Phoenix,
In a Christian marriage (as laid out by the Bible) IF the man is submitting himself unto the Lord (doing the right things, what is best for the family, what is good in God's eyes, etc.) then the woman doesn't have to worry about the man getting his way every time. This is only IF the man if following the Lord like they should. IF the man is following the Lord the way he should then he will be making the right and best decisions for everyone concerned.
Momma- I understand what you are saying, but there ARE issues of preference where one person's choice is a good as another's. Why should the man's opinion be any better than the woman's, and why should his choice of options be given preference over the woman's?
What comes to mind, and is an important issue in many marriages, is once
the necessities of life are paid for, what does one do with disposable income? Why in the world should the man always have the last say in matters of that nature?
The biblical question has been answered. It seems that we are now going off into an entirely different realm of today's world. They didn't have feminists back then.
Phoenix,
It's kind of like this. You know the saying, "What would Jesus do?" Well, it's basically the same thing here, IF one would do as Jesus would do, then it would be the right decision. Of course, this is something that has to be mutual within the marriage. If the wife believes the husband would do as God/Jesus would do then she would have no problem with it. Like I said it's only IF the husband is doing as God/Jesus would want him to do and therefore, most, if not all, of his decisions would be the right ones.
I realize in today's society this is a rather alien concept to many. But, it is a Christian principle handed down from the beginning, and of course, each person essentially gives up their ego for the best thing for the marriage.
MEN are just so superior! Oh wait a minute maybe I got that wrong, maybe I should be thinking WOMEN are just so inferior! YES that's it. I must be haing an epipfany.
...probably just gas, Dys.
Hi Snood, how's it going?
Dys, I don't recall anyone saying anything about man or woman being superior to either. Superiority has absolutely nothing to do with what we were discussing.
A husband who found that his bride was not a virgin on her wedding day was to have her stoned to death at her father's door (Deut 22:21).
Oh an dyeah this one really points out the bullshi*t, A man who rapes a betrothed (married or engaged) woman, is to be put to
death (Deut 22:25). However if the woman is a virgin and NOT betrothed
to any man, then the rapist shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver,
and he shall marry the woman. (However, because he has "humbled" her in
this way, he is not allowed to divorce her.)
dyslexia wrote:A husband who found that his bride was not a virgin on her wedding day was to have her stoned to death at her father's door (Deut 22:21).
Oh an dyeah this one really points out the bullshi*t, A man who rapes a betrothed (married or engaged) woman, is to be put to
death (Deut 22:25). However if the woman is a virgin and NOT betrothed
to any man, then the rapist shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver,
and he shall marry the woman. (However, because he has "humbled" her in
this way, he is not allowed to divorce her.)
This is not what the discussion was about and these are not the verses that were the subject of that discussion. If you want to change the discussion, say so and do not try to derail the first one with items that were not part of that discussion. You are, apparently, referring to Old Testament laws that no longer apply. The discussion was on bible contradictions.
Judges 11:30-35 tells how a Israelite judge named Jephthah, made the
following vow to God.In exchange for his victory over his military enemies,
he promised to offer as a burnt offering "whatsoever cometh forth of the
doors of my house to meet me". He wins the battle, but upon returning home, his daughter and only child comes out to greet him. Horrified at his promise, Jephthah proceeded to tell his daughter of his pact with God. They both agree that a promise to the Lord must be fulfilled. Unlike with Abraham and Isaac, no angel of the Lord arrives to stay Jephthah's hand--and his daughter is faithfully and obediently burnt as a sacrifice to God.
And there you go again, the Old Testament. Picking out just what you want and not considering the New Testament.
You are taking things out of the Bible out of context. And, as I stated, superiority had nothing to do with what had been said in this discussion. You were the one that introduced it into the topic.
Do you have a point or comment on this, or are you just providing bible verses for the masses?
Yes MA, whatever you say.
There is no implication whatsoever of anybody being superior within the order of the Christian family. As CR explained, somebody has to be the final authority when nobody can agree. In a way this is a great advantage to the woman. If the man accepts the responsibility to make the final decision and screws it up, it is his fault. If he relinquishes the authority so that the woman makes the decision, and she screws it up, it is still his responsibility. (I'm only partially kidding here.)
Too many however pluck one verse out of context--"The woman is to submit" and ignore the rest of the instruction: "The man is to love the woman as his own body." That means he has concern for her welfare, her feelings, her ambitions, hope, desires as much as he has concern for his own. When he does his job as instructed, it requires little effort on her part to allow him authority and responsibility to lead. And each will use their God given gifts and talents to the fullest and there will be harmony and happiness in the home.
I am fully convinced that the greatest gift any man can give his children is to love their mother using the Biblical definition of marital love.
Why is there a religion-fostered war against women's rights? Because the bible is a handbook for the subjugation of women. The bible establishes woman's inferior status, her "uncleanliness," her transgressions, and God-ordained master/servant relationship to man. Biblical women are possessions: fathers own them, sell them into bondage, even sacrifice them. The bible sanctions rape during wartime and in other contexts. Wives are subject to Mosaic-law sanctioned "bedchecks" as brides, and male jealousy fits and no-notice divorce as wives. The most typical biblical labels of women are "harlot" and "whore." They are described as having evil, even satanic powers of allurement. Contempt for women's bodies and reproductive capacity is a bedrock of the bible. The few role models offered are stereotyped, conventional and inadequate, with bible heroines admired for obedience and battle spirit. Jesus scorns his own mother, refusing to bless her, and issues dire warnings about the fate of pregnant and nursing women.
I think the term 'submit' is being taken a bit too literally here.
The whole point is this, IF a man is doing God's will then the woman follows the man. IF he is doing God's will, then he is doing what is right in God's eyes and you can't argue with that.
The examples Dys has thrown out there are again mostly Old Testament things taken out of context.
I don't understand that when we explain things that it seems to be either totally dismissed or treated as if we are lying or something. We tell the way it is for us. We tell what it means to us. And continually receive the same kind of replies.
If we have no problem with the way we are living, why do you (general) have a problem with it? Why is it that even though you (general, again) don't believe what we believe, you try to point out that we are not doing what we should be doing because of what we believe?
It is obvious from many of these conversations that there are those that do not understand our faith as we do, yet, those are the ones that continually try to tell us how our faith should be adhered to? I just do not understand it.
dyslexia wrote:Why is there a religion-fostered war against women's rights? Because the bible is a handbook for the subjugation of women. The bible establishes woman's inferior status, her "uncleanliness," her transgressions, and God-ordained master/servant relationship to man. Biblical women are possessions: fathers own them, sell them into bondage, even sacrifice them. The bible sanctions rape during wartime and in other contexts. Wives are subject to Mosaic-law sanctioned "bedchecks" as brides, and male jealousy fits and no-notice divorce as wives. The most typical biblical labels of women are "harlot" and "whore." They are described as having evil, even satanic powers of allurement. Contempt for women's bodies and reproductive capacity is a bedrock of the bible. The few role models offered are stereotyped, conventional and inadequate, with bible heroines admired for obedience and battle spirit. Jesus scorns his own mother, refusing to bless her, and issues dire warnings about the fate of pregnant and nursing women.
Can you say that you would have the same thoughts if you lived six thousand years ago? Of course not.
