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

Originally posted by stoker
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..

Care to share your views on what constitutes a "good wife" vs. a "bad wife"?

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.

Here's the entire section on marriage:

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.

25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, 26so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. 28So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; 29for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, 30because we are members of His body. 31FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH. 32This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church. 33Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband.

Seems like husbands are to love their wives as they love themselves and wives are to be subject to their husbands as they are to be to God.

From your posts, I gather that you reconcile verses 22-24 by ignoring them and give your wife equal authority regardless. Is this correct?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
This seems only remotely tangentially related. How long have you been sitting on this? Evidently long enough that you just had to get it out regardless of the circumstances.

Sounds like a good topic for another thread though.

What? It's directly related. The passages like 'wives, obey your husbands' and 'slaves, obey your masters' were later additions that contradicted what Paul (and Jesus) had in mind (according to Crossan and Borg).

Originally posted by rwingett
What? It's directly related. The passages like 'wives, obey your husbands' and 'slaves, obey your masters' were later additions that contradicted what Paul (and Jesus) had in mind (according to Crossan and Borg).

I thought the thread was about how Ephesians 5:22 fits in the beliefs of Chrsitans. Did you read the OP?

In discussions on Ephesians five it is often overlooked that first Paul all the beleivers to be "filled in spirit":

Before He embarks on instructions to wife, husband, children, or slaves he preceeds with an exhortation to be filled in the human spirit with the Holy Spirit of God (17-21)

It is not that Paul is saying, "No you all go home and do good things in the strength of you own will power."

That would simply be more law keeping. Paul precedes his instructions with this:

"Therfore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (v.17)

And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissoluteness, but be filled in spirit, (v.18)

Speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and psalming with your heart to the Lord, (v.19)

Giving thanks at all times for all things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to our God and Father, (v.20)

Being subject to one another in the fear of Christ." (v.21)

Wives, be subject to your own husbands as to the Lord, (v.22)

The Apostle portrays Jesus Christ as present, living, and available. They should first and foremost be filled with Christ. They should be filled in thier innermost being, in their regenerated spirit with the Spirit of Christ.

Christ is the only man 100% subject to the will of God. The Christian is to be filled with Him and be in the enjoyment of Him. Christ is to fill them up and overflow from within them in singing, psalming, praise and thanksgiving. In this enjoyment of the indwelling Christ they can be "subject ot one another" . That is all subject to one another in the humility of Christ's nature.

The obedience that Paul exhorts is preceed by his encouragement for them to be filled with the nature of Christ in their innermost being. This is like the enjoyment of sweet wine.

"And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissoluteness, BUT BE FILLED IN SPIRIT ..."

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I thought the thread was about how Ephesians 5:22 fits in the beliefs of Chrsitans. Did you read the OP?

And my point, dear sir, is that Ephesians 5:22 does not properly belong in the belief of Christians in the first place. It was not written by Paul and hence should not be included in the canon.

Originally posted by rwingett
And my point, dear sir, is that Ephesians 5:22 does not properly belong in the belief of Christians in the first place. It was not written by Paul and hence should not be included in the canon.

I think you know what was intended 🙂

Seriously, start another thread. I really does sound like an interesting topic.

Originally posted by jaywill
In discussions on Ephesians five it is often overlooked that first Paul all the beleivers to be [b]"filled in spirit":

Before He embarks on instructions to wife, husband, children, or slaves he preceeds with an exhortation to be filled in the human spirit with the Holy Spirit of God (17-21)

It is not that Paul is saying, "No you all go hom ...[text shortened]... o not be drunk with wine, in which is dissoluteness, BUT BE FILLED IN SPIRIT ..."[/b][/b]

So, do you believe in Ephesians 5:22-24? Do any modern Christian denominations?

If you don't believe in Ephesians 5:22-24, 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]

Sure they do. The Baptist church I attended believe in it, and the Lutheran. But one must always remember the key word--CONTEXT. One must read the Bible in the context it was writtten. At the time (1st century AD), women weren't exactly on an equal footing with men. Second, it was not Jesus who said the words in Ephesians--it was Paul. And Paul was not God--he was a man.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
Sure they do. The Baptist church I attended believe in it, and the Lutheran. But one must always remember the key word--CONTEXT. One must read the Bible in the context it was writtten. At the time (1st century AD), women weren't exactly on an equal footing with men. Second, it was not Jesus who said the words in Ephesians--it was Paul. And Paul was not God--he was a man.

Just to be clear, are you saying that the Baptist and Lutheran churches did not put it in context and so believed it? Just curious, was the Lutheran church Missouri Synod?

Seems like many, if not most, of the Christians who post here believe Paul's word as if God said it.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
So, do you believe in Ephesians 5:22-24? Do any modern Christian denominations?

If you don't believe in Ephesians 5:22-24, yet believe that the Bible is the "inerrant word of God", how do you reconcile this?

========================
So, do you believe in Ephesians 5:22-24?
=============================

Yes, Of course. For the proper church life we need such love of husbands towards wives and such submission of wives towards their own husbands.

Did everything I write about verses 18 through 21 go right over your head ?

==========================
Do any modern Christian denominations?
============================ [/b]

I am sure they do.

Did anything at all about my expounding of verses 17-21 help to see things in context.

By the way, denominations are schisms and are the work of the flesh. Denominating (dividing into kinds of local churches) among Christians is taught against in the New Testament.

==========================
If you don't believe in Ephesians 5:22-24, yet believe that the Bible is the "inerrant word of God", how do you reconcile this?
============================

It sounds like you are standing by salivating, hoping some Christians will fall into some trap that you have set.

Is this a really a profitable use of your time ? If you know how the proper Christian life should be lived, show us.

Jesus, didn't spend His whole life setting up traps for reiligious people to step into. He showed us life. He showed us what is was for a man to live unto God.

He showed us a man filled with God. Show us. Don't set up traps on innerancy to snare followers of Jesus. You trust the you have the way ??? Live it and show us.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I think you know what was intended 🙂

Seriously, start another thread. I really does sound like an interesting topic.

I hasten to add that both Crossan and Borg are Christians. Their view, as Christians, is that Ephesians 5:22 holds no weight. Considering the epistle's spurious provenance, they do not think women are meant to be subservient to their husbands. Perhaps that's not the Christian position you want to argue against, but it's there nonetheless.

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]========================
So, do you believe in Ephesians 5:22-24?
=============================

Yes, Of course. For the proper church life we need such love of husbands towards wives and such submission of wives towards their own husbands.

Did everything I write about verses 18 through 21 go right over your head ?

====== rancy to snare followers of Jesus. You trust the you have the way ??? Live it and show us.

[/b]Yes, Of course. For the proper church life we need such love of husbands towards wives and such submission of wives towards their own husbands.

Did everything I write about verses 18 through 21 go right over your head ?

The question was about verses 22-24 which you did not directly address. How you can think it appropriate to assume that because I asked you to do so constitutes my not being able to understand what you wrote about verses 18-21 is beyond me.

It sounds like you are standing by salivating, hoping some Christians will fall into some trap that you have set.

Is this a really a profitable use of your time ? If you know how the proper Christian life should be lived, show us.

Jesus, didn't spend His whole life setting up traps for reiligious people to step into. He showed us life. He showed us what is was for a man to live unto God.

They are questions to help arrive at the truth. Only those who do not know the truth would view them as "traps". By and large, Jesus spoke the truth. "Religious people" such as Scribes and Pharisees were continually falling into "traps" since they did not know the truth.

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]========================
So, do you believe in Ephesians 5:22-24?
=============================

Yes, Of course. For the proper church life we need such love of husbands towards wives and such submission of wives towards their own husbands.

Did everything I write about verses 18 through 21 go right over your head ?

====== ...[text shortened]... rancy to snare followers of Jesus. You trust the you have the way ??? Live it and show us.

i had a dog once. i loved the little fellow. i took care of him, walked him, fed him. but he had to do what i said. if i told him to get off the bed, he did. if i told him to sit by me while going outside he did. he was subservient to me. and i loved him.


is there anything wrong with this picture? of course not, it was a dog. and no matter how much i loved it, our relationship was still that of master-servant. it would never "speak" out of turn, it would obey my commands, and probably in its little dog head he hoped i loved it enough not to command it to do stupid stuff that might hurt him or get him killed.


is this what your church life is like? this is what it requires? that the woman be man's pet? is this a good life for a woman to be taken care of by a man? to be at the man's command? to hope that the man put in charge of her well being at certain points of her life, father, brother, husband, son, is a good master?

do you have any idea how horrible and demeaning that sounds?

Originally posted by rwingett
I hasten to add that both Crossan and Borg are Christians. Their view, as Christians, is that Ephesians 5:22 holds no weight. Considering the epistle's spurious provenance, they do not think women are meant to be subservient to their husbands. Perhaps that's not the Christian position you want to argue against, but it's there nonetheless.

Well, assuming that Christianity SHOULD have the doctrine of Jesus as its foundation, there is much in the OT and NT that should "hold no weight". This would include Ephesians 5:22-24. Jesus did not teach this.