Discipline of wifes?

[Miss Shy]

I read an article suggesting that wifes MUST be disciplined by there husbands in order to learn how to be obediant. (I can't remember what the details were or where it was I read it because it was read when I was waiting somewhere.)

Now I have always assumed that a christian marriage should follow traditional lines and in this I don't intend to change my mind, eg man = leader, woman = helper/housewife. and that aswell as following these traditional roles the marriage should be one of mutual submission to one another, man = submits through listening, leading and giving to his wife and the woman = submits through helping, obeying, following. I believe there should be respect on both sides.

So I wondered, could anyone give me some advice as to which is right? should wives be disciplined or have I always assumed rightly?

Thank you

 

[CounselorForChrist]

I pretty much agree, well with everything but this:

wifes MUST be disciplined by there husbands in order to learn how to be obediant.

Theres a very fine line between being an obedient wife and being a slave. Some women have the mind set of they are slaves and they think its how they should be. We know a few women like that. The men controls them instead of being a true husband to them. While I am uncomfortable with the idea of my wife submitting to me. I realize its not saying shes my slave. We mutually submit to each other. In the end she knows I am head of the household and she trust that I will always lead us in the right direction, protect her and so on.

If I recall though (correct me if I am wrong) the bible does say something about if a husband is leading you down a wrong path, such as saying he doesn't want to pay rent anymore (even though you will be kicked out). As the wife you at that point do have the right to temporarily for lack of better words "take over" and get your family back on track.

Again I may be wrong about that last part.

 

[Quasicentennial]

Spiritually, husband and partner become "one with Christ" so in reality, leadership can be a chosen responsibility with the person who has more experience or advantages, or with the person who has little experience or less advantages but is eager to learn during tough challenging circumstances, such as the husband being wheelchair-disabled and would have to allow his partner to take leadership and complete male responsibilities such as lawn mowing, if there is nobody else in the family to help together. On the other hand, doing female responsibilities such as washing and drying the dishes can be done in a large plastic tub on the coffee table if there is no stool for the disabled husband to sit on and reach the dishes in the kitchen sink.:
Leadership should not get out of control if it is seen as: "I should win the most medals for doing the most work or responsibilities". Leadership should be a sharing: "You had your turn, now it's my turn" kind of cooperation, taking note on how long each kind of different task or responsibility was completed .;'*';.

 

[Angelfrog]

I've no idea why anyone would see lawn mowing as 'male' or washing up as 'female'. If my son dared tell me that washing up is a 'female responsibility' he'd very soon be put right and get a firm talking to for being sexist into the bargain. Likewise, my daughter would jolly well learn that unless the particular lawn mower is one she has trouble handling (and that can apply to a male too), there's no excuse for her to play the 'poor weak female' card and think she can get out of things.

I do most of the housework in our home because I'm here- not because I'm a woman. When my husband was unemployed for a while years ago, he did everything I did and would have been horrified if someone had told him that hoovering, washing up etc were a 'woman's responsibility'. At another point when I worked and he was at home- he did most of the housework because he was there in the day time.

Nothing to do with gender and everything to do with who has the job at that time. I enjoy being a homemaker and I'm proud of it- but I absolutely do not do 'woman's work'.

Anyhow- Miss Shy- did the article elaborate on what it meant by 'discipline'? I'm not liking the sound of this article- but think it'd be useful to know what it meant. Can you remember where you read it?

 

[OntheHorizon]

I read an article suggesting that wifes MUST be disciplined by there husbands in order to learn how to be obediant. (I can't remember what the details were or where it was I read it because it was read when I was waiting somewhere.)

Now I have always assumed that a christian marriage should follow traditional lines and in this I don't intend to change my mind, eg man = leader, woman = helper/housewife. and that aswell as following these traditional roles the marriage should be one of mutual submission to one another, man = submits through listening, leading and giving to his wife and the woman = submits through helping, obeying, following. I believe there should be respect on both sides.

So I wondered, could anyone give me some advice as to which is right? should wives be disciplined or have I always assumed rightly?

Thank you

I dare any husband to try disciplining their wives and see what happens... marriage is not a parent to child relationship, husbands do not own their wives and husbands are not above their wives, a woman did not give up her ownership of herself the day she got married.

I think both positions are wrong, I believe the inspiration of the bible but I think Paul lived in a time where sexism was the culture. Wives are on equal footing as the husband, it is a completely equal relationship, it is a partnership not a contract and both maintain complete freedom and ownership of themselves, neither is obligated to obey the other. God is the epitome of righteousness and truth, he knows what fair is.

Now it probably isn't good for women go chop wood in the winter time because her beautiful soft and probably weaker body can't manage it and men probably aren't as good at nurturing the babies because they don't have breasts, they aren't as soft and they don't have relationship with that child that began well before it was born. But that has nothing to do with status... there is no hierarchy in marriage.

Part of Paul's reasoning for women being under the husband was because man was made first and because women began the sin in the garden and also showed their competence in doing so (1 Tim 2.14) those were some of the reasons and I think Paul was just too much a part of a sexist culture where women were undervalued to know he was mistaken.

If I am ever married again and someone breaks into my home, me the husband is going to do the protecting because I'm in the gym every day and I can throw that guy through a wall where as my wife just can't do that but it isn't because God made gender roles.

 

[Fireinfolding]

I sure dont see Titus 2:5 as some slave verse. If you look at the context and compare the same wording and admonishment to the wives (even in respects to the word of God being blasphemed) you can see such an example in David.

For example, wives be discreet right? David saw Bathsheba (the wife of Uriah) washing herself right? What did David do? David saw and then went into another mans wife.

Wives

Titus 2:5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

The wife of Uriah should have been obedient to her own husband not unto David, and thus, that the word of God be not blasphemed, why?

2Sam 12:14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.

So wives, be discreet, and be obedient to their own husbands,that the word of God be not blasphemed.

Its not talking about fetching remotes and beers for your husband but obedient to your own husband THAT the word of God be NOT blasphemed. The same thing is shown in David (with another mans wife) who had she been discreet and obedient to her own husband (Uriah) would not have given the occassion for the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme.

Its consistent

Romans 2:22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery?

Rom 2:24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

1Kings 15:5 Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.

2Sam 12:14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.

Its in the picture of David (with Uriah's wive) in Titus of wives being obedient to their own husbands, and making ones boast in the law concerning adultery and the blaspheming, either the Lord, the word of the Lord or the name of God in each one.

 

[strelok0017]

Those who say such things may want to look at what else St. Paul said because he told husbands to love their wives as Christ did and to give themselves to and for her. The Bible, however, forbids wives to be disciplined. They are equal to their husbands.

 

[Lilly Owl]

Muslims believe in disciplining their wives according to the edicts of the Koran.
There are video's on You Tube wherein Imams, prayer leaders, instruct how it is proper to beat the wife. And in the Koran there are even guidelines as to the size of the weapon to be used.

In the Bible there is this (Wives Discipline)
Keeping in mind that if you live in the United States spousal abuse is illegal.
No, it's not even lawful in the guise of religion.

Then there's the other thing. If you have to beat what you keep you're no good Christian.

Jesus came to set the captives free. Why on earth would you want to be held captive by an abusive husband?

I read an article suggesting that wifes MUST be disciplined by there husbands in order to learn how to be obediant. (I can't remember what the details were or where it was I read it because it was read when I was waiting somewhere.)

Now I have always assumed that a christian marriage should follow traditional lines and in this I don't intend to change my mind, eg man = leader, woman = helper/housewife. and that aswell as following these traditional roles the marriage should be one of mutual submission to one another, man = submits through listening, leading and giving to his wife and the woman = submits through helping, obeying, following. I believe there should be respect on both sides.

So I wondered, could anyone give me some advice as to which is right? should wives be disciplined or have I always assumed rightly?

Thank you

 

[Fireinfolding]

Though, to think about it, it would seem rather comical for Nabal to be Abagails discplinary coach lol. Abagail is commended for her ways when Nabal is not. In the case of Nabal though (before David took her to himself as his wife) God struck down Nabal (not David). Whereas in Bathsheba's case David had evil intent toward the husband of her he coveted for himself and had him killed by the sword of Ammon.

 

[Miss Shy]

I've no idea why anyone would see lawn mowing as 'male' or washing up as 'female'. If my son dared tell me that washing up is a 'female responsibility' he'd very soon be put right and get a firm talking to for being sexist into the bargain. Likewise, my daughter would jolly well learn that unless the particular lawn mower is one she has trouble handling (and that can apply to a male too), there's no excuse for her to play the 'poor weak female' card and think she can get out of things.

I do most of the housework in our home because I'm here- not because I'm a woman. When my husband was unemployed for a while years ago, he did everything I did and would have been horrified if someone had told him that hoovering, washing up etc were a 'woman's responsibility'. At another point when I worked and he was at home- he did most of the housework because he was there in the day time.

Nothing to do with gender and everything to do with who has the job at that time. I enjoy being a homemaker and I'm proud of it- but I absolutely do not do 'woman's work'.

Anyhow- Miss Shy- did the article elaborate on what it meant by 'discipline'? I'm not liking the sound of this article- but think it'd be useful to know what it meant. Can you remember where you read it?

I agree, I didn't like the sound of the article either, thats why I wanted advice as to weather it was biblical. They were talking about spanking and in extreme cases actually beating there wives, as you can imagine, I was shocked. I'm really sorry, I can't remember the name of the magazine, it's frustrating because I would have liked to understand what was being said better myself.

I would like to say that the idea of mutual submission is about equality, the traditional roles are used to help define who is the leader in an otherwise equal relationship, it doesn't mean that one is inferior to the other, and I agree that housework isn't always 'womans work' and gardening etc isn't always 'mens work' circumstances do need to be taken into consideration as well. It is a personal choice.

 

[REPHAIAHPEDAHEL]

I don't agree with what you read in the article about the wives being disciplined by husbands! As long as Christ is in the centre, the marriage will be held together brilliantly.

Eph 5:22 Wives, be subject (be submissive and adapt yourselves) to your own husbands as [a service] to the Lord.

Eph 5:23 For the husband is head of the wife as Christ is the Head of the church, Himself the Savior of [His] body.

Eph 5:24 As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands.

Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her,

Eph 5:26 So that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the Word,

Eph 5:27 That He might present the church to Himself in glorious splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such things [that she might be holy and faultless].

Eph 5:28 Even so husbands should love their wives as [being in a sense] their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself.

Eph 5:29 For no man ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and carefully protects and cherishes it, as Christ does the church,

Eph 5:30 Because we are members (parts) of His body.

Eph 5:31 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. [Gen. 2:24.]

Eph 5:32 This mystery is very great, but I speak concerning [the relation of] Christ and the church.

Eph 5:33 However, let each man of you [without exception] love his wife as [being in a sense] his very own self; and let the wife see that she respects and reverences her husband [that she notices him, regards him, honors him, prefers him, venerates, and esteems him; and that she defers to him, praises him, and loves and admires him exceedingly]. [I Pet. 3:2.]

 

[Fireinfolding]

Heres one, of an older post I love too. And this in respects to how the Lord has concern for the wife, even through their husbands in a way.

Here you can somewhat catch a connection where (as shown the OT) is in accord with the apostles teaching between husbands and wives. Here it is called the wife of THY (the husband's) covenant.

Showing here, the husbands coming to an altar even as we have an altar we in heaven (ofcourse)

Here the LORD is speaking to the husbands (who are crying to Him) and He says them....

Mal 2:13 And this have ye done again, covering the altar of the LORD with tears, with weeping, and with crying out, insomuch that he regardeth not the offering any more, or receiveth it with good will at your hand.

"Yet" ye say (huh?)

Mal 2:14 Yet ye say, Wherefore? Because the LORD hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy companion, and the wife of thy covenant.

Where as Paul says...

Col 3:19 Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them.

Now look at this again (knowing its in the conext of husbands and wives) He is speaking to the husbands) however, follow it through with Peters words

Mal 2:13 And this have ye done again, covering the altar of the LORD with tears, with weeping, and with crying out, insomuch that he regardeth not the offering any more, or receiveth it with good will at your hand.

So he regardeth not the husbands prayers (even as we have an altar in heaven) whereas Peter says...

1Peter 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

So Peter indicate the husbands prayers can be hindered (in respects to their treatment of his wife) and the LORD being a witness to it.

Which (to me) plays into the head of the wives is their husbands. However, its the husbands who are answerable to the Lord. These being admonished (and in respects to her). Peter seems to play off of this much the same, and specifically between the two (husbands and wives) or the wife of "thy" (the husbands) covenant.

Its like one power (trip) in the head "of her" (and his treatment of her) has set off the Lord (Who) the husband has seemed to have forgotten is over him. Quite a picture of the husbands prayers shown as hindered before God (in relation to her) the wife.

 

[OntheHorizon]

oh man! Now I know why my former marriage didn't work... it's because I didn't discipline her and teach her submission!

 

[Inkachu]

All I can say is

 

[BFine]

You talking about CDD?
that is, Christian Domestic Discipline?

Those who advocate domestic discipline do so on the basis of several passages taken out of context and wildly interpreted. Ephesians 5:22-24 is interpreted to mean that the husband is the head of the household, while the wife is submissive to her husband as if the Lord Himself were her husband. This verse is used by CDD proponents to justify the discipline of the wife by the husband in any form he chooses to use, including physical punishment and spanking. However, this interpretation misses the intent of the passage. While wives are to submit to their husbands as to the Lord, this bizarre interpretation ignores the fact that nowhere in Scripture does the Lord ever command or even allow for the physical punishment of wives by husbands. Spanking is reserved for children for the simple reason that they are too young to be reasoned with and loving physical punishment is, in many cases, the only way to protect children from their own foolishness. In fact, to fail to do so is to do a great disservice to children (Proverbs 13:24; 23:13-14). Wives, on the other hand, are not children and most certainly can understand biblical principles without the use of physical force.

Read more: What is Christian domestic discipline (CDD)?

 

[Fireinfolding]

Im married to an unbeliever myself, but I'll tell you had I have been informed earlier on, and still single and reading all this discpline your wife stuff and wives perceived more as slaves (stuff) I would have immediately checked out of the thought of marraige (altogether) lol. Best remain unmarried then would have been my thought.

And only as some christian men speak of it (not all of them). Which often mirrors (somewhat) of what a marraige to a muslim (in the sense of treatment) looks like. Nothing like what Jesus mirrors.

And there was a time I had thought to myself (in desiring my own husbands conversion) I stopped to think (through such conversations) and thought wow... would my unbelieving husband become LIKE THAT? And then the momentary joy (I had) in the thought of his converting had come to a halt (lol). There was a sort of dread that entered in. That was a joy killer for sure. But that was over the faulty concept.

 

[gideon123]

"I read an article suggesting that wifes MUST be disciplined by there husbands"

It's my personal observation after watching life for many decades that most wives PUT UP with an enormous amount of indignity from men. It's not an equal amount of suffering. Women usually get the worst end of it. If it wasn't for the magnificent commitment that most women have for their families - the human race would pretty much grind to a halt.

My suggestion is that husbands should actually be giving their wives a gold medal for Bravery and Courage Under Fire

Gideon

 

[Urbanredneck]

Well hopefully both "discipline" each other.

Like watching each others spending. Pushing each other.

I'll give an example, my wife was doing nothing with her life or degree until I pushed her to quit messing around and get on with her life. Quite frankly for far too long she was doing this piddly little job and not getting any meaningful career going. Why? She was at age 28, still living with her parents and hadn't been pushed out of the nest.

So yes, I do feel their are times spouses need to push each other when they are not pushing themselves.

And yes, I dont think its wrong to get onto your spouses case for poor spending habits.

 

[manitouscott]

Where was this article located? In a magazine, newspaper or brochure?

Ephesians 5 has more to say about what a man's duties are TO his wife than about what the wife's obligations are to be submissive.
Husbands are told to love the wife as they love themselves. There is no scriptural basis for this crackpot idea you read about.

I read an article once that said I could make my car invisible on my way to work so that I could speed when I was late if I learned the right encantations.

 

[Sketcher]

I agree, I didn't like the sound of the article either, thats why I wanted advice as to weather it was biblical. They were talking about spanking and in extreme cases actually beating there wives, as you can imagine, I was shocked. I'm really sorry, I can't remember the name of the magazine, it's frustrating because I would have liked to understand what was being said better myself.

I would need to see the article itself, but physically "disciplining" a wife is completely uncalled for. We are to sanctify our wives, make them better before the Lord, but anyone who takes that idea to mean we should spank/beat them is sick and foolish. If I marry, I'll not humiliate my wife by treating her as a child (spanking) or physically abuse her (which would be beating). I'll do what I can to be a blessing that improves her, per Ephesians 5:25-33.

I would like to say that the idea of mutual submission is about equality, the traditional roles are used to help define who is the leader in an otherwise equal relationship, it doesn't mean that one is inferior to the other, and I agree that housework isn't always 'womans work' and gardening etc isn't always 'mens work' circumstances do need to be taken into consideration as well. It is a personal choice.

I would actually take that a step further. Philippians 2:3-11 tells us what submission is all about, how even Christ in submission to humanity's need, took the form of a lowly human being, lived in this dirty world, and died a humiliating death. He was above it all, but made himself low out of his love for us. How much more should we submit to him! Therefore, mutual submission in a relationship does not insist on equality between those in the relationship - we could never be equal to Christ. Which leaves plenty of room for the husband to retain the position of headship in the relationship, especially considering that unlike a human being and Christ, a husband and wife are equals before God. So the husband is merely first among equals. And for everyone in the church with each other, including between husband and wife, positions of headship and positions of authority do not have room for domineering:

But Jesus called them to him and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” - Matthew 20:25-28​

"If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, that you also should do just as I have done to you. Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them." - John 13:14-17​

So people who live like that in a marriage - yes, there will be a position of headship within the marriage for the husband. But it wouldn't be about who has that position. The priority would be on loving each other.

In the Bible there is this (Wives Discipline)

And none of that pertains to disciplining your wife . . .