Tiffany

Just a quick reply (I hope).
TL-yes, I am NN wife.
Cheryl- it is uncharitable and inflamatory to take a quote (even a direct, word for word quote) of someone else that is most likely to turn the audience against them. You could have just as easily said that “NN believe the submission to be the same as that of the master-slave, government-subject relatioship” or even just the government-subject relationship (if you were going to pick one over the other that was used) or more accurately said that “NN points to the word used to give instructions to the husband-wife/master-slave/government-subject as the same word and draws his conclusions from that”. Perhaps a bit more verbose, but at least far more accurate. Making the master-slave correlation seems to be the go to in egalitarian circles. (Very similar to complementarians makes the egalitarian=feminism correlation which is equally uncharitable.)

Regardless if one is directly quoting an opposing side, quotes can be used in an accurate way(that most correctly conveys what the original author intended) or an inaccurate way (one the conveys something very different than what the original author intended, and thus biasis the audience against said author even though the full quote is right there.)

I am more than willing to give you the bennefit of the doubt that you didn’t intend to be inflammatory. Never the less the introduction to the quote you gave conveys something very different than what is actually being said. My concern was not with hurt feelings (because like I said I know the author) but rather accurate representation of the discussion. (It occurs to me you might appreciate knowing that if it had been a complentarian doing something similar I would have said something to them as well)

I think though you conveyed my tone to be upset, when really I was trying to be quick. Sorry about that. Not upset, just short on time.