crackhaus:

How did you come to this conclusion?

Take a look at these:

Note the emboldened bits.
They all say in summary that love should not be dependent on how well the person being loved treats the lover.

This is my point:
If you say submission is only dependent on love, are you not going against the scriptural characteristics of true love?

Yes, submission is also love...for a woman to submit, she must have loved first.
And since love is patient, kind, not irritable, keeps no record of being wronged, never gives up, never looses faith, and endures through every circumstance, the submission of a woman to her husband is not dependent on how much he loves her.
This is what I believe to be Christ's kind of love.

It will be hard, it will seem painful...but submitting to a husband who does not really love you is the true definition of Christ's love.

You are not really conversant with the Bible, are you?

I was describing the duty of the husband and somehow you quoted the husband's portion to talk about the wife

I really doubt you read the posts

bukatyne:


[s]You are not really conversant with the Bible, are you?[/s]

I was describing the duty of the husband and somehow you quoted the husband's portion to talk about the wife

I really doubt you read the posts

Totally unnecessary @struck out bits. State your point without the subtle jabs...being conversant with the Bible is not a difficult feat, and believe me I am very much conversant with it.

As for the emboldened, I turned it around on purpose to encompass the wives as much as husbands...what exactly is the problem with that?

The book of 1Cor 13 is all about love in the general sense of it and not one-sided to husbands, that particular chapter is talking about the qualities/characteristics of love as Jesus preaches it.

Love is patient, love is kind, it is not boastful, it does not envy, it is not proud, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no records of wrongs, it always perseveres...etc.

I hope you can now deal with my earlier post regarding submission and how it should not be dependent on love.

bukatyne:



@ 2nd statement, you clearly did not read what I wrote

Go back and slowly read

This is your statement:

Bukatyne:
if he has said he doesn't like fixing of nails and you want to, you must win him over. There might be a way to fix it without him knowing but even if he does not see or notice, God does

Madam I have read it again, what does the emboldened mean since I still don't get it?
Please clarify it for me.

You said... if he doesn't want you to, you must win him over.
The next sentence goes;
there might be a way to fix it without him knowing... what exactly do you mean here?

You then went further to say... even if he does not see or notice, God does.

Isn't it clear that what you're saying is that the nails can be fixed without him knowing...but because God sees everything, this is the only reason why the nails should not be fixed, instead of just obeying the husband in the first place?

Like I said before, please clarify it for me.

@First statement: I think consent is wrong. I meant that the husband must know about it i.e. informing him

I will look for the right word and edit that post

Yes, consent and permission mean the same thing.

So my next question is this;
If you 'inform him' and he doesn't agree to it, what will you do next?

cococandy:
Submission is not love.
Submission is the inevitable result of love
Or rather the natural response to love.

I never said that submission is love, I said for a woman to submit she must have loved first.

If a man loves a woman and that woman does not love the man, will she then submit because according to you 'submission is the INEVITABLE result of love'?

No matter how much a man loves a woman, even if he is willing to kill for her...a woman who does not love him back will not submit to him.

Hence for a woman to submit, she must have loved first...and since love keeps no record of wrongs, is patient, perseveres, and is not selfish - it is not dependent on how much love it receives from the person to be loved.

Yes. If for some reason a woman does not love her husband but is married to him nonetheless.
If he treats her with selfless love the NATURAL response from her is submission.

Unless it is a situation where the woman wants to ruin the union at all costs.

crackhaus:

I never said that submission is love, I said for a woman to submit she must have loved first.

If a man loves a woman and that woman does not love the man, will she then submit because according to you 'submission is the INEVITABLE result of love'?

No matter how much a man loves a woman, even if he is willing to kill for her...a woman who does not love him back will not submit to him.

Hence for a woman to submit, she must have loved first...and since love keeps no record of wrongs, is patient, perseveres, and is not selfish - it is not dependent on how much love it receives from the person to be loved.

Seems d op Has deserted her thread

If you have anything to add why not go ahead?

pickabeau1:
Seems d op Has deserted her thread

I have not deserted my thread however, I will not be drawn into roundabout arguements. That is why I made it clear that it is from a Christian POV

When other posters post, I will engage them and if you have anything to add, will be happy to discuss with you.

bukatyne:


I have not deserted my thread however, I will not be drawn into roundabout arguements. That is why I made it clear that it is from a Christian POV

When other posters post, I will engage them and if you have anything to add, will be happy to discuss with you.

OK...I responded to u...and was awaiting ur. Comments Or thoughts

Why must u think its a about argument?

pickabeau1:


OK...I responded to u...and was awaiting ur. Comments Or thoughts

Why must u think its a about argument?

My apologies

I will go back to check; I must have missed it

I was referring to crackhaus

pickabeau1:


Yes BUT t takes time for the inner man to eat meat..

Second point that is ideal but situations happen
Meetings, poor network etc

One should trust the best of his partner. When we see we will discuss.
However these are exceptional situations



I agree with you on people using scriptures for an agenda but it is not unique to Nigerians which is my point.

Whites used Bible to justify enslavement of blacks - curse of Noah

The Nigerians are special

I believe Christians should build their inner man before contemplating marriage

bukatyne:

The Nigerians are special
I believe Christians should build their inner man before contemplating marriage

I agree....
But like any human institution, marriage is also ssubject to imperfections

Ok.. thats good.. if u comment further, i will respond. nothing to add from me

bukatyne:


My apologies

I will go back to check; I must have missed it

I was referring to crackhaus

i fear .... .. since everything here could be construed as argument

No wahala...

moca:

I had to follow you all the way down here because I currently cannot reply to comments on the family section. Now listen, I have seen your type here who feel the liberty to say anything under the cover of the internet equals to the liberty to insult anyone, anyhow. I am not one to take such insults, I see posts I don't like, but I don't waste my precious time expressing frustrations on issues I tell myself is not my business, I advice you learn to do likewise. I have the right to say what I want, how I want it and it should be clear to you that your wretched person can't stop me. I know you have a very fulfilled life, just live it and don't let something that shouldn't ordinarily bother you take you to the path where such would messed up. F. O. O. L

mcdokwe:
I had to follow you all the way down here because I currently cannot reply to comments on the family section. Now listen, I have seen your type here who feel the liberty to say anything under the cover of the internet equals to the liberty to insult anyone, anyhow. I am not one to take such insults, I see posts I don't like, but I don't waste my precious time expressing frustrations on issues I tell myself is not my business, I advice you learn to do likewise. I have the right to say what I want, how I want it and it should be clear to you that your wretched person can't stop me. I know you have a very fulfilled life, just live it and don't let something that shouldn't ordinarily bother you take you to the path where such would messed up. F. O. O. L

Bros

I will appreciate if you can modify or delete your post

Thank you as you do so

bukatyne:
Practical examples of submission

Remember that submission is in all things (as far as they are not sinful) so we really do not have any 'private' business once we are married. For example, I think it is wrong to do the following:

1. Send money/stuffs to your family/friends/relatives without the consent of your husband note I said consent and not permission irrespective of the financial model run in your home (joint or separate accounts)

2. Do something hubby has said he doesn't like without trying him to win over (If it is important) E.g. if he has said he doesn't like fixing of nails and you want to, you must win him over. There might be a way to fix it without him knowing but even if he does not see or notice, God does

3. Buy things without informing him/ hiding what you bought/ investing without him been in the know etc. amongst others

Nice idea behind the thread, but let us take head to state the scrpitures exactly as it is.

Craukhuas already highlighted some inconsistencies, so no point discussing them again.

However, consider this:

Eph 5:21 and submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Eph 5:22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord,
Eph 5:23 because the husband is the head of the wife as also Christ is the head of the church – he himself being the savior of the body.
Eph 5:24 But as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.


Does the Church merely seek "consent and not permission" from Christ, or does the former do exactly as they are told. Something tells me Paul knew what he was talking about when he decided to use such a powerful comparison, The Church and Christ, to describe the union between man and wife.

That of course does not make the wife slave or robot, just as the Church is not a slave. But the message there is crystal clear. Any attempt at embellishment or watering down to soothe "gender correctness" of any form is ungodly.

The bottom line is the scriptures does not always go down well with the flesh; it takes the Holy Spirit to understand and heed, meekly, the treasures therein. May The HOLY GHOST grant us better understanding of His Word. Amen.

Stay blessed!

doofanc:


Nice idea behind the thread, but let us take head to state the scrpitures exactly as it is.

Craukhuas already highlighted some inconsistencies, so no point discussing them again.

However, consider this:

Eph 5:21 and submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Eph 5:22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord,
Eph 5:23 because the husband is the head of the wife as also Christ is the head of the church – he himself being the savior of the body.
Eph 5:24 But as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.


Does the Church merely seek "consent and not permission" from Christ, or does the former do exactly as they are told. Something tells me Paul knew what he was talking about when he decided to use such a powerful comparison, The Church and Christ, to describe the union between man and wife.

That of course does not make the wife slave or robot, just as the Church is not a slave. But the message there is crystal clear. Any attempt at embellishment or watering down to soothe "gender correctness" of any form is ungodly.

The bottom line is the scriptures does not always go down well with the flesh; it takes the Holy Spirit to understand and heed, meekly, the treasures therein. May The HOLY GHOST grant us better understanding of His Word. Amen.

Stay blessed!

Hi, welcome to the thread

Will deal with the issues raised tomorrow

Yet to see the inconsistences though and surprised that you both seem fixated on the submission aspect.

Good night

thank you. Good night

bukatyne:


I have not deserted my thread however, I will not be drawn into roundabout arguements. That is why I made it clear that it is from a Christian POV

When other posters post, I will engage them and if you have anything to add, will be happy to discuss with you.

bukatyne:
My apologies

I will go back to check; I must have missed it

I was referring to crackhaus

Good thing you mentioned me, you should have done that when you made that comment in the first quote.
I unfollowed your thread and was only expecting you to quote me with a reply before I come back, I didn't see your earlier comment until now.

First off, Bukatyne you are the one who responded to my comment to cococandy which I promptly responded to, so I don't know where the round argument would have come from.

Secondly, You say your post is from a Christian POV - bukatyne, from a Christian POV, is the book of 1Cor 13 about the way husbands should love or about how Christians generally (both men and women) should love?...characteristics of love that is.

Please I need you to answer cos I really didn't fancy the snide comments you made about 'round arguments' and 'Christian POV'.
Answer my question and then I will exit your thread.

doofanc:


Nice idea behind the thread, but let us take head to state the scrpitures exactly as it is.

Craukhuas already highlighted some inconsistencies, so no point discussing them again.

However, consider this:

Eph 5:21 and submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.
Eph 5:22 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord,
Eph 5:23 because the husband is the head of the wife as also Christ is the head of the church – he himself being the savior of the body.
Eph 5:24 But as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.


Does the Church merely seek "consent and not permission" from Christ, or does the former do exactly as they are told. Something tells me Paul knew what he was talking about when he decided to use such a powerful comparison, The Church and Christ, to describe the union between man and wife.

That of course does not make the wife slave or robot, just as the Church is not a slave. But the message there is crystal clear. Any attempt at embellishment or watering down to soothe "gender correctness" of any form is ungodly.

The bottom line is the scriptures does not always go down well with the flesh; it takes the Holy Spirit to understand and heed, meekly, the treasures therein. May The HOLY GHOST grant us better understanding of His Word. Amen.

Stay blessed!

I promised to treat this, sorry it is coming late

If I was treating from gender correctness, I would have not opened the tread. We submit to Christ in everything (even though in reality, nobody can claim to do) however, we still eat, wear, drink, go, do things as we like when we like as far as it is not a sin. I am sure you did not pray to God before posting on this thread; the only thing you ensured was that your posts glorify God. Jesus does not tell you what to eat, where to go (except He wants to send you on a special assignment) etc. and yet you are to submit to Him in all things.

I do not think a woman should seek her husband's permission before helping her family (Again, I am assuming the home is built on godly principles where there is openness and oneness so she will not think of giving her parents money when they are yet to pay their house rent etc.). As a preference, I go for joint account/accountability where a budget is run on the joint income and so the two are in the know of each other's needs. I however realize that not all families run joint account/accountability that was why I gave that example.

I am coming from a very practical standpoint and not just mouthing the theory.

God bless too

Hi pickabeau1,

What issues did you want us to discuss?

bukatyne:
Hi pickabeau1,

What issues did you want us to discuss?

Wlell.. you are the OP and can provide themes we discuss on

The last thrust was on trust between partners

Nothing further on my side

I have been keenly watching from the sidelines, and have read arguments and counter-arguments. I cant give an answer that will be acceptable to both sides. All I can say is that, from my experience as a married man, the more LOVE I show to my wife, the more SUBMISSIVE she becomes.

dein77:
I have been keenly watching from the sidelines, and have read arguments and counter-arguments. I cant give an answer that will be acceptable to both sides. All I can say is that, from my experience as a married man, the more LOVE I show to my wife, the more SUBMISSIVE she becomes.

First welcome to the thread

@bolded: You better not shout O! Even Jesus who created us had to leave his glory, live like a servant, die for our sins in the most painful manner, bear the anguish of been forsaken by God and bear forever the scars of saving us before he demanded we submit to Him as Christians.

I would like to hear some of your opinions on the subject matter too.

God bless your marriage real good

Interesting perpsective

I like what u said on love and submission being directly proportional so i will ask you what kind of love are you talking of

Remember love has two dimensions

Pro 27.5 Open rebuke is better than secret love


Pro 10.12b Love covereth all sins


bukatyne,... i will like your comments also

dein77:
I have been keenly watching from the sidelines, and have read arguments and counter-arguments. I cant give an answer that will be acceptable to both sides. All I can say is that, from my experience as a married man, the more LOVE I show to my wife, the more SUBMISSIVE she becomes.

pickabeau1:
Interesting perpsective

I like what u said on love and submission being directly proportional so i will ask you what kind of love are you talking of

Remember love has two dimensions

Pro 27.5 Open rebuke is better than secret love


Pro 10.12b Love covereth all sins


bukatyne,... i will like your comments also

Love covereth all sins: when you love someone, you will not lie against the person, steal from him or her etc. Remember Jesus summed all the commandments to 'love the Lord with all your heart, all your soul and with all your might & love your neighbor as yourself'

You also have to look at the contextually meaning; I sometimes read all the chapter or topic to grasp what a particular verse is saying.

@ Open rebuke is better than secret love: hmm...

bukatyne:


First welcome to the thread

@bolded: You better not shout O! Even Jesus who created us had to leave his glory, live like a servant, die for our sins in the most painful manner, bear the anguish of been forsaken by God and bear forever the scars of saving us before he demanded we submit to Him as Christians.

I would like to hear some of your opinions on the subject matter too.

God bless your marriage real good

Yes. He had the right to demand our love and loyalty, having first displayed such lofty and selfless character Himself.

I believe each spouse should concentrate MORE on their responsibility than on the responsibility of their partner. What I stated in my first comment has really worked for me; I endeavor to love my wife: that's my duty. Now, it may not be the case with all women, but it has worked for me. According to Ephe 5:25-29'

The duty of husbands is to love their wives. The love of Christ to the church is an example, which is sincere, pure, and constant, notwithstanding her failures. Now this may not be easy, but that's exactly what Apostle Paul meant in that passage.

pickabeau1:
Interesting perpsective

I like what u said on love and submission being directly proportional so i will ask you what kind of love are you talking of

Remember love has two dimensions

Pro 27.5 Open rebuke is better than secret love


Pro 10.12b Love covereth all sins


bukatyne,... i will like your comments also

Pro 27.5 Open rebuke is better than secret love.............The open rebuke to a person's fault( sin) is done out of love, which thereafter covers the person's wrongdoing.

It doesn't mean publicly correcting a person with a condescending view.

dein77:


Yes. He had the right to demand our love and loyalty, having first displayed such lofty and selfless character Himself.

I believe each spouse should concentrate MORE on their responsibility than on the responsibility of their partner. What I stated in my first comment has really worked for me; I endeavor to love my wife: that's my duty. Now, it may not be the case with all women, but it has worked for me. According to Ephe 5:25-29'

The duty of husbands is to love their wives. The love of Christ to the church is an example, which is sincere, pure, and constant, notwithstanding her failures. Now this may not be easy, but that's exactly what Apostle Paul meant in that passage.

Thanks a lot

bukatyne:


Thanks a lot

You're welcome! Nice meeting you here.

dein77:

Pro 27.5 Open rebuke is better than secret love.............The open rebuke to a person's fault( sin) is done out of love, which thereafter covers the person's wrongdoing.
It doesn't mean publicly correcting a person with a condescending view.

So correcting the person is good just not publicly?
Is that love too

The idea of love one gets around these parts is one of an easy, fuzzy, hubby let me do what i want type

bukatyne:

Love covereth all sins: when you love someone, you will not lie against the person, steal from him or her etc. Remember Jesus summed all the commandments to 'love the Lord with all your heart, all your soul and with all your might & love your neighbor as yourself'
You also have to look at the contextually meaning; I sometimes read all the chapter or topic to grasp what a particular verse is saying.
@ Open rebuke is better than secret love: hmm...

What is the contextual meaning to you

pickabeau1:


So correcting the person is good just not publicly?
Is that love too

The idea of love one gets around these parts is one of an easy, fuzzy, hubby let me do what i want type




What is the contextual meaning to you

That's what I typed in my earlier post.

@bolded: There is a difference between dealing with adults (your wife/husband) and kids. If a husband/wife does not like something the spouse has done, he/she ought to tell the spouse in love and they settle it.

Can you expand the correction you mean?

dein77:


You're welcome! Nice meeting you here.

Thanks