How about no.

Did you notice that this shirt is unisex? Fit for both submissive wives and dominant husbands!

Alas, they don't include Ephesians 5:21, which is actually the controlling purpose for what follows...

What about my favorite passage...
"Thou shalt kiss my ass and enjoy-ith it"
(Reality 13:45)

Good for target practice.

Preferably while the asshole is still in it.

Here is a diagram of the chain of command:

GOD---->CHRIST ---->Husband---->wife---->family pet

The logic is airtight, please follow: God was a man. husbands are men. women are not men. Women not same sex as god. wives are women. Wives need godly leadership. Wive obeys husband. Wife obeys man. man obeys god. All are happy. all go to heaven.

The bible does not lie.

I feel like Superstar's comment was a joke but I'm just going to add a little something anyway.

Those who believe in God do not know God's gender. Yes, there are verses in the Bible that refer to God as male, but there are also verses that refer to God as female. So the idea that women should be submissive to males because "God is male" isn't exactly logical.

"You deserted the Rock, who fathered you; you forgot the God who gave you birth (Deut 32:18).

I think about the following idea all the time.

The teachings of Jesus in the Bible are about love, always unconditionally as far as I remember. He is constantly telling us that God's law is a living, breathing thing; and not to get to caught up in the small print. The laws change. See the bigger picture of God's love.

If that is the case, why are Christians (I am one) so resolute in the following word for word the scriptures as they were written by man 2000 years ago? Does it stand to reason that the meanings or the laws themselves could have changed since then? Did God just quit talking to us after man wrote the New Testament?

"The Bible does not lie"

A book thats chapters were written, in some cases, decades after the subjects of the story had died, been edited and revised over centuries for various political reasons is infallable?

I find it hard to believe that God gave me common sense and free will, but expects me to sit down and smile while my husband tells me what to do.

hey, JesusJones. You missed a couple.

GOD---->CHRIST ---->Husband--->fetuses-->babies-->wife---->family pet

Hello, I'm a rep. from the Christian Company which produced this the design.

It's easy to understand the initial irritation (and even anger), associated with this scripture; Especially for a non-christian and (futher-more a female). It's also a controversial & heated topic within the Christian Church and amoung the Christian community.

The tee shirt is not in any way a "Billboard" or fashion statement, intended to inflate or pump-up the male ego (nor is it a "testosterone" enhancer). And it's definitely not an advocate of "weakness" or "inferiority complexes" in women. (I myself, as a female, had a hard time at first accepting this principle discussed in Ephesians in my initial walk with Christ.)

The quoted text on the tee-shirt, is actually just a portion of the complete context of the scripture which deals with Spirit-Guided Relationships between Wives and Husbands. It's broken down in it's entirety in the Bible; God basically loves us and doesn't want either counterpart, the male or female (husband or wife) to abuse, neglect or misunderstand their roles. Gods' word it not a tool to demean nor mistreat women in any way.

I think if you lack an understanding of the scripture (quoted on the tee-shirt), and thus find it offensive, then by all means please don't purchase it (that's wisdom). And likewise, it's probably best not to take the scripture out of context nor "lash-out" at it, if you do lack a thorough understanding. We do apologize for any offense.

Word-Up.org™ is a small "Online Christian Shop" dealing in tees & accessories & such, but we're also a Ministry. It would be hypocritical of us to say that we stand for Christ as long as our message is "PC", non-challenging and only a fraction of the Gods truth; thus it would be hypocritical for Word-Up.org™ to discontinue the tee. Not everyone is going to accept & agree with all of Gods' word.

At the same time, our mission is to uplift and encourage people to know Christ, not to deliberately piss them off. Word-Up will update & re-release the unisex version - "Wives Obey Your Husbands..." and the female version - "Husbands Love Your Wives..." tees to both include the entire quoted scripture/context of Ephesians 5:21-33. Until the design update is made, we will continue to sell our current existing version of both the Unisex/Male & Female tees.

God bless you all, and we appreciate everyone's comments and opinions.

"Wives obey your husbands" and "Husbands love your wives" are not the same thing. For a lot of people, it would be easy to love someone if they obeyed your every word. Obeying is something servants do.

A woman? Working out of the home? Lecturing men on Biblical principles? For shame!

Worduporg---

"I think if you lack an understanding of the scripture (quoted on the tee-shirt), and thus find it offensive, then by all means please don't purchase it (that's wisdom). And likewise, it's probably best not to take the scripture out of context nor "lash-out" at it, if you do lack a thorough understanding."

Oh, so it isn't saying that wives should obey their husbands?

"The quoted text on the tee-shirt, is actually just a portion of the complete context of the scripture which deals with Spirit-Guided Relationships between Wives and Husbands."

Your spirit-guided relationship formula is sexist. It gives the husband authority over the wife, whether it's demanding obedienceor submission or insisting that he's more of a spiritual authority than she is.

You say I'm misunderstanding it, and that's why I lash out at it. Explain to me, then, how it's egalitarian. Explain to me how it's really saying men and women are equally qualified in matters of spirituality. Because I'm complaining that it treats men and women differently, that it assigns men authority that women don't have. I find that offensive, and thouroughly worthy of complaint.

"God basically loves us and doesn't want either counterpart, the male or female (husband or wife) to abuse, neglect or misunderstand their roles."

The roles are different. The men are given authority. The wives are given a duty to "obey" and "submit." This is demeaning.

"Gods' word is not a tool to demean nor mistreat women in any way."

No, of course not. It accomplishes that all on its own! Putting women under men's authority and expecting obedience from them isn't demeaning? Like hell!

I don't trade obedience for love. And I don't offer love to anyone (or anyOne) that demands obedience from me. My Gods are not such assholes.

Rep form Co.: We respect your opinion and understand your point of view.

For your reference (in case you're interested) here's the scripture of Ephesians 5:21-33 in it's entirety ('Contemporary English Version', for a more literal translation)...

"(21) Honor Christ and put others first. (22) A wife should put her husband first, as she does the Lord. (23) A husband is the head of his wife, as Christ is the head and the Savior of the church, which is his own body. (24) Wives should always put their husbands first, as the church puts Christ first.

(25) A husband should love his wife as much as Christ loved the church and gave his life for it. (26) He made the church holy by the power of his word, and he made it pure by washing it with water. (27) Christ did this, so that he would have a glorious and holy church, without faults or spots or wrinkles or any other flaws.

(28) In the same way, a husband should love his wife as much as he loves himself. A husband who loves his wife shows that he loves himself. (29) None of us hate our own bodies. We provide for them and take good care of them, just as Christ does for the church, (30) because we are each part of his body. (31) As the Scriptures say, "A man leaves his father and mother to get married, and he becomes like one person with his wife." (32) This is a great mystery, but I understand it to mean Christ and his church. (33) So each husband should love his wife as much as he loves himself, and each wife should respect her husband."

Please understand, it's your poragative to agree/disagree with it. We did't write, we just quoted it.

"Please understand, it's your poragative to agree/disagree with it. We did't write, we just quoted it."

Nice that I don't have to agree with it.

Unfortunately, I still have to deal with people who DO agree with it, and who also wish to influence laws and public policy in line with that philosophy. Plus, my conscience calls me to defend the girls who are raised with this crappy philosophy and find it psychologically hard to break free of it, and the women in abusive situations who don't get the support they need because they are just told to "submit".

But nice that it's simply a matter of having a different, but equally valid perspective! (that was sarcasm...)

first off, this reminds me of when i heard this passage read at a wedding i attended last summer... my fiancee's family, too - and i shuddered when the minister was going through all that madness, much to my fiancee's chagrin...

continuing on:

Gods' word it not a tool to demean nor mistreat women in any way.

yeah... that reminds me of what that minister said, too... something like "this isn't me saying it, this is the word of Jehova/God"...

i didn't know that God wrote Ephisians... i always thought it was Paul who wrote it (although there are something like 75 words in it he never used anywhere else, so his authorship is contested)... hmmm...

further, he certainly didn't write it in english... so several other people were involved in authoring the quote we all read on here and which i heard at that small church...

considering that biblical translations were responsible for David being understood to have had horns instead of rays of light coming out of his head (see Michaelangelo's "David"), i would tread carefully on taking some KJV as the word of God.

just some thoughts on the biblical accuracy of all this mess... also, might i add that:

it's probably best not to take the scripture out of context