Paul of Tarsus is a bigot and should be as revered as he is.

You seem to have moved your argument to whether or not a wife submitting to her husband is right or not. You have neglected to address your original points about slavery and Paul's status as an apostle. I will assume you concede these points and address your argument on a wife submitting to her husband. You posted:"Father: is your elder and raised you, so he is deserving of your respect, not submission. Boss: You willingly work for them, and they pay, deserving of respect, but since you can quit, still is not submission. President: Runs the country, of course is very deserving of respect, but seeing how we elect the president, we are not subbmissive." In the ancient Greek the word Paul uses that is translated to "submit" is upotasso. This word means "to arrange under". Regardless of the choices one makes in life they are arranged under other people. If you choose to work for someone you actually arrange yourself under your boss. Not only can you quit but they can fire you and tell you what to do while you work for them. You are born arranged under your mother and father. They raise you and guide and set boundaries for you. The president signs laws that tell you what you can and can not do. You are arranged under all of these people. A woman who chooses to marry a man,and lives as a Christian, arranges herself(by choice) under a man, as long as he is striving to be Christlike. You posted:"Of course it's symbolic... they cant litteraly merge to become one body, therefore the becoming one refers to the merging of the minds, because they love one another, definently symbolic of love. Also they can have differing opinions AND differing wills." It is not symbolic of love, which was my original point. Love is more than just some warm feeling you get when thinking of another person. As I stated before when Paul alludes to love in his writings it is almost never symbolic and when he does, in all cases, he uses the term agapate. In this case Paul used "sarka mian", which would mean, as stated before a man and woman becoming one person. Of course this does not mean becoming one physical body, but as one emotional and spiritual body. In conclusion in your op you stated that Paul is a bigot and should not be revered because of three reasons: 1.In his letters he states that wifes should treat there husbands as we treat jesus because as jesus is the head of the church a husband is the head of the wife. I believe your first reason is invalid because a woman choses to "become one flesh" with her husband, thus deciding for herself to submit to a husband who is striving to treat her in the same way Jesus treats the church. 2.Also he was not an apostle chosen by god, but a self appointed one. I believe that I have shown, according to the bible,(which is the only source of information regarding Paul's apostleship) that Paul was in fact chosen by God. Acts 9 3.In Ephesians, paul says that slaves should be completely subservient to thier masters You originally implicated that Paul was condoning slavery when in fact the opposite is true, he was stating that the souls of slave and master were equal in heaven.