- Thread starter
- #61
LOL! Yeah, I'm sure I would make life a living Hell for my husband if he ever tried to bring home another wife!dmp said:Sanity, yes.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LOL! Yeah, I'm sure I would make life a living Hell for my husband if he ever tried to bring home another wife!dmp said:Sanity, yes.
Pfffft. How close minded of you.mom4 said:LOL! Yeah, I'm sure I would make life a living Hell for my husband if he ever tried to bring home another wife!
[Archie voice on]Well, Said... I don't know you very well... jeeez... well you'll have to talk to my husbnd...just remember I got here first! Enough said! [/voice]Said1 said:Pfffft. How close minded of you.
mom4 said:[Archie voice on]Well, Said... I don't know you very well... jeeez... well you'll have to talk to my husbnd...just remember I got here first! Enough said! [/voice]
You misunderstood me. I believe this to be true, too, but it also set it up for society.mom4 said:Thanks, Joz! That means a lot, coming from you!
I do have to disagree with this, though. I really think it means just what it says. That a husband will have SOME (NOT TOTAL) authority over his wife, and over his household.
I don't think it was just by chance.This is just the way it worked out, as mankind became more and more sinful.
mom4 said:Yeeeeees..... to a certain extent. Just being careful to understand that she is not expected to subvert her entire personality, or mindlessly obey. Just that he has become the head of the household hierarchy........
True. The man definitely has a greater responsibility in the marriage than the woman. To love her as Christ loved the church...wow! That is a BIG job.Joz said:You misunderstood me. I believe this to be true, too, but it also set it up for society.
But husbands are only to be "over their wife" the same way Christ is over the church. He is to be her spiritual leader. And love her to the point of giving his life for her. Too many get hung up on this text as tho't women are to be at the beck & call (girl) of a man's every wish, under his rule & thumb.
mom4 said:....But through the ages, men have abused their authority and subjugated women WAAAAY more ....... He didn't turn around and say to Adam, "Okay, you're her master. Whatever you say she has to do." He didn't place Adam above her....
Yes, I agree. Although I think it has been taken way too far the other way by some women today.Joz said:Mm is gonna get upset over this one, I know. He says he's tired of hearing that the white christian male is to blame for everything. Well who the h*ll does he think has been in control??? Well maybe not the christian part. But there are many christian hubbies who are quite adamant about these texts.
Because of men & their abuse of "power" women have had to claw their way for recognition as an equal partner.
I believe so, too. But the pendulum has to swing that far until it can find the right little groove in which it operates correctly.mom4 said:Yes, I agree. Although I think it has been taken way too far the other way by some women today.
I like Archie. He's quite a character!Said1 said:Not....enough.....dots....good effort though.....I give you 7/10. Keep up the good work and good luck with your future endevours!
And I'm telling him you were making fun of him. He'd expect me, but you.......ne...v...er. Enough said (pun intended!).
mom4 said:I do have to disagree with this, though. I really think it means just what it says. That a husband will have SOME (NOT TOTAL) authority over his wife, and over his household.
I'm not so sure. Not to say that God isn't he giver of life, that's not what I'm saying. Anything man does/ can do, he will NEVER be acle to create life.mom4 said:God is in control of when a human being is created.
This idea probably came from the dude who was in trouble for "spilling his seed on the ground" instead of inside the woman. (Dang, I can't remember that dude's name!) But that was a specific instance, in which this guy was responsible for impregnating this woman, so that she could have offspring to provide for her. He didn't want to impregnate her because the child wouldn't bear his name. It wasn't the wasting of the "seed" that was wrong, but the man's refusing to give the woman offspring to provide for her.
Why what?kurtsprincess said:But why?
But there are three parts that go into the creation of a human. Genes fom the sperm, genes from the egg, and a spirit. No person is an accident; God purposefully orchestrates the creation of every human being, from conception. No person comes into being without a spirit.Joz said:I'm not so sure. Not to say that God isn't he giver of life, that's not what I'm saying. Anything man does/ can do, he will NEVER be acle to create life.
But, IMO, just because an egg & a sperm come together isn't always Divine.
Awesome! Thanks, Joz!8 Then Judah said to Onan, "Lie with your brother's wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother." 9 But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother's wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. 10 What he did was wicked in the LORD's sight; so he put him to death also.
Whole story \/
http://bibleresources.bible.com/passagesearchresults.php?passage1=Genesis+38&version=31
Please elaborate if you can.mom4 said:But there are three parts that go into the creation of a human. Genes fom the sperm, genes from the egg, and a spirit. No person is an accident; God purposefully orchestrates the creation of every human being, from conception. No person comes into being without a spirit.
I remembered this thread from a long time ago, and the fact that I forgot to address the slavery question raised by liberalogic. Here is a great link on the subject...
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/feedback/2007/0202.asp