When Should Women Obey Their Husbands?

[Debater Slayer]

That same thought might be thrown your way seeing as you don't understand it

I find it ironic that the beliefs of the person who keeps iterating that the Bible is misunderstood are a perfect example of why a good bulk of Biblical teachings are fundamentally harmful.

 

[Draka]

The sheer bile being thrown around in the forum lately by someone is enough to literally make one feel sick to their stomach. Hateful, vile, repulsive notions about women, and actually, men...it's beyond the pale.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I am arguing obey. Look at the thread title. Does a human heart obey the brain? Not yet. God did not make the brain to order the body. God made the brain to lead the body. Man leads woman follows. Can a person follow without obeying? Certainly can. Look at the nation of Israel. They all went together. Did they all OBEY??????

I though I had explained that, that ''obey'' is probably-- in this hyper sensitive feministic-chauvinistic world-- not the right word. But that it means to ''listen to''. Though it might be asked what the difference is other than ''obey'' tends to make on think of a slave.

Teaching it is any person's duty to obey is not wise. To obey should be a very personal matter but now we have a WORLD of people obeying for human FOLLY. God does not teach anyone To Obey.

God telling women man is the head is saying Follow him! Obey him? Then why not blame God for every crime which came from a person's obedience To MAN.

Man is the reflection of the God, for man was created in his Image. Woman is in the Image of man. This is within higher-consciousness of God.

I think you should be more careful. Those women I think DO believe in God.

I doubt it.

Maybe women must seize the power because after all this time MAN has not learned to listen yet.

A woman must ''seize'' the power? Interesting. And when she manages to seize it, what will she do, make men obey I wonder...haha.

Pay some little attention and you will discover she has an anti-everything vibe. And I love her for it!

That is not something to brag about.

Take a deeper look at Bible's word "OBEY" and you should see it means yield. What does yield mean? "give way to arguments, demands or pressure". Does "give way" mean obey?

surrender, capitulate, submit, relent, admit defeat, back down, climb down, give in, give up the struggle, lay down one's arms, raise/show the white flag

Hm I wonder why The Brain left out obey on that list?

I am hearing something. Where does contention start? and contention causes WAR. Actually I heard it the other way around.

Yield simply means it is not most people's job to contend.

Contention is what starts wars and contention is birthed in families. Contention began with man and woman. If like leaven contention spreads then get out the leaven. But people have defined leaven as people. It isn't.

''Obey'' means to ''listen to'' to ''conform to'' to '' pay heed to'' and when speaking of God, it is often rendered as ''obey''. Now you will say that the Bible is not right. And so I have to ask again for the umpteenth time, is God not that powerful then?

I find it ironic that the beliefs of the person who keeps iterating that the Bible is misunderstood are a perfect example of why a good bulk of Biblical teachings are fundamentally harmful.

Only to those who don't want to do them. You are a secularist. So what is new? You think we will agree on much? I doubt it.

The sheer bile being thrown around in the forum lately by someone is enough to literally make one feel sick to their stomach. Hateful, vile, repulsive notions about women, and actually, men...it's beyond the pale.

And who is this ''someone'' I wonder. Shall I take the title ''someone''? So where is this ''sheer bile'' or the ''hateful vile repulsive notions about women''? oh and don't let us forget (as this will sound good) ''and actually, men''. Go and quote some, please do. This is the thread to expose the bile. This is the bile thread, so let's bring it on.

Perhaps you have a problem with someone who has an opinion different to yours, and someone you can't control, hmmm

 

[savagewind]

I though I had explained that, that ''obey'' is probably-- in this hyper sensitive feministic-

chauvinistic world-- not the right word. But that it means to ''listen to''. Though it might be asked

what the difference is other than ''obey'' tends to make on think of a slave.

I do not agree. I say it means "to follow", Yield to his direction, not to his words which is "to listen". It is possible for World to go in one direction only. OK? God say let it be the man's way (and God has reason for every decision). We might not know the reason (that is me stating the obvious) but it is always for good reason.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I do not agree. I say it means "to follow", Yield to his direction, not to his words which is "to listen". It is possible for World to go in one direction only. OK? God say let it be the man's way (and God has reason for every decision). We might not know the reason (that is me stating the obvious) but it is always for good reason.

The OT says it is to ''give eye to'' to ''pay attention to'' his word, to pay attention to God to what he says. The NT says it is to ''listen to'' to ''conform '' to. It can in some circumstances be seen as obey.
The general idea is that one listens to the word of God... listens and conforms to his commands his teachings. One could say obey then, right? It is a problem word for women perhaps and no doubt a problem word for slaves as they obeyed their master. It appears to be a problem for blacks to obey or ''listen'' to the rule of law in some lands. That is systematic of their past (not that we weren't also slaves to them, but who cares about the whites, right?)

 

[MysticSang'ha]

That says a lot about you i think and feminism in general..... you slight the patriarchal soceity but I feel the matriarchal one would be worse. At least men defended their women. Hard to imagine women ever doing that for men.

Then you don't pay attention to my posts where I am critical of the idea of matriarchy being any better. I don't subscribe to any systems of culture that appoint one gender as elevated in ability or importance just because of what is between the legs.

Patriarchal customs, as you call it, come from the primordial savage male being the stronger gender. When we were animals, the one that is head is the strongest and best fighter. So they ruled (as is God given) and laid out what we see, which on the whole, is not bad.

I disagree. It isn't that simple, and it ignores the propagation of various cultures....in particular Anglo-European cultures...due to geography, the development of a culture's collective immune systems over time, the investment of those with the most resources into innovation of weaponry, and spreading their idea of civilation however clandestine the empire may be.

It isn't just women that are dehumanized here. These cultures place men from lower classes into either feudal systems of economic enslavement or use the bodies of young men to enter into war as an imperialist power.

These oppressive systems use and exploit both genders to the benefit of only a few men (sometimes only one) at the top. It isn't necessarily the strongest and best fighter. Many times, it's the person who can negotiate the best economic deals with neighboring tribes/kingdoms/countries/states for resource acquisition.

The assumption that men are better than women at these negotiations is another sexist notion that is archaic and would do better if put aside.

With further help from women to teach children to not be delinquents, we might rise even higher, but at the moment there is this feminist secular way of hunting for power-- now that there is chance to do that-- none of which is godly, but secular. Either way, it comes from the stronger gender. It shows how much the modern day world has changed that the natural god given roles are changing, now that the goddess is rising up, even within religion itself it seems, as they try to fit in with the world, the very thing they are not supposed to do.

I don't share your religious views, and we don't have to agree on religious views. Feminism, from what I have been taught and have been active in for much of my 40+ years on this planet, is much much less about hunting for power and much much more about fighting the violence against women and establishing bodily autonomy for each woman.

Try as one might to bemoan women entering into the public sphere more and more, complaining that this is a man's world and women should respect it and either leave it or remain in servitude...women's equality is a movement that has resulted in a decrease in rape against women, a decrease in assault and battery against women, and a decrease in gender-based homicide. Feminism...as much as you hate it....has helped women survive gender-based domestic violence as well as brought awareness to the practice of rape in wartime.

Because of the awareness brought, various mens rights counter-movement have been created to draw attention to violence against men...and feminists have been paying attention and starting to address these issues, as well. Our group is constantly seeking out measures that we can collectively engage in to protect all people from sexual assault and domestic violence.

I don't attribute feminism as being the answer to everything. But any movement IMO that seeks to end violence, rape, and battery is a good movement. If one sees this as a hunt to attain too much power for our own good as women, then I believe that person's priorities are more about protecting an institution than protecting human lives. Choose wisely.

 

[savagewind]

Man is the reflection of the God, for man was created in his Image. Woman is in the Image of man. This is within higher-consciousness of God.

I doubt it.

They do not believe your version of God (which is an idol of the mind - or did you not know that) so they do not believe? That is called "my way is superior". But it isn't. Is it? Please see that last phrase is a question.

A woman must ''seize'' the power? Interesting. And when she manages to seize it, what will she do, make men obey I wonder...haha.

Oh Did you hear me say that? But I didn't. Did I?

That is not something to brag about.

I have not heard anyone bragging. It is the only thing I know about her. The command is "love!" and I obey. I love her.

''Obey'' means to ''listen to'' to ''conform to'' to '' pay heed to'' and when speaking of God, it is often rendered as ''obey''. Now you will say that the Bible is not right. And so I have to ask again for the umpteenth time, is God not that powerful then?

NOW I say the Bible is not right? Human kind is not right to read it "obey". OK? It is way, way to obvious God comes in weakness to debate God's power. So I won't.

Only to those who don't want to do them. You are a secularist. So what is new? You think we will agree on much? I doubt it.

Savagewind is a secularist. Got proof?

And who is this ''someone'' I wonder. Shall I take the title ''someone''? So where is this ''sheer bile'' or the ''hateful vile repulsive notions about women''? oh and don't let us forget (as this will sound good) ''and actually, men''. Go and quote some, please do. This is the thread to expose the bile. This is the bile thread, so let's bring it on.

Too many words in here all a-jumble. I can't answer.

Perhaps you have a problem with someone who has an opinion different to yours, and someone you can't control, hmmm

Oh I think I can control you.

 

[savagewind]

The OT says it is to ''give eye to'' to ''pay attention to'' his word, to pay attention to God to what he says. The NT says it is to ''listen to'' to ''conform '' to. It can in some circumstances be seen as obey.
The general idea is that one listens to the word of God... listens and conforms to his commands his teachings. One could say obey then, right? It is a problem word for women perhaps and no doubt a problem word for slaves as they obeyed their master. It appears to be a problem for blacks to obey or ''listen'' to the rule of law in some lands. That is systematic of their past (not that we weren't also slaves to them, but who cares about the whites, right?)

Yes. I believe we are to listen to GOD. But I do not believe your theory that you are god. OK?

 

[savagewind]

If God's way is women obey men then God's way is man to control woman. That is not for debate. It's math. Math? Ya, equals. Just change 'then' to equals and it is math.
But if God's way is through control then why doesn't GOD control everyone? Giving over control to the lesser ones (not lesser than woman haha; lesser than God) is the opposite of wise I think.

 

[Willamena]

I suppose when you say ''accidental'' that means you don't believe in God then, right?

Since you felt compelled to ask that question, I can safely say I believe in something different than you.

 

[Wirey]

I can just imagine telling my wife to obey me. She owns a 32 ounce Louisville TPS and would be happy to take my skull off-field for a single. We're more of a violent-threat based partnership.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Then you don't pay attention to my posts where I am critical of the idea of matriarchy being any better. I don't subscribe to any systems of culture that appoint one gender as elevated in ability or importance just because of what is between the legs.

Very crude, and will not help your understanding of men nor women nor this discussion. But it is an often used phrase... by guess who? Women.
I wonder why.
Sounds like an insecurity to me.
Who is putting one above the other I ask? The scripture tells us that the man is the head of the woman and that is born out through history and soceity even now. Yes women have more power now, but so what? Men have given it them. If they wanted to take it from them they could.

So it is not WHO is ''important'' as both are, and I have never said that the woman is of no importance; that, I'm afraid, is something that women seem to think, hence the reason you keep judging yourself by men.... never a sound beginning to anything.

I disagree. It isn't that simple, and it ignores the propagation of various cultures....in particular Anglo-European cultures...due to geography, the development of a culture's collective immune systems over time, the investment of those with the most resources into innovation of weaponry, and spreading their idea of civilation however clandestine the empire may be.

It isn't just women that are dehumanized here. These cultures place men from lower classes into either feudal systems of economic enslavement or use the bodies of young men to enter into war as an imperialist power.

These oppressive systems use and exploit both genders to the benefit of only a few men (sometimes only one) at the top. It isn't necessarily the strongest and best fighter. Many times, it's the person who can negotiate the best economic deals with neighboring tribes/kingdoms/countries/states for resource acquisition.

The assumption that men are better than women at these negotiations is another sexist notion that is archaic and would do better if put aside.

I was speaking, and still am, about our primordial past, well before we would have been considered civilized.
As for some men being above other men, well, that is natural, and is why men were above women. It came down to who was the strongest personality, (and that for various reasons). Later in the times of early man, yes we see a power structure which benefits those at the top, (as it still does), and is part of the pattern of God that we follow. We have a human 'king', as the real king is God! When we follow such things intuitively as man, we don't follow them as we should; otherwise we would have God as our king (as the OT says). But we wanted a man, and becasue of that, many problems would come are way (OT) which it has.
But it has always been about who is strongest; that is part of evolution, and evolution (if you are intested) of the divine consciousness which we are a part of and follow.

I don't share your religious views,

I don't know anyone who does

and we don't have to agree on religious views. Feminism, from what I have been taught and have been active in for much of my 40+ years on this planet, is much much less about hunting for power and much much more about fighting the violence against women and establishing bodily autonomy for each woman.

That is quite quaint I'm sure, but that is not what they set out to do. I have seen a woman say on TV that they set out to ''destroy the family''. Now @Draka thinks ''someone'' is sick for saying certain things. Well destroying the family makes me sick.

Now you have power, through the vote, jobs, and money...sure, an so the goals have moved slightly. but it amounts to the same thing. What has happened recently is that some prominant men have noticed (as has the medai) that feminist women are just as s-xist and chauvinistic as their male counterparts. Pot calling the kettle black me thinks.

Try as one might to bemoan women entering into the public sphere more and more, complaining that this is a man's world and women should respect it and either leave it or remain in servitude...women's equality is a movement that has resulted in a decrease in rape against women, a decrease in assault and battery against women, and a decrease in gender-based homicide.

The last time I saw someone comment on that, ''he'' said that men were more likely to die at then end of domestic problems than women.
As for the other things you mention, that just shows that there are problems that have not been sorted out through the (elders if they believe) courts. So it is a failure in society and the governement. The response to that from women, (which one might understand) was to run from men. And so we have now more crime associated with single parents and more adultery. Fact.

Feminism...as much as you hate it....has helped women survive gender-based domestic violence as well as brought awareness to the practice of rape in wartime.

Because of the awareness brought, various mens rights counter-movement have been created to draw attention to violence against men...and feminists have been paying attention and starting to address these issues, as well. Our group is constantly seeking out measures that we can collectively engage in to protect all people from sexual assault and domestic violence.

So guilt kicks in eh? Weren't bothered about men until it was pointed out.

I don't attribute feminism as being the answer to everything. But any movement IMO that seeks to end violence, rape, and battery is a good movement. If one sees this as a hunt to attain too much power for our own good as women, then I believe that person's priorities are more about protecting an institution than protecting human lives. Choose wisely.

I can certainly agree if something helps it should be looked at. But feminism is not the answer, nor is that the reason women are feminist. Perhaps it is difficult to really admit why it is women are feminist... but one thing for sure, it is not about having less, nor about helping anyone bar themselves.
I suppose it shows how placid males have become in the west that you may now do that.

We have a pattern given by God and laws that covered the misuse of power against men and women. It did not need changing; it needed adhereing to. That is largely a failure of men, which I understand; but that does not mean I will subscribe to something that blatently breaks up the family and creates more adultery and damage to the children and destroys the natural pattern of God, which in turn follows the Goddess and not the God.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Yes. I believe we are to listen to GOD. But I do not believe your theory that you are god. OK?

When did I say that? You are putting words in my mouth perhaps?

 

[Robert.Evans]

They do not believe your version of God (which is an idol of the mind - or did you not know that) so they do not believe? That is called "my way is superior". But it isn't. Is it? Please see that last phrase is a question.
Oh Did you hear me say that? But I didn't. Did I?
I have not heard anyone bragging. It is the only thing I know about her. The command is "love!" and I obey. I love her.
NOW I say the Bible is not right? Human kind is not right to read it "obey". OK? It is way, way to obvious God comes in weakness to debate God's power. So I won't.
Savagewind is a secularist. Got proof?
Too many words in here all a-jumble. I can't answer.

Oh I think I can control you.

You said ''seize''. Go check, controlling woman.

 

[Robert.Evans]

If God's way is women obey men then God's way is man to control woman. That is not for debate. It's math. Math? Ya, equals. Just change 'then' to equals and it is math.
But if God's way is through control then why doesn't GOD control everyone? Giving over control to the lesser ones (not lesser than woman haha; lesser than God) is the opposite of wise I think.

There is a pattern that we should follow. And it is ''maths''

 

[savagewind]

When did I say that? You are putting words in my mouth perhaps?

You say MAN is God's fractional image. In other words (as I understand it) look back at the image far enough and it will be God.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Since you felt compelled to ask that question, I can safely say I believe in something different than you.

Most people do.
But whereas I was compelled to ask, you don't seem compelled to answer.

 

[savagewind]

You said ''seize''. Go check, controlling woman.

No. I said perhaps. Should i go check?

 

[savagewind]

Most people do.
But whereas I was compelled to ask, you don't seem compelled to answer.

It is not right to expect a straight answer from Willamena. God! Pay attention. Won't you???????

 

[Robert.Evans]

You say MAN is God's fractional image. In other words (as I understand it) look back at the image far enough and it will be God.

Yes. But that does not make me a god. I am but man, as you are.