Fellow Christians, what does this passage mean to you?

Rana said:
I bet you have a very happy wife, thus a happy marriage! ;)
Click to expand...

I must say that I have a very happy wife and a great marriage as well. I think the key, in either situation, is finding a wife (or husband) with the same or very similar beliefs. My wife will tell you that she is happy in her role and would be very uncomfortable stepping outside it. But that is the way that we are raised.
 
While I think I mostly agree with LeaningRight's assessment, it is often taken too far. Just yesterday, my fiance and I discussed how some men in our church "forbid" their wives from doing certain things for no apparent reason (legalism). Too many men regard it as an opportunity to be macho rather than do the right thing for their wife. Even some of my friends treat their wives like children.

Personally, I don't think I'd ever "forbid" my wife from doing anything. It's not my style. She has a brain of her own, and is quite intelligent - much more so than I. She's capable of making her own decisions. It's a matter of trust. If a husband can't trust his wife, they probably shouldn't be married.
 
leaningright said:
I must say that I have a very happy wife and a great marriage as well. I think the key, in either situation, is finding a wife (or husband) with the same or very similar beliefs. My wife will tell you that she is happy in her role and would be very uncomfortable stepping outside it. But that is the way that we are raised.
Click to expand...

My sister is the same way, she is the type who loves her submissive role, her husband as head of household, it works for them.

I, on the other hand, am more of the independent type, but with my husband gone half our married life, I have had to make decisions on my own, but most of the major decisions we make together. It works for us, but it would have made my sister miserable.
 
Thor said:
While I think I mostly agree with LeaningRight's assessment, it is often taken too far. Just yesterday, my fiance and I discussed how some men in our church "forbid" their wives from doing certain things for no apparent reason (legalism). Too many men regard it as an opportunity to be macho rather than do the right thing for their wife. Even some of my friends treat their wives like children.

Personally, I don't think I'd ever "forbid" my wife from doing anything. It's not my style. She has a brain of her own, and is quite intelligent - much more so than I. She's capable of making her own decisions. It's a matter of trust. If a husband can't trust his wife, they probably shouldn't be married.
Click to expand...

Exactly right, Thor. This is the reason the biblical teaching of the husband/wife or man/woman relationship is looked down on so much by so many. Because so many have abused what the Bible teaches concerning our roles. I suspect this is where Jarod is going with this. There are sects that teach that as well, and it is sad. These sects give credence to the idea that Christianity is equal to Islam as far as the treatment of women is concerned when nothing could be further from the truth concerning the true teaching of the New Testament.
 
Phanes said:
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:
Click to expand...

lol. That's a bunch of nonsense. Protestantism came because Luther believed that the bible didn't have to be written in Latin. True story, man. Oddly the Catholic Church and the Lutheran church have very little difference any longer. If you went to a Lutheran service you'd be pretty darned comfortable as a Catholic, the guy preaching even wears the same types of clothing. (One difference, he may just be a married dude.)
 
leaningright said:
Exactly right, Thor. This is the reason the biblical teaching of the husband/wife or man/woman relationship is looked down on so much by so many. Because so many have abused what the Bible teaches concerning our roles. I suspect this is where Jarod is going with this. There are sects that teach that as well, and it is sad. These sects give credence to the idea that Christianity is equal to Islam as far as the treatment of women is concerned when nothing could be further from the truth concerning the true teaching of the New Testament.
Click to expand...

Why did it take over 2,000 years for women to get respect? Inheritance rights, property rights, voting rights and rights to the priesthood which most sects still deny. It just tells me there are very few people who Ollie the words of Jesus.

What you have now brought to light is that your faith has been high jacked and corrupted. It seems to be the case with all organized religions. "The History of God" is an excellent short summary, easy to read, of the changes in Judaism, Christianiry and Islam. I found it fascinating!
 
leaningright said:
Exactly right, Thor. This is the reason the biblical teaching of the husband/wife or man/woman relationship is looked down on so much by so many. Because so many have abused what the Bible teaches concerning our roles. I suspect this is where Jarod is going with this. There are sects that teach that as well, and it is sad. These sects give credence to the idea that Christianity is equal to Islam as far as the treatment of women is concerned when nothing could be further from the truth concerning the true teaching of the New Testament.
Click to expand...

My point was only that women are to be subservent to there husbands according to the Bible. Men are also to respect there wives and love them, that does not change that women are to be subservent.

Personally I belive that teaching women this prevents many from living up to there full protential and breaks the spirit of many women who could live a more full live making there own decisions. But women are free to choose what they want for themselves. I personally would not allow this message to be taught to my daughters, but if they choose it as adults, well then it is there choice.

Damocles, Supercandy and Dixie thought I was crazy to say many Chrisitans belive as Leaning and Thor do.

This conversation has veered off from my origional point which had nothing to do with how Christians view a womans roll, the origional point was that Sharia should be allowed in American courts to the same extend that Chrisian rules and laws are allowed or any other code.... as long as allowing specific provisions is constitutional and Consionable.
 
Damocles said:
lol. That's a bunch of nonsense. Protestantism came because Luther believed that the bible didn't have to be written in Latin. True story, man. Oddly the Catholic Church and the Lutheran church have very little difference any longer. If you went to a Lutheran service you'd be pretty darned comfortable as a Catholic, the guy preaching even wears the same types of clothing. (One difference, he may just be a married dude.)
Click to expand...

It was more than Latin, it was the selling of indulgences and more. Please review the 99 Thesus that he tacked to the door of the church. Not all 99 were about the bible being in Latin.

Also please tell me what you thing about Leaning and THor's interpertation of the Bible and a womans roll?
 
Jarod said:
My point was only that women are to be subservent to there husbands according to the Bible. Men are also to respect there wives and love them, that does not change that women are to be subservent.

Personally I belive that teaching women this prevents many from living up to there full protential and breaks the spirit of many women who could live a more full live making there own decisions. But women are free to choose what they want for themselves. I personally would not allow this message to be taught to my daughters, but if they choose it as adults, well then it is there choice.

Damocles, Supercandy and Dixie thought I was crazy to say many Chrisitans belive as Leaning and Thor do.

This conversation has veered off from my origional point which had nothing to do with how Christians view a womans roll, the origional point was that Sharia should be allowed in American courts to the same extend that Chrisian rules and laws are allowed or any other code.... as long as allowing specific provisions is constitutional and Consionable.
Click to expand...

what christian rules and laws are you referring to?
 
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...

Makes your skin start to burn; HUH!!
 
Jarod said:
My point was only that women are to be subservent to there husbands according to the Bible.
Click to expand...

except that I have showed you your error....you asked me to provide the original language for you.....I did......you haven't had the balls to respond to it yet......why is that?......
 
Jarod said:
My point was only that women are to be subservent to there husbands according to the Bible. Men are also to respect there wives and love them, that does not change that women are to be subservent.

Personally I belive that teaching women this prevents many from living up to there full protential and breaks the spirit of many women who could live a more full live making there own decisions. But women are free to choose what they want for themselves. I personally would not allow this message to be taught to my daughters, but if they choose it as adults, well then it is there choice.

Damocles, Supercandy and Dixie thought I was crazy to say many Chrisitans belive as Leaning and Thor do.

This conversation has veered off from my origional point which had nothing to do with how Christians view a womans roll, the origional point was that Sharia should be allowed in American courts to the same extend that Chrisian rules and laws are allowed or any other code.... as long as allowing specific provisions is constitutional and Consionable.
Click to expand...

I never said you were crazy for saying that, you are attempting to argue a straw man again.

I said that the interpretation is incorrect and gave scripture that clearly indicates it. Women are not "less" in the church, it is an equal thing and that is supported by the scriptures I provided.
 
Jarod, I suspect you started this thread just so you could avoid responding to this.....I'm not letting you off that easy.....you made me do the research......now respond to it or look like a dick.....

Quote Originally Posted by Jarod View Post
So show me the origional?
http://www.biblestudytools.com/inter...esians+5&t=kjv

21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.
uJpotassovmenoi {V-PPP-NPM} ajllhvloi? {C-DPM} ejn {PREP} fovbw/ {N-DSM} Xristou'. {N-GSM}
22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
AiJ {T-NPF} gunai'ke? {N-NPF} toi'? {T-DPM} ijdivoi? {A-DPM} ajndravsin {N-DPM} wJ? {ADV} tw'/ {T-DSM} kurivw/, {N-DSM}

....
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
OiJ {T-NPM} a~ndre?, {N-NPM} ajgapa'te {V-PAM-2P} ta;? {T-APF} gunai'ka?, {N-APF} kaqw;? {ADV} kai; {CONJ} oJ {T-NSM} Xristo;? {N-NSM} hjgavphsen {V-AAI-3S} th;n {T-ASF} ejkklhsivan {N-ASF} kai; {CONJ} eJauto;n {F-3ASM} parevdwken {V-AAI-3S} uJpe;r {PREP} aujth'?, {P-GSF}

key words....from verse 21 verb; to submit.......from verse 22 transitory adverb....."do this by". feminine version......from verse 25 transitory adverb "do this by", male version......

given that, is it your position a wife is required to submit but a husband isn't?.....
Click to expand...
 
Damocles said:
I never said you were crazy for saying that, you are attempting to argue a straw man again.

I said that the interpretation is incorrect and gave scripture that clearly indicates it. Women are not "less" in the church, it is an equal thing and that is supported by the scriptures I provided.
Click to expand...

I dont believe I ever said women are "less", if so please show me.

I dont belive I ever disagreed that the interperation is incorrect, I said I am upset by what many churches teach. We may well be in agreement here. ARE WE?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
Jarod, I suspect you started this thread just so you could avoid responding to this.....I'm not letting you off that easy.....you made me do the research......now respond to it or look like a dick.....
Click to expand...

Yes, sorry I ignored your post because of all the garble in it.

To me it still says women are to submit to husbands and that men are to love wives. Two different things. You could argue that men are to submit to wives, but that is limited only to being "in the fear of God." If men and women were to be equal the passage would not have given different verbage for each.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top