It's not slavery at all

http://www.quodlibet.net/articles/parker-women.shtml

"Third, the description in this passage of the future relationship between Adam and Eve is about ‘alienation and conflict’ (Woolvard & Zuck, c. 1983–c. 1985). ‘The marriage ordinance continues, but is frustrated by the battle of the sexes.’ (Whitlock & Sproul, 1997) The whole message of the New Testament is one of reconciliation and unity, including those of the marriage relationship. To understand the consequences of Adam and Eve’s sin, in respect to their relationship with each other, as a command of God, would mean that this dimension of human relationships would be excluded from the gospel of Jesus Christ. As Richards (1997) points out, ‘Male dominance in the family is a consequence of sin. Why perpetuate it in the Christian home?’ Perry Yoder (1975) makes a similar point:

... while [Genesis] chapter 3 serves as an explanation for the less than ideal state of affairs that may now exist, it does not condone or pardon it. On the contrary, concessions or inadequate realizations of God’s will in terms of creation are to be challenged. (pp. 10–11 cited in Swartley 1983, p. 157)
If we persist in perpetuating these distorted types of relationships which are the result of the Fall, it is a clear message that we want to avoid allowing the gospel to teach us the proper Christian relationship between men and women.

Fourth, even if it is insisted by some that all of these are curses imposed by God, God immediately institutes a plan to reverse these curses. Apart from the implicit promises of a Saviour in verse 15, Abram is promised that all the nations of the earth will be blessed (the opposite of a curse!) through him (12:3).

We see the ultimate fulfilment and reversal of these consequence with the arrival of Christ. In Romans 5:21, Paul celebrates God’s wonderful kindness which rules instead of sin and the death it brought. As a result, sin’s power is broken (Rom. 6:1ff.) and the consequences of sin that we suffer begin to be undermined until they are completely eradicated at the Second Coming of Christ.

Whereas Genesis speaks of the husband ruling the wife, Paul commands mutual submission as the principle of all relationships in the Christian community, including marriage: ‘...you will submit to one another out of reverence for Christ’ (Eph. 5:21, NLT). Some argue that, in the following verses, Paul explicitly requires women to submit to their husbands and that the man is to rule her. However, it is essential to read the subsequent verses within the framework of the mutual submission of verse 21. In this verse, Paul makes a principle explicit using the term ‘mutual submission’. If we go on and make the specific applications that Paul makes deny this explicit principle, then we are twisting the Scripture to suit our own agendas. Whatever Paul has advised in the following verses must be seen as the application of the principle of mutual submission in the context of Paul’s time.

The contrast between the old and the new is clearly articulated by Redmacher (1997):

The word desire [in Genesis 3:16] can also mean "an attempt to usurp or control" as in [Genesis] 4:7. We can paraphrase the last two lines of this verse this way: "You will now have a tendency to dominate your husband, and he will have the tendency to act as a tyrant over you." The battle of the sexes has begun. Each strives for control and neither lives in the best interest of the other (see Phil. 2:3, 4). The antidote is in the restoration of mutual respect and dignity through Jesus Christ (see Eph. 5:21–33).
The motivation for this mutual respect is reverence for Christ (Eph. 5:21). Christ makes all the difference in relationships, including those between male and female, because ‘[t]here is no longer ... male or female. For you are all Christians—you are one in Christ Jesus.’ (Gal. 3:28, nlt) The fact that Paul makes reverence for Christ the centre of relationships, resulting in mutual submission, means the evil of the husband ruling the wife is reversed. Evans (1983) summarises the centrality of Christ in restoring our broken relationships: ‘It is only ‘in Christ’ that the broken relationship between man and woman, as that between God and Man, can fully and permanently be restored’ (p. 21).

The model for Christian relationships is most clearly and extensively articulated in Ephesians 5–6. We need to listen carefully to these passages of Scripture, for they help us to keep the consequences of Genesis in perspective. Fraser & Fraser (1975) summarise the difference that Jesus’ message makes to the relationship between husband and wife:

What was lost in the fall, expressed in Genesis 3:16 as the wife’s loss of equality in a functional subordination to her husband, Jesus intends to restore. The curse is rescinded by grace, and she is placed on the same level as her husband that she might be joint-heir with him in the responsibilities and grace of life (1 Peter 3:7).... The husband and wife are to be one in love and mutual subjection to each other. It would be difficult to find any norm for marriage as permanently threatening to all traditional marriage structures as that! (p. 18 cited in Swartley 1983, p. 265)
Christ came to reverse the consequences of the Fall. This means that we must stop using Genesis 3:16 to legitimate male dominance and tyranny over women, even if this is legitimised by saying that it is done in love. It is for freedom that Christ has set us free! Women should not allow men to place them back under the yoke that Christ has come to remove (Galatians 5:1).

The heart of the matter

Surely it has to be asked: Why is it that men (in particular) are so keen to argue that women should be submissive? If God has identified the tendency to rule as part of the consequences of sin, then we surely should ask ourselves whether, at the heart of the traditional interpretations of the Genesis story is a lust for power and domination. Power is seductive and easy to legitimate with religious arguments. But if Christ is our model for all of life, then we have no greater reason for an attitude of service and submission by both people in a marriage. It is in this way that marriages can witness to the radical change that has come with the arrival of Jesus Christ."

delusionsmeller

I am a serious man, when it comes to serious matters...

The word of G-d does indeed cut to the marrow like a two edged sword. Some can take it and some can't, but it will never go away.

klimmer, you're misquoting the bible to prove your private point, a common abuse in the history of "scripture". every time i've ever heard it, it was "heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."

what i get from this is: 1) big ego trip for jesus; 2) wait a minute--heaven's gonna pass away? you mean, we're not gonna go to heaven and live forever? maybe not such good deal after all; 3) it's just another biblical contradiction. norton's gonna be all over it.

of course, as you say, grammar and translation are important. for example, i've been told it's really, "thou shalt not murder," not "thou shalt not kill". opens quite a door, doesn't it? martin luther has assured us that, if a soldier dies on the battlefield, it is the will of god.

another thing, klimmer, very important at this stage in your career. if your wife and you have split up, you're just gonna have to remain celibate for the rest of your life, or at least until, and if, she straightens out and comes back to you. god was very serious about that "until-death-do-us-part" business. you're gonna havta carry the torch, maybe not for the old lady as much as for the integrity of your program. remember this terrible pronouncement:

The word of G-d does indeed cut to the marrow like a two edged sword. Some can take it and some can't, but it will never go away.

let me warn you, you're gonna have all kindsa ministers and/or priests figuring out loopholes so's you can try again with someone prettier, younger, and readily adaptible to an old f*#k with a house and a job. these guys are dodging for your dimes. even though they're wearing the cloth of the lord, they're doing the work of the devil. a vow's a vow, brother. get used to cold showers.

and what's with this "G-d" stuff? and in the same paragraph as "sex". doesn't win you any brownie points. god could well be pissed at you for leaving the vowel out. the hebrews did that too, and lookit what happened to them--given one of the worst patches of territory in the mideast and told it was "the promised land", kicked the heck outa egypt, which really had the choice real estate, and they didn't even get a desert full of oil, the bonus for faith in allah. and whatever happened to yahweh and elohim? could it be that god has an identity crisis? right around that corner, i'll bet you find a process theologian.

another thing, klimmer, very important at this stage in your career. if your wife and you have split up, you're just gonna have to remain celibate for the rest of your life, or at least until, and if, she straightens out and comes back to you. god was very serious about that "until-death-do-us-part" business. you're gonna havta carry the torch, maybe not for the old lady as much as for the integrity of your program. remember this terrible pronouncement:

The word of G-d does indeed cut to the marrow like a two edged sword. Some can take it and some can't, but it will never go away.