Ministry of the "week"
"As experts on domestic abuse, especially as it relates to issues of faith, we will equip the faith community to recognize and respond appropriately to this problem that does not discriminate according to age, race, ethnic origin, religion or socio-economic status. With a goal of preventing the abuse cycle before it can even begin, we will develop and implement educational curricula to teach children and young people to recognize signs of abusive behavior and unhealthy relationships. We will work toward the elimination of domestic abuse, promoting knowledge and change, one person at a time."
~~~~~~~~~~
Sue
In the newsletter of Safe Haven I read about a session on how the Bible is used to abuse. There was also an example of a husband abusing his wife by requiring her to obey. And there were specific instructions not to talk to abused women about headship and submission. I found this information very sensitive.
Ellen
Well...um. Yes. I wouldn't counsel somebody who had just broken their leg to go jogging either. BUT...in the LONG run, I'm not sure that the path to healing involves wallowing in fear and bitterness.
There are many people in this world who see submission as a good thing.
I wanted to highlight a ministry that I contribute to and you want to make into your political agenda. I WILL NOT PLAY.
Sue
Just so as you know that demanding a wife to obey is an ubiquitous and powerful form of abuse, truly very common and painful, and not something that should not be encouraged. The "obey thing" should be deep sixed.
Ellen
Your next answer should deal with (specifically) a vow of obedience and (specifically) that vow being evil and (specifically) beginning with "Scripture tells us..."
Ellen
Before I see a reply...let me further articulate: the reply needs to have
1. Scripture
2. Obey
3. Evil
4. marriage
Sue
"Again, (AS)you have heard that the ancients were told, '(AT)YOU SHALL NOT MAKE FALSE VOWS, BUT SHALL FULFILL YOUR VOWS TO THE LORD.'
34"But I say to you, (AU)make no oath at all, either by heaven, for it is (AV)the throne of God,
35or by the earth, for it is the (AW)footstool of His feet, or by Jerusalem, for it is (AX)THE CITY OF THE GREAT KING.
36"Nor shall you make an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black.
37"But let your statement be, 'Yes, yes' or 'No, no'; anything beyond these is of (AY)evil.
Matt. 5:33
But Peter and the apostles answered, " We must obey God rather than men.
Acts 5:29
but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.
Romans 2:8
Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey,
Romans 6:16
The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry."
Matt. 19:10
Ellen
Interesting...and...you lose.
you say that all oaths are evil. Including (I assume) oaths of office, the promise of a monarch to rule over his or her country and every single marriage vow every spoken.
Do you call EVERY vow evil? EVERY one?
Or, in context, does Scripture tell us not to make frivolous vows? Especially given that (on one hand) Jesus tells us not to make an oath and (on the other hand) God made an oath by Himself...making (in your teaching) God "evil". That is...if ALL oaths are evil because of the very fact that they are oaths.
You see, you are not teaching that vow of obedience in marriage is evil (as I asked you to). You are teaching that every vow, because it is a vow is evil.
In Matthew 19:10 was Jesus talking about a vow to obedience? or was he talking about the permanency of marriage? It appears that you did nothing more than search Biblegateway or some other Bible software for the right words and used those verses in spite of context. You should know better.
It does not make your case, although it does tell me the depths that a scholar and very bright woman will go to in order to attempt to make her case. And it does not make you case.
Ellen
I might also add that calling "evil" that which God has NOT called "evil" is on very shaky ground.
Sue
Okay, I did search Biblegateway and it was a little tongue in cheek. However, I do believe that the vow of obedience is evil because you really can't obey based on a vow but based on morality.
Suppose there are obediences to different kinds of commands.
1. Good and pure - no problem, why would you not agree, anyone would
2. Bad, you must disobey
3. Preference, corn vs peas
Men are not more moral, as we surely agree. And corn disagrees with my stomach. I am tired of corn. However, the woman who makes the vow with the intention of keeping it is in real trouble, serious trouble. The woman who makes the vow for show, well I don't know why anyone would do that.
Actually I am surprised that you think vows are okay. Christ explicitly teaches that they are wrong. I have always believed that vows are wrong. Vows are just cultural, not scriptural.
And if you vow to obey, the scriptures say that you do become a slave to that person. It is clearly evil because you should obey God first always. So, really why would you vow to obey a human. I don't do that at work. I have conditions which I have to keep as a social contract. But the marriage ceremony does not do that.
Some Christian dissenters and pacifists would not join the army or hold office for these reasons, out of conviction that they should not make an earthly vow.
Now think of the old wedding vows. They had "love, honour, and cherish" but what if you didn't love the person every second. That does not nullify the marriage. These are not conditions. They are just nice thoughts. In fact, the husband used to vow to "worship" his wife. They were just a bit of cultural nonsense and not at all scriptural.
No, on three accounts the vow is wrong.
1. Christ says not to make a vow.
2. We must always obey God or our conscience first. (Think of citizens of Nazi Germany who were conditioned to obey their leader. It is very dangerous to silence dissent in society.)
3. You a slave to the person you vow to obey.
I actually believe these things and they are taught in scripture.
I do think that financial contracts are different than vows. They have conditions and they can be broken by agreed upon terms.
But unconditional vows are bad. Only God can make those. Humans cannot. We can offer our children unconditional love. But even that eventually has limits. We can only care for someone else when we keep our own integrity, when we keep ourselves strong. The strong woman cares for her partner, the obedient woman is a slave. The strong and caring woman is truly submissive because she has strength to give and support and provide, but the obedient woman is deprived of all of these things over the years.
Both partners must protect and provide, you know that already, there is no such thing as complementarity in that the man has strength and the woman receives strength from the man. The woman is the stronger one naturally, and the man receives strength from the woman. That is what ezer means. But the complemntarians have it the other way around and this makes both man and woman weak because it is turned upside down from creation.
The man should provide for the woman but the woman also for the man. Each must meet the needs of the other, and I don't mean this in a crass way.
Once again, I believe vows are evil, and to obey is to be a slave, and I support this from scripture.
Can you support the vow to obey from scripture.
Can you show me verses with
vow
good
obey
marriage
Only Sarah - and as you know God told Abraham to obey Sarah in so many words. That is the scriptural context. Is there any other verse which supports an actual vow to obey?
Ellen
Actually I am surprised that you think vows are okay. Christ explicitly teaches that they are wrong. I have always believed that vows are wrong. Vows are just cultural, not scriptural.
Really. God swore an oath, as did Abraham. Covenant promises are the bedrock of Scripture.
As I said, I will not play. Do I have an answer?
Yes. Marriage is a covenant and covenants involve swearing oaths.
I'm done. The lengths that you will go to further your anger and bitterness is evident.
I will not play.
Sue
I am very surprised that when I posted these verses, which I actually do believe, that this has upset you so much.
It is just a list of scripture verses. But you seek to write them off. I really don't understand. They seem obvious to me. Don't swear an oath. Don't become a slave to anyone except God.
I don't think that my offering these verses warrants your calling me angry and bitter. Something makes me think that these are your emotions not mine. I do get angry when people insist on teaching something that is not in the Bible, but nowhere in my comments do I see any cause for you to call me bitter.
Ellen
I am not angry...I am sad for what your experience has done to you. I could have chosen to become bitter but have chosen not to.
Most scholars understand (with the rich history of Biblical covenants, oaths and promises) that Christ was speaking of frivolous oaths. Especially with God Himself making covenants and oaths. If oaths (in and of themselves) are evil, then God participates in evil.
Again, I am not upset. Where you could have said, "this is a good ministry and it is good that you participate", you use it as a reason to attack. That says volumes about you.
It went (again) from a really good ministry to "oaths are evil" (again). That is wearying (again).
Unless you want to make the attempt to teach me that God is evil, you might want to rethink this tactic.
Again (as I have said before) I will repeat (again) that I will vow to submit to my husband as the church submits to Christ and he will vow to love me as Christ loves the church.
Again (as I have said before) I will repeat (again) I support the right of each couple to make their marriage commitment based on what they believe best Biblically reflects what they believe God wants for their marriage.
Period.
Sue
Ellen,
There has been a severe misunderstanding on your part. I grew up in a community that argued considerably about whether a Christian could or could not swear an oath of office. This group believed that all oaths were worldly at best and possibly evil at worst. For some, they also held that marriage was civil ceremony and were only married in a judges office. They really did believe that oaths were evil.
So I quoted the scripture that oath taking is evil. I was completely sincere in this. This is what I was taught from scripture as a child. In the OT oaths were part of the way God interacted with people. However, in the NT Jesus says not to do this. Instead the Holy Spirit indwells believers and replaces the need for an oath and binds us to obey God first.
I deeply regret that you are not open to the beliefs and convictions that other Christians have from scripture.
My simple belief is that for the wife to vow obedience is against scripture on several accounts and I have quoted verses to explain why. This is my conviction.
I have no problem with a wife acknowledging scripture. I have clearly said that the vow to "obey" is wrong - whether she intends to always obey or if she has a list of conditions that she keeps silent in her heart - ether way.
I don't think that under any circumstances could you say that my sharing with you the beliefs that I was taught as a child reflect bitterness. I am sorry that you interpret an attempt to dialogue in this way.
I am not comforted with people supporting shelters for abused women if they don't also take a stand to prevent the systemic causes of abuse.
It is like being part of MADD. I have certain convictions about change, preventing abuse. My views may be radical but I believe that Christians have a call to be radical sometimes.
Ellen
I deeply regret that you are not open to the beliefs and convictions that other Christians have from scripture.
Ummm...consider the way that you have treated complementarians and their sincerely held religious beliefs. Case closed.
Sue
I have been pretty clear. There are people who are casualties of the vow to obey. These people are damaged. They are mentioned in this organization you support.
We should attempt to prevent other people from being hurt. An abused woman is like a victim of a drunk driving accident or of cancer from smoking. She really wants other people not to suffer the same fate she did.
Nor every drunk driver hits someone and not every person who smokes gets cancer. In fact, there is nothing morally wrong with smoking or drinking. However, we don't do things that can be a cause of damage and loss of rights to others. We consider our conscience, our God-given sense of what is right.
Those who have been damaged by the vow to obey want to protest this. It is a legitimate campaign. You have helped me to see that this protest comes out of the teaching from scripture that I received when I was little.
This is an ethical issue for me.
Ellen
I am sorry that you interpret an attempt to dialogue in this way.
You do not want a dialogue.
What you want is a bully-pulpit from which to brow beat those who disagree with you into capitulation.
I disagree with you on the matter of submission and women in leadership. Your false accusations and your innuendos are wearying and I am very tired of them.
I choose not to play.
Sue
I have one request and it is that Christians not allow wives to make a vow of obedience their husband. I support this with scripture.
It is like a cancer patient asking others not to smoke. It is about danger and incredible suffering which some have suffered because of this vow.
Ellen
I have one request and it is that Christians not allow wives to make a vow of obedience their husband. I support this with scripture.
you have many more requests than that and for you to even attempt that point is highly hypocritical.
What you want is a bully-pulpit from which to brow beat those who disagree with you into capitulation.
I disagree with you on the matter of submission and women in leadership. Your false accusations and your innuendos are wearying and I am very tired of them.
I choose not to play.
You should give up trying to "dialog" with those who would have been more than willing to have that dialog with you before your antics.
Sue
People may accept me as an exegete but they reject what I really am, the victim of a crime. People are embarrassed by that. When I talk about reality you call this antics.
You are using a lot of heavy language against me and that hurts. I am trying to open the scriptures, the whole scriptures, and show that Jesus himself said that he came to "proclaim freedom for prisoners and to release the oppressed." Luke 4.
Ellen
People may accept me as an exegete but they reject what I really am, the victim of a crime.
bull. BULL.
I have consistently said that you have been grievously sinned against and that abuse is a sin.
The language that I am using is what you have earned with your own attitude.
I am not angry, I am just no longer interested in having a "conversation" with a person with your agenda, for reasons that I have gone over enough times that I'm not interested in that either, NOR am I interested in more false accusations.
Sue
Whew! I responded to the exact instructions you gave me. I did exactly as I was told - exactly. Wow.
Ellen
Actually, you responded to a post in which I wished to highlight a ministry that I am fond of and that I support - and made it into a bully pulpit.
If your opening arguments had been that all oaths were evil, you would have a point...but that was not your opening argument.
You (on one hand) say that it was "tongue in cheek) and (on the other hand) wish to claim that you were following directions exactly. You were either making a serious attempt at making the point or you were making a tongue in cheek effort at humor.
FACT: women are not hurt by a vow of obedience. They are hurt by being sinned against with violence (both emotional and physical).
FACT: women are not hurt by a vow of silence (in and of itself) because the statistics tell us that women in lesbian relationships (where there is no marriage vow) experience violence at at least the same rate as heterosexual relationships.
FACT: It is impossible for a woman to be hurt by a vow of obedience (in and of itself) in a cohabitation, since there have been no vows exchanged.
FACT: I have never stated that I would urge a woman to take a vow of obedience (and have repeatedly told of the vow that I would take). I do (however) live in a county with the religious freedom to take marriage vows in the way that an adult, consenting couple believes is the most glorifying to God and the most reflective of Christ and the church. Your continual (constant, repeated, etc. ad nauseum) references to "evil" vows of obedience has little to do with a vow of submission as the church submits to Christ. If you don't like the vows that I would make, continue your argument with God, not me. If you don't have a problem with the vow that I would make, stop arguing against the vow that I never said that I would make.
That is a straw man argument and that dog don't play here.
I once heard a school counselor tell a student that if she had low self esteem, it was because she earned it.
If you don't like my weariness of your games, you earned it.
Sue
I think I have been able to come to a better understanding myself through this exercise. Clearly I do think that vows are not spiritual but worldly. I was taught that they were wrong. I hadn't really thought this through before. For some reason, in our church we just used the Anglican prayer book for weddings, it said obey and many women tell of the abuse this has brought in their lives.
I do find support in the scriptures for the connection between obedience and slavery.
I can see some facts also.
Vows to love your wife as Christ loves the church do not reduce violence.
Vows to keep oneself faithful till "death do us part" do not reduce the divorce rate.
Vows to make the wife obey are only one of many ways that women can be coerced.
I would say that if people don't model a vow of obedience, that is, the slavery of the wife to the man, then I am a lot more comfortable. It is some relief to me. It saddens me to know that Bible.org and many other Christian organizations are actively promoting this.
Unfortunately, the expectation that the woman should obey the man is pervasive not only among married Christians, but also, as you point out, among those who cohabit. In fact, in any two people, heterosexual or not, the notion that one person, the stronger person, should be the leader and make decisions, is very common.
The coercion of one partner by the other is not a uniquely Christian problem. However, how can Christians combat this in useful ways? We know that men are not equipped to make decisions for women. How can we take some steps to release women from emotional as well as physical violence?
How can we also release women from injustice done to them by modern Bible translations, and be a witness to the truth? I wish I knew. How can something positive be done to prevent abuse, rather than just rescue those who have been abused. Certainly watching for early warning signs as you have presented does help.
I think that a huge conflict is presented to Christian women who are taught to do what their husband says. On the one hand this is abuse, on the other hand it is preached in church.
Ellen
I think that a huge conflict is presented to Christian women who are taught to do what their husband says. On the one hand this is abuse, on the other hand it is preached in church.
This is not abuse. Abuse is abuse.
Comments are closed.