Speaking of college educations, I was actually planning to post about something I recently read about Paige Patterson and how he is so distressed that 60% of all college students are now female. Something about how if women are educated that is deameaning to men because they get left behind. I need to read up on it some more and then I will post.

I wouldn’t mind reading some links to the fundamentalists just to see what they are saying. I stumbled across something that was linked in the truewomanhood blog a few days ago and now I can’t remember the URL. I’m sure there are a thousand more like it though.

If you ever want me to give you a bunch of links to craziness like that let me know. That TrueWomanhood blog I gave you a link to a few days ago is working to address a lot of those issues and stand up against that craziness (the whole women should never go to college, and working college-educated women are corrupted by the world type of spiel).

My main point of the whole submission post is that a lot of people think it’s anti-feminist and a flashback to the 50’s. I think that focusing on submission (and for men, love and respect), means you’re focusing more on the other person than yourself, which is what we should all do.

I think the anti-submission camp misses the point because they are so busy arguing how submission is an affront to women and is unequal, that they fail to see why it’s taught in the first place. And again, I personally think men get the short end of that stick. Loving someone as Christ loved the church? How tall an order is that?

It’s an interesting argument because I actually do think the Bible says “you must submit always.” I mean, “Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord” is pretty clear. However, I cannot reconcile that with “you must submit to a wife-beater.” And besides, if you are submitting to your husband as to the Lord, well, the Lord would not be a wife beater. So it’s at times a difficult parallel to draw. Husbands are not, of course, without sin like Jesus. I think that is a major part of the issue.

I’m more speaking to your earlier point on submission. I think you could actually take your paragraph about staying at home and replace it with wifely submission and have a sound argument:

I’m saying wifely submission is not a Biblical principle. Those who say it is, allow for exceptions. My point is that if these people allow exceptions for adultery, addiction or abuse or whatever, why do they not allow exceptions for financial need (sometimes a husband could lead you into dire circumstances), personal fulfillment (there are men who wouldn’t allow their wives a night out with friends), female socialization (most of us believe that relationships with family and friends are important, but some husbands would disallow it), and all the other reasons that women have. Who decides what exceptions are allowed? The Bible? I haven’t read that anywhere. Probably because I haven’t read “you MUST submit always” anywhere either.

It just struck me as interesting that your argument against staying at home (which, again, I don’t disagree with) is the same argument I hear against wifely submission.

I’m saying staying home is not a Biblical principle. Those who say it is, allow for exceptions. My point is that if these people allow exceptions for death, disability, divorce (that’s a lot of D’s!) or whatever, why do they not allow exceptions for financial need (remember saving for retirement is also a need), personal fulfillment (many women think they are better as wives and mothers because they work), child socialization (many people believe their children thrive in an environment with other children present), and all the other reasons that women have, including that they WANT to work. Who decides what exceptions are allowed? The Bible? I haven’t read that anywhere. Probably because I haven’t read “you MUST stay home” anywhere either.

I have heard what you are saying about submission as well. It is hard to articulate my response, even though I do have thoughts. Is it possible to submit to a person but not to their behavior? In other words, submit to your husband but not to his abuse if that is his tendency? Do you leave rather than subjecting yourself to such? (as opposed to fighting back)? It’s a fair question.

I have heard it argued (by other Christians) that wifely submission isn’t a true Biblical principle, either. They argue that everyone who holds on to wifely submission as Biblical also quickly note exceptions (unless he is abusive, unless he hurts your childrem unless he is an adulterer), and their point is that if wifely submission were a Biblical principle, then it would have to be consistent without man-made exceptions.

It’s a cultural principle, and a religious principle, but not a Biblical one.

See, though, this is what I have heard in a few Christian circles to combat wifely submission. That there are no exceptions laid out within those passages for when a wife is to not submit - so, if submission is a Biblical principle, then it is to always be, regardless of a husband’s willingness to uphold his end. That if God meant for there to be exception, then those exceptions would have been noted. Not saying I agree, but it’s an interesting point.