It does not say: “Wives be subject to your husbands as to the devil.” As Jesus Christ said to the Pharisees in John 8: 43 Why do you not know my speech? Because you cannot hear my word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do.
This passage from Ephesians is huge and you can’t take one phrase out of context.
Keep in mind that Jesus DIED for the Church.
Ephesians 5:22-33New International Version (NIV)
22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[b] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
Paul also said escaped slaves should return to and obey their masters. Would you follow that prescription if you were abducted and enslaved?
Please provide the text from Paul.
Ephesians 6: 5-8
Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ; not by way of eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. With good will render service, as to the Lord, and not to men, knowing that whatever good thing each one does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether slave or free.
It’s also interesting that despite the fact that we are told repeatedly in the New Testament to “submit” to basically every form of human authority, but then this happens in Acts 5:
"27 And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest questioned them, 28 saying, “We strictly charged you not to teach in this name, yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and you intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.” 29 But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men. "
Given how much time the Apostles spent in prison for similar episodes and how many of them were ultimately executed, one has to draw the conclusion that their view of “submission” did not involve total, unquestioning obedience to all requests from the authorities in the “submit” passages.
Yes, this is one of the global submission passages I was talking about.
A lot of these discussions treat wifely submission as a unique phenomenon to be discussed separately from the rest of the NT, but in the minds of the writers of the NT, wifely submission was closely connected with submission to parents (and you’re not going to see anything about “until you’re 18”), slave masters, and civil and religious authorities, as well as general submission (Ephesians 5: “21 Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.”).
We get a lot of talk about how “everybody knows not to do XYZ” and “only bad people would do XYZ,” but that’s assuming that a lot of education is happening that may not be happening.
I know when I was in public school sex ed back in the late late 1980s, it was all anatomy and diseases–no talk at all about consent. In fact, I don’t think the words “rape” or “sexual assault” were used at all. And how many parents really seriously talk to their teens of either sex about consent?
I am going to try to do it, mostly because I now realize that that’s a huge hole in the life skills and moral education of US teens.
And I think this goes for marriage, too. I’m sure a lot of people will say, “everybody knows not to be abusive,” but where and when did they learn it? I remember once reading a book on abuse and having the unpleasant realization that I was doing one of the abusive behaviors mentioned in the book. So I stopped.
I think that I lot of people of both sexes would be well served by looking at a list of abusive behaviors or a book about abuse and asking themselves: Am I doing this? Is my boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse doing this?
And that goes double or triple for anybody who thinks that they always deserve the “final say.”
Another thing–it’s a commonplace in Red Pill/MRA/ultra-traditional circles to say that modern understandings of abuse criminalize normal husbandly behavior.
I say to that that if your style of being a husband and father matches the standard definitions of abuse, you should feel bad about that and should stop.
I’d also quote this from Romans 13 (St. Paul again!):
“13 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.”
From the Suscipe Domine site: — spousal rape/forcing sex in marriage:
So yes-- abuse of a wife --is still circulating within. And abusers use scripture to “justify” it.
That there is no evidence was not proven at all. That the woman speaking was ill-prepared does not speak to the reports or research that were referenced.
All I can think is that she froze because, without citing the documents referenced, I know it’s around 1 in 5 to 1 in 3 women. But as Xantippe acknowledged we don’t know exact numbers because not all abuse it reported. And the rate is the same in the US. It’s not really different here.
Do you think that it is propaganda because of the poor defense of the campaign? And that is what it is, a campaign; not propaganda.
If you want specific points answered, your’s or Senator Leyonhjelm’s, go ahead and ask but one question that stood out to me was why other contributing factors weren’t addressed. Simple answer: Abuse is a choice. If it wasn’t than abusers would abuse anyone they felt like. They can’t though because they will lose their job if they beat up a coworker, get thrown from a restaurant if they verbally abuse the waitstaff, get arrested if they attack someone on the street or public transportation. Abusing a partner (and/or children) is something that was acceptable in their family of origin and within in certain subcultures (religious, social). The campaign isn’t saying that all men abuse but that society does a lot that reinforce that girls/women being ill treated is acceptable, and addresses some of those things.
Christianity is all about being Christ-like, a martyr, not worldly: our reward is in heaven.
And yet, paradoxically, a person who is a martyr to their family may not actually be doing a good job as a parent or spouse.
Marriage is complex and complicated that is what I got from this post. I couldn’t read over 500 of the responses.
Sometimes the family is secondary, depending upon the situation.
29 And every one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting.
What an odd perspective to take. Very “contractual”, not so marital. It means the extent of one’s “say” about all things that cost money is a function of who earns the most money!
And thereby devaluing everything a SAHP does.