The idea that the message of the Gospel isn’t to be accommodated to the culture in which it’s presented, is against everything Paul himself preached. He said, “to the Jews I became as one under the law, to the Gentiles I became as a Gentile. . . I became all things to all people, so that I might by any means save some.” (This is a paraphrase because I’m not in a place where I can look up the passage right now.) In Titus 2, where he said women were to be submissive to their husbands, he gave the reason– “so the gospel will not be hindered.” In other words, Paul was asking women to accommodate themselves to the cultural norms, for the sake of the gospel, which would have been hindered if Christian women were perceived as too “uppity.”

Notice in Acts how different the sermon Paul gave in Athens was to sermons directed towards Jews. Everything Paul did and taught, by his own confession, was intentionally tailored to suit the culture in which he was presenting it. Why, then, do we assume that we are all now to accommodate our own methods and messages to the cultures Paul was accommodating? What hinders the gospel today is when we preach that men are created by God to to be wife-leaders, and women are created to be husband-followers.

As for Eph 5:21-22, in the earliest manuscripts they read as one sentence, with the word “submit” in v. 22 actually missing! A good translation will at least have a marginal note to this effect. The earliest manuscripts read (translated), “Submit to one another in the fear of Christ; wives to your husbands as to the Lord.” This makes it plain that verse 22 is indeed a continuation of verse 21.

I know you say you have no “privilege” — but being born to lead your wife, however much you turn it into servanthood, is indeed a privilege. Paul was speaking to cultures where men were indeed so privileged, by their cultures. He was asking them to lay down their privilege and be servants. When we understand what he was telling them, what it means for us today becomes much clearer.

This being the case, TruthSeeker, if you and your wife are happy with you as the leader and her the follower (which must mean that you’re laying down your life as the Ephesians passage says, and not taking advantage of the male privilege you believe you have), then great! But that doesn’t mean my marriage, where neither of us is the leader and neither the follower, can’t work too. The Biblical principle is that Christians should be yielding to one another and putting one another’s needs before their own. If that’s happening in both our marriages, then God is glorified and we are loving one another– which is really what it’s all about.

Are you serious?
When you say believer, are you including the OT? Because often Believer is used for NT believers. Not that OT persons weren’t Believers, it was just different.
You must have some seriously narrowing definitions of what a believer is because I can think of several men who, as leaders of their families and part of the promise of Israel, have made some serious sins of commission, and omission. At least three that caused the death of someone, all three female. One wife, one concubine, and one daughter.
I could start listing them, but rather than have you shoot them down because they don’t meet with your idea of what is a patriarch or believer or something, I’ll wait for you to define what you mean.

Truthseeker: “I have mine, which DOES intimidate those who mischaracterize biblical patriarchy.”

This statement of yours is so incredible and speaks such volumes I cannot even comment. But not because you intimidate me. It’s for other reasons.

Truthseeker: “In fact, it is the Egalitarians who seek to hush the voices of anyone daring to disagree with them.”

I see that your experience with egals is quite different than mine and many others. This is fine. Each person’s experience is his/her own. But know that your experience does not define all egals anymore than my experience defines all patriarchs or comps.

Truthseeker: “Also, you’ll just have to take it at my word that my Comp marriage is exactly how I describe it …. and from both of our perspectives.”

Sorry, can’t do that. Since you are so inimidating, how do I know that your voice isn’t intimidating her into agreeing with you.

Lovely conversation TS. I may come back and see what you’ve written or not. I may start my list of men in the Bible who were believers and abused their ‘patriarchal privilege’ as you call it. I’ve not done a study on it before. But you have inspired and challenged me to take another look. If two or three popped into my head immediately, how many are there that I haven’t thought of. Because you are right about at least one thing for sure. The Bible is completely accurate. And it lays out the sins of our greatest and best Bible heros right along with their triumphs.

And about throwing the baby out with the bath water, there are many women doing just that, not with patriarchy, but with Christianity all together BECAUSE of patriarchy and what it has robbed from them. It is easier for them to quit being a Christian than to try to navigate the choppy waters of doctrine that gives men privilege over them. Sorry, sorry state. I wish these women knew the love of their heavenly Father, but it has been so warped by earthly fathers and husbands who view themselves as privileged and entitled, these women are fleeing the church in larger numbers than polite Christians want to see or acknowledge.

Yes, the way you read the Bible has also been used to support the Divine Right of kings,, and also the right of people to own slaves, as long as they are good, kind slaveholders. The problem with slavery is simply that some slaveholders abused their privilege. But there were “happy” slaves, and that proves there was nothing wrong with slavery per se.

Also, I can easily turn your comment to me around and put it this way, to you.

“You want patriarchy to be unhealthy, therefore, in your mind, it is. Not because you have proven it to anyone.”