gengwall

Yes – to all. And aren’t you saying that men are thus called because the first Adam failed and we have all inherited at least the fleshly inclination of that failure? If so, I whole heartedly agree.

This is where I have run into problems in the past with women who only have known abusive men. You made the statement:

God set up a system whereby men now are called to sacrifice (not silence!) in order to pave the way for their women to get past all of the sin-filled traditions that stop a woman from fulfilling her calling as an imitator of God (my emphasis)

I can tell you from experience, a statement such as that from a man (i.e. me) would have elicited great howls of fowl from many of the women I have dialoged with in the past. One chief complaint would have been “I don’t need any man to pave the way for me.” Another would be, “that is just another ‘system’ where God puts men in charge.” I must confess, there are times where I feel men can’t catch a break. It seems we are always presumed to have alterior superiority motives.

But enough whining. I think we see things the same even though we use different terminology. Do we agree that Paul’s directions to husbands in Ephesians 5:25-30 are expressly designed to address a fleshly flaw in males brought on by the fall? And the more controversial parallel question: would you agree that Paul has similar motivation and is taking a similar approach in vs. 22-24 in his direction to wives?