Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 0/368 Day: 0/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Women and the Fundamentalist View of Marriage
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 211 of 314 (278428)
01-12-2006 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 209 by iano
01-12-2006 10:45 AM


Re: Women and the Fundamentalist View of Marriage
Great post, Ian, I agree. I've never been the submissive type and haven't been in a marriage for years, so I don't know how I'd do now, but my picture of the ideal working out of this order of things is that the husband's headship is led by his love for his wife, which doesn't sound like anything oppressive at all. As you say, in reality we're all so flawed anything is going to be a struggle, but before Paul told wives to submit to their husbands, he told husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by iano, posted 01-12-2006 10:45 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by iano, posted 01-12-2006 1:05 PM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 213 of 314 (278435)
01-12-2006 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 212 by crashfrog
01-12-2006 11:38 AM


Re: Women and the Fundamentalist View of Marriage
However, there are many fundemental decisions that need to be made within a marriage where the potential for fundemental disagreement can take place:
- whether to have more kids
- whether the family should move home to another part of the country
- whether it is better that both work and the kids are placed in creche
- whether a risky but life enhancing operation should be performed on a child.
quote:
Absolutely none of these are situations where one person's opinion should overrule another, especially the first. Particularly the first. What you would describe as the man taking the lead and making the decision as the "head" of the wife, would be an illegal act of marital rape.
Actually I should have mentioned that I didn't think these were good examples of where the husband should rule. But in any case the husband's headship isn't to be a laying down of the law but a decision made when it is hard to make a decision, not when his wife is adamantly opposed to him.
This message has been edited by Faith, 01-12-2006 11:46 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by crashfrog, posted 01-12-2006 11:38 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 216 by crashfrog, posted 01-12-2006 1:00 PM Faith has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 215 of 314 (278440)
01-12-2006 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by crashfrog
01-12-2006 11:38 AM


This topic got way too polarized
This idea that the Bible is a throwback is completely wrong. In any area of life whatever, Christ's teaching was a liberalizing influence. In the area of marriage it was a CORRECTIVE to the frequent tyrannical abuse of wives by husbands that prevailed in the pagan world, and in fact still does in many parts of the world. "Headship" is not tyranny. I haven't followed this entire thread but there shouldn't be any implication of the husband's overruling a wife's strong feelings about something. That is not what it means. He's to be a leader, not an oppressor in any way at all. Although in one place wives are told to be submissive to their husbands, in other places the idea is that they are to be submissive one to another. Much of what people seem to be saying on this thread about mutuality in marriage actually comes from the once-Christian culture, and is out of place as an objection to the Bible. This topic somehow got wrongly polarized. Too much heat, little light.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by crashfrog, posted 01-12-2006 11:38 AM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 252 by nator, posted 01-13-2006 6:43 PM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 219 of 314 (278452)
01-12-2006 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by iano
01-12-2006 1:05 PM


Re: Women and the Fundamentalist View of Marriage
I agree. The problem I think is that we take fallen world meanings for submit/head/helpmeet etc and force them into Gods order and so end up with power struggle and abuse.
Yes. And some Christians have even misread those terms into the Bible.
Certainly your opponents do.
This message has been edited by Faith, 01-12-2006 01:15 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by iano, posted 01-12-2006 1:05 PM iano has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 254 of 314 (278815)
01-13-2006 8:07 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by nator
01-13-2006 6:43 PM


Re: This topic got way too polarized
Do you mean "pagan" like in goddess worship?
It's just the generic term used for the entire nonChristian world
This message has been edited by Faith, 01-13-2006 08:08 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by nator, posted 01-13-2006 6:43 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by nator, posted 01-14-2006 4:51 PM Faith has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024