would you really give your life for your wife?

"Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave his life for her..."

I'm not a preacher. We'll get that out of the way. But I'm not married either, so I don't have a husband who'll beat or chastise me for 'usurping his authority'. And, no, my words aren't as God's, but they might be an insight that men won't get from a (male) pastor who's also a husband and - let's be honest - benefits from the situation just fine as it is.

There's a lot made of the "wives submit to your husbands as to the Lord". It's that verse that's used to justify a great deal of nasty power play in relationships as to "who wears the pants" and "who makes the decisions" and "who obeys whom". It's also a verse with a great deal of love and joy in it - I acknowledge that freely.

But you've heard a million pastors and preachers, male and female, ordained and lay tell you about "submission of women to men". Why add to that?

I'm going to toss a water-bomb into the middle of the congregation. It'll be a bit cold, and a bit surprising, and a few people might get a bit splashed and shouty because I dampened their clothes, but you'll come out of it okay.

Every preacher I've ever heard preach on the 'submission of wives' passage casually elides over the "love your wife as Christ loved the church and gave his life for her..." There's a little bit of exegesis on what 'gave his life for her' means, but it tends to be very waffly and very highfalutin'. Of course a guy would give his life for the woman he loves! If someone was holding a gun to her head, or if he could save her from a rampaging criminal, or something suitably heroic, leaping in to save the day just as Jesus did by dying on the cross for the church.

Yes, yes, I know you guys love your wives in the way a hero loves the love of his life, willing to die for her in a life-or-death scenario.

My question is: what about Jesus' three years leading up to the 'dying on the cross'? What about Jesus' life? That life he spent as an itinerant preacher, loving humanity, healing their hurts, getting his hands 'fouled' with the ritually unclean, addressing their concerns, giving up time he'd set aside for himself because the crowds - his church, his people, his wife - needed him to be present more than he needed his 'me-time'.

When a man points out the "and gave His life for her" phrase, nine times out of ten, they're talking about "life" in contrast to "death". They're not talking about "giving their life" in contrast to "living the way they want to".

How many Christian men and husbands look at Jesus' ministry to his people - his church, his wife - and think about emulating that? Do you love your wife by being present with her, getting your hands dirty with 'her' work (not 'helping' - are you a partner, or is she your servant?), listening to and addressing her concerns? Do you give up that 'you-time' on the weekend so she can have a break from the children and the house - and not just 'babysit the kids' (hint: if you're "babysitting", they're not your kids; when they're your kids - in blood or in name - you're "parenting"). And when she comes back from whatever activity she's been involved in, is the workload that settles back down upon her shoulders greater than it was when she left? Are there more dishes, more cleaning, more washing, more things to organise, more things to fix?

I have many married friends. We talk about plenty of topics - including theology, politics, health, and husbands-and-children. To a woman, every single one of them loves their husband - and their husbands are all great guys. And yet I've seen them take calls when ther husband can't find something or doesn't know something or can't deal with the kids anymore - and there's this look that they get, however carefree they've been before, that kind of sighs and says, I'll have to clean up the mess, won't I?

Now if you're giving up your life for your wife in a godly manner - being a husband and partner, not an extra child she has to herd along - jolly good, excellent, well done good and faithful servant, this piece isn't aimed at you. Don't get defensive, the last thing I need a bunch of hysterical guys saying I'm accusing them of Doin' It Rong. (Guys can totally get hysterical; observe the most dramatic reactions to: Max Mad: Fury Road, Ghostbusters 2016, Episode VII, and the announcement of the 13th Doctor.)

But perhaps the next time someone starts talking about 'wifely submission', you might also think about 'husbandly giving up' and just how you're doing on that front. Also, how much you complain about the things you have to give up (your time, that trip with your mates, that time away) to your wife, to your kids, to your friends. How many verses in the bible are there about Jesus complaining to the disciples: "Wow, these people don't appreciate me! I'm giving up my life for them, and they're just not grateful!"

there is not a married woman I've ever met and chatted with - and certainly no mother - who has ever felt that her husband truly lifted her load as Jesus has lifted the burden of guilt from the church. And yes, we are imperfect humanity in the face of divinity, but still.

singlehood, virginity, society

I've been thinking about the move '40 Year Old Virgin' - partly due to a conversation with new friend (also a Christian, about singlehood and Christianity related to an article she linked to that really hit her buttons) and partly because, for the first time in years, I'm in a Bible study where I'm the youngest person and the only one who's never been married (one woman is single, her husband having died a few years back). It's a women's Bible study group, so they're all mothers and wives, dealing with the things that wives and mothers struggle with, while trying to be holy women of God.

It's not an easy thing, from what I see, from the stories I hear from them and the other women in my life who are mothers and wives. Salute to all the women who do it day in, day out, particularly given that we recently celebrated Mother's Day here in Australia.

But it's not a 'better' thing either.

A somewhat accidental slip of the tongue by one of the women in the group the other week got me thinking. We were doing introductions, I was about 3/4 of the way through. All the other women at that point had mentioned children or grandchildren. And the woman beside me started with, "I'm [name], I have two kids - we all have kids..." And I shouldn't have embarrassed her, but I nudged her gently and reminded her, "not all of us have kids."

In the Christian life, singlehood and virginity generally go together; if you're single and never married and were brought up in the church, you're likely a virgin - not always, mind you! ps. Oral sex is still sex. Handjobs are sex. Anal is sex. Actions done with the intent of bringing other people to orgasm are sex, however my personal jury is out on masturbation. *shrugs* (Note: 'virgin' does not mean 'innocent'. I've done the reading up and what I don't know, given human nature, I can imagine.)

Maybe I'll never be married. That's something I'm pretty sure I can live with. Because I'm not alone or lonely.

I think that it's natural to want to be in a relationship with someone - that it's not a bad thing to desire intimacy, emotional, spiritual, and physical. We're made to be in relationships with people, after all - God Himself is in a relationship: Father, Son, and Spirit. On the other hand, when finding someone becomes an obsession, a focus, or a fault - a lack - in the individual, then it's become a problem, as much as gambling when you just have to play another hand, or when you have to have another drink.

It doesn't help that the world puts out the 'virginity is boring' crap either. And yet, I'm sure there are many women whose sexual experiences have been dissatisfying, or plain old brutal, who would love to have that 'innocence' back.

I think we forget that single is a state, and marriage is a state, and finding someone isn't proof against all the frailties of our existence. Is it good to go through with someone else? Sure it is! But it's not permanent, it's not the be-all and end-all, and while it's the closest thing we have to understanding the intimacy of the relationship between God and his church, it's still a long long way from anything like the love God has for his people.

all have sinned

Eugene Peterson backtracks on same-sex marriage: it's a couple of months old by now, but still relevant, I think.

I am troubled about the question of homosexuality.

I can fully believe that history twisted the text of the bible around to denounce homosexuality overall when the words in the original text meant nothing like what we understand as homosexuality. I can also fully believe that it may be that God considers active homosexuality to be the same as 'fornication' (sex without committment/sex as urge and lust and satiation; not sex as intimacy and personal relationship tool).

Would I prefer the first? Yes. Yes, I would.

Was I brought up in the second. Yes. Yes, I was.

Am I just looking for the exit options on the Evangelical hardline on homosexuality? I don't know. Maybe I am. Maybe I'm seeking a way I can have my cake and eat it, too - to not offend my LGBTQ friends with my faith.

Offence is to be expected - though not because of the question of queer sexuality.

Does God hate queers? No. He hates sin. We are made to worship Him, to give Him all due glory as Creator, and we have fallen short of that mark. That is sin - more than lying or cheating or having sex outside of marriage: to give God the Creator one whit less than is His due.

And yes, we're all guilty of it. Queer and heteronormative, all genders, all races, all nationalities, all people. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.

Most people think of sin as something they do. I think of sin as something I am - until the grace of Jesus comes and clears me of it. Yes, I have been incredibly fortunate to witness the love of humanity and the grace of people in so many ways; there is hope in humanity. But that seed of hope is not enough to save us - to redeem us from the darkness in our souls and make us better as individuals or as a people. We can be good, yes, but we can never be perfect.

That's the offensive message I carry: that we are not good enough, individually or grouped together, for God. Not without the help of Jesus.

"God is in control" shouldn't be an excuse to do nothing

If I hear one more "well, God is in control" from a well-meaning Christian...

Here's the thing.

God was in control when Hitler came to power. And yet we still consider it wrong that Jews and Romany and people who were the 'outcasts' of society were slaughtered like they were less than cattle.

God is absolutely in control, but His control and His power does not require us to tamely stand by and watch others suffer injustice.

The book of Zechariah is God's prophecy to the kingdom of Edom. Where is Edom? you might ask. Well, the truth is that God destroyed it as a nation a little less than a couple of thousand years ago. The Jews have spread across the whole earth, and so has Christianity, but nobody identifies as an Edomite in these days.

The thing is, the Edomites watched the Babylonians and Assyrians ride into Judah and Israel and slaughter them, then take the best of what was left and ride away. They watched from their hillside cities, knowing what the dust and the distant flash of sunlight on weapons meant. And then they went down to the lowlands where Judah and Israel had been, and they basically raided the remnants who'd been left behind.

And so God punished them.

The Babylonians and Assyrians were, indeed, God's plan for dealing with the sin of Judah and Israel. But the fact that Edom didn't even try to intervene? God held that against them.

What if Drump’s election is God’s plan for showing out the Christians whose ‘faith’ is mere words and shows of prayerful piety without action against the bigotry and cruelty inspired by Drumpf's message of division and the silence of the religious right? What if all the deaths by gun is God's signpost that it's not enough to have 'thoughts and prayers', but that action is required.

As faith without works is dead, so prayer without action is meaningless. Remember, Jesus acted first – performing miracles, healing, tending, and teaching – for three years before he died on the cross to save us for our sins and it all became clear; so too, it is in our actions that people see God, and in our prayers that God works in others. It's only when God works in hearts, and when our actions show His love, that the message of the cross become clear to those who don't know or understand it.

survey on whether LGBTQI should get legal rights previously exclusively attached to permanent relationships

Dear my fellow Christians, do you remember whose turf we are playing on? That the score is no reflection on our skill? That we might be winners by the score but we still have to play to full time, even if we lose, lose, lose until the horn goes off? Anyway, let's not call the waaaambulance right off the bat, and then we can say quite truthfully to God we weren't a bunch of whiners when the world wouldn't give us a fair hearing, we just got on and did the job he left us with (loving the world, using words when the time is appropriate), m'kay?