to unhealthy relationships. Some women tend to be weak, indecisive, and uninformed about important issues, while some men can be controlling, selfish, and irresponsible, and I have observed women in these types of relationships gravitate toward this kind of thinking. It does make things "easier" on them, because it plays to the weaknesses on both sides, and prevents outward conflict. That could *look* like spiritual growth (i.e. We don't fight about money anymore! Now my husband does all of our finances and tells me if I am allowed to spend any money each month.), but imo, it's far from it because it simply allows both spouses to continue on in their sinful ways more comfortably.

 

This is a very good post. While I voted that I have seen marriages changed, I agree that if the purpose of "submitting" or practing sacrificial love is to try to MAKE a spouse change, you've got the whole things bass-ackwards. FWIW, my pastor, and I know he is not alone in this, emphasizes the sacrificial love of the husband first. I might go so far as to say that he fairly browbeats the men in our congregation with that. :tongue_smilie::lol:

[Ginevra]

What you describe as mutual is not what the Christian shared respect, shared leading, equally submissive marriages *I* know look or function like.

 

You mention clear scripture: the scripture on mutual submission seem clear to me. *shrug*

 

 

I don't think I said "clear scripture" anywhere. I've made efforts to continuously say this is what I believe, what I believe God intended for me. It obviously "worked" in my situation, though I did not "do" something to try to achieve the end goal of it "working".

 

You describe shared respect, shared leading and equal submission. To me, the entire point that I got when I "discovered" these scriptures was that this was what *I* was to do. Whatever my dh does, whether Christian or not, wonderful or not so much (he's the former, thankfully), this was for me to do. The scripture in particular that I'm thinking of says, "...so that if any of them do not believe the Word, they will be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives." For me, that was the important part. This was instruction to me; we were not in marriage counseling where our actions towards each other were being jointly worked on and addressed. It was by having an epiphany regarding this scripture that I saw for the first time the way I really was. I did not realize that I was so unilateral. I did not see how controlling I actually was. It never occurred to me. If I had never stepped back and given him the opportunity to lead, I would not have seen it. If I believed we were to "mutually submit", I would not have seen the need to step back and give him opportunity to lead. SWIM?

 

The problem I see again and again with "mutual submission" is that there is no answer to the question of what decision will be made when both have valid, but opposing views? Before these scriptures impacted me, we just continued to struggle and struggle and struggle over the same thing. Eventually, one would "win" to the other's detriment. After these scriptures impacted me, I have accepted his final decision on matters. Sometimes, it has turned out that he abruptly changed his mind and went "my" way. Other times, he went the way he wished and I realized the wisdom in it. Other times, he went the way he wished and he realized the way I said would have been better. In all cases, the ultimate outcome was better than one of us "won out" in our equality.

[Sasha]

The problem I see again and again with "mutual submission" is that there is no answer to the question of what decision will be made when both have valid, but opposing views? Before these scriptures impacted me, we just continued to struggle and struggle and struggle over the same thing. Eventually, one would "win" to the other's detriment. After these scriptures impacted me, I have accepted his final decision on matters. Sometimes, it has turned out that he abruptly changed his mind and went "my" way. Other times, he went the way he wished and I realized the wisdom in it. Other times, he went the way he wished and he realized the way I said would have been better. In all cases, the ultimate outcome was better than one of us "won out" in our equality.

 

I'm not sure if this is rhetorical but it's relatively simple (although I wouldn't say, certainly, that we are a mutually submissive couple). We're both good debaters and, if it's important to you, you should be able to give a logical argument to support it. Or we defer to the one that knows more about the subject.

[Joanne]

The problem I see again and again with "mutual submission" is that there is no answer to the question of what decision will be made when both have valid, but opposing views? Before these scriptures impacted me, we just continued to struggle and struggle and struggle over the same thing. Eventually, one would "win" to the other's detriment. After these scriptures impacted me, I have accepted his final decision on matters. Sometimes, it has turned out that he abruptly changed his mind and went "my" way. Other times, he went the way he wished and I realized the wisdom in it. Other times, he went the way he wished and he realized the way I said would have been better. In all cases, the ultimate outcome was better than one of us "won out" in our equality.

 

In my 15 year former marriage, I only had this situation on 1 issue.

 

It hasn't happened at all in my current marriage.

 

I do, however, like that you include "valid, but opposing views". This is a reality I've come to embrace as real in many circumstances. Knowing that 2 people can BOTH be right but hold different viewpoints was a serious (and needed!) turning point of maturity for me.

[Ginevra]

We're both good debaters and, if it's important to you, you should be able to give a logical argument to support it. Or we defer to the one that knows more about the subject.

 

For myself, I felt that God was showing me that I put too much faith in being a good debater and winning by logical argument. I think you had said you were an atheist, so obviously, this would not be applicable to you. (My sincere apologies if you were not the one who said they were an atheist.)

 

I do, however, like that you include "valid, but opposing views". This is a reality I've come to embrace as real in many circumstances. Knowing that 2 people can BOTH be right but hold different viewpoints was a serious (and needed!) turning point of maturity for me.

 

It was for me, too. Also, that it wouldn't be a catastrophe to do something the way I thought was not best.

 

I have had a few of the situations I mentioned in my 15 years of marriage. The hard feelings generated by one of them almost broke our marriage in two.

 

And now, I have to go be a wife and mother IRL, rather than just talk about it! :D

[OnTheBrink]

I actually think it's many evangelicals who have perverted the meaning. What I've seen taught as "Biblical submission" in churches has been, well, what those here seem to be against.

 

I truly am not being snarky when I say this, but I'd love to know what churches promote this teaching? Name some names! LOL Because, I was saved in a non-denom Bible church and attend one today, and I've never, ever heard a Church preach the woman-only-submit teaching. I've seen a lot of feminist diatribes against it, mostly in a Women's Studies class, where extreme feminists seemed to gather, in that class, anyway.

 

So, could someone please tell me specifically what churches teach this. Don't bother with the "conservative Christian culture" rhetoric; a phrase that broad and vague, as well as negative in the context in which I see it used here, doesn't hold water with me.

[angela in ohio]

I also think there is waaaaaaaaayyyyy too much emphasis in Christian circles on the woman's submission part of the relationship. I don't (ever?) hear anyone telling men how much their wives will change, and their marriages will change, once he finally loves his wife sacrificially the way he should.

 

Dh just finished a two year class at our church about this very thing (they talked about other things, too, but most of it was about how to love your wives and your family sacrificially and lead them well.) It is preached at my church just as much as wives submitting.

[Crimson Wife]

One trap I see many Christian wives falling into (and this is something I definitely have struggled with) is being passive-aggressive: paying lip service to the husband's role as head of household and then going on to voice one's opinions in a manner that undermines it. Saying something along the lines of: "it's obviously your decision, but..." It's a passive-aggressive attempt to control him.

 

I've had to work on better phrasing my concerns in a way that is productive, rather than destructive. My DH values my opinion and appreciates when I point out potential pitfalls that he hadn't considered. But it has to be from the standpoint of working as a team rather than engaging in a power struggle. :)

[Sasha]

Well, I'm certainly not interested in whether or not my experiences hold "water" with you, but I was raised in a Nazarene church. Later I attended a "New Testament" church. Several of my family members attend a Pentecostal church and practice a Pearl-ish model of Biblical submission.

 

Finally, my MIL is Catholic and also believes in the above-mentioned model, although she has no idea who the Pearls are.

[OnTheBrink]

Well, I'm certainly not interested in whether or not my experiences hold "water" with you, but I was raised in a Nazarene church. Later I attended a "New Testament" church. Several of my family members attend a Pentecostal church and practice a Pearl-ish model of Biblical submission.

 

Finally, my MIL is Catholic and also believes in the above-mentioned model, although she has no idea who the Pearls are.

 

I wasn't saying your experience doesn't hold water, I said attributing the oft-used "conservative Christian culture" cliche doesn't.

[Holly IN]

I was one of them....I voted no this is an evil myth....

 

I got the book called "Created to be his helpmeet" on several of my friend's insistence I get this book. I read it and applied it to my life and marriage. Our marriage changed for sure. But for the WORSE!!!!!!!! Because of this book, we were in financial trouble, dh started to dislike me because I didn't argue with him or discuss things with him anymore....so on and on....

 

He found the book and read parts of it. He said to me that "this book is TRASH!! No wonder you changed" He said that is not what the Bible said about marriage. Submission is to be mutual between two Christian people. Husband and wife, brother sister and so on are to be submissive to each other then the husband is the head of the household but not the head of his wife in a sense that she is a doormat to him.

 

My dh hated that time of our marriage. He was disliking me very much. He threw the book away and told me he wanted me back, the woman he married. The fire breathing, arguing wife back!! :D I did a 180 after I read the book and it really backfired on our marriage.

 

So if I had continued with this type of submission as stated in the created to be his helpmeet book then I believe we would have dissolved our marriage.

 

So dh has the woman he married back now. :)

 

Our marriage is going great.

 

Now for the quiverfull....We WANT to be quiverfull but that door is closed (tubal pregnancy destroyed my good tube). We are quiverfull in our hearts but not of Patrical movement. We are actually against the Patrical movement but not the quiverfull.

 

My dh and I do not believe that quiverfull= patrical. These two things are not connected. I know some quiverfull families personally that do not follow the patrical movement and they are homeschoolers as well. I am not sure why the not quivering anymore mom said that.

 

Holly

Edited November 17, 2009 by Holly IN
added my vote

[angela in ohio]

One trap I see many Christian wives falling into (and this is something I definitely have struggled with) is being passive-aggressive: paying lip service to the husband's role as head of household and then going on to voice one's opinions in a manner that undermines it. Saying something along the lines of: "it's obviously your decision, but..." It's a passive-aggressive attempt to control him.

 

I've had to work on better phrasing my concerns in a way that is productive, rather than destructive. My DH values my opinion and appreciates when I point out potential pitfalls that he hadn't considered. But it has to be from the standpoint of working as a team rather than engaging in a power struggle. :)

 

I did something similar for a while. My now-13 yo dd had started an annoying habit of telling me what to do in a veiled way: "Don't you think we should..." "Did you remember that we are going to..." etc. It was driving me crazy, and then I realized I was doing it to dh!! She had learned it from me. I had to learn to really, really let go and ask for his decision (or just hush,) not make recommendations that he would then have to agree or disagree with. :001_smile:

[Erica in PA]

Dh just finished a two year class at our church about this very thing (they talked about other things, too, but most of it was about how to love your wives and your family sacrificially and lead them well.) It is preached at my church just as much as wives submitting.

 

That is great! This is the way it is at our church too. However, in Christianity at large, it seems to me that there is much more emphasis on women's submission. Often it's among women themselves, and in the form of telling one another how much their husbands will change if they do XYZ (i.e. the quote that started this poll). I do not hear that among Christian men. I would really doubt that in your dh's class, the emphasis was on how to lead in such a way that it will change your wife and make her a better person.

[angela in ohio]

That is great! This is the way it is at our church too. However, in Christianity at large, it seems to me that there is much more emphasis on women's submission. Often it's among women themselves, and in the form of telling one another how much their husbands will change if they do XYZ (i.e. the quote that started this poll). I do not hear that among Christian men. I would really doubt that in your dh's class, the emphasis was on how to lead in such a way that it will change your wife and make her a better person.

 

Actually, it was. :001_smile: Or at least that's what the class leader and I discussed. I disagreed with him, though, as I do only see a promise in Scripture for wives to change their dh and not for dhs to change their wives. He has more life experience than me, though, and he said that he has seen it happen. But that is the role of the class: to change husbands so that their marriages, wives, and families change through their leadership.

 

Dh and I have discussed many times that most of the wives we know who have serious sin issues (especially with pride and greed) do because they are unhappy at home because their dh does not love them the way he should. So I guess I can see it working that way: a dh starts loving his wife, and she gives up the sin and becomes a better person. We have seen with a family member, though, that a man can change completely and his wife still remain hard and unloving. I know other men who have changed and the wife just starts walking all over his more. I suppose the same can happen with a dh not changing even though his wife does, though I have not seen that. I think that is what most people fear, though, that a wife will submit and the dh will abuse it.

[Holly IN]

In response to Angela from the previous post....

 

So who is supposed to take the 1st step???

 

The wife or the husband???

 

Also several of my friends are reading the Love and Respect book. My family dr is also reading it (he is a man). My dr doesn't like it because he says it puts way too much emphasis on the women to the point of being quiet and non-confrontational. btw my family dr is a Christian and goes to a Christian church.

 

Now I haven't read the book but my friends who are women are liking this book. So I am confused about the women vs. men thing in re: to this book.

 

Holly

Edited November 17, 2009 by Holly IN
clarify my question directed to angela....

[Greta]

Just a small thing, but I was told by one woman to stop acting intelligent in order to raise my dh up.

 

And did you say something like "I'm not acting intelligent, I AM intelligent!!"? :D The kind of man who feels good about himself by feeling smarter than his wife is not the kind of man I want to be married to.

 

ETA: ... is not the kind of man that I AM married to either. My dh is brilliant, but modest, and not at all intimidated by intelligent, capable women.

 

ETA2: I also did not mean this to be a general comment on the idea of submission. I am abstaining from commenting on that, though I have read the entire thread with interest. I only had to laugh at the "acting intelligent" comment.

Edited November 17, 2009 by GretaLynne

[Renee in NC]

And did you say something like "I'm not acting intelligent, I AM intelligent!!"? :D The kind of man who feels good about himself by feeling smarter than his wife is not the kind of man I want to be married to.

 

Just for clarification, my dh did *not* say this and when I later told him about it he thought it was one of the dumbest things he'd ever heard.

[Greta]

Just for clarification, my dh did *not* say this and when I later told him about it he thought it was one of the dumbest things he'd ever heard.

 

Oh, yes, I knew it wasn't him who said it, and did not believe that he thought that way at all. I was assuming this was all in the mind of the woman who said that to you.

[Crimson Wife]

Oh, yes, I knew it wasn't him who said it, and did not believe that he thought that way at all. I was assuming this was all in the mind of the woman who said that to you.

 

Maybe you misunderstood what she was trying to say to you? Maybe all she meant is to stop acting like a "know-it-all" (something I've been guilty of). My DH isn't intimidated by brains in a woman, but nobody likes dealing with somebody who acts like he/she knows everything about everything. :tongue_smilie:

[Unicorn.]

Nagging- yes, submission-No :D

[Renee in NC]

Maybe you misunderstood what she was trying to say to you? Maybe all she meant is to stop acting like a "know-it-all" (something I've been guilty of). My DH isn't intimidated by brains in a woman, but nobody likes dealing with somebody who acts like he/she knows everything about everything. :tongue_smilie:

 

I wouldn't know what she was thinking. Maybe that was what she meant. All I know is that following advice like that made my dh almost HATE me. He didn't want a quiet, meek wife that asked his opinion about everything. He didn't want a wife that would make decisions based on what she thought he would do instead of using her own brain. He didn't want a wife who would just "submissively" let him do whatever he wanted in the name of his "authority", even if it was to the detriment of his family.

 

The worst thing was that it dumped ALL the responsibility on him - since he was the head and in charge, everything that went wrong was no longer my concern, but his, right?:tongue_smilie:

 

My dh is a free spirit and I am much less so. (He thinks I am a control freak until I read stuff from this board to him that is MUCH more controlling than anything I would do!:lol:) We balance each other well. When things tilted so far over into his direction, it was a disaster. It took several years to recover somewhat and we are *still* facing the repercussions today.

[Erica in PA]

I just reread the OP, and what I come back to is the idea that one person cannot make another person "better" in any way. Can we be a good example to others by living as God has commanded, in every area of life? Of course! But only God can change someone's heart, and so I can't claim to ever have "made someone a better person."

[Lovedtodeath]

FWIW, you can pick up The Watchtower articles on family life and see that the husband has at least twice as many paragraphs that are directed to him and his role. He is the leader of the family, so it is his responsibility overall to set a good example for the rest of the family members. Taking care of their needs and showing them love is greatly emphasized.

 

I actually think it's many evangelicals who have perverted the meaning. What I've seen taught as "Biblical submission" in churches has been, well, what those here seem to be against.

:iagree:I really didn't understand Michelle's post, to tell the truth.

 

I also think it's possible for a woman to be so much of a doormat that she can actually encourage unloving and disrespectful feelings from her husband. Some men really struggle with being domineering and overbearing, and I think it might actually benefit them more if their godly wife would stand up for what's right and tell him where he's sinning, rather than quietly smiling and agreeing with it all.

 

My husband is our spiritual leader in the home, and I am more than willing to submit to his final decisions because he loves and respects me. One of the ways he shows this is by listening to my thoughts on everything, and considering them carefully. He acknowledges that there are things that I know more about than he does, and defers to my opinion on those matters. He trusts me to handle most things without running them past him, because he trusts my judgment.

:iagree:

[justamouse]

Again, you are misquoting the whole scripture, and it's meaning. I posted the context of the scripture and its correct meaning a few pages back. What you're trying to argue is that just because a duck is a fowl it can be interchanged with a goose. http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139169&page=12

 

 

I am not misquoting the Scripture, which is why I posted that entire passage in context (which, by the way, has numerous supporting verses backing it up). It is not OT law. What you call "correct" meaning is really trying to intellectualize and explain away a portion of Scripture you disagree with. It's like saying "it depends on what the meaning of is is". You are telling me that since I can't read Greek, then I can not have God's Word (even though he promised to preserve it for me forever-Psalm 12:6-7)? I need you to "interpret" it for me or "tell me what it really means"? God was clever/powerful enough to inspire the Bible but not to preserve it for the majority of Christians today? Only a small sect of scholars can really know what God means? Sounds familiar...

 

You posted a TRANSLATION of a TRANSLATION as reference. No, not only scholars can no, but the people we allow/believe with their translations have been doing a pretty shoddy job. So if it means knowing exactly what was said, then yes, learn Greek. I am. We have that ability these days, which is kind of insulting that you would refer to the dark ages when that kind of stuff was kept from the masses.

 

And the mutual submission thing-

 

You are in mutual submission TO CHRIST.

[rookie]

a resounding NO.

[angela in ohio]

In response to Angela from the previous post....

 

So who is supposed to take the 1st step???

 

The wife or the husband???

 

Also several of my friends are reading the Love and Respect book. My family dr is also reading it (he is a man). My dr doesn't like it because he says it puts way too much emphasis on the women to the point of being quiet and non-confrontational. btw my family dr is a Christian and goes to a Christian church.

 

Now I haven't read the book but my friends who are women are liking this book. So I am confused about the women vs. men thing in re: to this book.

 

Holly

 

If either one of them will do it, I consider it a good start. :001_smile: I have personally only seen it work if a woman has taken the first step, but wiser people have told me that it does happen if the man takes the first step.

 

I have never read Love and Respect.

[coffeefreak]

I truly am not being snarky when I say this, but I'd love to know what churches promote this teaching? Name some names! LOL Because, I was saved in a non-denom Bible church and attend one today, and I've never, ever heard a Church preach the woman-only-submit teaching. I've seen a lot of feminist diatribes against it, mostly in a Women's Studies class, where extreme feminists seemed to gather, in that class, anyway.

 

So, could someone please tell me specifically what churches teach this. Don't bother with the "conservative Christian culture" rhetoric; a phrase that broad and vague, as well as negative in the context in which I see it used here, doesn't hold water with me.

 

I'll PM you with the names of my local churches that have preached this. Don't expect to see it on their websites, they know better than to put it there. But it is being preached in the pulpit. And, the nolongerquivering.com site lists all the churches and pastors Vyckie came in contact with.

 

Blessings!

Dorinda

[coffeefreak]

Nagging- yes, submission-No :D

 

:lol:

[coffeefreak]

I just reread the OP, and what I come back to is the idea that one person cannot make another person "better" in any way. Can we be a good example to others by living as God has commanded, in every area of life? Of course! But only God can change someone's heart, and so I can't claim to ever have "made someone a better person."

 

:iagree:

 

I've been reading every post and maybe that's the problem. Maybe it's because the church demands submission from the wife only and if there's any problem at all in the marriage that has to be what the problem is? We have no more control over our spouses than our children (tee hee), and to act a certain way to try and control them is wrong. I guess that's why I like the word respect better or mutual submission. We all keep focusing on Ephesians, but what about 1 Corinthians 13? That was read at my wedding and I'm sure it has been read by most of us here. Nothing is said about submission there. It's all about Love and how you will/should act if you love someone. Me loving my husband does not make him love me back. That's up to him.

 

Great Post Erica!

[JenniferB]

I've been keeping up with this thread hoping to squeeze out some time to respond. I voted "yes". My yes is from personal experience in my life. I read the Help Meet book a few years ago. It was quite a shock to my system, as I had never heard directly from the pulpit or from any other Christian the kinds of things I read in Debbie Pearl's book. When I read the book, I realized that I was quite naggy, snippy, and tight in every way. This book helped me to see that one of my roles, well my main role as a wife, was to support and encourage my husband's goals and desires. I was not raised that way, so this was foreign to me. Since my change of attitude my husband has gone through some changes as well. At first, his attitude was getting really bad - really, really bad. He was angry, hateful, bitter, resentful, and the list goes on and on. At first I thought he just wasn't appreciating my efforts to support and encourage him. After this continued a while I realized that he was bitter because he was finally getting the support he needed, and he was reflecting on all the years that had gone by without this kind of support. He was blaming me for many of our life's decisions which weren't going so well at the time. After this bitterness subsided and he took responsibility for the decisions *we* made, and after he got used to my support and encouragement, things got better and better. I still speak up, quite forcefully sometimes, when I disagree with something. But, it's different now. He knows he has the final say, and he "owns" it now. It was really neat to see the transformation. He does the finances now, and he's much more conservative financially. He's taken full responsibility for the business we started together over 10 years ago. The business was one of his biggest bitterness points, because it was my idea to start it, and he didn't really want to own this kind of business. Now he completely runs it, and he's even making plans to keep it after everything is paid off. This is a 180 degree turn around.

 

So, I say "yes" from personal experience. I would like to qualify my answer though that the kind of attitude change I had toward my husband was not done in order to change him, it was done in order to build him up and live out my role as his helper, and to make him successful in every way. The fact that he changed for the better was a bonus. :D

[Punks in Ontario]

but a df's dh couldn't be bothered working too much, while she worked full time and took care of the kids all the time. When she finally, stopped working so hard so that she could homeschool, he finally got in gear and started supporting the family. I guess he finally realized he needed to contribute to the family.

Punks

[ThatCyndiGirl]

I'm always amazed when people admit to reading and loving 'Created to be his Helpmeet' by Debi Pearl. It makes me wonder how people can gloss over the whole, "if your husband molests your daughter then continue to stay married to him, love him through his prison term, then welcome him home with open arms". (she leaves off the part, "so he can now molest your grandchildren".) Just lovely, lovely advice, no?

 

I should never read these threads. It hurts my heart that so many women think it is necessary to subject themselves to the lower role, to be told what to do by their husbands. (And before I hear, "we aren't told what to do" and "I'm no doormat" one more time...Uh, if you don't have EQUAL say, then, yes, you are a doormat, if not Doormat Adjacent.)

 

It seems unbelievable that in this day and age women still believe this. My husband and I have an equal relationship. I don't get what is so wrong or evil about this.

 

And, really, to the christians who state, "this is what the bible says and that is that" your belief/sentiment is part of exactly why many will NOT be christians. It makes NO sense whatsoever for a man to have more power in the relationship just because he is in possession of a penis!

 

 

ETA: I stand corrected. It was Michael Pearl, not Debi Pearl who said this. (But, keep in mind that the man who is quoted below is the man who Debi Pearl has sworn to obey. SCARY!!!)

 

 

"But if your husband has sexually molested the children, you should approach him with it. If he is truly repentant (not just exposed) and is willing to seek counseling, you may feel comfortable giving him an opportunity to prove himself, as long as you know the children are safe. If there is any thought that they are not safe, or if he is not repentant and willing to seek help, then go to the law and have him arrested. Stick by him, but testify against him in court. Have him do about 10 to 20 years, and by the time he gets out, you will have raised the kids, and you can be waiting for him with open arms of forgiveness and restitution. Will this glorify God? Forever."

Edited November 18, 2009 by ThatCyndiGirl

[PollyOR]

It makes NO sense whatsoever for a man to have more power in the relationship just because he is in possession of a penis!

 

:lol: Oh, Cyndi! You don't beat around the bush do you? :lol:

[ThatCyndiGirl]

:lol: Oh, Cyndi! You don't beat around the bush do you? :lol:

 

 

I'm SUCH a shrinking violet!

[DawnM]

I have not read the Debbi Pearl book nor am I interested in it, but I do believe in mutual submission and my husband and I started out as best friends. I didn't even want to date him because I didn't want to ruin our friendship.

 

I just can't imagine respecting a man who lorded over me or treated me more like a child than his wife.

 

There are things that we do for each OTHER because we love each other that we may not want to do, but we talk about them and try to pray about the decision and figure it out. For example, HE is the one who brought up the idea of homeschooling way back when I was still working full time. I thought he was out of his mind and dismissed it. But things kept coming up regarding homeschooling that made us both start to question it more and realize that God may be moving us in that way. Turns out my husband had been praying about it and asked the Lord to show us and me if it was what we were meant to do. What a HUGE difference to "me man, you woman, you quit job and homeschool!"

 

I have a lot more to say, but you get the idea. I haven't read this whole thread and I am sure there is a lot on both sides of this issue. I guess I am right in the middle....because I say NEITHER side should have the final say.....you should work things out together and with prayer.

 

Dawn

[ThatCyndiGirl]

I have not read the Debbi Pearl book nor am I interested in it, but I do believe in mutual submission and my husband and I started out as best friends. I didn't even want to date him because I didn't want to ruin our friendship.

 

I just can't imagine respecting a man who lorded over me or treated me more like a child than his wife.

 

There are things that we do for each OTHER because we love each other that we may not want to do, but we talk about them and try to pray about the decision and figure it out. For example, HE is the one who brought up the idea of homeschooling way back when I was still working full time. I thought he was out of his mind and dismissed it. But things kept coming up regarding homeschooling that made us both start to question it more and realize that God may be moving us in that way. Turns out my husband had been praying about it and asked the Lord to show us and me if it was what we were meant to do. What a HUGE difference to "me man, you woman, you quit job and homeschool!"

 

I have a lot more to say, but you get the idea. I haven't read this whole thread and I am sure there is a lot on both sides of this issue. I guess I am right in the middle....because I say NEITHER side should have the final say.....you should work things out together and with prayer.

 

Dawn

 

I agree. Mutual submission, equal partnership, call it what you will. I believe that THOSE work out very well. (like business partners, but with fringe benefits. :lol: )

[OnTheBrink]

I'm always amazed when people admit to reading and loving 'Created to be his Helpmeet' by Debi Pearl. It makes me wonder how people can gloss over the whole, "if your husband molests your daughter then continue to stay married to him, love him through his prison term, then welcome him home with open arms". (she leaves off the part, "so he can now molest your grandchildren".) Just lovely, lovely advice, no?

 

I should never read these threads. It hurts my heart that so many women think it is necessary to subject themselves to the lower role, to be told what to do by their husbands. (And before I hear, "we aren't told what to do" and "I'm no doormat" one more time...Uh, if you don't have EQUAL say, then, yes, you are a doormat, if not Doormat Adjacent.)

 

It seems unbelievable that in this day and age women still believe this. My husband and I have an equal relationship. I don't get what is so wrong or evil about this.

 

And, really, to the christians who state, "this is what the bible says and that is that" your belief/sentiment is part of exactly why many will NOT be christians. It makes NO sense whatsoever for a man to have more power in the relationship just because he is in possession of a penis!

 

 

ETA: I stand corrected. It was Michael Pearl, not Debi Pearl who said this. (But, keep in mind that the man who is quoted below is the man who Debi Pearl has sworn to obey. SCARY!!!)

 

 

"But if your husband has sexually molested the children, you should approach him with it. If he is truly repentant (not just exposed) and is willing to seek counseling, you may feel comfortable giving him an opportunity to prove himself, as long as you know the children are safe. If there is any thought that they are not safe, or if he is not repentant and willing to seek help, then go to the law and have him arrested. Stick by him, but testify against him in court. Have him do about 10 to 20 years, and by the time he gets out, you will have raised the kids, and you can be waiting for him with open arms of forgiveness and restitution. Will this glorify God? Forever."

 

The Pearls make me sick.

 

Secondly, as I explained a gazillion posts back, it's not one over the other, the roles and responsibilities are different. The genitalia argument is a red herring. It has nothing to do with anything. The man isn't head of the home because he has a penis.

 

Thirdly, Christians aren't responsible for whether others become Christians. Christians are to share the gospel of Christ; salvation is between the hearer of the gospel and God.

[Joanne]

The Pearls make me sick.

 

Secondly, as I explained a gazillion posts back, it's not one over the other, the roles and responsibilities are different. The genitalia argument is a red herring. It has nothing to do with anything. The man isn't head of the home because he has a penis.

 

Thirdly, Christians aren't responsible for whether others become Christians. Christians are to share the gospel of Christ; salvation is between the hearer of the gospel and God.

 

Something we can agree on: The Pearls!

[coffeefreak]

I'm SUCH a shrinking violet!

 

And, you have beautiful hair!

:lol:

[CAMom]

The Pearls make me sick.

 

Secondly, as I explained a gazillion posts back, it's not one over the other, the roles and responsibilities are different. The genitalia argument is a red herring. It has nothing to do with anything. The man isn't head of the home because he has a penis.

 

Thirdly, Christians aren't responsible for whether others become Christians. Christians are to share the gospel of Christ; salvation is between the hearer of the gospel and God.

 

:iagree:

 

Cyndi, I think you know I love ya!:)

 

My husband is not the leader of the family merely because he is in possession of a penis.;)

 

As Michelle said, submission does not mean you are lesser in a biblical marriage. It means you are of equal-totally equal-value but just play a different role.

 

In my own home I am no shrinking violet either.;) My husband hears and knows my opinion on everything! I mean everything! Sometimes I share it with him more than once or twice.:tongue_smilie:

 

But, spiritually, the buck stops with him. I align myself under his authority but his loves, honors and respects me and whatever input and/or counsel I have on any given matter. Sometimes (I should say often) he defers to my judgement and we mutually make decisions. There have been very, very few times during the course of our marriage when we just could not agree and someone had to make a decision and it ultimately fell on him.

 

We have a very healthy marriage. We both adore each other. We still have the flames of passion burning after 20 years.;) He loves me sacrificially. I am about as far from a doormat as you can get.;)

 

We both believe that we have a responsibility to fulfill our biblical roles as we understand them. I offer my willingness to be submissive in heart and he offers to love me as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her. I am so thankful to be in such a wonderful marriage with such an amazing and caring man who would never dream of lording his God given authority over me or the kids.

 

I better go find him so I can love all over him. He'll wonder what's gotten into me.:lol:

[coffeefreak]

The Pearls make me sick.

 

.

 

Amen sister!

[LisaKinVA]

Reading through this thread, it's sad that so much is based upon a single verse. What is also sad, is the way certain aspects of Prov. 31 are highlighted, while others (her business dealings, going out to purchase a field to plant a vineyard, etc.), are completely ignored.

 

Some argue that Prov. 31 shows that a woman's place is in the home -- but what they ignore is the implicit arguments that the woman's place is anywhere it is needed, and brings honor to her husband.

 

Additionally, and perhaps most importantly is what the Bible does NOT say throughout this passage, and that is this, "And she went and asked her husband before she..." Instead, the Bible says, "And she went AND" did. This implies she had a range of authority to do things that went far beyond homeschooling and making bread, and she was not asking her husband (as some churches are pushing, as the meaning of true "submission").

 

The relationship between a husband and wife may take many different forms. Being "subject" to one's husband may also take many different forms.

 

My husband and I are one. We complete one another. If I were to be like my SIL, this would NOT be possible. I was made for him, and he for me -- and anyone who says I am not a good wife because I don't fit their interpretation of what being a "wife" means is dead wrong.

 

To purposely be less than who God made me, would be a lie. To pretend (which is what I would be doing) that I am dumb, opinion less, or incapable of doing a variety of tasks would NOT be God-honoring, as that would be tantatmount to saying God was wrong in the way HE created ME.

 

Just my 2 cents.

[CAMom]

 

Additionally, and perhaps most importantly is what the Bible does NOT say throughout this passage, and that is this, "And she went and asked her husband before she..." Instead, the Bible says, "And she went AND" did. This implies she had a range of authority to do things that went far beyond homeschooling and making bread, and she was not asking her husband (as some churches are pushing, as the meaning of true "submission").

 

 

 

Yep. And, even though I do consider myself to be submissive to my husband, I don't ask his "permission" before I do anything.

 

Our relationship is built on mutual trust and respect and he trusts me completely to handle just about anything.

 

I think submission gets a bad rap because of the way some couples live it out. I know women who resist ever giving their husbands their opinion on anything in the name of submission and that is just not what it's about at all.

[ThatCyndiGirl]

And, you have beautiful hair!

:lol:

 

 

Thanks. But,...I look like such a DOG in my avatar!

 

Ronette, I hear what you are saying, but to me the one in charge is the one "with whom the buck stops", so, to me that is not equal. Tomato/tomAHto, perhaps. And I love you, too! ;)

 

I guess a part of me understands, "it's not my concern if someone becomes a christian", but it has never been the sentiment of many christians I know. So many of them really WANTED others to embrace that religion. A lot of christians seem to think that they are supposed to tell people "the gospel". To each his/her own, I guess.

 

I didn't mean that the man is in charge "only because he has a penis". I meant that, on the surface the difference between us is seen.....there. My husband does not deserve a higher place of authority just because he had the luck of being born male. I should not have to bow the will of my spouse just because I had the dumb luck to be born a female. We should BOTH bow to each other's will at different times, as the situation demands. I grew up hearing that "you can't have two bosses". REALLY!? Every pastor who said that has apparently never heard of equal partnership businesses.

 

Some have talked about how "but, we aren't talking about abuse, we are talking about sacrificial love and respect/submission", etc. I see it as a slippery slope. I have seen WAY TOO MANY message board posts about women who were in scary situations and being told by other women, "just submit, more, honey and maybe he will get a job, stop cheating on you, stop spending all the money on stupid stuff, ALLOW you to get a job, etc."

 

No.

 

No way.

 

There is NO REASON for a woman to sit idly by and try her hardest to "just submit a little more" and hope that things get better. It is a slippery slope.

 

How about living in a relationship in which you BOTH are where the buck stops? Sometimes my husband gets his way, sometimes I do. At times I have been responsible for decisions we have made (bad and good), at times it has been him. Yes, it means that sometimes someone compromises, but at NO time has it ever come down to, "well, I am the man so we are doing X" or...."well, I am the woman and we are doing X". To me that relegates the other party to forever living as the follower.

 

I have often heard the sentiment (echoed on My Big Fat Greek Wedding) "The man is the head of the household, but the woman is the neck and the neck turns the head". To me that sounds manipulative. Why not be an active participant and say, "I think that is not a good idea because.....X" instead of trying to manipulate?

 

I can NEVER imagine a relationship in which a MAN becomes a better husband or father becuase his wife is submissive. Doesn't sound much like a man to me.

 

I appreciate the fact that not everyone wants MY relationship. I get that, but after reading this thread I am more and more thankful for my husband!

Edited November 18, 2009 by ThatCyndiGirl