pinklight

In other words the power is in the woman’s hands not in his.

Nuff said. The power is in the WOMAN’S hands. 🙂

If she gives you authority to make decisions that she could have made, doesn’t that mean that she has the power to give something that actually belongs to her too?

*BIG GRIN*
😛

Are you sure? Where does the Bible command that she make no decision about the kids when you are in the house? And does the Bible go further by commanding that she make no decision about the kids even when you are not in the house? Would it also be usurping your authority if she did that? Should she be calling you first to ask your permission to put the kids to bed if you are not in the house? How exactly does the Bible describe your wife’s usurping of your authority?

He only has final authority when he’s physicaly under the roof.

Mark, oh come on…

The more I think about what Mark is saying, the more I believe that his wife is the key to his authority.

YEP YEP!

How could your wife “usurp” your authority? An authority can be usurped only if the authority belongs to one person and not the other. Does the authority over your children belong solely to you? If it doesn’t, and your wife makes a decision about your children, how could she usurp what also belongs to her?

I would like to know too, Mark. How is that possible?

How would we know if authority exists unless someone takes authority?

That’s right!! If Mark cannot take authority (he doesn’t need to cause his wife gives it to him) then he doesn’t actualy have any authortiy. He only has what has been given by his wife, therefore the question is, if SHE DECIDED not give him this authority would he have it? The answer depends on whether or not he can at that point take the authority because she had no longer decided to give him authority.

When you say this it seems to imply that your wife doesn’t have the authority to tell the kids when they can leave the table.

I think Mark is saying that she indeed does have authority to tell the kids when they can leave the table even if Mark is present, but that she gives the descision power to the father as she believes she is commanded to do. So she has the authority because they are her children, but she doesn’t use it over the head of the home, the father.

Mark doesn’t have to exercise his “right” of authority because his wife places herself under his authority. It would be sin for her from her perspective (and Mark’s) to not give the descion power over to the father of the home.

Is this right, Mark? (Gotta double check)

Thank you Mark, for giving 227! I might have a few things to say more in response later.. Thanks again, Mark. It helps me understand where you are coming from.

I have never said i need to ‘take authority’ over my wife, as appears common in these threads. It is not about ‘taking’ the auhtority, it is whether authority exists. Even when authority exists we can choose not to obey it. I can choose to break laws, but it doesn’t mean that the authority to fine me, no longer applies.

Right, Mark. It’s about what your wife does. She places herself under your authority – you don’t have to “take” authority over her. This is what Lydia pointed out.

If my children ask me first to hop down, would i tell them to ask their mother aswell…no i wouldn’t.

My example does not say that the wife does not have authority over our children, nor able to make decisions. It simply shows, that when both parents are there, and an authoritative decision is to be made, i make it. My wife expects me to make it. Would she make the same decision if i were not there…of course she would.

Mark,

So you are saying that in the home both you and your wife have authority but you have ultimate authority or final say – in the home.

I think it is clear then what you are saying, if I’m not mistaken.

The idea that God would arbitrarily choose to designate half the human race to be subordinate to the other half in the church and in the family without just cause,

Love the way you’ve worded this – “without just cause”.

So what’s the sound rational for women being placed under men?

There’s nothing sound about that. Comp doctrine is NOT sound doctrine. I hate to say that cause I don’t want to cause offense, but it’s simply true. It’s just not sound.

117
SM, I completely agree. Awesome comment. I look at it the same way.

His commands and precepts are based on sound reason for sure.

114

TL, I read some stuff of the Five Aspects awhile ago and it was some of the most horride stuff I had ever read up to that time on gender roles. I think Five Aspects is creepy stuff. Though I’ve not read the material in awhile.

There was something I was reading at CBMW kinda recently and I was under the impression that what I was reading was getting the message across that women arn’t called to make disciples. I just can’t rememeber what it was that I was reading about.

It is interesting that most pastors do not give this kind of counsel but look to the wife to be the “head” in initiating a sacrificial submission in order for him to “respond” in a good way to her. I believe that this is completely backwards to the “leaving” and “cleaving” that the man is called to do.

I agree.

When they teach on the male ‘role’ they are vague as gengwell mentioned above: spiritual leader, final authority, etc.

Was the male”role” at one time the focus?

“And one question I have is, why? Why is the focus on the women or what the wife does?”

I have studied CBMW writings for some time now and have several answers:

Lydia, how long has the focus been on the women?

217

Heavy. I’ll have to respond later to it. It’s a very serious matter the issue at hand and so I don’t know exactly how to address it. It’s depressing too.

110 Yep!

The New Covenant does not tell women specifically to go and make disciples only of other women.

Lydia, I don’t remember exactly why, but I was under the impression through reading CBMW material within the last few months or so that women aren’t even called to make any disciples at all. Yes, no? Like CBMW is trying to wipe the woman “off the face of the earth.” Wish I could rememebr what it was that I read that lead me to that conclusion. There stuff is getting worse and worse and spiraling down, down, down.

Egal: Why?

Comp: I dunno? God said so.

Egal: Way to go!

LOL

Hey but the stock answer is what makes it so much fun, don’t ya think lol Me thinks so 😛 because it’s so revealing. And what is there that gets revealed? Nothing LOL

SM, looks like he’s left you hanging @67. Er maybe he’s just been busy hopefully and will be back to answer. That would be cool.

Going “round and round over words” (as some comps are wont to do) doesn’t answer the fundamental question of why women “need” to have men “in authority” over them.

Alison,
I think that, that question is one of the best questions to be asked of comps to answer.

Why does a wife NEED her husband’s authority over her??

Lydia:
And guess what! The answers were ALWAYS what the wife should do. The point was that SHE had to make him feel like the big authority. It was all about what she does. This was no matter if the wife worked 50 hours a week or not. It was the same message. And it started sounding like a rule book or to do list or one of those 10 step how to books.

And your example was about what your WIFE does. It never ceases to amaze me how this is the same everywhere in the comp movement! The focus is on the women.

And one question I have is, why? Why is the focus on the women or what the wife does?

Hi Kay 🙂

So then in the example Mark gave, only the father actualy has any say.

Mark, would or could you ever agree to always telling the kids yourself that they need to ask their mother, even if they have asked you first?

So my question is if the husband always has final say does the wife actually have any say – ever? (In Mark’s case)

my wife will always tell the kids that they need to ask me, even if they have asked her first.

That’s about final say.

Is that GOOD?