The Backside to Submission

[missourimary]

Originally Posted by Jim H

The "love" being referred to here by Paul is Agape.

Can a person have true Phileo or Eros without Agape?

[iceniez]

Originally Posted by ILG

Yeah, but I never heard much of that. I heard a lot about women submitting and how women were not normally submissive. That it was a woman's nature to usurp authority and she needed to work hard spiritually to not be that way. There was little teaching about how a husband should be tender and loving.

Lots of teaching about how people would go their own way and needed the pastors help. Little about how he should serve the church in love.

Now I will step out on a limb and say I think that is an organization wide problem with a few pastors having it right but most heavy-handed on the submission stuff.

If you think about it, it is taught backwards. Not really the way Jesus taught it . Jesus gave us a picture of the way he wanted it when he washed the disciples feet.He became the servant. I know for a fact, that is not taught for leaders across many denominations.I know we do foot washing and most do it out of tradition, but do we understand what He was trying to get across.

[Withdrawn]

Originally Posted by missourimary

Can a person have true Phileo or Eros without Agape?

Absolutely! Agape love is unconditional and self-sacrificing. Agape love is willful and active. This is what we mean when was say "love is a verb."

Phileo and Eros love are actually what we see most of in the world. It's all about feelings - feelings and emotions that can change like the weather, depending upon circumstance. Agape is nothing like it.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by iceniez

Amen. This kind of Love makes it SAFE to submit to, not out of fear but mutual respect and love.

There is the key point, I think. This kind of leader is SAFE to submit to. He probably doesn't talk about submission much either because most people under him probably do not find it a difficult thing to do.

[Withdrawn]

Originally Posted by coadie

There is no reference to eros in the NT. It is the luv that is behind gay marriages. Relationships limited to that won't work out.

Agreed! And I'll go on to say that many (if not most) heterosexual marriages and relationships are based on eros as well, and NOT agape. If agape was the basis of all marriages, would we see nearly as many divorces? Would we even use the term "fall in love" if we were truly talking about agape? Eros and Phileo are based on emotion. Agape is not.

[iceniez]

Originally Posted by ILG

There is the key point, I think. This kind of leader is SAFE to submit to. He probably doesn't talk about submission much either because most people under him probably do not find it a difficult thing to do.

True

[ILG]

Example:

Young woman gets into the church. Young woman wants nothing more than to please God. She does not understand the church's social norms. She is taught that women are usurpers of authority and, by nature, seducers. This is evident in the way that women cut their hair and wear make-up in the world. Uncut hair is a sign of submission. No make-up is a sign of purity. No pants are also a sign of not usurping maleness. Jewelry is for wanton women wanting to beautify themselves. YW sees neighboring pastor's wife trim some hair just to fluff it a bit and she also wears a wedding ring. YM is taught that the liberals are probably not saved. YM looks around her church and sees a few wedding rings. YM becomes confused and expresses concern. YM is told she should not judge others and that she is usurping the pastor's authority by being concerned. YM is reminded to keep her place and stop usurping authority.

=Confusion. Depression. Oppression.

[iceniez]

Originally Posted by ILG

Example:

Young woman gets into the church. Young woman wants nothing more than to please God. She does not understand the church's social norms. She is taught that women are usurpers of authority and, by nature, seducers. This is evident in the way that women cut their hair and wear make-up in the world. Uncut hair is a sign of submission. No make-up is a sign of purity. No pants are also a sign of not usurping maleness. Jewelry is for wanton women wanting to beautify themselves. YW sees neighboring pastor's wife trim some hair just to fluff it a bit and she also wears a wedding ring. YM is taught that the liberals are probably not saved. YM looks around her church and sees a few wedding rings. YM becomes confused and expresses concern. YM is told she should not judge others and that she is usurping the pastor's authority by being concerned. YM is reminded to keep her place and stop usurping authority.

=Confusion. Depression. Oppression.

unfortunately this is also true. What is the answer ?

[ILG]

Originally Posted by iceniez

unfortunately this is also true. What is the answer ?

Stop preaching things that were made up by men.

[johnny44]

Originally Posted by missourimary

Very true. You cannot have submission without love. If a husband loves his wife as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for it, then he will respect her. She can then voluntarily submit in respect for his giving and sacrifice for her.

Ephesians puts a greater responsibility on the man than the woman. The wife is asked to submit, but the man is asked to do all he can, up to and including giving his life for, his wife. So she gives of herself daily, but he is asked to give all of himself daily.

Shhhhh,not so loud my wife is in the room.