When Should Women Obey Their Husbands?

[freethinker44]

Hmmm... I disagree. When someone is put in a life threatening position, their primordial instincts WILL kick in, kick in or die. There are well documented events where people have helped in life threatening instances and many where they have not, and just run. That is our promorial instincts, and we follow them far more than you know it seems. It governs a whole lot of our lives, if you stop to think about it. Even such a thing a football has little to do with a game but more to do with catching game or killing one's enemy.

It's debatable whether humans even have instincts, we certainly don't have instincts like other animals have instincts. There seems to be a correlation in the animal kingdom where the more intelligent an animal is, the less instinctual it becomes. In humans, instincts are more of an urge than a predefined behavior as they are with other animal instincts. There is never a situation where a human has no choice but to act out an instinctual urge, they might really, really want to run or fight but they always have the ability to choose not to.

 

[Nietzsche]

It's debatable whether humans even have instincts, we certainly don't have instincts like other animals have instincts. There seems to be a correlation in the animal kingdom where the more intelligent an animal is, the less instinctual it becomes. In humans, instincts are more of an urge than a predefined behavior as they are with other animal instincts. There is never a situation where a human has no choice but to act out an instinctual urge, they might really, really want to run or fight but they always have the ability to choose not to.

Only Sith deal in absolutes.

 

[jchristopher]

A woman should hearken unto her husband as her husband hearkens unto the Lord. She has no obligation to follow him down an unrighteous path. Marriage is an equal partnership. In all things, they are to consult one another and make decisions as a family unanimously. Any domineering behavior from either side is unacceptable in the eyes of God. However, it is appointed that the man preside over his family, and also that he be the one to answer to God for the discharge of his duties to care for, protect, and lead his wife and children unto righteousness.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

A woman should hearken unto her husband as her husband hearkens unto the Lord. She has no obligation to follow him down an unrighteous path. Marriage is an equal partnership. In all things, they are to consult one another and make decisions as a family unanimously. Any domineering behavior from either side is unacceptable in the eyes of God. However, it is appointed that the man preside over his family, and also that he be the one to answer to God for the discharge of his duties to care for, protect, and lead his wife and children unto righteousness.

I have a unique concern over this in how and when does a husband answer to The Lord? After death? In prayer? Every week at church service? In confession?

If a wife must answer to her husband, there is a tangible two way conversation that can be documented or witnessed by other people.

How is that possible for a husband's answering to a deity?

 

[jchristopher]

I would like to address your question, but first, I just want to clarify what you mean by "if a wife must answer to her husband"?

 

[Robert.Evans]

The problem with this view is that victims are typically assaulted when they don't expect it. So by the time it occurs, to just stay from the assailant isn't an option. Moreover, it usually isn't in a court room, where a bailiff or marshal could defend them. So for those of us who believe in the right to self defense, this responsibility falls to us. To prepare for a violent encounter makes sense.

I think it makes more sense to make people less violent, not to add more violent people in to the mix, which will make the first group even more violent to counteract the second

 

[Robert.Evans]

It's debatable whether humans even have instincts, we certainly don't have instincts like other animals have instincts. There seems to be a correlation in the animal kingdom where the more intelligent an animal is, the less instinctual it becomes. In humans, instincts are more of an urge than a predefined behavior as they are with other animal instincts. There is never a situation where a human has no choice but to act out an instinctual urge, they might really, really want to run or fight but they always have the ability to choose not to.

In a split second choice? no. Instinct always take over. That is when lions turn into lambs and lambs into lions.

 

[Robert.Evans]

A woman should hearken unto her husband as her husband hearkens unto the Lord. She has no obligation to follow him down an unrighteous path. Marriage is an equal partnership. In all things, they are to consult one another and make decisions as a family unanimously. Any domineering behavior from either side is unacceptable in the eyes of God. However, it is appointed that the man preside over his family, and also that he be the one to answer to God for the discharge of his duties to care for, protect, and lead his wife and children unto righteousness.

Put far better than I could I think

 

[Robert.Evans]

I have a unique concern over this in how and when does a husband answer to The Lord? After death? In prayer? Every week at church service? In confession?

If a wife must answer to her husband, there is a tangible two way conversation that can be documented or witnessed by other people.

How is that possible for a husband's answering to a deity?

If the man is not keeping the law right in the first place, the woman does not have to listen. And he, as the woman, answers to the lord all the time.

 

[savagewind]

If the man is not keeping the law right in the first place, the woman does not have to listen. And he, as the woman, answers to the lord all the time.

Aha! "Not all the time". Good!

 

[oldbadger]

If the man is not keeping the law right in the first place, the woman does not have to listen. And he, as the woman, answers to the lord all the time.

Ah ha! So........ If the husband is driving a car, faster than the speed limit, his wife, as a passenger, can order 'Slow down!' and he must do this.... Correct?

In fact, a wife can require that her husband is correct, honest, dutiful and decent in all things, all matters, and must be obeyed...?

Interesting....

 

[oldbadger]

Aha! "Not all the time". Good!

Yep!
There is no man alive that follows biblical law all the time, or even most of the time. Ergo, no wife is duty bound to obey her husband in all his commands........ only those that she considers to be correct and true.

Ergo.... since this condition seems to be the (generally) religious one, it might be much better for a husband to make humble requests of his wife, because his demands would automatically be without humility..... most certainly a requirement of most creeds anyway!

I can't think of any order that I would ever give to Mrs B, nor she to me........ we are a couple, and couples just don't do that.

 

[savagewind]

Yep!
There is no man alive that follows biblical law all the time, or even most of the time. Ergo, no wife is duty bound to obey her husband in all his commands........ only those that she considers to be correct and true.

Ergo.... since this condition seems to be the (generally) religious one, it might be much better for a husband to make humble requests of his wife, because his demands would automatically be without humility..... most certainly a requirement of most creeds anyway!

I can't think of any order that I would ever give to Mrs B, nor she to me........ we are a couple, and couples just don't do that.

My husband ordered me not to bring up our children as Jehovah's Witnesses. He believes in freedom of religion and often made it hard for me but he never once ordered me to stop. I am so glad I did not persuade any of my children to be dedicated. If I had and they did now they would consider me dead.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think it makes more sense to make people less violent, not to add more violent people in to the mix, which will make the first group even more violent to counteract the second

As an individual, I can't make potential assailants less violent, except in some cases where I can manipulate them emotionally. But I can take steps to protect myself. Tonite I'm heading into Detroit for dinner (with my 380 Colt).

 

[jchristopher]

Yep!
There is no man alive that follows biblical law all the time, or even most of the time. Ergo, no wife is duty bound to obey her husband in all his commands........ only those that she considers to be correct and true.

Ergo.... since this condition seems to be the (generally) religious one, it might be much better for a husband to make humble requests of his wife, because his demands would automatically be without humility..... most certainly a requirement of most creeds anyway!

I can't think of any order that I would ever give to Mrs B, nor she to me........ we are a couple, and couples just don't do that.

Perhaps you should re-read post #324 more closely and re-consider it's meaning and practical application.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I would like to address your question, but first, I just want to clarify what you mean by "if a wife must answer to her husband"?

Headship. The buck stops with him. He admonishes and guides toward what is "Godly." He makes the decisions.

A wife who is obeying must answer to his direction, according to this hierarchy.

If she isn't fulfilling her role, it can be easily and conveniently addressed. But for patriarchs, how do they answer to their failings? How easily is the admonishment made? Does he answer to God, church elders? Is that not convenient? And does the wife simply have no choice but endure until her husband is admonished by God?

 

[CMike]

Based on the bible, men are the head of the household. Women are the foundation of the house, and are responsible for nurturing.

Genesis.

16. To the woman He said, "I shall surely increase your sorrow and your pregnancy; in pain you shall bear children. And to your husband will be your desire, and he will rule over you."

 

[jchristopher]

Headship. The buck stops with him. He admonishes and guides toward what is "Godly." He makes the decisions.

A wife who is obeying must answer to his direction, according to this hierarchy.

If she isn't fulfilling her role, it can be easily and conveniently addressed. But for patriarchs, how do they answer to their failings? How easily is the admonishment made? Does he answer to God, church elders? Is that not convenient? And does the wife simply have no choice but endure until her husband is admonished by God?

This is not what "headship" means in the godly sense. I Iike how you said "he admonishes and guides toward what is Godly." That is true. The husband is to admonish and guide, but not to make decisions unilaterally. There is no rightful place for dominance in marriage. He is to take the lead, but they are to be equal partners. The ultimate accountability before God is to fall upon his shoulders, though they are both accountable to God for their own actions. The patriarch answers first and foremost to God, whether by God's own voice through the Holy Spirit, or by the voice of His servants, the prophets and elders of the church. Secondly, he is accountable to his wife, for they are to be united in the eyes of the Lord. They must not live secret or dual lives, and should keep nothing from each other, otherwise they could not be each others' companions and advocates (this same principle goes for our individual relationships with God). If the husband is acting according to the will of God, and the wife also, they will discuss and pray about family decisions, and the Holy Spirit of God will be their confirming witness of what is right. The wife will rarely have to rely solely on the husband's word, for ninety nine percent of the time she will be able to discern the righteousness of it. In the times she does not know if it be right, she can take confidence in his divinely appointed role as patriarch and that God will warn her if he steps amiss. *When a man and a woman enter into the eternal covenant of marriage, they form a three-dimensional relationship with God. Not only is the man and woman bound together by that covenant, but they are both bound to God forming a triangular relationship, with Him being at the pinnacle. As the husband and wife obey God's commandments, they both draw closer to Him and simultaneously to each other. You see? Their salvation becomes co-dependant. The husband cannot offend his wife without offending himself as they are to be one flesh by covenant.

 

[Ingledsva]

Man is the HEAD of woman, not IN CHARGE of woman.

You say correctly and then you say your hunt. Hunt as in kill? And that is correct to you? Do you live in a cave? And if you do indeed mean what you say, I think you will be hunting from the knowledge that men have acquired, and probably with a rifle, made by men, yet yoy say you don't need men. You are from this planet are you.

No it is about lust and adultery... which is what you are doing, and absolutely nothing to do with love.

LOL! I can't believe the absolute patriarchal crap you keep putting out.

Of course I hunt and kill game. Why else would I be hunting. We believe in cleaner, safer, food = meat with no hormones and chemicals, etc. I also fish, set crab pots, and shrimp pots, etc.

Your religious ideas about sex are just bull, and don't apply to me.


*

 

[Ingledsva]

It is not a myth. Bad start.

Because they are part of the feminine, and Chavvah IS the feminine. You part of that same tree.

You think we still are not? I see plenty of thorns and thistles about.

Punishing other people for someone else's crimes. Found throughout the Bible, and one of the reasons I know it is a false book.


*