Bible: Wives, be subject to your own husbands...in everything

Ephesians 5
22Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Do any Christians here believe in the above? Do any modern Christian denominations?

If any Christians here don't believe in the above, yet believe that the Bible is the "inerrant word of God", how do you reconcile this?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne

Ephesians 5
22[b]Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Do any Christians here ...[text shortened]... e above, yet believe that the Bible is the "inerrant word of God", how do you reconcile this?[/b]

Could this text have been added to keep the women in line? It doesn't sound very spiritual to my way of thinking.
I too would be keen to here some christians rationalization of these words.
How about you ToO? You're a christian aren't you?

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Could this text have been added to keep the women in line? It doesn't sound very spiritual to my way of thinking.
I too would be keen to here some christians rationalization of these words.
How about you ToO? You're a christian aren't you?

I believe it's important to read the entire chapter. I don't have too much time so I'm sure another Christian will chime in here sometime before I can be back. It also states husbands should love their wives and husbands and wives shall be one flesh - which (just off the top of my head) means husbands and wives should love one another and work together. I'll think on it some more though. It's late and I'm tired 😴😴😴

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Could this text have been added to keep the women in line? It doesn't sound very spiritual to my way of thinking.
I too would be keen to here some christians rationalization of these words.
How about you ToO? You're a christian aren't you?

How about you ToO? You're a christian aren't you?

Based on the response of what seems like the overwhelming majority of Christians who post here, most Christians don't think so 🙂 I'd have to agree. By and large, I believe in the teachings of Jesus. However, there's a wide gulf between the teachings of Jesus and Christianity on the whole. For the most part, Christianity has abandoned the teachings of Jesus for the teachings of others. As one example of many, Jesus did not teach this.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]How about you ToO? You're a christian aren't you?

Based on the response of what seems like the overwhelming majority of Christians who post here, most Christians don't think so 🙂 I'd have to agree. By and large, I believe in the teachings of Jesus. However, there's a wide gulf between the teachings of Jesus and Christianity on the whole. For th ...[text shortened]... ngs of Jesus for the teachings of others. As one example of many, Jesus did not teach this.[/b]

So you dont like to be associated with followers of the church, right?
How do you see womens roles in religous/spiritual affairs? Judging by the title of your OP, it would seem you do not agree with the oppression of women by the church.
I think womens views were oppressed by the men to keep the control,(to keep women doing housework,etc.). Would you agree with that in general?
Also, do you think there is more to it? (than just keeping them in the home. For example did the women have some sort of power that the men wanted to oppress? )

Originally posted by gtbiking4life
I believe it's important to read the entire chapter. I don't have too much time so I'm sure another Christian will chime in here sometime before I can be back. It also states husbands should love their wives and husbands and wives shall be one flesh - which (just off the top of my head) means husbands and wives should love one another and work together. I'll think on it some more though. It's late and I'm tired 😴😴😴

I'm not sure women throughout the ages would have always been as willing to send their sons into war,(for example), as your post would have make out.
I dont know about this "one flesh" business.
Why is reading the entire chapter important? Surely ToO has pointed out the most important bit. Would the rest of the chapter somehow reconcile (t)his basic point,ie. that women be subject to their husbands in everything?

Originally posted by gtbiking4life
I believe it's important to read the entire chapter. I don't have too much time so I'm sure another Christian will chime in here sometime before I can be back. It also states husbands should love their wives and husbands and wives shall be one flesh - which (just off the top of my head) means husbands and wives should love one another and work together. I'll think on it some more though. It's late and I'm tired 😴😴😴

You mean, the bible doesn't has to be true in its details? If only some details is true in each chapter, then it is all true?

The bible isn't exactly known to show that women are equal to men. The history of christianity shows that women isn't worth much.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne

Ephesians 5
22[b]Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Do any Christians here ...[text shortened]... e above, yet believe that the Bible is the "inerrant word of God", how do you reconcile this?[/b]

it would be great ... .. as a good wife is worth all the gold in china.. a bad wife is worth all the s**t in china..

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne

Ephesians 5
22[b]Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Do any Christians here ...[text shortened]... e above, yet believe that the Bible is the "inerrant word of God", how do you reconcile this?[/b]

Of the thirteen Pauline epistles, only seven are generally agreed to have actually been written by Paul (Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon), while the remaining six are of disputed authorship (Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, and Titus).

John Dominic Crossan and Marcus Borg have written a book called "The First Paul" which basically claims that if you read Paul's undisputed letters by themselves that you get a very different theological picture of Paul than if you add the disputed letters. They claim that Paul was a much more radical and egalitarian figure than has been generally supposed. The later, disputed letters were added to tone down Paul's original position and make it more acceptable to Roman notions of hierarchy and patriarchy, the passage you quote from Ephesians being a good example. What we are left with is the radical Paul being transformed into a very conservative Paul by the early church.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne

Ephesians 5
22[b]Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Do any Christians here ...[text shortened]... e above, yet believe that the Bible is the "inerrant word of God", how do you reconcile this?[/b]

There's nothing to reconcile ToO.

It's all part of God's perfect plan, and is in no way contradictory to the rest of scripture.

The woman was made for the man as a help meet.

The passage from which you quote begins by saying that the husband should love his wife. This places a greater accountability on the man.

There is order in God's universe. God created it. That's the way it is.

But just because God set in order that the man is the head of his wife does not in any way diminish the value of the woman.

Man and woman are equal in soul, but our roles are laid out differently.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
I'm not sure women throughout the ages would have always been as willing to send their sons into war,(for example), as your post would have make out.
I dont know about this "one flesh" business.
Why is reading the entire chapter important? Surely ToO has pointed out the most important bit. Would the rest of the chapter somehow reconcile (t)his basic point,ie. that women be subject to their husbands in everything?

Well - it's important to read the whole chapter because otherwise you take things out of context. I think joshepw explained well above so I'll just leave it at that. Men and women have different roles but should love one another.

Originally posted by gtbiking4life
Well - it's important to read the whole chapter because otherwise you take things out of context. I think joshepw explained well above so I'll just leave it at that. Men and women have different roles but should love one another.

You mean that there shouldn't be women astronauts? Woman scientists? Woman jet pilots?

Originally posted by josephw
There's nothing to reconcile ToO.

It's all part of God's perfect plan, and is in no way contradictory to the rest of scripture.

The woman was made for the man as a help meet.

The passage from which you quote begins by saying that the husband should love his wife. This places a greater accountability on the man.

There is order in God's universe. ...[text shortened]... e of the woman.

Man and woman are equal in soul, but our roles are laid out differently.

The woman was made for the man as a help meet.

But just because God set in order that the man is the head of his wife does not in any way diminish the value of the woman.

Are you married? Have you ever met any women? And told them that you believe this?

😲

Originally posted by FabianFnas
You mean that there shouldn't be women astronauts? Woman scientists? Woman jet pilots?

lol - umm...no? We're not talking about careers here. I admit I laughed when I read your reply. Thanks for that.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
[b]The woman was made for the man as a help meet.

But just because God set in order that the man is the head of his wife does not in any way diminish the value of the woman.

Are you married? Have you ever met any women? And told them that you believe this?

😲[/b]

I'm married and my wife understands she is not valued any less. We actually have the same beliefs and work together to create a happy marriage and family.