Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I must have missed the part where she said she was not considered equal to her husband, or her opinions were secondary. In fact, she said the opposite of that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brentwoodgirl
That's the Biblical definition of marriage. A wife is to submit to her husband, and a husband is to love his wife as Jesus loved the church. A husband is accountable to God for his family.
It's basically the same thing Candice Cameron Bure said recently that freaked everyone out. I think our culture is ingrained to rebel at the word "submit." But the bigger responsibility is on the husband.
I submit to my husband as the head of our household, and he seeks my counsel for everything.
I was a little frustrated, but as a wife who is willing to submit, I was willing to accept his answer and not try to guilt or manipulate him into it.
Sounds like her opinion is secondary to her husband's to me.
Sounds like her opinion is secondary to her husband's to me.
You're confusing submission for lesser value and being secondary. She's "choosing" to submit. She could nag, manipulate and torment her husband, but she's choosing to respect his leadership role. You clearly misunderstood.
You also forgot to highlight the part where he loves her as God loves the church and seeks her counsel on decisions, which is the most important part of a marriage.
Submission would not work if God or the love of God was not involved because God always has the best interests of everyone in the family involved in mind.
"Traditional" marriage didn't work for my great grandparents, or either set of grandparents. Meanwhile, my parents are truly equals and my dad would knock any man upside the head who even nicely asked me to submit in any way I would feel comfortable telling my parents. They're the ones who have been married over 30 years and together for almost 40.
I have no time for a man so profoundly weak that his opinion needs to reign supreme every time, even if he is willing to consider my opinion. Being born with a penis doesn't mean squat about making decisions or leading a family.
You're confusing submission for lesser value and being secondary. She's "choosing" to submit. She could nag, manipulate and torment her husband, but she's choosing to respect his leadership role. You clearly misunderstood.
You are correct, she is choosing to submit to her husband's "leadership" in their marriage. If he is the "leader" than she, by definition, must be secondary to him. I am not the least bit confused nor do I misunderstand anything.
You are correct, she is choosing to submit to her husband's "leadership" in their marriage. If he is the "leader" than she, by definition, must be secondary to him. I am not the least bit confused nor do I misunderstand anything.
She was describing a Biblical marriage. Show me in the Bible where it says the woman is secondary to the man, or is of less value. If you cannot, you are indeed confused.
You're confusing submission for lesser value and being secondary. She's "choosing" to submit. She could nag, manipulate and torment her husband, but she's choosing to respect his leadership role. You clearly misunderstood.
Those are a female's only two choices? Submission or nagging, manipulating and tormenting her husband? You don't have a very high opinion of women, do you?
Hey, maybe you should run for office, on the Republican ticket.
She was describing a Biblical marriage. Show me in the Bible where it says the woman is secondary to the man, or is of less value. If you cannot, you are indeed confused.
I wasn't responding to the Biblical description of marriage, I was responding to this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylux
You're confusing submission for lesser value and being secondary. She's "choosing" to submit. She could nag, manipulate and torment her husband, but she's choosing to respect his leadership role. You clearly misunderstood.
And my response is that if one is the "leader" then the other must be secondary. If not, who is he the "leader" of? She is clearly and consciously choosing to be secondary in her relationship and submitting to his will. She states that herself.
As for showing you anything in the Bible, you'll have to ask someone else. It's not a book I have any belief in.
I wasn't responding to the Biblical description of marriage, I was responding to this:
And my response is that if one is the "leader" then the other must be secondary, as they both can't be. She is clearly and consciously choosing to be secondary in her relationship. She states that herself.
As for showing you anything in the Bible, you'll have to ask someone else. It's not a book I have any belief in.
In her original post, she described the Biblical description of marriage. She did not state she was secondary.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
