Originally posted by pritybettaThis is what Christianity does to people... :'(
Things would go badly like when Eve was begiled by the serpent.
Betta, I LOVE pretty women, but women can do more than be pretty, squirt out babies at age 13, work and protect themselves. Women are as smart and capable as men are.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI agree whith you one the fact that women can be as smart and capable as men are. Infact, some are even smarter than some men.
This is what Christianity does to people... :'(
Betta, I LOVE pretty women, but women can do more than be pretty, squirt out babies at age 13, work and protect themselves. Women are as smart and capable as men are.
I am a Christian and I too am a woman. I don't think that women are any less than men, just that the Lord has set order and women have there role. The role is not any less than what men have, infact, it is just as inportant and when they abanden that role the order is disrupted and it sets thing up for failer.
1 edit
Originally posted by pritybettaSouthern Baptist Scholar Links Spouse Abuse to Wives' Refusal to Submit to
I agree whith you one the fact that women can be as smart and capable as men are. Infact, some are even smarter than some men.
I am a Christian and I too am a woman. I don't think that women are any less than men, just that the Lord has set order and women have there role. The role is not any less than what men have, infact, it is just as inportant and when they abanden that role the order is disrupted and it sets thing up for failer.
Their Husbands
Bob Allen
06-27-08
One reason that men abuse their wives is because women rebel against their
husband's God-given authority, a Southern Baptist scholar said Sunday in a
Texas church.
Bruce Ware, professor of Christian theology at Southern Baptist Theological
Seminary in Louisville, Ky., said women desire to have their own way
instead of submitting to their husbands because of sin.
"And husbands on their parts, because they're sinners, now respond to that
threat to their authority either by being abusive, which is of course one
of the ways men can respond when their authority is challenged--or, more
commonly, to become passive, acquiescent, and simply not asserting the
leadership they ought to as men in their homes and in churches," Ware said
from the pulpit of Denton Bible Church in Denton, Texas.
In North Texas for a series of sermons at the church on "Biblical Manhood &
Womanhood," Ware described his "complementarian" view as what "Southern
Seminary as a whole represents."
Commenting on selected passages from the first three chapters of Genesis,
Ware said Eve's curse in the Garden of Eden meant "her desire will be to
have her way" instead of her obeying her husband, "because she's a sinner."
What that means to the man, Ware said, is: "He will have to rule, and
because he's a sinner, this can happen in one of two ways. It can happen
either through ruling that is abusive and oppressive--and of course we all
know the horrors of that and the ugliness of that--but here's the other way
in which he can respond when his authority is threatened. He can acquiesce.
He can become passive. He can give up any responsibility that he thought he
had to the leader in the relationship and just say 'OK dear,' 'Whatever you
say dear,' 'Fine dear' and become a passive husband, because of sin."
Ware said God created men and women equally in God's image but for
different roles.
"He has primary responsibility for the work and the labor and the toil that
will provide for the family, that will sustain their family," he said.
"He's the one in charge of leadership in the family, and that will become
difficult, because of sin."
Ware also touched on a verse from First Timothy saying that women "shall be
saved in childbearing," by noting that the word translated as "saved"
always refers to eternal salvation.
"It means that a woman will demonstrate that she is in fact a Christian,
that she has submitted to God's ways by affirming and embracing her
God-designed identity as--for the most part, generally this is true--as
wife and mother, rather than chafing against it, rather than bucking
against it, rather than wanting to be a man, wanting to be in a man's
position, wanting to teach and exercise authority over men," Ware said.
"Rather than wanting that, she accepts and embraces who she is as woman,
because she knows God and she knows his ways are right and good, so she is
marked as a Christian by her submission to God and in that her acceptance
of God's design for her as a woman."
Ware cited gender roles as one example of churches compromising and
reforming doctrines to accommodate to culture.
"It really has been happening for about the past 30 years, ever since the
force of the feminist movement was felt in our churches," Ware said.
He said one place the "egalitarian" view--the notion that males and females
were created equal not only in essence but also in function--crops up is in
churches that allow women to be ordained and become pastors.
Ware said gender is not theologically the most important issue facing the
church, but it is one where Christians are most likely to compromise,
because of pressure from the culture.
"The calling to be biblically faithful will mean upholding some truths in
our culture that they despise," he said. "How are we going to respond to
that? We are faced with a huge question at that point. Will we fear men and
compromise our faith to be men-pleasers, or will we fear God and be
faithful to his word--whatever other people think or do?"
Ware offered 10 reasons "for affirming male headship in the created order."
They include that man was created first and that woman was created "out of"
Adam in order to be his "helper." Even though the woman sinned first, Ware
said, God came to Adam and held him primarily responsible for failure to
exercise his God-given authority.
Ware also said male/female relationships are modeled in the Trinity, where
in the Godhead the Son "eternally submits" to the Father.
"If it's true that in the Trinity itself--in the eternal relationships of
Father, Son and Spirit, there is authority and submission, and the Son
eternally submits to the will of the Father--if that's true, then this
follows: It is as Godlike to submit to rightful authority with joy and
gladness as it is Godlike to exert wise and beneficial rightful authority."
Bob Allen is managing editor of EthicsDaily.com.
You would agree with this man?
The humanist meeting last week had the topic of "Is there such a thing as a just war?" After listening to each other's definitions and such, we were asked to vote on all the Americcan wars from WW2 until now. I wound up voting "just" on all of 'em. I can't imagine why, but it seemed right at the time.
kirksey957, no I do not agree with him.
I think men should do what the Lord comanded them do by loveing their wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself for it. And I believe wives should be in subimtion to the husband as the church is to Christ.
Eph 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
Eph 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.
Eph 5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
Col 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.
Col 3:19 Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them.
This man seems to make it look okay for the husband to beat his wife and I do not agree with him. However, it does show how when the order of things is disrupted things go bad. This is why the Lord set things to be done with order. When there is no order there is no peace.
Originally posted by pritybettaOK, here's my point. If you want women to be in a submissive role with their husbands, it opens up many problems and I want to name a few of them and you can respond if you like.
kirksey957, no I do not agree with him.
I think men should do what the Lord comanded them do by loveing their wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself for it. And I believe wives should be in subimtion to the husband as the church is to Christ.
Eph 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
Eph 5:23 For the ...[text shortened]... This is why the Lord set things to be done with order. When there is no order there is no peace.
The first problem is that many women today are in the role of leadership in their home out of necessity. They should be praised for this. For whatever reason, women perform a godly duty when they take on leadership roles to provide for their families whether it be feeding the children or earning a living that puts food on the table.
Secondly, I would argue that children today need examples of strong women in leadership roles. Remember Esther? I think you liked her as I recall. A strong woman leader.
Thirdly, a man comfortable with himself is never threatened by a strong woman in the home. Show me a man who is threatened by a woman or worse, harps back to the fall or Scripture as why a man needs to get his way with a woman, and I will show you a little boy.
Finally, if you want to defend this position based on the Bible, I beseech you to be silent. If you will be nice to me, I will petition Russ (the owner of this site) to have a woman's only forum as it is not proper for you to speak. I can tell by how much you have been posting that you would like a leader role in the forums. You should repent. OK, I'm being facetious, but please know that if you want the world to be that way, there is a lot of good stuff for women that you will throw right out the door.
God bless, and learn to play some chess. You have my male-dominant permission.
Originally posted by dryhumpWhat you're describing is more like a struggle between individuals for
I saw a documentary about wolf packs in yellowstone, battling for territory. Looked pretty warlike to me. Don't even get me started on chimpanzees.
resources (or opposite sex admiration) they both need. It hardly ever
results in death. And it's certainly not the kind of studious malice that
war is, when a group of individuals decide to screw an entirely different
group for the only purpose of increasing their power. Now, true, you could
say that the reason you don't see that kind of organised terror in other
animals is because we're the only ones with an apparent capability of
abstract thought, but then there's the question of why, if we're so
intelligent, do we engage in something as destructive and counter-
productive as war?
It's not really necessary at all, is it? We make it necessary by our own
paranoia and fear, and by the fact that we're intelligent enough to
organise ourselves, but not intelligent enough to co-operate with people
we don't always see eye to eye with.