I’ve seen this often from complementarians and egalitarians but was just reminded of it from Full Metal Patriarch’s post on Doug Wilson’s quaduple-speak.
He quotes from Doug’s book:
Yes, she must have sex whenever you want it. And you must refrain whenever she wants to refrain. You have authority over her body, but never forget that she also has authority over your body.”
Fidelity, pp. 109-110
Let’s actually read the passage, shall we?
1 Corinthians 7:3 The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. 5 Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
The intent of the passage starts in verse 3 where each spouse to fulfill their marital duty to the other. Thus, verse 4 speaks that each spouse should rightfully give their spouse sex when they desire it. Verse 5 continues along this theme of not depriving each other except for a special situation where both agree to it for spiritual purposes.
It’s an absolutely contradictory reading of the passage to suggest that husbandly authority over the wife’s body and the wifely authority over the husband’s body means that that she should have sex with you but her authority over your body means she can stop you from that. The whole passage including each verse is about fulfilling the marital duty not refraining from it, and refraining from it is only by mutual consent and prayer. The authority is indicated to have sex, but there is no authority to not have sex.
It’s no better than the egalitarian cherry pickers saying that Eph 5:21 “and [church members should] submit to one another in Christ” also applies to the marriage verses. It’s just bad exegesis of the text.
