Dave

NN, you said, “Dave – because a subject has a specific right with respect to the governing authorities does not necessitate that this subject thereby has equal authority to the government over him.”

I completely agree with you, but the passage not only makes it clear as to the rights that the husband and wife have, it also makes it clear as to the ‘governing authority’ involved. Now, does the ‘governing authority’ of the woman extends to all areas of marriage beyond the marriage bed? That is the question!

I would however ask the question, ‘Why is it that the only place that refers to the man being the governing authority of the woman it also says that the woman is also the governing authority of the man?’

The burden of proof is surely on the comps to show us where the ‘governing authority’ of the woman is limited to the bedroom.

Further to this, when we look at 1 Cor 7:3-4 we should note that the conjugal rights (i.e. sex) are only a part of the jurisdiction of the governing authority that has authority over the entire body of the spouse. The implication is that the authority extends to more than just sex, I would suggest to even things like providing for and caring for the body under their jurisdiction (Ephesians 5:28-29).

Paul could appeal his right to a fair trial, but he had to do this to a governing body that had authority over more than simply the right to grant a trial to those who requested them. To me, 1 Cor 7:3-4 is simply an outworking of the concept of what it is to be one flesh, a concept that I believe relates to so much more than simply the act of sex, though the act of sex clearly comes within it’s ‘jurisdiction’!

Thanks for popping back NN. I believe that we are now ‘getting somewhere’ after so many comments. Perhaps you might like to stick around just a bit longer?