Mark

Dave,

I think we have a similar sense of humuor…maybe it’s the Aussie blood, i dunno. I have accepted your challenge to look at dictionary entries and found them interesting. Especially in light of claims that comps give egals definitions that are not correct, such as ‘identical’. Bare with me as i look at some meanings. I’m basing what i say on the assumption that you believe in ‘mutual submission’, or ‘reciprocal submission’. So here goes!

BDAG translates hypotasso as i’m sure we all know as ‘subordinate’

Most english translations make hypotasso as ‘submit’. So according to the Oxford dictionary submit means…

“accept or yield to a superior force or stronger person”

So it doesn’t appear that the english term ‘submit’ allows for such a concept as ‘mutual’ since it involves a ‘superior force’. But what about ‘submission’ which is similar but different…

“the action or fact of submitting”

The Oxford allows the term ‘submitting’ which is grouped under the same title as ‘submit’. So again it appears that the english words ‘submit’ or ‘submission’ do not allow for a mutual or reciprocal force. Therefore are comps all that wrong! It seems hard to understand the egal system when it uses terms that are oxymoron’s in nature. But what about ‘mutual’…maybe that helps qualify the term submit…

“experienced or done by each of two or more parties towards the other or others”

It seems that this is quite good. What A does to B, B does to A. But we must ask how does that fit with the term ‘submit’ or ‘submission’, since by definition it requires a ‘superior force’ to exist. Now reciprocal…

“given, felt or done in return”

Another good definition…what A does to B, B does to A. Now to me, this appears ‘identical’ in nature. Both mutual and reciprocal say that it is ‘done towards others’ or ‘done in return’.

So i maintain that the phrase ‘mutual submission’ is an oxymoron in the English grammar. To ‘submit’ or be in ‘submission’ requires according to the Oxford dictionary a ‘superior force’, so how can it be mutual, since one is superior?

So now how does this ‘mutual submission’ work in practice. You say it is not identical in all relationships which i think is right…but then we must ask, is it then ‘mutual’ at all? Apparently not! It seems to me that the egal system is a nonsense statement since mutual submission is an oxymoron. It’s not mutual because it does not look the same in all relationships, and it is not submission becasue it denies a ‘superior force’. The egal phrase ‘mutual submission’ is a contradiction, so please don’t accuse comps for giving wrong definitions to your terms. You need to re-calculate your terminology so that it does not mean ‘submit’ because you deny authority, and so that it does not mean mutual, since it does not behave the same in all situations or circumstances.