WHAT DOES IT MEAN WIVES ARE TO BE OBEDIENT TO THEIR HUSBANDS?

[Wrangler]

No it doesn't.

Again, that's YOUR interpretation. Paul DOES say that "IF a woman separates from her husband...." which means that she she's allowed to separate from her husband.

You are reading into the text, assuming why there is separation. The text says NOTHING about the choice being achieved by over-ruling her husbands directions.

It's hilarious that you are willfully ignorant of a command lacking qualifications and conditions is unqualified and unconditional. "Give me the book" has no conditions. Basic reading comprehension - unless you are a feminist with an agenda.

 

[Wrangler]

She doesn't have to stay with a husband who's a non-believer.

1 Peter 3:1-2
Wives
In the same way, you wives must accept the authority of your husbands. Then, even if some refuse to obey the Good News, your godly lives will speak to them without any words. They will be won over 2 by observing your pure and reverent lives.

 

[Mink57]

1 Peter 3:1-2
Wives
In the same way, you wives must accept the authority of your husbands. Then, even if some refuse to obey the Good News, your godly lives will speak to them without any words. They will be won over 2 by observing your pure and reverent lives.

Riiiiiight. And how many times does she have to endure physical beatings, emotional distress, sexual violence before he's "won over"?

I've read what you've written here. Obviously, you're not "won over" yet...

 

[Wrangler]

And how many times does she have to endure physical beatings, emotional distress, sexual violence before he's "won over"?

Victim mentality. You are desperate to allow an exception to undermine the unconditional rule.

Guess what? No command in Scripture is conditional.

 

[Mink57]

You are reading into the text, assuming why there is separation. The text says NOTHING about the choice being achieved by over-ruling her husbands directions.

No, I'M not reading into text. It's YOU who is doing that! The Bible DOES NOT SAY "UNCONDITIONALLY!"

It's hilarious that you are willfully ignorant of a command lacking qualifications and conditions is unqualified and unconditional. "Give me the book" has no conditions. Basic reading comprehension - unless you are a feminist with an agenda.

Wrong again. But I won't attempt to explain it. Obviously, you're a power-hungry man who wants to lord whatever power you THINK was God-given over his wife.

The kind of man that most women should stay away from...

 

[Mink57]

Victim mentality. You are desperate to allow an exception to undermine the unconditional rule.

Guess what? No command in Scripture is conditional.

Exception?? Are you SERIOUS????

God is NOT controlling your heart.

Your EGO is...

 

[Wrangler]

No, I'M not reading into text. It's YOU who is doing that! The Bible DOES NOT SAY "UNCONDITIONALLY!"

It does t have to say that word; the absence of conditions TELLS YOU it is unconditional. ROFLMAO.

 

[Mink57]

It does t have to say that word; the absence of conditions TELLS YOU it is unconditional. ROFLMAO.

Maybe try reading the WHOLE Bible...and stop cherry-picking verses, taking them out of context.

Ahhh, but you're too ego BLIND to do that. You so obviously don't want to be subject to a woman....then don't subject a woman to YOU!

Jesus was a REBEL. He brought about new ideas that others didn't like, ESPECIALLY preaching to MEN. He never mistreated a woman...or thought of a woman as "lesser than" a man. After all, who was the FIRST person to go to Jesus'' tomb? A WOMAN.

Who was the FIRST person to see Jesus as risen? Again, a WOMAN.

Ever wonder WHY Jesus appeared to a woman FIRST...and not a man? Not even his male disiples?

 

[TLHKAJ]

It's pretty clear that we have a couple of wife beaters, rapists, and polygamists in this thread.

 

[Wrangler]

Bearing false witness

 

[Verily]

Unfortunately, many a man thinks that 'love' is just a feeling...and not an action. Ohhh, they claim to 'love' her...and yet put her down, tell her no one else would want her...insult her weight, breast size, clothing (even though modest), her cooking, child rearing, her job....

But they "love" her....

...right?

That is outlined for us also. Jesus Christ (who is meek and gentle) is the husbands example. He has a pretty high bar in Jesus

Ephes 5:23 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.

John 15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, AS I have loved you.

Ephes 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, EVEN AS Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

And even as Christ is the saviour of the body

Ephes 5:28 SO OUGHT men to love their wives AS their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.

For the two are one flesh

Ephes 5:29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, EVEN AS the Lord the church

To cherish, with tender love, or foster with tender care (example, John 13:4-5)

John 13:15 For I have given you an example, that ye should do AS I have done to you.

In the same way it speaks of honour and preferring the other

Romans 12:10 Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another

The same here

1Peter 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife

And likewise

Col 3:19 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord. (See also Ephes 5:22)

Col 3:23-24 And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.

 

[Mink57]

Bearing false witness

And what's your point?

 

[Mink57]

It's pretty clear that we have a couple of wife beaters, rapists, and polygamists in this thread.

Yup. And they misuse the Bible to justify their actions.

 

[Wrangler]

And what's your point?

A direct quote is not an interpretation. How do you interpret:
Ephesians 5:22 For wives, this means submit to your husbands as to the Lord.

It most certainly does! The absence of conditions implies unconditional. You know this. We’ve been over this before.

Doesn't sound like you were a very good helper in helping to defend him. You and @Mink57 like to have it both ways. Pick one:

1. I can help protect my husband because I am brave and strong, like him.
2. I am a victim and must cower in fear when my husband is threatened, and use my children as a weapon or shield to deflect accountability.

1 Peter 3:1-2
Wives
In the same way, you wives must accept the authority of your husbands. Then, even if some refuse to obey the Good News, your godly lives will speak to them without any words. They will be won over 2 by observing your pure and reverent lives.

 

[Mink57]

Bearing false witness

Yes...you ARE.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
Has turning the other cheek gone out of vogue?

● Gal 5:15 . . But if you bite and devour one another, take heed that you be
not consumed one of another!

Biting and devouring one another describes cannibals and carnivorous
beasts.

● 1Pet 2:21-23 . .To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you,
leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. When they
hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate.

I've yet to see it fail that discussions relative to women's place in the divine
scheme eventually turn into a pie fight.
_

 

[MA2444]

Yup. And they misuse the Bible to justify their actions.

The scripture is very clear but you choose not to see it because of the bitterness in your heart.

Do you have a humble bone in your body towards men in any way?

 

[TLHKAJ]

I've yet to see it fail that discussions relative to women's place in the divine
scheme eventually turn into a pie fight.

If they would take ALL of scripture together and not single out the ones they want to reinterpret it to mean they can be tyrants, abusers, and dictators.... then we could agree. I agree with scripture rightly divided. Speaking the truth is not a pie fight.

 

[Wrangler]

The scripture is very clear

Agreed.

they want to reinterpret it to mean they can be tyrants, abusers, and dictators …

Again, you and @Mink57 are doing worse than re-interpreting. You are reading exceptions into unconditional commands BECAUSE of your ego, BECAUSE of your agenda. Let me give you a simple example.

I have a boss at work and if I don’t follow his directions, I can be terminated. To escape this burden, I can be like you and @Mink57, write hysterically about my boss POSSIBLY being a tyrant, abuser, and dictator. Then attempt to limit the conversation to the restrictions on my boss, such as lawful directions, and assert a right I have that is not explicitly a condition of employment; that on my own authority, not follow my bosses directions if they don’t meet my delicate sensibilities, e.g., offensive, degrading or ‘abusive.’

So, what is your agenda? To hide the fact that you don’t trust, don’t have faith in God OR the husband you chose.

 

[TLHKAJ]

So, what is your agenda? To hide the fact that you don’t trust, don’t have faith in God OR the husband you chose.

My marriage was arranged by our cult handlers. I never would have chosen to be used for s.x (etc, etc, etc), or that my children would be born into the cult to be used. You can justify that all you want. But God, nor His Word will agree with you. I don't regret every effort I made to resist them, and to keep my children and grandchildren from them.