[Tax-chick]

Not sure what this means.

It means (according to the author) that if a man tells his wife to commit a sin (such as adultery) or a crime (such as murder), then God wants the woman to obey. In effect, there is no such thing as right and wrong for women, only obedience or disobedience to their husbands.

You said: Knowing she will "submit" to me puts me under the pressure to ask it only when I would feeel comfortable explaining to the Lord why I asked her to do it. I am accountable to Him. Do you mean that if you asked your wife to commit an obvious sin or a crime, you believe you would be responsible, not her?

I'm not trying to start a fight (honest!), just to nail down the exact meaning.

Thank you.

[drstevej]

***It means (according to the author) that if a man tells his wife to commit a sin (such as adultery) or a crime (such as murder), then God wants the woman to obey. In effect, there is no such thing as right and wrong for women, only obedience or disobedience to their husbands.***

Ahh, that's the issue.

I am a hierarchical ethicist. When asked to disobey a clear command of God, we must obey God and accept the consequences.

The apostles refused to obey orders not to proclaim Christ. They did so anyway and went to jail. Ditto with Daniel and the lion's den.

I have been a protestant pastor for over 25 years and the view of this tract is not one I have encountered except on rare occassions.

***Do you mean that if you asked your wife to commit an obvious sin or a crime, you believe you would be responsible, not her?***

If I asked that and she obeyed, we both would be guilty. For my wife to place my commands above God's commands is idolatry.