What God Authorizes Husbands to do

Whether one claims to be complementarian, egalitarian, or any other arian, the rules God, our authority, has given are the same. What behavior does God authorize for a husband?

1. As part of the body of Christ, a husband is to submit to his wife, Ephesians 5:21, I Peter 5:5.

2. A husband is to love his wife as he loves and cares for his own body. He is to sacrifice for her, doing what it takes to benefit her—even at the expense of NOT getting what he wants. Ephesians 5: 25-31

3. A husband is to esteem his wife as better than himself, Phil 2:3

4. A husband is to treat his wife as he would want to be treated if he were her. Matt. 7:12

5. A husband is to demonstrate God’s agape love to his wife I Cor 13.

6. A husband is to guard his tongue. James 3

7. A husband is to honor his wife so his prayers won’t be hindered, I Peter 3:7

8. A husband is to have the fruit of the spirit, love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance, and this is to show up in all his dealings with his wife, not just at church.

There are likely more, but this is sufficient.

With a commandment list like this, why would any husband prefer to be a complementarian? If he is a complementarian and he has the job of making that final decision, this list requires him to make the decision his wife wants.

God did not give him an exception clause. He is always to honor, love, submit to and sacrifice for his wife, all the while esteeming her better than himself. This is the commandment of God, not of the egalitarians.

It seems to me the egalitarians are easier on the husbands. Egalitarians teach that husbands and wives are to divide responsibilities based on gifting, not on pre-fabricated roles that may have both spouses struggling to pretend to be what they are not. They also teach couples to come up with solutions both spouses feel good and at peace about. That means neither of them make a final decision that hurts their spouse, and that both seek to find a solution that pleases them, yet pleases their spouse as well.

Life in egalitarian families is win-win, while life in complementarian households frequently has one spouse being the loser while the other gets things his or her way depending on whether the husband obeys the command to sacrifice for his wife, or whether he indulges in sinful self-pleasing.

Again, if complementarian husbands truly live in obedience to God’s word and authority, they will always sacrifice their own wishes, desires, needs in order to serve their wives.

But even with the complementarian rules, which give a husband authority over his wife, a husband has the authority to set up a relationship where neither spouse overrides the will or preferences of the other. The husband can use the authority he believes God has given to him to live by the Golden Rule, to honor his wife, to esteem her better than himself, to lay down his wishes in favor of his wife's, and to use disagreements as a means to learn to know one another better as they search for solutions each spouse will actually like. But when he does that, it is important that he tell her that he considers her his equal, not just for salvation and in the eyes of God, but in his eyes, too. Only then will she be free to totally be herself, to fully entrust herself to her husband, and to be all God has made her and called her to be.




Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge, A novel" See www.wanetadawn.com A Mennonite woman fights to save her family yet keep her faith.

The Silent Plea of Complementarians & CBMW

I confess, I have been so wrapped up in my own research of submission tyranny that I completely missed an important detail, and I have failed to submit properly. I apologize for being so blind to this fact that has been right in front of my face all along. Yet this opens exciting possibilities that could put a stop to the war between the sexes.

Women, the complementarian, CBMW-type men in our lives claim to be Bible-believing Christians, who follow the plain reading of scripture, correct? They obey the scripture to the best of their ability. The problem is us, women. We have failed to “listen” to what they are trying to tell us.

For centuries Christian men have been trying to tell us that they want to be subjugated, and now the CBMW has been making this ever more clear with their Danver's statement. That is right. Complementarian MEN want to be SUBJUGATED. I don't know what I was thinking, why I didn't see the signs before. I was listening to what they said with their mouths instead of to what they said with their actions. I totally forgot that actions carry much more weight than words. That is why pastors do not offer help to abused women who come to them for help; they are hoping the women will turn the tables and CONTROL their husbands.

You'd be surprised how I figured this out. It's the rule of the Golden Rule:

“Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.” Matt 7:12
“And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.” Luke 6:31

These men who “live according to the scriptures” are telling us by their actions that they want WOMEN to make the final decisions, that they want WOMEN to be the leaders, that they want WOMEN to put men in subjection to women, that they want WOMEN to take AUTHORITY OVER MEN.

Think of it, they are doing to women what they secretly want women to do to them. They want to be dominated by women. They want women to be the preachers and teachers. Some of them want women to beat them, chew them out, denigrate them, call them horrid names.

The problem is, since I don't want men to subjugate me, I don't want to subjugate them lest they get the wrong idea. But perhaps I could find a way to tickle their fancy without actually subjugating them. Perhaps I could order them around three days a week, (although many of them complain about women acting as ditches--except the first letter is b--three days a month.)

Women, we need to develop our skills at keeping men, especially husbands, under our spiked heels without actually subjugating them. This apparently is much closer to what they want.



Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge, A novel" See www.wanetadawn.com A Mennonite woman fights to save her family yet keep her faith.

To Fear or Not to Fear

Traditional teaching would have us believe I Peter 3:2 commands wives to have chaste conversation coupled with fear, yet four verses later, in I Peter 3:6 they are not to fear. “Even as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.”

Q: Why would Peter tell wives to be afraid, and then tell them to not be afraid? (Both fear and afraid are some form of phobos.)

A: He didn't. I Peter 3:2 is the only time “coupled with” is used in the whole Bible.
“Coupled” is in italics, which means it was added by the translators.

If we delete the added “coupled,” the verse reads: “While they behold your chaste conversation with fear.”

That actually makes sense! When a wife becomes a new Christian, and her husband is still following a self-centered and ungodly lifestyle, when she acts Christ-like, he would have good reason to be afraid.

Consider someone from our own culture. The couple goes to drinking parties or worse, uses vulgar and 4-letter words a lot, considers lying acceptable as long as they aren't caught, cheats if they can get by with it, etc. When the wife becomes a Christian and refuses to do those things, the husband becomes afraid because his whole life has turned up-side-down and he has no control over it. To him life looks out of control. He is studying her spirit-filled living and it makes him afraid!

It is not her chaste conversation that has fear attached to it. It is her husband who is afraid. And verse 6 seconds that fact, saying she is Sara's daughter if she does well and is NOT AFRAID.



Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge, A novel" See www.wanetadawn.com A Mennonite woman fights to save her family yet keep her faith.

Wives take Authority over your Husbands

Where in scripture are wives told to take authority over their husbands? We could claim I Tim 5:14 in the original tells wives to rule their husbands, since husbands are part of the household. (I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, ["guide the house" should be "rule the house"] give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.) But notice wives are not extrapolating wife authority from that verse. Perhaps this omission means wives are amiss in their obedience to this scripture.

Husbands do not have even that much in scripture commanding them to rule their wives. Instead they are told to love, sacrifice for, honor, and love their wives as they love their own bodies. The verse in Timothy about managing their households specifically mentions their children, not their wives.

Eph 5:25-29 “Husbands love your wives even as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it;” and “So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.”

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

Colossians 3:19 “Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them.”

Since God does not command husbands to take authority over their wives, but commands them to love and honor their wives lest their prayers be hindered, and since He also says male and female are equal, who is following the Bible? Those who practice husband authority, or those who practice functional equality?

God does command us all to submit to one another. God also commands us to be kind to one another. If taking authority over another adult is kindness and submitting one to another, then women need to obey the command to be kind and submit by taking authority over husbands, too.

If authority over is “suffering long, being kind, not envying, not vaunting itself, not being puffed up, not behaving unseemly, seeking not her own, not easily provoked and thinking no evil, (I Cor 13:4-5) then wives should be doing this authority over, too.

This is not an argument from silence. If anyone claims it is an argument from silence, then women could claim the silence about wife authority also means they are to take authority over their husbands. It is an argument that carries no water.

In fact, complementarians teach the opposite of God's commandment to husbands. The command to wives to submit to their husbands is NOT a command to husbands to take authority over wives any more than the command to husbands to sacrifice for their wives is a command to wives to be the masters of their husbands.

It is time complementarians follow God, not man.


Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge, A novel" See www.wanetadawn.com A Mennonite woman fights to save her family yet keep her faith.

New Coalition Demands Apology from CBMW

The Seneca Falls 2 Evangelical Women's Rights Convention met on July 24, 2010 and culminated in a demand for an apology from the CBMW, and demanded the cessation of promotion of the Danvers Statement, which has perpetrated so much damage on Christian families.

Jocelyn Andersen, master of ceremonies, opened the Convention and introduced each speaker. www.womansubmit.com

The Faith Family Singers began the proceedings with a number of songs.

The first speaker, Cynthia Kunsman, spoke on the methods used to push a doctrine onto a group of people who would otherwise reject such a doctrine. http://undermuchgrace.blogspot.com

Shirley Taylor reminded us of the rights we currently have that women did not have as she was growing up. Examples: women could not buy their own car, and were required to quit work when 3 months pregnant. http://www.bwebaptist.com/

Dale Felix sang both before and after the morning break.

Jocelyn Andersen presented Dale Felix with a copy of her newly released book, Woman this is War! Gender, Slavery, and the Evangelical Caste System, honoring African Americans who fought side by side with women of European descent for equality and freedom for both women and slaves.

Jocelyn Andersen also presented our response to the Danvers Statement, which is included in its entirety here:

Our Response to the Rationale based on the Danvers Statement and Our Affirmations

We have been moved in our purpose by the following contemporary developments which we observe with deep concern:

1.We are concerned about the widespread uncertainty and confusion within our churches regarding the divinely mandated equality between men and women and the inordinate attention given to the deeply harmful and prejudicial concepts of Biblical masculinity and Biblical femininity as perpetuated by the council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood;

2.The tragic effects of this confusion in overturning the balance of perfect equality of men and women, within the church and marriage, is inestimable. With men and boys assuming the posture of lords of creation while girls and women fall prey to an unscriptural inferiority;

3.We are concerned about the increasing promotion given to male dominance along with accompanying distortions and/or neglect of the functional equality portrayed in Scripture between redeemed husbands and wives;

4.We are concerned about the widespread ambivalence regarding the value of women except in regards to what is perceived as their “roles” as “vocational” homemakers and other ministries historically performed by women;

5.We are concerned about the spurious charges that equality between the sexes leads to addiction to pornography and radical lifestyle/worldview changes in favor of homosexuality or lesbianism, which it does not.

6.We are convinced that the prevalence of abuse in within Christian families is a direct result of patriocentric theology;

7.We are concerned about the growing number of churches enforcing rigid roles for men and women that do not conform to Biblical teaching but backfire in perpetuating the oppression of women and in hindering and crippling men in their efforts at being biblically faithful witnesses;

8.We are concerned about the increasing prevalence and acceptance of hermeneutical oddities such as the trinity marriage paradigm based on the heretical Arian doctrine of an inferior Jesus.

9.These hermeneutical oddities pose a threat to Biblical authority as the clarity of Scripture is jeopardized and the accessibility of its meaning to ordinary people, is withdrawn into the restricted realm of Hebrew and Greek “scholars” who attempt with “scholarship” to refute that in Christ there is neither male nor female Jew not Greek slave nor free but that all are one.

10. And behind all this, is the apparent accommodation of leaders within the evangelical church to the spirit of male dominance at the expense of biblical authenticity.

We Affirm the Following, Based on our Understanding of Biblical Teachings:

1.Both man and woman were created in God's image and are equal before God in every way both in theory and in practical function and application.

2.Distinctions in “masculine” and “feminine” roles are man-made ordinances and were not ordained by God as part of any “created order.”

3.The man’s headship in marriage was not established by God before the Fall, nor later as a result of sin. The doctrine of male “headship” does not exist in scripture.

4.The Fall introduced distortions into the relationships between men and women, the most significant being the universal dominance of males over females as both prophecy and all history attest. In the home, the husband's loving, humble, companionship tends to be replaced by domination or, if he cannot be in charge, by passivity, and if a wife does not joyfully submit to male domination, she is accused of usurping his supposed authority. In the church, sin inclines both women and men toward a worldly love of power or an abdication of spiritual responsibility, and inclines such women as are called to the ministry to view such calls as gender inappropriate and to rebel against the legitimate call of God in accepting limitations imposed upon them by the unbiblical injunctions of men. As women, we assume full responsibility for our own neglect of the use of our spiritual gifts in ignoring the call, the responsibility, and the authority to carry out whatever ministry God has called us to do.

5.The Old Testament, as well as the New Testament, manifests the equally high value and dignity which God attached to the work and words of godly men and women. The New Testament affirms the overriding principle that all individuals, whether male or female must work out their own salvation with fear and trembling. The patriarchal and racial hierarchy evident in parts of the Old Testament, which is exclusively prophetic and applicable to the Old Covenant Nation of Israel only, is lifted completely, in the New Testament from both Jew and Gentile by the redeeming work of Jesus Christ. There are no longer any legitimate hierarchies involved in race or gender.

6.Redemption in Christ aims at removing the distortions introduced by the curse. In the family, husbands should forsake harshness and the selfish idea that they are mandated by God to rule their families and, instead, to grow in love for their wives; wives should forsake blind submission to the false doctrine of male headship. Wives and husbands should grow in love for each other preferring the other before themselves.

7.In the church, There are no governing and teaching roles restricted to men only. Redemption in Christ gives both men and women equal share in the blessings of salvation as well as in governing and teaching roles within the church.

8.In all of life, and in every situation, domestic or otherwise, Christ is the supreme authority and guide for both men and women. Men are not mandated by God to replace the Holy Spirit in the lives of Christian women.

9.In the church, both men and women should repent of gender prejudice and respond obediently to a heartfelt sense of call to ministry. Obedience to God should never be set aside in favor of submission to traditions of men. Commands to abstain from obeying the Holy Spirit in regards to ministry gifts and callings are blasphemous and heretical. Biblical teaching—not traditions of men—should remain the authority for testing our subjective discernment of God's will.

10.With half the world's population outside the reach of indigenous evangelism; with countless people in those societies who have never heard the gospel; with the stresses and miseries of sickness, malnutrition, homelessness, illiteracy, ignorance, aging, addiction, crime, incarceration, neuroses, and loneliness, no man or woman who feels a passion from God to make His grace known in word and deed can be excused for ignoring a heartfelt call to the ministry. Gender will not be excused in the day of reckoning for neglecting to fulfill any ministry to which we are called by God. With all authority, for the glory of Christ and the good of this fallen world. We should obey God and not man in all things.

11. We are convinced that a denial or neglect of obedience to the Word of God, and to the Spirit of God, in regards to the authoritative function of women, ,as well as men, in the home, church, and society will lead to increasingly destructive consequences within our families, churches, and the culture at large.

After lunch Waneta Dawn(that's me)spoke on how the male authority doctrine perpetrates domestic violence in all its forms, and how Christians must reject such doctrine in favor of the biblical loving sacrifice that is required of husbands, and how we can respond compassionately to abused wives and influence society to stop male entitlement beliefs. www.wanetadawn.com

Jocelyn Andersen announced the formation of the Freedom for Christian Women Coalition, stated that movement had been begun toward freedom for Christian women, and that we intended to keep it moving forward. The coalition requires no membership; only a network of people working together toward a common goal.

Shirley Taylor presented the demand for apology from the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.

Janice Levinson of Protective Mothers Alliance International spoke on the growing number of good mothers who are losing custody of their children due to a growing tendency of family courts to place the children with their abusive and violent fathers. 70%-80% of abusive fathers who sue for primary or sole custody win their children away from loving, protective, fit mothers. www.protectivemothersalliance.org

Doug Philips pastor of Oleander Church of God of Fort Pierce, FL spoke on the need to tear down the walls, the need for unity in the body of Christ, regardless of gender or color.


Demand for Apology

Freedom for Christian Women Coalition


July 24, 2010


Dr. Randy Stinson, President
Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood
2825 Lexington Road, Box 926
Louisville, KY 40280

And

Dr. J Ligon Duncan III
Chairman of the Board of the CBMBW
First Presbyterian Church
1390 North State Street
Jackson, MS 39202

The Freedom for Christian Women Coalition met on July 24, 2010, in Orlando, Florida, and agreed and affirmed this Demand for an Apology from the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood because of the concerns as listed in the following pages.

For the sake of all Christians, men and women, we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, make a public apology for the misuse of Holy Scripture as it relates to women, and cease to publish or promote The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood.
Sincerely,



Freedom for Christian Women Coalition
Demand for an Apology from the
Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood
At a time in our church history that the main focus should be on winning lost souls and spreading the gospel to a hurting world, we fear for the future because the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood has placed a greater priority on women’s submissive role rather than on the gospel of Jesus Christ.
It is with that thought in mind that we make these statements.

1.We are concerned that men are being taught that they are god-like in their relationship to women within the church and home. As the mothers, wives, and daughters of these men, it is our concern that this doctrine is setting them up for failure as Christian fathers, husbands and sons;

2.we are concerned about the sin that evangelical church leaders commit when they deny the love of Christ fully to women simply because they were born female;

3.we are concerned about the damage this causes to families when husbands and fathers are told that they have Headship over their wives and daughters;

4.we are concerned about wife abuse, girlfriend abuse, and abuse to female children that takes place in many homes where evangelical men are taught that they have earthly and spiritual authority over women;

5.we are concerned that the children who attend churches that subscribe to the principles of The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood will grow up not knowing the full redemptive power of the blood of Jesus for both men and women;

6.we are concerned for the mental and emotional development of girls and boys who attend churches that teach males have superiority over females;

7.we are concerned that men who are taught that they have Male Headship over a home and church do not feel that they are accountable for abusive attitudes and actions towards women;

8.we are concerned about the mistranslation of the scriptures by complementarian translation committees and by the false teachings propagated by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood;

9.we are concerned that pastors who teach and preach male domination/female subordination cannot relate in a loving, Christ-like manner to female members of their congregations because they have already judged them and found them lacking;

10.we are concerned that the issue of wifely submission, promoted so heavily by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, is more about power and control than about love or obeying the Word of God.

It is because of these concerns that:

1.We demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood acknowledge the harm that has been done to the church body by The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, confess it as sin, and denounce it;

2.we demand that denominational leaders and all churches and seminaries which have adopted The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood do the same;

3.we demand a public apology from the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, and from all heads of seminaries and Bible colleges that have adopted The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, for the inestimable damage this statement has done to all Christians whose lives have been influenced by it;

4.we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood begin to promote the Biblical design of functional equality for all Christians, both men and women;

5.we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood begin to speak out against pastors who continue to demean women and oppress Christians by the use of The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood;

6.we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood chastise pastors who claim that abuse of women is acceptable and justified because the wife is not submitting to the husband;

7.we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood make known to every boy and every girl who attend an evangelical church, that God is their head, and that authority over another human being can come only from God;

8.we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood teach men that they share equally in the burden of society’s ills, and that all that is wrong with society today cannot be blamed on women;

9.we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood do everything in their power to teach seminarians to show the love of Christ to both men and women;

10.we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood teach pastors to be loving towards those Christian men and women who disagree with The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood;

11.and, finally, for the sake of all Christians, men and women, we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, make a public apology for the misuse of Holy Scripture as it relates to women, and cease to publish or promote The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood.

Shirley Taylor, bWe Baptist Women for Equality presented at the Seneca Falls 2 Evangelical Women’s Rights Convention July 24, 2010 in Orlando, Florida

Affirmed by the Freedom for Christian Women Coalition
at the Seneca Falls 2 Evangelical Womens Rights Convention
July 24, 2010 in Orlando, Florida

Signed by:
Shirley Taylor
Jocelyn Andersen
Waneta Dawn
Janice Levinson
Cynthia Kunsman

Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

Setting up Boys to go to Jail for Beating their Future Wives

The teaching of husband authority encourages husbands to abuse their wives verbally, emotionally, physically, spiritually, sexually, and any other way. When boys are taught that they will have authority in their homes, and they see the authority that 25% to 50% of the men in their group wield, they look forward to the time when they are no longer controlled by their parents, but they can make the rules they want for themselves. When again and again they hear women being told to submit joyfully to their husbands, to subject themselves and set aside their wishes in order to serve their husbands, but do not hear the same weight of loving, yielding, and sacrificing taught to men, they arrive at their weddings expecting their wives to be their servants who will give them whatever the husbands want. When this expectation is in place, and the only teaching against this is to not hit one's wife, and wives are both blamed for being abused (Bruce Ware), and told to endure the abuse for a season (John Piper), the young men begin their marriages believing all other means of manipulation, domination, power and control of their wives are legal and biblical. Thus many of them begin their marriages throwing their weight around, doing whatever it takes short of hitting their wives to get what they want. They gripe and complain and put their wives down, which is non-physical assault. They mistakenly think when they choke their wives, shove them against the wall and pin them there, kick them, block them, elbow them, rape them, etc, that these are not physical violence or a crime. It is a very tiny step between these methods of abuse and hitting or beating one's wife. Since those who violate their wives both intensify the violence and speed up how suddenly and swiftly they assault their wives, and also grow in disrespect for their wives, they have less and less time to reconsider and stop the thinking that is causing them to attack their wives, as well as less and less motivation to stop themselves from the pleasure they receive when they rip her to shreds, whether verbally/emotionally, physically, spiritually, or both.

When so-called Christian doctrine ignores the actual biblical commands to husbands to sacrifice for and love their wives, which is a form of submission, and instead focus on controlling their wives, they are allowing the leaven of sin into their lives. That sin grows like leaven in the individual and he has no idea it is his belief and not the frustration of the moment or any action of his wife that caused him to assault her.

The sin also grows in the church body. Unless checked with jail time and other deterents, more and more males pick up the thought pattern and belief system that leads men to assault their wives, either physically or non-physically. It is this sin of lording it over, of disregarding the commandments of the Lord—both things the Gentiles do—that causes the downfall of the church.

"Sin will take you further than you want to go..."

Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

Predicting Which Husband will Murder his Wife

The rate of the domestic murder of women is still high. Of all murders committed against women, 30% of them are committed by spouse, boyfriend, former spouse or former boyfriend. What can we do to stop the killing of women by those who claimed to love them? Intervening to stop physical violence through jail time, fines, and other consequences from society has brought a decrease in domestic murders, but they are still too high. And one in four women are assaulted by their male partners at some point in their lifetime--often over a long period of time.

Those who work to combat domestic violence have stepped back and asked themselves what is the best predictor of a man murdering the female in his life? They would like to say that it is physical abuse, since so many who murder their wives committed increasingly more destructive physical violence against the women in their lives before they murdered them. Yet, in too many cases there was no known physical abuse. Husbands who seemed to be regular guys with no history of abuse seem to “out of the blue” rise up and kill their wives or ex-wives.

I think of the Sueppel family in Iowa, who had adopted foreign children. Neighbors gathered at the Sueppel house frequently and sat out on the lawn/driveway, chatting. Children came over to play. And then the news came out that Mr. Sueppel was about to be charged for embezzling funds from the bank where he was employed. Before he was formally charged, Mr. Sueppel killed his wife and children and then himself, shocking the whole community. The media reported that about 10 years prior Mrs. Sueppel had called the domestic violence shelter because of an incident at her home. This information was dismissed. They claimed Mr. Sueppel was a loving man who just “snapped” and did the unthinkable. How could this “loving man” hit his 5 year old daughter, who was in the play room, over the head with a bat and then continue to beat her upper torso until she died? How could he one by one kill off 3-4 children, and shoot the wife he loved so much? He didn’t find it so easy to kill himself. It took driving at super high speed and crashing into an abutment to do himself in. Yet the media denies that this man was an abuser.

However, the domestic violence workers say the best predictor of domestic murder is verbal/emotional abuse. What causes a person to use verbal/emotional abuse against the very person they claim to love? It is an attitude and belief of entitlement. The belief that he is entitled to have his way, to have what he wants. Verbal and emotional abuse are caused by the belief that he is entitled to cast the deciding vote, to have authority that his spouse does not have. It is a belief in his own superiority, that the rules don’t apply to him.

The attitude of entitlement, the belief that he has the right to have his way stands out in the Sueppel story. Even if Sueppel never hit his wife again after she called for help 10 years prior to her murder, it is doubtful that he stopped controlling her through verbal and emotional abuse. It is probable he also used a quiverful of other controlling techniques, which he selected much like one selects an arrow to slice through a targeted prey. His belief in his right to have what he wanted spilled over into his work and he stole from his boss. Actually, he stole from the people who trusted him enough to deposit their money in his bank.

Holding the Sueppel story up next to John Piper’s answer to how a wife should submit to her abusive husband by enduring his “verbal unkindness for a season,” shows Piper’s denial of the life-threatening danger that he advocated for verbally and emotionally abused wives. And his answer showed that he was refusing to deal with the husband’s sin until the husband had sinned “for a season” and to the point that the sin had escalated into something Piper considered life-threatening.

The Sueppel story is one of many. There is the Haitian husband who had physically assaulted his wife, and then persuaded her to drop the restraining order against him. The husband and wife had been going to their pastor for counseling to help them forgive and reconcile, and then the husband murdered his wife and children. There is the man—Lutheran, I believe—who shot his ex-wife during a counseling session at church. Nothing was said of previous domestic violence, yet he shot his wife repeatedly, killing her.

These are not isolated incidents of abuse. They are the culmination of years of abuse; the abuse that doesn’t leave bruises on the outside, but that turns wives black and blue on the inside.

It is time people of faith stop limiting the definition of domestic violence to “regular beatings” and take all the tactics of domestic abusers seriously. Domestic abuse—even verbal abuse, limiting access to family resources, marital rape, and twisting scripture to insist that a wife obey her husband—is life-threatening. It shows a disrespect for the life and person of another, which is the seed and poisonous plant that blooms into domestic murder.


Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

An Eye-opening Look at Societal issues Among Christians

Waneta Dawn's review of
Woman this is War!
Gender, Slavery & the Evangelical Caste System
~by Jocelyn Andersen
www.womanthisiswar.com

If you think Jocelyn Andersen’s title of her new book is inflammatory, and loaded with gender-bias, please note that she is quoting the attitude of John MacArthur in his introduction to “The Fulfilled Family,” “Gentlemen, don’t even think about marriage until you have mastered the art of warfare.”

Andersen shares with us the horrific pattern she discovered in her research—a pattern of war against women—especially in Christian churches. Although disagreements abound between denominations, the attitude toward women is very similar in nearly all of them. Even some women join in the war against women. Although similar to the cold war against the USSR, with propaganda and innuendo being the key tools, it is also a war that has been and is being waged from many pulpits. Scripture has been twisted, mistranslated, and misinterpreted, and the twists, mistranslations, and misinterpretations repeated until a large majority of Christians believe the human changes to scripture ARE scripture, and insist that to deviate from the misinformation they have been taught is to rebel against God.

Both those who fought for the decent treatment of women and the fight itself, now called feminism, have been maligned and misrepresented from pulpits and from Bible college teachers, even by women who themselves are the recipients and users of those rights that other women have suffered and fought to obtain for women all over the world.

Jocelyn Andersen shows what tactics are used to wage the war against women, and the final goal those waging the war are aiming to achieve.

She points out how the war against women has gained ground with certain doctrinal heresies that are used to convince women themselves that God has mandated women are to be vanquished by men. Indeed, similar doctrines were used in times past to convince slaves that God had mandated they were forever to be slaves.

Contrary to the claims of popular Christian writers, teachers and pastors, that the women who fought for the rights of women were self-centered, bored and rebelling against God, Andersen shares the truth, including excerpts from the biblically-based writings of the Christian women who fought to stop the mistreatment of their fellow human beings.

Andersen’s arguments are carefully researched, sound, biblically based, and invite the reader to reconsider whatever conclusions he or she has previously drawn. The reader is likely to discover she has been holding onto unsound doctrine, or even doctrine that opposes itself. Woman this is War! makes straight paths out of those that were crooked and offers the liberty Paul speaks of in Galatians to women as well as to men.

“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” John 8:32
“Stand fast therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.” Galatians 5:1

click HERE for more info and to order.


Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

Good for the Goose-Good for the Gander

16 Redeeming __ time because the days evil are 17 because of this not ye foolish but understand what the will of the Lord 18 And not to become intoxicated with wine during which is dissipation but be you filled in spirit 19 speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and songs spiritual singing and striking strings the heart of you to Lord 20 expressing thanks always for things in name of Lord of us Jesus Christ to God even Father 21 subject to each other in fear of anointed 22 the wives __ to own husbands as to Lord 23 for husband is head of wife as also __ Christ head of church himself savior of the body 24 therefore as the church is subject to Christ so also the wives __husbands in everything.
~Ephesians 5:16-24 Interlinear http://biblos.com/ephesians/5-16.htm

Wayne Grudem states “Submission (of wives) acknowledges an authority that is not totally mutual,” and says submission “always implies a relationship of submission to authority.” (Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood).

If submission “always implies a relationship of submission to authority, then Eph 5:21 where we all are told to be subject to one another, would mean that husbands are to submit to the authority of their wives. If submission always implies a relationship to an authority, wouldn’t it be a rather obvious twisting of scripture to claim that it only means submission/authority when wives are told to be subject to their husbands, and never when husbands are told to be subject to others, including their wives?

Notice that Grudem and others get the idea of husband authority from the instructions to wives, not from instructions to husbands. Grudem says “husbands are never told to submit to their wives” and “it is very significant that the New Testament authors never explicitly tell husbands to submit to their wives.” (Italics are Grudem’s)

Yet husbands are told to submit in verse 21, along with everyone else. It appears Grudem is claiming that Eph 5:21 does not apply to husbands. If it does not apply to husbands, to whom is Paul writing in v 21? To wives only? Wives are to submit one to another? I wonder why Paul didn’t spell that out. Are husbands exempt from the rest of Ephesians, too?

Grudem also inserts the word “leadership” and “authority” into the instructions for husbands, yet that instruction is never in the scripture. Again, he says that submission IMPLIES there is an authority to submit to.

If Grudem and his friends can interpret scripture based on what they claim is implied, and on passages that are not written to them, then women can use the same rules. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

So according to these rules, it is obvious that we have not been interpreting Ephesians 5:25-31 correctly. We are SUPPOSED to insert implications, and use this passage to define the role of wives.

“Husbands, love your wives even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.”

The instruction to husbands to love their wives sacrificially, even as Christ loved the church sacrificially, carries huge implications for wives. First, Jesus left the comforts of home and came to this cruel world. He suffered cold, heat, an itchy straw or hay bed, hunger, and a multitude of other human conditions that He never experienced in His Heavenly home. This implies husbands are to give up their cushy chairs, their remote controls, and all their other creature comforts for the purpose of providing those comforts for their wives. (Jesus made Himself a little lower than the angels in order to bring us to His level and make us joint heirs with Him. We are now heirs to His exceedingly-better-than-palatial home, if we believe in Him and accept his gift of life provided to us through His death and resurrection, and accept Him as Lord of our lives.) Jesus also laid aside his right to rulership, and became a baby and a child who was subject to his parents. He did all this to serve His church, His bride. This implies that husbands should give up all their own desires, their own comforts, to serve their wives.

If we follow the if-then logic of complementarians, we will conclude that if husbands are the servants of their wives, as Jesus was servant of the church, then wives must be the masters of the husbands. The husbands are to lay aside every “right” of rulership that they may think they have, and instead be servants to their wives, each subject to the wife (or wives) he serves. This implies that wives are the authority over their husbands, for how else will husbands know how to serve their wives? Do not masters direct their servants and tell them what to do? In the same way, wives are to command the day-to-day and moment-by-moment activities of their husbands, and husbands are to continually sacrifice their own desires for their wives, just like slaves lay aside their wants in order to obey their masters.

But that is not all. Even as Jesus nourished his church through words of affirmation and through acts of healing, so also are husbands to build up their wives through praising them and affirming the ruler-role of their wives. Husbands are to joyfully follow the leading of their wives. Indeed, Proverbs 31:28 gives us an example of this. “Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her.” Strongs # 1984 says praiseth means “a prim. root; To be clear…to shine; hence to make a show, to boast; and thus to be (clamorously) foolish; to rave…” So the husband doesn’t just quietly praise her to her face. He raves about her, he boasts about her. He makes a show about her—so much so that he appears to be clamorously foolish. And notice that none of Proverbs 31 is about how beautiful she is. Instead, it’s all about her leadership. And THAT leadership is what the husband is praising her for.

How does she lead? She buys a field, she provides for her servant girls as well as for her own children, she goes on business trips, she dresses her family in beautiful clothing, fit for princesses and princes. She is indeed master and ruler of her house and family, and her husband brags on her. In other words, the implication is that he submits joyfully to her leadership. He doesn’t complain that she goes on business trips, nor that she buys fields. Nor does he make any attempt to rule her; he submits to her leadership.

Think this is far-fetched? Consider I Timothy 5:14. “I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.” The word “guide” has been translated incorrectly. Strongs #3616 says “guide” means “to be the head of (ie: rule) a family.” The number given for “house” is also 3616. Therefore, I Tim. 5:14 should read “I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, rule the family, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.”

The one verse, (I Tim 3:4) about husbands ruling their house, is about bishop/husbands ruling their children, not their wives. “(A bishop) that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity.”

In other words, there is actually more scriptural support for wives to be the authority over or to lead the husbands, than there is for husbands to take the lead/authority role over their wives. This is especially so, if one uses passages written to the spouse to discover one’s own God-mandated role and uses the “add in implications” rule.

So if Grudem is right that submission always implies relation to authority, then Eph 5:25-31 does indeed indicate that Eph 5:21 is also telling husbands to more than submit to their wives. Husbands are to lay down their will and their very lives for their wives. This is not just in the event of a physical attack from an outside source; this is a daily attitude of servitude that is completed through action day after day for the duration of the marriage. Instead of thinking “What do I want my wife to do for me?” a husband is to think “What does my wife want and what do I need to do to provide it for her?” If there is any leadership at all for husbands, it is to lead in servanthood and in self-sacrifice for their wives. If there is any final decision-making authority given to husbands, it is to sacrifice their own preferences and comforts to serve their wives.

The leadership and authority taught by complementarians demands compliance and forced joyful submission from wives. But the biblical way is for wives to submit to the love and sacrifice of their husbands, not to the demands or expectations of their husbands. When husbands sacrifice for their wives, when they prefer their wives’ preferences above their own, they are loving themselves. When they genuinely rave about their wives, encouraging them and building them up, helping them reach for their goals instead of suppressing them, when they genuinely listen and care and do everything within their power to help their wives and meet their needs for love, respect, & etc, the natural response of the wives will be joyful submission.

We have been led to believe that submission for wives is to comply to that which they would rather not. But scriptures point to the great reversal—that submission for wives is to submit to the loving self-sacrifice of their husbands. To submit to the self-sacrifice of another requires humility and love. In short, both the loving self-sacrifice of husbands and the humility and love required of wives to be able to accept the self-sacrifice of their husbands are foundational to Christian maturity.


Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

God as Help Meet

Having read Jocelyn Andersen's new book, which is due to be released July 20, 2010, “Woman this is War! Gender, Slavery and the Evangelical Caste System, I want to share a snippet of information that I picked up and enlarged on.

The words “help meet” are not in the original scriptures. Check it out. Look up “help” in Strong's Concordance, and then look up “meet.” The Hebrew word, #5828 is the same for both.

That same word, #5828 is also used in other passages. Therefore, what is translated “help” should be “help meet,” right?

Ex 18:4 “And the name of the other was Eliezer, for the God of my father, said he, was mine HELP MEET, and delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh.”

Deut 33:7 And this is the blessing of Judah: and he said, Hear Lord, the voice of Judah, and bring him unto his people: let his hands be sufficient for him; and be thou an HELP MEET to him from his enemies.

Deut 33:26-29 There is none like unto the God of Jeshurun, who rideth upon the heaven in thy HELP MEET, and in his excellency on the sky.
The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms: and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them. Israel shall then live in safety alone: the fountain of Jacob shall be upon a land of corn and wine; also his heavens shall drop down dew.
Happy art thou, O Israel: who is like unto thee, O people saved by the Lord, the shield of thy HELP MEET, and who is the sword of thy excellency! And thy enemies shall be found liars unto thee, and thou shalt tread upon their high places.

Psalm 33:20 Our soul waiteth for the Lord: he is our HELP MEET and our shield.

Psalm 20:1-2 The Lord hear thee in the day of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob defend thee; Send thee HELP MEET from the sanctuary, and strengthen thee out of Zion.

Psalms 121:1-2 I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my HELP MEET. My HELPMEET cometh from the LORD, which made heaven and earth.

ROFLOL (Rolling on the floor laughing out loud.) Every man’s wife comes from the hills, right?

Notice how replacing the word “help” with “helpmeet” gives the sense of one who is inferior to the one helped. It makes God sound subservient to those He is helping. In spite of the claims of Christians for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood that wives are not inferior to husbands in their doctrine, the effect of “helpmeet” when applied to our strong and Almighty God, shows that it is indeed a word that reduces Him to a menial position of an assistant to one who is greater. If it does that in reference to God, it is obvious it also does it in reference to wives.

The verse should read, “I will make him an help.” According to the blue letter, “for him” is also added and there is no corresponding Hebrew. When the verse is correctly translated, one can look at those other passages that use #5828 and see that “help” means someone of strength, might, and power, someone who is a deliverer, a rescuer, a savior who can do battle against the enemy—and win—an excellency that may be superior to the one being helped.

So one can deduce that God meant that He would make a woman who is a deliverer, a rescuer, a help in times of trouble, a strong person whose strength may be more effective than her husband's. Yet, because God's whole life is not involved in helping man, we can also assume that woman's whole life will not be wrapped around helping her husband. She is to be a deliverer, helping him up when he is down, but not his servant whom he can look down on and dominate. Just like man is not to dictate to God, so man is not to dictate to his wife. One ASKS for help from one who is an equal or a superior (wife and God, respectively); one doesn't DEMAND it, because if one demands it, the helper has good reason to refuse to extend aid.

May I suggest this is what the translators saw and understood. And because they did NOT want to think of women as superior—or even equal—in strength or importance, and did NOT want society to think of women as anything other than the inferiors they thought them, they decided the scripture was wrong, and therefore they changed it. Notice that they did NOT alert us to their deed by putting meet, for, or him in italics. In other words, for centuries they have gotten away with adding to scripture, with the intent to change the meaning. And the men who had the education to be able to study the scriptures, who saw this “error,” kept silence, thereby choosing to be accomplices in the sin of adding words to scripture in order to change the meaning to nearly the opposite of what was intended. How many “little ones” have they offended by their deed(s)? Jesus said it is better that a millstone were hanged around their neck and they were drowned in the depth of the sea, rather than face the wrath of God for causing anyone to lose faith in God.

If translators and scholars would change the meaning of scripture and teach the same, (they have done this with other gender-related passages as well), if pastors would see the error, yet continue to teach a false doctrine, what else were and are they willing to teach to keep women in a man-designed inferior place?

Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

Subverting the Gospel—Husband Authority

The following comment came from “Rose” in response to my post “Husband, Give Yourself up for your Wife.” Since my response was going to be lengthy, I chose to publish it here, rather than in the comment section.

Your arguments are the extreme opposite of "wives submit to your husbands." You want husbands to completely submit to their wives. When, in actuality, if people stop being feminist and read the text for what it is, you realize that both are supposed to happen. Wives are supposed to give their husbands leadership over the family (examples would be allow him to make big decisions for the family WHILE STILL making her opinion known, trusting him to lead the family spiritually just like Jesus leads us) and the husband is supposed to give himself up for the wife (examples would be putting her first in his life under God and serving her in this way). I am a woman myself and completely rebuke the feminist ideas because they are not biblical. Instead of getting offended that your husband is supposed to lead you and your family, accept it as a wonderful gift from God and a blessing and act of servitude from your husband as he does his absolute best to make sure the best comes for your and your children.

The only truthful statement in this entire comment is: “…both are supposed to happen.” Rose got that part right. Both husband and wife are to submit to one another. This blog is focused on the tyranny of one-way submission that is taught by so many who claim to be Christians. Although complementarian preachers may tell husbands to love their wives, when the preachers are asked to deal with unloving husbands, they blame the wives instead. Basically then, their teaching about husbands loving their wives self-sacrificially is meaningless, and husbands know this. Wives find out about it when they go to their pastors for help after being abused--usually for a long time--by their husbands.

The rest of Rose’s comments are based on falsehood. “You want husbands to completely submit to their wives.” Although this statement is true, I do believe it is biblical for husbands to completely submit to their wives, that is not what Rose meant. From the context it is clear that she meant to say that I think ONLY husbands are to completely submit to their spouses. I never said that, nor do I believe it, and no egalitarian or Evangelical Feminist believes that, either.

The next false statements are: “if people stop being feminist and read the text for what it is…” and “Wives are supposed to give their husbands leadership over the family…” If one reads the text for what it is, one finds that husbands are NEVER told to lead their wives, and wives are never told to give their husbands leadership over the family. Never. In fact, when one checks the concordance for “guide” in I Tim. 5:14, one finds the translators chose the wrong word. They should have chosen “rule.” Paul was telling young women to get married, bear children, and RULE their homes. They were to be the “head of the house.” Husbands are never told to do that. If wives are told to rule their households, why would they "give" that rulership to someone else? Those who are church leaders are to manage their children, but nothing is ever said about husbands, even those who are church leaders, managing their wives. Rose, you need to read the text for what it is. You don’t even have to be a feminist to see the truth that is there.

Rose also says: “Instead of getting offended that your husband is supposed to lead you and your family, accept it as a wonderful gift from God and a blessing and act of servitude from your husband as he does his absolute best to make sure the best comes for your and your children.”

Rose, I am not offended when a husband practices loving self-sacrifice as he is commanded. But I have one leader, Jesus, and I reject any others. When a man—even one who is my husband—attempts to take the place of Jesus in my life, I will—rightfully—get very offended. I will be offended that he is practicing exactly what Jesus told him not to do, lord it over me, and that he is trying to convince me to agree with his twisting of scripture. I refuse to live by his scripture-twisted rules. As Paul stated in Galatians 2:5, I will not yield to him, I will not be put in bondage, no, not for an hour, because that would subvert the truth of the gospel.

The Bible DOES say, “Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God,” and then shows how that is done. Wives, by submitting to their husbands, and husbands by loving their wives self-sacrificially. Nothing, absolutely NOTHING, is said about husbands ruling or leading, being the authority over their wives, making the final decisions, nor about wives giving their husbands those privileges or entitlements. All those directives are entirely MAN-made doctrine.

And that man-made doctrine has the very damaging side-effect of CAUSING domestic abuse and domestic violence. It harms everyone it touches, including Rose.


Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

Joyful Submission

Having been an abused wife, I cringe every time I hear or read that wives are required to submit joyfully to their husbands. In my mind it means to be joyful when I am humiliated by my husband, joyful when he orders me around, joyful when he mistreats me, joyful when my husband mistreats my child, joyful when he destroys my things, joyful when my husband threatens me. It is the ultimate in domestic abuse because it not only demands that wives both permit themselves to be abused—submit to abuse and abuser—and accept the justification husbands, pastors and church folk put forth to force wives to tolerate the abuse, it also demands that wives be happy—joyful—about being violated by their own husbands who promised to love and cherish them.

The fact that this is the experience of so many wives, leads me to examine whether “joyful submission” to one’s husband is biblical. Does the Bible ever command wives to submit JOYFULLY?

First, I look up the word “Joyful” in the concordance to see if it is ever connected to “submission.” Out of 25 occurrences, nearly all of them are about being joyful to the Lord for some marvelous thing He did. Exceptions are Esther 5:9, when Haman went home joyful because he thought he was promoted, Ps 113:9 when the barren mother has children (and is rejoicing in the Lord), and 2 Cor 7:4 when Paul is joyful in tribulation. Unless one concludes the teaching of “joyful submission” is talking about abused wives being joyful when their “Christian” husbands bring them tribulation, it is an entirely man-decreed doctrine that tells wives to leap for joy as they dump their brains down the garbage disposal and rush to allow the very thing they know will ruin their family. It is foolishness.

Picture it: When the husband overturns the table, dumping the pot roast, peas, mashed potatoes and apple crisp on the floor, along with shards of glass from broken glasses and plates, all doused liberally with water and milk, all because he thinks there is too much salt on the peas, the wife is to submit joyfully. Exactly HOW does that look? Will she be singing Amazing Grace or There is Power in the Blood? But that is being joyful to God and will likely provoke her husband to whack her across the mouth.

Perhaps a John Piper moment is what they mean. “My dear husband, I love you very much and joyfully submit to you. I am so sorry the peas were oversalted. I will joyfully make sure they are salted just right in the future. (as if anyone could guarantee that!) I am so sorry to have caused you such distress. What would you have me do now? Shall I clean the mess off the floor or cook you another dinner first? I will gladly do whatever you want.”

Gag me. What a syrupy bunch of hogwash. And why do the husbands who make such messes require their wives to clean them up?

God never asks wives to submit joyfully to their husbands. To say that He does, is to say that He demands that wives grovel at the feet of their husbands and be joyful at their own humiliation. This is a picture of a subjugator and his vanquished foe, not of a love relationship. It has no place in a marriage that is to be a symbol of our loving sacrificial Christ and the reciprocating church.

There is not a single verse in the Bible telling wives to submit to husbands who mistreat them. Slaves are told to submit to harsh masters, I Peter 2:18, but wives are NOT told to submit to harsh husbands. In fact, husbands are told to not be harsh to their wives. (Col 3:19, NIV)

Sapphira buried her brain with the excrement and agreed with her husband to lie to God about the proceeds of the sale of their property. She didn’t even do something that was “clearly” sin, like group sex, as Piper taught. She told a “little white lie” and God held her accountable with her life.

The demand that wives submit joyfully is a demand that wives put their blessing on being mistreated, and even sin joyfully because it isn’t “clearly sin.” BOTH THESE are wrong. While we are to “bless those that persecute us, bless and curse not,” we are never to put our blessing on the sin of persecution, nor on sin. Joyful submission is blessing the sin, because anytime a wife is required to submit against her better judgement, and then pushed to be joyful about it, there is sin involved on the part of the husband.

When husbands love sacrificially and make decisions WITH their wives instead of for them or in opposition to what wives think is best, wives ARE submitting to their husbands, and they don’t have to be told to do it joyfully.

Even worse, it is HUSBANDS who are told to be joyful with their wives. Ecclesiastes 9:9a “Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity.” Once again, a command or recommendation to husbands has been twisted and misconstrued to apply to wives.

We should be hearing, “Husbands sacrifice joyfully for your wives, for that is genuine love and will bring out the best in your wives.”


Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

Complementarian, Hierarchicalist, or Traditionalist

John Piper and Wayne Grudem write a preface (1991) for “Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood.” Here is a telling paragraph:

“A brief note about terms: If one word must be used to describe our position, we prefer the term complementarian, since it suggests both equality and beneficial differences between men and women. We are uncomfortable with the term “traditionalist” because it implies an unwillingness to let Scripture challenge traditional patterns of behavior, and we certainly reject the term “hierarchicalist” because it overemphasizes structured authority while giving no suggestion of equality or the beauty of mutual interdependence.”

These are great-sounding words. But do Piper and Grudem live up to them?

First, their so-called equality is limited to salvation and that we are equal in the eyes of God. But they refuse practical equality in the eyes of man. Theirs is equality in name only, not equality that makes any difference in a woman’s earthly life nor that lifts women from the status of “lifetime servants to/slaves of men.” Although they reject the term hierarchiacalist, saying it overemphasizes structured authority, structured authority is exactly what they teach. This authority is so important, that Piper advises wives whose husbands practice “verbal unkindness” toward them, to endure it for a season, and when the husband smacks them one night, to call the pastor in the morning. Talk about minimizing husband-supremist behavior! Most folks would call that traditionalist at the very least, since it winks at selfish and abusive male behavior, and it would not be stretching it to call it hierarchicalist.

Second, although they give lip service to the scriptural command to husbands to love their wives self-sacrificially, that is not what they push. When a wife is mistreated, their first focus is for her to be more submissive. Piper claims to not allow physical abuse, yet tells wives to wait until they are physically abused to report it to a pastor. In other words, he DOES allow physical violence and it is unclear what he will do if a wife calls him in the morning. Will he thoroughly question her about her submission or will he actually hold her husband accountable?

Note that the term “mutual interdependence” is not the same as “mutual submission,” but the context of the paragraph--"equality," "overemphasis on structured authority," and "challenge traditional patterns of behavior"--leads one to believe Piper and Grudem are speaking of mutual submission. Wayne Grudem believes “mutual submission” except for “mutual consideration and deference,” is unscriptural, He says:

“Within marriage an egalitarian view tends toward abolishing differences and advocates “mutual submission,” which often results in the husband acting as a wimp and the wife as a usurper…”

Grudem claims in Chapter 10 of “Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood,” that husbands are never told to submit to their wives, denying that Ephesians 5:21 “Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God,” means that the husband is also to submit to his wife. But he claims that “Wives submit to your own husbands” means that husbands have an authority and leadership position, even though the Scriptures never state that husbands are to take authority over their wives, nor command husbands to be leaders of their wives. So even though, husbands are commanded to submit along with everyone else, Grudem denies that this includes a submission to their wives that is equal to the submission of wives to their husbands. Grudem reasons that “Submission acknowledges an authority that is not totally mutual.” Meanwhile, he ignores the “submission” that husbands are called to when they are commanded to love their wives as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for it.

Interestingly, Paul Hegstrom, in “Angry Men and the Women Who Love Them,” agrees that the submission of husbands and wives is not mutual, because the submission required of husbands is more demanding than that required of wives. He says:

“Eph. 5:25-28 reminds us that as Christ died for the Church, a man should give his life for his wife. A childish, abusive man will spiritually abuse his wife by telling her that she has to be subjected to her husband in everything. He does not realize that a husband’s mandate is to literally be willing to sacrifice his life for her. Which is the greater submission? The greater submission is for the man. I Pet. 3:5-6 in essence says that the wife should not be terrified, fearful, or full of anxiety in a godly home. The passage as a whole speaks to the man with a mandate of creating a very safe place where she is not terrified or living in fear and anxiety.”

Which are we to believe, those who subtract submission for husbands from scripture and add an authority that is never mentioned or those who point to the scriptures that state that submission and sacrificial love is required of husbands?

And what of “mutual interdependence” that Grudem and Piper believe is so beautiful? Apparently, they think making wives totally dependent on and obedient to their husbands is beautiful, and that husbands depending upon their wives to serve them and do whatever the husbands want is beautiful. And, of course, getting together to make babies when the husband so desires, is beautiful, too.

This arrangement APPEARS beautiful for husbands, but their prayers are being hindered. As Paul Hegstrom points out, when a man rebels against the principles of loving self-sacrifice toward his wife, (IE a greater submission than her submission) “his prayers will be hindered and cut off, and he will not be able to pray effectively (1 Pet. 3:7).” And wives have to LIE to themselves to convince themselves it is beautiful for them, too. Many a wife who has been freed from the grip of complementarianism, admits that although she told others she was happy, she actually was NOT happy.

It is no wonder Grudem, Piper, and the rest of the complementarians are “uncomfortable” with being called “traditionalist” or “hierarchicalist.” Thieves don’t like being called thieves, either, and con-artists reject being called con-artists, too.

But even the choice of “Complementarian” is a lie. As Piper and Grudem say, the word “suggests both equality and beneficial differences between men and women.” The word does indeed suggest those things, but the complementarian doctrine emphasizes neither equality nor beneficial differences. The doctrine is primarily about the authority of men—husbands in particular—and the submission and subjection of women, with special emphasis on wives. The correct term to define those with Grudem’s and Piper’s so-called complementarian doctrine is Hierarchicalist. It is the Egalitarians who practice true Complementarianism.


Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

Absolute Authority Brings Death

BALTIMORE—For more than a week, Ria Ramkissoon watched passively as her 1-year-old son wasted away, denied food and water because the older woman she lived with said it was God's will.
Javon Thompson was possessed by an evil spirit, Ramkissoon was told, because he didn't say "Amen" during a mealtime prayer. Javon didn't talk much, given his age, but he had said "Amen" before, Ramkissoon testified.
~From Monterey County, CA, The Herald 2-24-2010

http://www.montereyherald.com/ci_14462394

Although Ria Ramkissoon in the story above was submitting to and obeying a cult leader, marriages where both spouses belong to the same church, and the entire denomination pushes husband authority, and when both husband and wife repeatedly hear teaching that not only grants authority to the husband, but also demands that he wield that authority (some say by force if necessary,) they could easily wind up in the same tragedy that the Ramkissoon family did.

Submission Tyranny kills. When anyone is told they have the right to absolute rule, except for orders that are “clearly sin,” (From John Piper's answer session on “How to submit to your husband when he is abusive,") the stage is set for tragedy. Those teaching this rule apparently have little to no understanding of how domestic violence works, or of its effect on the one(s) who are ruled.

First, the ruler starts with a belief that he has the right to control his wife, and the wife, also believing he has that right, bows herself to that rule and tries her best to subject herself to her husband—no matter what.

Next the ruler-husband imposes rules that are just at the edge of nonsensical, and his partner yields to him, even though those rules do not seem right to her. After all, she has been commanded from the pulpit to submit to her husband in everything, whether or not she agrees with him.

After he has gained that ground, the ruler-husband revels in his power for a time, but soon his sense of supreme power wears off and he goes for another fix. He tries something reasonable, and his wife doesn't protest at that. So he increases the demand to something more ridiculous than his previous nonsensical demand. His wife reasons with him, and he tells her she must submit. She again insists that what he is demanding is over the top, and he tells her if she does not do as he says, she is rebelling against God, which is as the sin of witchcraft, and it is clear that all witches go to hell. So the humiliated wife yields to a demand that feels totally wrong to her, but which she is unable to categorize as sin.

This pattern continues, with the ruler-husband's demands increasingly becoming more and more absurd, and the wife feeling she has no recourse but to do as he says. After all, is sending their son to bed without supper, because he left a sock on the floor, sin? Is it sin to yield to her ruler-husband's demand that she act out the porn he has been watching? It isn't adultery—exactly--so it must be ok, even if she cries herself to sleep afterward, and continues to feel awful days later. Is it sin to throw out a complete setting of dishes for eight because her ruler-husband declares she must because a plate got a chip? The Bible doesn't address that directly, but it feels so wrong she asks their pastor about it. He tells her to submit to her husband, so she puts the whole set in the garbage, even though she really likes the design and it feels all wrong to her.

One day their son leaves his tricycle outside overnight, and her ruler-husband commands that the son is to go without food all day. The wife doesn't feel right about this, but she has already asked the pastor about things she feels are wrong, and the pastor supported her husband. She doesn't want to embarrass herself again. So she obediently keeps food from her son for that day. She gets more and more uneasy as her husband continues to demand that their son be punished for his neglect of his tricycle, but she is so deep into subjection, that she is unable to discern at what point her ruler-husband's demands become sin. Is there anything in the Bible about it being sin to make a child skip meals? She doesn't know, and she can't think straight; the issue is so worrisome. She cannot ask their pastor, and by now she is afraid the state would charge her with child neglect. But she cannot see her way clear to disobeying her husband, either. She knows from earlier times how he will rant, throw things at her, and possibly beat her. And their pastor will say it was her fault for not submitting. So she looks on in horror as her son fades to skin and bones and then dies. Later, as she looks back, she still cannot determine at what point she should have stood up to her ruler-husband and risked the lives of the whole family when that provoked him to rage.

Complementarians seem to think that this scenario is impossible in Christian settings. I want to go on record telling them it is very possible. I, personally, did many things I should never have done, because I was taught that is what a wife is required to do. I, personally, was unable to think straight, went to the pastor for help, and was advised to submit to my ruler-husband.

I am not proud of these things. Although the Bible is not specific about those individual demands, they violated scriptural principles. It wasn't until I separated from my ruler-husband and his over-powering ways that I began to be able to reason correctly, and to know for certain that the feeling that those things were wrong, was correct.

Wives submit to your own husbands is not a command that overrides all other biblical commands. We are also commanded to be good stewards, to behave in loving ways toward others, to bind up the broken-hearted (rather than help a ruler-husband oppress the broken-hearted), to obey the laws of our land (as long as we are not disobeying God).

Frankly, John Piper is wrong. Wives must obey God rather than man. And the demands of the ruler-husband does not need to be “clearly sin” for them to be wrong in the eyes of God. Sin is not limited to sexual sin, nor to what Piper thinks are obvious and gross sin. “Little” sins, like “verbal unkindness” are just as much sin as things that are “clearly sin.” In fact, the “verbal unkindness” of abusive ruler-husbands is aimed at getting the wife to agree she is worthless and inferior. If the wife agrees with that, she is also sinning. Indeed, the belief that they are inferior and worthless is a hallmark of abused wives.

Not only is husband authority a sin that leads to death, it is also a sin that FORCES the wife to sin in spite of her best intentions and efforts to remain righteousness. It is sin that is CAUSED by subjection to her ruler-husband.



Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

The Love of a Husband

Many Christians put so much of their attention on the submission of wives that they leave a huge void concerning the love of husbands for their wives. Furthermore, the statements of popular leaders like John Piper, Bruce Ware, Wayne Grudem, and John MacArthur who emphasize husband authority, excuse the unloving behavior of husbands and place the blame for the husband's abuse on his wife, give the impression that husbands do not need to love their wives at all, that the focus of husbands should be to insist that their wives submit to them. Where exactly is this command in scripture? Besides the command of the Gentile king in Esther, it is NOT in scripture at all. Complementarian doctrine is taking men off the narrow way and into the ditch.

What ARE husbands told to focus on? They are to love and sacrifice for their wives. Since when is demanding obedience either love OR sacrifice?

So what does a husband's love look like? First, consider what a man does to interest the woman on whom he has set his sights. He calls her a bad name, right? He tells her she's a lousy cook, or that her hair is full of cooties. Absolutely not! A woman who is treated like that, is likely to have nothing to do with him. If he persists in such behavior, she will likely tell him a home-truth or two that will have him slinking away in shame. Does he approach her and tell her that God told him she is to submit to him? Of course not! She'd rush away from him as fast as she could or laugh in his face. Yet, this is how husbands presume to “love” their wives.

So how DOES a man convince a woman to date and marry him? He speaks respectfully to her, he treats her as he would like to be treated, he shares his thoughts and feelings with her and listens to her thoughts and feelings as well. He becomes her friend, her companion, someone she can rely on, and she returns the favor. He begins to include her in his plans, making decisions together; first for what they will do on a given day, and much later where they will live and how they will raise children.

Yet, once they are declared husband and wife, the husband changes his behavior. He no longer makes decisions WITH her unless he wants to. He makes decisions FOR her, and orders her to follow them. He stops loving her and starts ordering her—but insists his ordering her is loving her. He shifts his entire focus from loving and winning her to dominating her. He calls this possession and smothering of her spirit love.

Men do this in varying degrees. Some through belief in the complementarian view alone, maintain a “trump card” that they can pull out at any time. Even if they rarely use that card, it is still there. The inequality is still a form of domination. Others go a step further and expect their wives to get permission for nearly everything: how money is spent, whether she can go anywhere, what they will eat and when, what her role is, and how many children they will have, and what she will believe of the scriptures. Still others use verbal, emotional, and spiritual abuse to keep their wives humiliated and subjugated. And then there are those who use physical violence in addition to verbal, emotional, and spiritual abuse to keep their wives under their control.

These husbands protect their wives from others, but don't consider that the person their wives most need protection from is their husbands.

Basically, husband, go back to courting your wife. Even though your wife says she doesn't want to make a decision, encourage her to start thinking about what she would decide if given the opportunity, but do not force her to make a decision. If you withheld from her the freedom to make choices, she will need time and encouragement to grow in this skill. Talk to your wife and listen to her, like you did when you were courting—or even better than you did when you were courting. Treat your wife as you would like to be treated if you were her. Although you will have to ask her for the details, many behaviors are common knowledge. Would you like your input scorned or ignored? Of course not! Then don't scorn or ignore or brush off her input. Would you like to be treated as less important than she is? Of course not! So stop treating her like she is less important or less valuable than you are.

Honor your wife. This is not limited to telling her flowery words, giving her roses, chocolates, and jewelry, or honoring her on Mother's Day. Honor her by listening attentively to her thoughts,ideas, and feelings--even when they are complaints about your behavior. Don't silence her. Discuss how money and time will be spent and make decisions together. When you don't agree, don't pull out the trump card and expect her to do it your way. Instead, keep brainstorming for ideas until you find one that works for both of you. When you have a deep abiding love for your wife, you will be concerned that she is satisfied, that decisions do not hurt her.

And don't forget to sacrifice for your wife. Put your own needs and wants aside so that she can go back to school, go on that trip, or anything else she believes would be beneficial to her. Stop thinking all the cooking,housework and child care is her job. Pitch in. It is your job, too. Do your own laundry if your wife agrees that would be helpful, and throw the boys' jeans in with your own. And PLEASE do NOT wash light and dark colors together!

A husband who enjoys fellowshipping with his wife, is likely to have a wife who enjoys fellowshipping with him. Real fellowship requires trust, friendship, and equality in both everyday life and in your social and spiritual lives. Give your wife the gift of equality in every area. Never assume you know better than she does; perhaps YOU are the person who lacks information. Talk it out, research together, decide together.

Lastly, read I Corinthians 13 together—perhaps once every 4-8 weeks. Does your wife feel safe enough to be honest with you and tell you if the chapter describes you? If she doesn't feel safe (and you may have no way of knowing) and/or if the chapter does not describe you, you need to improve in loving your wife and in giving her preference over yourself. In fact, it is best to presume that you always have room for improvement in loving your wife.

Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

God as Parent 101

God is our father. He told all of us to submit to one another; wives to submit to their own husbands and husbands to love their wives so much they will sacrifice for their wives. Complementarians don't seem to understand that their focus on wife submission and husband authority is in itself a sin that would be punishable if their own daughters did it.

Consider: if you the parent gave directions to 2 of your children. You told your daughter to set the table, and your son to vacuum the dining room floor. While your daughter sets the table, your son doesn't even bother getting the vacuum out. Instead, he critically watches his sister's every move.
He says to her, “Mom (or Dad) told you to HURRY UP and set the table.”
Your daughter replies, “She didn't tell me to hurry. She just said to set the table. And she told you to vacuum the floor.”
“No, she didn't,” your son says, “she told me to make sure you do a good job, and do it fast. Now get a move on!”

Which of the children pleased you, the parent? The one who was obeying you, or the one who made himself into a god, added to your words to your daughter, and ignored and disobeyed your instructions to him? Would you allow your son to get by with disobeying you?

Sadly, quite a number of complementarian parents WOULD allow their sons to get by with such behavior, and they'd make their daughters accountable for their brother's behavior, and tell their daughters to vacuum the floor after dinner, too.

However, if the behaviors were reversed, and the daughter was the one who had not obeyed, who had added to the directions for her brother, and focused on his work instead of her own, she would be punished.

Sadly, those same parents encourage their sons to focus on wife subjection, change the command of God for husbands to “authority,” instead of love and sacrifice, and mistreat their wives, sisters and mothers.

The disobedience to God begins at childhood, when parents hold girls responsible for obeying, but dismiss the disobedience of boys, saying “boys will be boys.” Some parents purposely raise boys to take charge of and assume superiority over others—especially girls—instead of taking charge of themselves and considering others better than themselves. Meanwhile, they raise girls to assume the mantle of slavery, obedience, and inferiority to males.

It is as children that boys learn to disrespect women and girls, and believe themselves to be so superior that domestic abuse is the natural manifestation of their strongly taught and deeply engrained belief.

But God is not mocked. Children who disobey Him, will reap what they have sown.

Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

Husband Submission to Wife Prohibited

Within marriage an egalitarian view tends toward abolishing differences and advocates “mutual submission,” which often results in the husband acting as a wimp and the wife as a usurper.
~Wayne Grudem, editor of Biblical Foundations For Manhood And Womanhood

Grudem is right. The Bible says NOTHING about husbands submitting to wives. At least, not in so many words in Ephesians 5.

However, I Peter 5:5 says “Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, ALL of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud and giveth grace to the humble.”

Now, for Grudem’s view to be correct, we must conclude Peter is only talking about males in this directive. MALES are to be subject one to another and be clothed with humility [toward one another only]. It is unlikely this was written to females only, because that is not specifically stated. And he most certainly could not be ordering males to submit to females, particularly NOT husbands to wives. Since males were considered the superior gender in the New Testament era, and since Christians for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood also consider males to be the superior gender, we must conclude the Bible, which was written by males, was primarily written to males, except when otherwise stated.

Ephesians 5:21 says “Submitting yourselves to one another in the fear of God.” This must be speaking to males only. After all, the Epistle to the Ephesians was written to the saints at Ephesus, and no females, particularly, wives, could EVER be saints. Therefore, the book MUST have been written to males, except for Ephesians 5:22-24, of course. That was most definitely written to wives, since it orders them to obey their husbands.

Furthermore, isn’t there a verse in the Bible (can’t think where it is located) that says: “The Lord sayeth, husbands, keep your wives in all subjection. Let not submission to your wives be known among you, for it is not seemly for a husband to submit to his wife. He that submitteth to his wife shall have his part in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone. Rather, let the husbands rule their wives first with tongue lashings, cursings and threats, and then through withholding of money and friends and forcing them on the marriage bed, and then through smiting with the hand. If the wife refuse to subject herself to her husband, let the husband bring it to the church, and let the church rebuke her. If she still puts on the cloak of Jezebel the rebel, let her be considered a heathen, and let no one have anything to do with her.”

Oh, yes, you can find that in the book of Ahasuerus 1:22


Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com

CBMW Complementarian teaching Threatens Wives

When leaders of Christians for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood state that a wife who is abused or beaten by her husband has brought it on herself because she is not submitting to her husband, they are publicly threatening all Christian wives because they are giving license to all Christian husbands to abuse their wives—even if they add there is no excuse for using physical violence.

Wives who hear such statements understand the meaning quite well, and redouble their efforts to do all within their power to make sure their husbands are happy. Wives who suffer abuse, understand their husbands have been given license and encouragement to abuse or beat them for any reason, since no matter what the reason, it will be blamed on the wife.

Many wives who are not abused or beaten, join with the CBMW in blaming the abused and beaten wives, because they assume they are doing a better job than their abused sisters of submitting to their husbands.

Husbands who hear such statements, experience no pressure to stop their nasty behaviors. In fact, they are encouraged to enforce their man-given authority rights. They know their pastors and peers will not hold them accountable for their sinful actions, but will instead shift the accountability onto their wives.

The result of this is an entire Christian community of wives striving to obey their husbands. Those whose husbands are kind and non-abusive do not need to strive as hard and can voice and push their opinions and preferences. But those whose husbands are harsh and demanding, live in fear of punishment from their husbands and put their entire effort into pleasing their husbands, even if that makes them less than perfect in the eyes of God.

Wives who live with domineering husbands are so focused on submitting, that they are rarely abused for non-submission. Contrary to the teaching of Bruce Ware and other CBMW teachers, these wives are abused because their husband is unhappy about something, or because he feels less powerful than he thinks he ought to feel. If he wasted the day being social, he will come home and chew out his wife for doing nothing all day, even if she was extra energetic and accomplished more than usual that day. If he is attempting to repair the car and the process is not going according to his wishes, he may beat his wife or hurl the wrench at her when she comes to tell him lunch is ready.

Abused wives know this, and do all within their power to make things go well for their husbands. It is unfortunate that they are unable to control the weather, wild animals, pets, inanimate objects, children, other men, the government, & etc.

Because “Christians” blame wives for the sinful behavior of husbands, husbands know they can freely sin against their wives and children.

When pastors like John Piper refuse to intervene until the husband’s violence against his wife turns physical or until the husband demands “major” sin from his wife, they are tempering the threat against wives by disallowing physical violence and blatant sexual sin, but still encouraging husbands to use all other forms of assault and control against their wives.

Furthermore, withholding intervention until the abuse turns physical, makes it unlikely the abuser will stop abusing. The abusive husband’s mindset has become so engrained that any other way of thinking seems ridiculous and non-biblical to him.

When pastors spend 90% of their effort to push wives to forgive and reconcile, and 10% of their effort to encourage husbands to stop abusing, and continue to teach husbands to take authority over their wives, wives know it is pointless to go to pastors for help.

The result of living with this threat from their peers is that far too many abused Christian wives never go to anyone for help until the abuse is so severe their lives, or the lives of their children, are threatened through health problems, suicidal thoughts, or from the abuser’s own hand. And far too frequently, they never go to anyone for help, and one day they end up dead, killed by the very person who vowed to cherish them.

And then some “Christians” claim the murder is the will of God. This blames the wife for being murdered by her husband, and ends up also being a threat against all Christian wives.

It is no wonder Christian women are fearful and prone to anxiety. They live with a major threat over their heads.


Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See www.wanetadawn.com