![[Books & Gifts]](images/bk41.gif)
|
Foundation for |
|
|
Foundation for |
Another major difference between submission and obedience can be found in the level of responsibility that God places on a subordinate for his or her own actions and attitudes. In Acts 5:29 we are told that obedience to God takes precedence, if there is a conflict between God's command and man's decree. A biblically submissive wife is willing to comply, but, realizing that she still remains accountable to God for personal sin, she may choose to disobey if her husband's request or command is a known violation of one of God's direct commands. If noncompliance is necessary, however, the biblically submissive wife continues to maintain the proper attitude of respect for her husband's leadership position and for his overall right to lead. This action might be called, "submissive noncompliance."
A biblical example of submissive noncompliance is found in the sixth chapter of Daniel. In this passage the king made a law that "...whosoever shall ask a petition of any god or man for thirty days, except of thee, O king, shall be cast into the den of lions" (Daniel 6:7b).
Obedience to the king's decree would have caused Daniel to sin against a direct command of God: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Exodus 20:3). Therefore, it was necessary for Daniel to disobey the king's law. However, was his disobedience an act of self-righteous rebellion, or was it submissive noncompliance? It is imperative that we examine Daniel's attitude toward his king for the answer to this question.
In the first place, Daniel maintained a close personal relationship with God, even though it meant that he had to disobey his king.
"Now when Daniel knew that the writing was signed, he went into his house; and his windows being open in his chamber toward Jerusalem, he kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did previously." Daniel 6:10
Secondly, there is no indication that Daniel had a rebellious or defensive attitude toward his subordinate role as a subject under a king. He previously submitted to the king's authority in all things, and he did not disobey until the king passed a new law that directly opposed God's expressed will: that believers worship Him alone, praying and giving thanks. Although Daniel knew the dire consequences of choosing to disobey in this instance, he did not do so defiantly, nor did he run away from those consequences. Daniel continued to recognize the king's right as a duly appointed authority to execute punishment.
"Then the king commanded, and they brought Daniel, and cast him into the den of lions ..." Daniel 6:16a
Thirdly, Daniel, remained respectful of his king's position of authority. He was free from all rebellious or self-righteous attitudes before, during, and after his disobedience. Daniel's speech after God delivered him from the lions is a perfect example of willing submission to an authority in a situation requiring submissive noncompliance.
"Then said Daniel unto the king, O king, live forever. My God hath sent His angel, and hath shut the lions' mouths, that they have not hurt me, forasmuch as before Him innocence was found in me; and also before thee, O king, have I done no hurt." Daniel 6:21-22
Keep in mind that Daniel said, "O king, live forever," to an authority who had just ordered his death.
Daniel's example of submission is a far cry from the defiant "I'll never let a man tell me what to do," that we hear many women say today. Such outcries usually come from women who try to justify their refusal to obey God's command to submit to their husbands by claiming that he "might" ask them to do something that would violate their personal rights. Such women lie in wait, expecting their husbands to err, so that their before-the-fact attitude of non-submission will be vindicated. They often fabricate "what if's" and treat the rare misuses of their husbands' authority as if they were common, everyday events. (I believe, the percentage of husbands who actually ask their godly wives to sin is very, very small. Therefore, for most women this is a moot point, born more from a desire to escape submission entirely, than a true concern over wronging God.) The attitude of women who attempt to pre-justify non-submission is a continuation of the garden-variety rebelliousness that has existed since the fall of mankind. By contrast, Daniel's example is a testimony of what is possible when a believer obeys God by submitting to human authorities who actually do act unrighteously.
No, obedience and submission are not synonymous. The difference, however, is not necessarily seen in one's overt actions. Obedience is an external act of compliance, while submission toward any authority is a respectful attitude that comes before, during, and after all actions. Where a list of rules and commands must precede obedience, submission precedes rules and supersedes law. Submission includes a woman's freedom of choice -- her choice to obey God by freely yielding herself to the authority He has placed over her. It involves trust -- her absolute trust in the integrity of the God who designed her role and included submission to authority within His plan. Submission is the natural result of a biblical woman's abiding trust in God, and it is the fruit of her desire to do His Will.
This excerpt was from The Other Side of the Garden, and is in continuation of October's lesson on "Submission
vs.
Obedience".
It is available at your favorite Christian book store, or from the author.
Home | History | Philosophical Position | Theological Position | How to contact Us | Book Reviews
©
2001 Foundation for Biblical Research. All rights reserved.
Site hosted by Emerging Markets Web Design and
Hosting