Post by silas on Oct 5, 2007 20:55:50 GMT -5
Wives obey your husband, husbands love your wives.
To understand what this means you have to look at it from a Christian perspective. From a Christian perspective, marriage is a union so sacred that the dissolution of it is akin to the dismemberment of a living person.
In such a union, over the course of time, disagreements will arise. It is impossible for them not to. In ideal circumstances such disagreements would be discussed in a courteous and logical manner. But what if no consensus can be reached in this manner? What if, after long diplomatic argument, there is still no agreement?
In a mere business partnership, each partner can go their separate ways, saddened by the turn of events that has led them to disagree. But remember that from a Christian perspective marriage is much more than mere business. To a Christian marriage is sacred, and should therefore not be dissolved except in most extreme circumstances (till death do us part).
In this case, what is to be done about this disagreement in the marriage? From a purely democratic standpoint we are at a standstill. We cannot agree, but we cannot part ways. For us not to be eternally at a stalemate, one party must have the deciding vote. One party must be able to say: “I'm sorry that we can't agree, but we must make a choice, and this is the choice that we will make.”
The Bible does say that this is the man's job. It is sexist that it never occurred to them at the time that a woman could fulfill this role. They had some reasons for being sexist; this was a time when men went out to work, and women stayed home and took care of children. Why did the women have to stay home? Women have breasts, and, at the time, you needed those in order to feed your children. The men, who worked away from the home, were generally better informed about the world. Since they were better informed, it fell naturally to them to have the deciding vote.
From a current Day standpoint, I can see no reason why Christianity would deny a woman headship of the household. Personally I have no problem with a woman who wants to be in charge. I wish her the best of luck finding a mate.
As to the “love your wives” clause. Remember that this was a time when marriages were prearranged by parents, mostly based on money. Maybe it should say: “husbands don't resent your wives just because you're stuck with them forever through no choice of your own.”
Please know that I don't claim any of this as original thought, it comes mostly from C. S. Lewis, almost none of it is mine.
To understand what this means you have to look at it from a Christian perspective. From a Christian perspective, marriage is a union so sacred that the dissolution of it is akin to the dismemberment of a living person.
In such a union, over the course of time, disagreements will arise. It is impossible for them not to. In ideal circumstances such disagreements would be discussed in a courteous and logical manner. But what if no consensus can be reached in this manner? What if, after long diplomatic argument, there is still no agreement?
In a mere business partnership, each partner can go their separate ways, saddened by the turn of events that has led them to disagree. But remember that from a Christian perspective marriage is much more than mere business. To a Christian marriage is sacred, and should therefore not be dissolved except in most extreme circumstances (till death do us part).
In this case, what is to be done about this disagreement in the marriage? From a purely democratic standpoint we are at a standstill. We cannot agree, but we cannot part ways. For us not to be eternally at a stalemate, one party must have the deciding vote. One party must be able to say: “I'm sorry that we can't agree, but we must make a choice, and this is the choice that we will make.”
The Bible does say that this is the man's job. It is sexist that it never occurred to them at the time that a woman could fulfill this role. They had some reasons for being sexist; this was a time when men went out to work, and women stayed home and took care of children. Why did the women have to stay home? Women have breasts, and, at the time, you needed those in order to feed your children. The men, who worked away from the home, were generally better informed about the world. Since they were better informed, it fell naturally to them to have the deciding vote.
From a current Day standpoint, I can see no reason why Christianity would deny a woman headship of the household. Personally I have no problem with a woman who wants to be in charge. I wish her the best of luck finding a mate.
As to the “love your wives” clause. Remember that this was a time when marriages were prearranged by parents, mostly based on money. Maybe it should say: “husbands don't resent your wives just because you're stuck with them forever through no choice of your own.”
Please know that I don't claim any of this as original thought, it comes mostly from C. S. Lewis, almost none of it is mine.