-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Meat Why the Patriarchal form of family leadership is wrong.
- Thread starter steve
- Start date
Biblical Patriarchy is when selfish unrighteous men lord over and oppress and abuse women and children because they are power hungry dictators over their families. This is a departure from God’s original design of mutual submission.
Like when God said in the garden “it’s not good that the guy is alone, I shall make for him some accountability.”
Like when God said in the garden “it’s not good that the guy is alone, I shall make for him some accountability.”
Noice!
C
Cap
Guest
I really would like to learn how this group defines Biblical Patriarchy.
And @frederick, I agree, thank God for spell checker.
And @frederick, I agree, thank God for spell checker.
I simply believe in husband leadership.
Which, handily enough, is advocated in the New Testament.
Ephesians 5:22-24 (KJV) 22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so [let] the wives [be] to their own husbands in every thing.
Which, handily enough, is advocated in the New Testament.
Ephesians 5:22-24 (KJV) 22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so [let] the wives [be] to their own husbands in every thing.
Biblical Patriarchy, aka Biblical Headship, is the authority structure of marriage and family we see clearly throughout all Scripture. This is God’s design for marriage… that the husband is in authority over his wife(s) & household… completely… period!
*This authority structure in marriage is apparently so important to the Lord that the Word instructs wives to submit fully to their husband even if the husband is an unbeliever or isn’t obedient to the Word of God.
————————————-
However, I’ve heard it preached quite differently another way:
If Christ is the Head of the church, and we see that He set aside His crown, selflessly humbled Himself to become a man, and then lay down His life for His bride… (and husbands are instructed to love their wives like Christ loves the church)… then obviously it’s sinful and terrible for a man to do anything that would upset his wife or hurt her feelings or make any decisions that would make her uncomfortable. A husband truly walking in proper “servant leadership”, and really loving his wife will lay down his life, and set aside his own selfish desires, and protect his wife from any hurt or pain or discomfort. (I think the proper term for this better way of marital Structure is called “mutual submission”… and I’m told it is far more righteous and good than the out dated archaic oppressive system of Biblical patriarchy.)
*This authority structure in marriage is apparently so important to the Lord that the Word instructs wives to submit fully to their husband even if the husband is an unbeliever or isn’t obedient to the Word of God.
————————————-
However, I’ve heard it preached quite differently another way:
If Christ is the Head of the church, and we see that He set aside His crown, selflessly humbled Himself to become a man, and then lay down His life for His bride… (and husbands are instructed to love their wives like Christ loves the church)… then obviously it’s sinful and terrible for a man to do anything that would upset his wife or hurt her feelings or make any decisions that would make her uncomfortable. A husband truly walking in proper “servant leadership”, and really loving his wife will lay down his life, and set aside his own selfish desires, and protect his wife from any hurt or pain or discomfort. (I think the proper term for this better way of marital Structure is called “mutual submission”… and I’m told it is far more righteous and good than the out dated archaic oppressive system of Biblical patriarchy.)
C
Cap
Guest
I agree with that %100.
C
Cap
Guest
I am not sure what group of people you hang out with or who came up with this, but I surely don't agree with it.
Here is my view of mutual submission. Sorry it's a boat analogy but it's how I can relate things easiest.
You are the captain of a boat. You are completely responsible for the crew, vessel and the surrounding environment you may cause damage to in the event there is a miss calculation.
You and you wife decide to take a trip to a wonderful little island offshore just a few miles. She likes to operate the boat every now and again and she is pretty good at it but does need guidance. She wants to go check out a point that is a little off course but she really likes the view there. You get the boat out of the harbor and is pretty clear sailing, a considerable amount of traffic and the seas are manageable but not calm. You are tired and the trip to the point will cause a delay youdon't want to do, but to be fair you tell her, look I'm going to go to sleep for a while, you handle the boat, go see the view at the point. Tell me when we get to the island. You have just mutually submitted to her for the duration of the trip, unless a problem arises. At which time you will take control to enter the port of the island.
That's my idea is mutual submission.
I don't have a problem with that. I wouldn't describe it as mutual submission though. You have remained as the head. You have made a decision, as head, to permit your wife to go and see the view even though it is not your personal preference. At no point in this have you submitted to your wife - but you have decided to let her do what she wants to do, out of love.
Where patriarchy vs mutual submission show is when there is a disagreement. And when that disagreement is over an important decision, or an unimportant decision.
Unimportant decision: "Which restaurant will we eat lunch at?"
Patriarchy: Ask the wife what she wants to do. Unless it's going to be completely inappropriate (e.g. far too expensive), do what she wants as a loving gesture. Or sometimes do what you want, just because your desires are important too.
Mutual submission: Both say what you want to do. Try and come to a mutual agreement. If no mutual agreement is possible, do what she wants to keep the peace.
Important decision: "Do we buy this house?"
Patriarchy: Ask the wife for her opinion and listen extremely carefully to all of her input. Listen equally carefully to your own thoughts on the matter. Then make an executive decision that takes into account her views but is entirely your decision.
Mutual submission: Both say what you want to do. Try and come to a mutual agreement. If the disagreement is stark this might involve many long arguments. If no mutual agreement is possible, do what she wants to keep the peace.
Yes, that is the way that some preach it.
When she is the Queen, and he is King of #MakingHerHappy.
I see truth in both of those and think that depending on the person you ask they are going to go one way or the other with it. I think the truth is in the middle of the two. To argue one or the other is adding or taking anyway from what Gods word is saying in both of those. Yes the wife is to submit to her husband but a loving husband will also not push his wife to far in a decision knowing that she can’t handle it. The Bible says to be like God, that we are made in His Image so to make a decision and push a wife to far is not being like God or acting in his image. God does not put us through anything we can’t handle so a husband should not do it as well. See both ways have Gods word in them but yet both are adding to or taking away. Both auger Against the other but yet both have Gods words and Directions. I what it known that I am not trying to argue with my husband in this at all. I have been having people argue with me about this topic and more and the best way for me to Learn is to Throw out what others have said to see the response from my husband and others. I will Omit that I have for years grown up believing differently then how my husband feels. So to hear his response helps me understand even if it seems I am Arguing. I am trying to find a better way of doing so that works for me but so far have not found one. The one thing we both agree on is that the husband is the head of house hold. The husband has the final decision making in anything and all things.
Last edited:
I see what you are saying, that he is submitting to a desire of hers. But it is peripheral to the trip and isn’t really costing him anything to grant her desire.
If the detour were to add quite a delay in getting to their destination and caused him to sacrifice something that he had hoped to do, that would be a example of submission to her desire out of love, but, for me, that still wouldn’t fall into the mutual submission category.
Let’s take this to where it is impossible for both of them to have their hearts desire.
He wants to take a boat trip but she wants to take an airline flight. They only have this two week period in a year. They took a boat trip last year.
True mutual submission requires him to settle for the flight. Even though the costs related to the upkeep of the boat continue while they spend their vacation in another way.
C
Cap
Guest
How is this even Christian? This is what the world does. If I encounter this discussion with a couple I would immediately assume they are not God centered.
I have heard the phrase, Happy wife, happy life, mostly from those who live outside of God's leading. If I did hear it from a christian man, I automatically knew they do not follow the Christianity I do. So to me this is non issue and no threat to a Godly family.
I don’t Argue about a boat ride Versus a plane ride. Those are little things that in the end are the husbands decision. I am talking about bigger decisions that the wife may not be ready for. Decisions Such as boat rides versus airplane rides or a move versus not a move or a wife quitting a job versus not quitting a job because it’s the husbands decision our little things in the big picture they always should submit to those decisions a husband makes in. If a wife is fighting about things like that then there is a big problem as far as Submission. The wife is not doing as the Bible says. For a husband to push for a wife to take another before she is ready is putting her in to a place that she can’t handle just for him to get his Desires. Depending on how fast he pushes her he could lose her and then he made a decision based on a flash desire. Loses a wife to take another. For what because he is the man and has the right. He in the end is hurting himself the new wife and the wife he pushed to far.
C
Cap
Guest
Challenging scenario.
Taking the flight because they already took a boat trip last year could be submission out of love and not considered mutual, in my mind. Forcing her to take the boat vacation just so he could show that he has the final say could also be considered forcing his authority, which I don't believe is biblical.
I understand what you are getting at with the "Even though the costs related to the upkeep of the boat continue while they spend their vacation in another way" part, but in reality boat upkeep is a continual thing whether you go on the trip or not. It would be continual if they did nothing.
One of the facets of a marriage responsibility of a husband, at least a loving one, that I don't think is being considered is the leadership ability of the husband to reveal the reasons why a particular decision should be made. The boat upkeep is a responsibility he decided to undergo when he bought the boat 5 years ago. They regularly go out on it and she routinely enjoys it. However, this year she asked to do something different. Maybe in reality he can't afford the boat anymore and his wife's request is forcing him to make a decision that he doesn't want to do.
To me the idea of mutual submission is twisted and is not the real problem.
Again we agree.
As has happened many times before in discussions here, I think both "sides" are mostly agreeing on fact but disagreeing on terminology. This is extremely common in theological discussions and it is very good when you can cut past the language and see the common core of agreement.