Fellow Christians, what does this passage mean to you?

Rana said:
Well you didn't reread your post, it sounds like you don't understand.
Click to expand...

here's a clue....YOU reread my post with the assumption I know that people who don't believe in Jesus Christ aren't Christians and see if you can figure out what I'm saying this time.......
 
Yurt said:
hilarious....yet you "know" i make quotes out of context from the quran. which is it christie?

i got a two day ban stalker for asking a question about their religion. i am not banned at that board and left because they refuse to answer tough questions and call that disrespectful. perhaps you should have your head so far up legion troll's ass and find out the facts for yourself.

lmao....you complain you can't remember what i've told you about my experience and study about islam, but you expect me to remember what you said. typical hypocrisy from you. i've never flamed over islamic discussions. you get upset and angry because i show you're wrong nearly every time. can't handle it, stop posting about it.

i notice you still cannot provide one single post to back up your allegation i posted the quran out of context.
Click to expand...

Liar.
 
Dixie said:
Okay, so NOW you want to drag this off into a discussion about the various beliefs and interpretations of the scripture by different groups? I don't think so, skippy! This is not about what people mistakenly believe the Bible says, but what the Bible actually says. Some people believe all kinds of CRAZY shit... was THAT your point? If so, you proved it by your own erroneous thinking about what the Bible said. Well done!

You said, in the other thread, that you didn't see anything wrong with considering Sharia law in American courts. Have you had a sudden awakening on that point of idiocy today too? Or are you still standing behind that statement? I never know with you... next you'll be telling us that you don't really believe what you said, that it's just "some Muslims" who you personally know, who've told you they believe this... but you really agree with all of us.... lol

The Bible does stipulate that wives are to submit to their husbands and husbands are to love and protect their wives as if they were holy, and submit to them... it is mutual. It further states that no distinction is made by gender, all are equal in the eyes of God. NOWHERE does it state that WOMEN are to be SUBSERVIENT to men.... NOWHERE! It also doesn't state that men should subjugate women... NOT IN THERE! It doesn't say men are greater or more important than women.... NOT IN THE BIBLE! These are ALL interpretations you have derived through limited and ignorant knowledge of the Bible, and you have been totally schooled on it here, by people who aren't even Christian believers!

Meanwhile, throughout the Koran and Sharia, women are relegated to property of the man, NEVER is it articulated they are EQUAL in ANY way.... as a matter of fucking fact.... MUCH of what Radical Islam is all about, is the Western custom of gender equality, and how it undermines the teachings of Islam. That's what makes us "infidels" to them, women's liberation! Yet, here you are with your profound ignorance of both Christian AND Muslim religions, telling us what you believe both religions are saying... as IF you have any clue!
Click to expand...

1) It is about what the clear meaning of the passage is, I believe it has been misinterperated or misincluded as it does not fit the spirit of the Bible, but it still says it, pretend what you will, the Bible says women are to submit to there husbands and it does not say husbands are to submit to there wives.

2) I dont see anything wrong with considering Sharia law in American Courts, to the same extent that other codes are considered, and I said as long as the provisions are not unconstitutional or unconsionable. You are intentionally leaving out the caviats here.

3) Where is the quote where the bible says men are to submit to there wives?

4) I have more of a clue than a redneck Emo yokle from Alabama. While my faternal Grandparents were from Alabama they were far from redneck or yokle.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
they don't have to......they are free to make their own choices.....they might choose to be Satanists.......they might choose to be Wiccans........they might, god forbid, choose to be atheists......
Click to expand...

I agree and I should have been more clear, they dont have to, they have a choice, but many Christian Churches say that its the only way to follow Christ.
 
Dixie said:
I don't have a version of the Bible. King James asked me to write one, because of my profound wisdom, but I said I didn't have the time to devote to the project, so he had to do it himself. I realize people all have different interpretations of what the Bible says, but as so far as we are discussing specifically what the Bible says, it's simply a matter of reading the text. Nowhere does the Bible say that women are to be "subservient" to men.



Nothing there about the woman being subservient to man.



Still... nothing there to indicate a woman is supposed to be subservient or inferior to a man.



This is Old Testament Law, not the teachings of Christ or Modern Christianity, but the original laws of Moses. Much has changed in Christian understanding since that time, and it is only presented as a pretext to the message Jesus brought. This is really grasping at straws to make your point, which still has not been made, toots.



Now you leap ahead a few thousand years from Moses, to Jesus and what Jesus said? Again, Jesus and Christianity have NEVER stipulated women should be subservient to men or that women are inferior to men, or that women should be subjugated by men, or that women are valued less than men in the eyes of God. These are all tenants of ISLAM, not Christianity.
Click to expand...

You are pretending to not understand the clear meaning... Obtuse.

I do agree that Jesus never said it, but Christianity has! OVER AND OVER AGAIN!
 
Jarod said:
" Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and He is the saviour of the body. "
Click to expand...

Without reading the other posts in this thread, the meaning of the piece above is quite simple.

It simply means that whoever wrote it lived at a time and in a society where females were considered less important than males.
That was pretty common until very recently. We have, thankfully, evolved into more intelligent beings.
If anyone wishes to think, and I guess this lies behind it, that this was the word of some god or of some earthly representation of some god, then I suggest they be allowed to wallow in their ignorance.

Frankly, to even pose the question advertises extreme ignorance and a refusal to accept reality. But then that's only my opinion... and like 99% of all opinions it counts for very little.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
they don't have to......they are free to make their own choices.....they might choose to be Satanists.......they might choose to be Wiccans........they might, god forbid, choose to be atheists......
Click to expand...

I somehow doubt that any god could stop someone being an atheist.
 
Jarod said:
I agree and I should have been more clear, they dont have to, they have a choice, but many Christian Churches say that its the only way to follow Christ.
Click to expand...

Which doesn't change the fact that its a choice. People can choose whether to follow Christ or not. They can, for example, decide not to follow the true teachings of the Apostles and the Church, which is where Protestantism came from. :cof1:
 
I think Jarod is wanting to hear from someone like me who believes the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. All of it...exactly as written.

Yes, I believe that passage means what it says...that wives are to submit to their husbands. Taking the entire teaching of the New Testament on the matter, the husband is to be the head of the household, meaning that he has the final decision on household matters. A man would be stupid if the didn't talk things over with his wife and value her opinion though. He is also to be the provider for the household and the protector of the household (I Tim. 5:8). He is to honor the woman as the "weaker vessel," which she is (I Pet. 3:7). Putting it quite simply, each, the man and woman, have roles to fill when following NT teaching. We are all better off (again a choice of those of us who choose to believe) not stepping outside of those roles. Fulfilling those roles here we look forward to an equal reward (I Pet. 3:7).

OK, Jarod, now you have some more ammunition to use. I do agree with the others that you try to paint all "Christians" with a broad brush, but with this stroke you have covered me. I am indeed a fundamentalist. You must remember that many if not most "Christians" are not.
 
leaningright said:
I think Jarod is wanting to hear from someone like me who believes the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. All of it...exactly as written.

Yes, I believe that passage means what it says...that wives are to submit to their husbands. Taking the entire teaching of the New Testament on the matter, the husband is to be the head of the household, meaning that he has the final decision on household matters. A man would be stupid if the didn't talk things over with his wife and value her opinion though. He is also to be the provider for the household and the protector of the household (I Tim. 5:8). He is to honor the woman as the "weaker vessel," which she is (I Pet. 3:7). Putting it quite simply, each, the man and woman, have roles to fill when following NT teaching. We are all better off (again a choice of those of us who choose to believe) not stepping outside of those roles. Fulfilling those roles here we look forward to an equal reward (I Pet. 3:7).

OK, Jarod, now you have some more ammunition to use. I do agree with the others that you try to paint all "Christians" with a broad brush, but with this stroke you have covered me. I am indeed a fundamentalist. You must remember that many if not most "Christians" are not.
Click to expand...

Well, at least you are honest. It will be interesting to see the reactions to this. I am not a student of the bible, but I had heard what to me sounded like exactly this - you will submit - in church all my life. It's why I walked out and would never return, except when forced to. Like when I was Godmother to my nephew. And then the priest ended the ceremony with "And now they are all God's children", and even that is difficult for me not to yell out "give it a rest, pedophile, I don't think God needs you telling him who his children are".

Church is a very bad place for me, as you might guess.
 
leaningright said:
I think Jarod is wanting to hear from someone like me who believes the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. All of it...exactly as written.

Yes, I believe that passage means what it says...that wives are to submit to their husbands. Taking the entire teaching of the New Testament on the matter, the husband is to be the head of the household, meaning that he has the final decision on household matters. A man would be stupid if the didn't talk things over with his wife and value her opinion though. He is also to be the provider for the household and the protector of the household (I Tim. 5:8). He is to honor the woman as the "weaker vessel," which she is (I Pet. 3:7). Putting it quite simply, each, the man and woman, have roles to fill when following NT teaching. We are all better off (again a choice of those of us who choose to believe) not stepping outside of those roles. Fulfilling those roles here we look forward to an equal reward (I Pet. 3:7).

OK, Jarod, now you have some more ammunition to use. I do agree with the others that you try to paint all "Christians" with a broad brush, but with this stroke you have covered me. I am indeed a fundamentalist. You must remember that many if not most "Christians" are not.
Click to expand...

Christianity has evolved. The world has evolved in the regards of rights for women and we have a long ways to go. What disappoints me is that some Christians do not want to acknowledge that scripture has been used to subjugate woman for many centuries.

I thank you for your always thoughtful dialogue.
 
leaningright said:
I think Jarod is wanting to hear from someone like me who believes the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. All of it...exactly as written.

Yes, I believe that passage means what it says...that wives are to submit to their husbands. Taking the entire teaching of the New Testament on the matter, the husband is to be the head of the household, meaning that he has the final decision on household matters. A man would be stupid if the didn't talk things over with his wife and value her opinion though. He is also to be the provider for the household and the protector of the household (I Tim. 5:8). He is to honor the woman as the "weaker vessel," which she is (I Pet. 3:7). Putting it quite simply, each, the man and woman, have roles to fill when following NT teaching. We are all better off (again a choice of those of us who choose to believe) not stepping outside of those roles. Fulfilling those roles here we look forward to an equal reward (I Pet. 3:7).

OK, Jarod, now you have some more ammunition to use. I do agree with the others that you try to paint all "Christians" with a broad brush, but with this stroke you have covered me. I am indeed a fundamentalist. You must remember that many if not most "Christians" are not.
Click to expand...

Jeez - I should be an orthodox Christian. I haven't made a real decision since getting married...
 
leaningright said:
I think Jarod is wanting to hear from someone like me who believes the Bible to be the inspired Word of God. All of it...exactly as written.

Yes, I believe that passage means what it says...that wives are to submit to their husbands. Taking the entire teaching of the New Testament on the matter, the husband is to be the head of the household, meaning that he has the final decision on household matters. A man would be stupid if the didn't talk things over with his wife and value her opinion though. He is also to be the provider for the household and the protector of the household (I Tim. 5:8). He is to honor the woman as the "weaker vessel," which she is (I Pet. 3:7). Putting it quite simply, each, the man and woman, have roles to fill when following NT teaching. We are all better off (again a choice of those of us who choose to believe) not stepping outside of those roles. Fulfilling those roles here we look forward to an equal reward (I Pet. 3:7).

OK, Jarod, now you have some more ammunition to use. I do agree with the others that you try to paint all "Christians" with a broad brush, but with this stroke you have covered me. I am indeed a fundamentalist. You must remember that many if not most "Christians" are not.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your honest reply. You have proven my point.
 
Darla said:
Well, at least you are honest. It will be interesting to see the reactions to this. I am not a student of the bible, but I had heard what to me sounded like exactly this - you will submit - in church all my life. It's why I walked out and would never return, except when forced to. Like when I was Godmother to my nephew. And then the priest ended the ceremony with "And now they are all God's children", and even that is difficult for me not to yell out "give it a rest, pedophile, I don't think God needs you telling him who his children are".

Church is a very bad place for me, as you might guess.
Click to expand...

You have options, there are Churches that believe that stuff is Bullshit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top