I still have a problem with Nairaland changing pen.is to joystick, messes up the flow of the message and it's simply childish if we are being honest. Joystick really? Smh.

CAPSLOCKED:
THE BIBLE SHOULD BE BEYOND THE LAST THING TO MAKE REFERENCE TO WHEN TALKING ABOUT GENDER EQUALITY.
ALL THAT NON-VIRGIN BRIDE KILLINGS AND YOUNG WOMEN TRADING LIKE GOODS IS NOT OUT OF CONTEXT.

OH, JESUS CARED SO MUCH ABOUT WOMEN THAT HE MADE HIS DISCIPLES 12 MEN?
GOT TO BE KIDDING ME. .

I tell you, it was men that saw Jesus first after resurrection. The soldiers guarding the entrance to the tomb saw as the angel open the tomb while Jesus came out. mary saw him waaaaaaay later in the morning. Read your bible women. You are the crack in the world for the fall of mankind right from Eden.

This woman should shut up her dirty mouth.infact any woman that does not bow to the authority of Jesus christ cannot be submissive to the word of GOD nor man.it was when eve wanted equal rights with adam that she rebelled against God.it is somehow and so bad

TonyeBarcanista:

Why should husband submit to the wife when she is under his authority? Does your boss submit to you even though you submit to him/her?

Does your boss love you like his life? Personally, I think love comprises submission and is even greater. Read 1 corr 13:4 and tell me what love is?

According to the scripture, love is kind, forgiveth, endureth all things, doesn't dishonour nor boast nor seeketh her own gain nor easily provoked yet we were commanded to show this Love to our wives. How is this love cited above different from submission? In fact, I feel husband are the ones being shortchanged if both parties decided to follow the rules to tee, just like Jesus did, i.e, God's love who came to the earth to serve and washed his disciples' feet. Why did you think the pharisee couldn't identify him from the rest and needed Judas to do this? Because he was no different from the common man and his disciples. We're expected to lead and show by example, and our disciples, which in this case, our wives and children will follow suit naturally.

I just pray His grace should keep us because none is infallible. In fact, everyone is flouting this scriptural law abeg.

alBHAGDADI:
You quoted the Bible out of context. That verse says we are to submit as Christians when we are together. But you twisted it to mean husband and wives should submit to each.

The Bible proved you wrong in the following verses when it stated what a wife should do, which is to SUBMIT, while the husband is to LOVE his wife. If that verse you quoted out of context was really talking about the marriage scene, then the succeeding verses would have stated that men should submit to their wives also, but it didn't.

Love is submission and vice versa bro.

okeyfineboy:


The verse I quoted explains what love really is, that's why I said you should read and understand the meaning of love. And o yes, love is the greatest, love conquereth all.

I'm not advocating that women shouldn't submit, I'm only saying that why most men rant and dwell so much on women submitting, they themselves don't show love and most men bank on submission to subdue their wives and see them as inferior.

I don't know why many of you are attacking Chimamanda, I guess many didn't read what she wrote. She made a very good point but most of you failed to see it.

Exactly. alBHAGDADI is just being evasive. Love is greater. In fact, we're to lead by example while our wives and children follow naturally.

alBHAGDADI:


You and Chimamanda should keep shut.

Jesus Christ said wives should be submissive to their husband because he is the head of the wife. Feminism kicks against that.

Ephesians 5:22-33 (KJV)

22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

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.

24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;


Wives are to submit and Husbands are to love. That is what Jesus passed on to his disciples which Satan is trying to change today.

Thank you very much for this. Innocent ladies are buying into this feminist agenda.

.

alBHAGDADI:


You and Chimamanda should keep shut.

Jesus Christ said wives should be submissive to their husband because he is the head of the wife. Feminism kicks against that.

Ephesians 5:22-33 (KJV)

22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

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.

24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;


Wives are to submit and Husbands are to love. That is what Jesus passed on to his disciples which Satan is trying to change today.

Did she say do not submit to husband or everyone should have equal access to opportunities?

omoelerin1:
As long as man and woman are not equal physically, biologically, physiologically, behaviourally and attitudinally, then both can never enjoy equal rights and privileges. Aren't you people aware that those differences are enough to serve as hindrances, obstacles and make one sex to be at disadvantage compared to other sex?
Even our natural environments are not the same and equal for many reasons. And as such, one area may be more better in term of opportunities, advantages and privileges. And whosoever lives in that area may be at hedge compared to other who lives in area where such opportunities do not exist.
In fact, our parts of the body are not equal and the same. One part may enjoy more attention, care and dignity due to its function and feature. Though this does not mean it is more important that the other.

Man and woman are not the same and cannot be the same. God created both sexes to complement each other. Where one is weak, the other one is strong. Be that as it may, due to the area of weakness of one, they may experience denial in enjoying certain privileges and vice-vasa.

So you are trying to tell me that because men and women are different in their make up means they shouldn't have and enjiy equal rights and priviledges as human?
If that is the case, that means blacks shouldn't and can't enjoy equal rights and privileges with the whites simply because they are different physically in terms of colour, Since physical make up and differences hinders one from enjoying and having equal rights and privileges.

#Xavier.

This woman should leave Jesus out of her madness. Jesus has nothing to do with the kind of feminism she is championing

alBHAGDADI:
You quoted the Bible out of context. That verse says we are to submit as Christians when we are together. But you twisted it to mean husband and wives should submit to each.

The Bible proved you wrong in the following verses when it stated what a wife should do, which is to SUBMIT, while the husband is to LOVE his wife. If that verse you quoted out of context was really talking about the marriage scene, then the succeeding verses would have stated that men should submit to their wives also, but it didn't.

It is obvious that even if I took the time to spell it out for you, you still would not get it.

kingcornel:


U sure say ur sense nor dey pain u?

ee dey pain me like your own. ewu

Xavier5:


So you are trying to tell me that because men and women are different in their make up means they shouldn't have and enjiy equal rights and priviledges as human?
If that is the case, that means blacks shouldn't and can't enjoy equal rights and privileges with the whites simply because they are different physically in terms of colour, Since physical make up and differences hinders one from enjoying and having equal rights and privileges.

#Xavier.

Well, I am yet to know the rights and privileges which a man enjoys and a woman does not enjoy simply because she is a woman.

Using white and black to drive home and support your argument here is out of it. It doesn't relate to the issue of contention whatsoever.
Your good self know that there are certain stressful work that a woman would not be encouraged to engage due to her physical nature.
Presently, Federal Road Safety is conducting recruitment exercise and it has issued a statement that married women, pregnant women, those with bow and k leg would be dropped. Take note, married men would not be dropped on the ground that they are married, but women would be dropped for that reason. Are you saying they are being discriminated or denied their rights?

You people should stop deceiving yourself and channel your energy and effort to another fruitful project instead of this futile mission.
Culture is different all over the world. It is women that rule their world in the wester part of the world, but here in Africa it can never work.
The rate of discrimination between a man and a woman in English language is even more than many languages in Africa,
such as: proprietor, proprietress, headmaster, headmistress, He, Him, She, Her.
I think feminists should direct their effort to correct these language discriminations which may have negative impacts in real social life.

English language even goes as far as telling us that woman derives her identity from man and cannot stand alone. For example:
Man = woMan
Male=feMale.

He= sHe
He= Her
Masculinity is regarded as more strong, active and giver, while Feminism is seen as less strong, passive and receiver.

Xavier5:


That's the thing. That's why I always say that we don't need feminism in Nigeria because Nigeria is already a Feminist nation. Nigeria as a country has offers women everything feminism stands for which is EQUAL RIGHTS AND PREVILEDGES. Women in Nigerian are given equal rights and privileges in Nigeria in all aspects which includes education, health, politics, career, profession, sports, freedom of speech and expression, justice, entrepreneurship etc.
So the question I always ask is, What do Feminist in Nigeria actually want?

#Xavier.

my brother if u put that question 2 any so called feminist in Nigeria, u will become an enemy. D reason I will share with u in my attachment. ChimaMANda is using feminism 2 further her career cos its what d white man wants 2 hear. Sometimes I read her feminists sermons there's no head, there's no tail. She's s good writer, but she has lost her way in getting involved with things she nos little or nothing about. Sometimes she wants 2 justify feminism using sociology, psychology, politics, religion, biology. And each time she does this, she displays more&more ignorance. But yet, some ladies still think she knows what she is saying

Olodo24:
most of those biblical contents are fictional but Chimamanda has brains.


feminism is a movement everyone should embrace but Nigerians are too daft to accept what's right

first, are u a nigerian?
u have forgotten that chimaMANda makes a living from being a fictional writer so fiction is her thing. exactly what right about feminism u Nigerians aren't accepting?

tevinsolt:


It is obvious that even if I took the time to spell it out for you, you still would not get it.

he took time out 2 spell out his position&didn't relent despite u don't agree with him. Y are u hesitating in doing same?

omoelerin1:
Well, I am yet to know the rights and privileges which a man enjoys and a woman does not enjoy simply because she is a woman.

Using white and black to drive home and support your argument here is out of it. It doesn't relate to the issue of contention whatsoever.
Your good self know that there are certain stressful work that a woman would not be encouraged to engage due to her physical nature.
Presently, Federal Road Safety is conducting recruitment exercise and it has issued a statement that married women, pregnant women, those with bow and k leg would be dropped. Take note, married men would not be dropped on the ground that they are married, but women would be dropped for that reason. Are you saying they are being discriminated or denied their rights?

You people should stop deceiving yourself and channel your energy and effort to another fruitful project instead of this futile mission.
Culture is different all over the world. It is women that rule their world in the wester part of the world, but here in Africa it can never work.
The rate of discrimination between a man and a woman in English language is even more than many languages in Africa,
such as: proprietor, proprietress, headmaster, headmistress, He, Him, She, Her.
I think feminists should direct their effort to correct these language discriminations which may have negative impacts in real social life.

English language even goes as far as telling us that woman derives her identity from man and cannot stand alone. For example:
Man = woMan
Male=feMale.

He= sHe
He= Her
Masculinity is regarded as more strong, active and giver, while Feminism is seen as less strong, passive and receiver.

u forgot to add chimaMANda

Xisnin:

You used to back up some of your opinions with solid logic, but this one is standing on shaky legs.
There are millions of men who never did the works you listed either due to physical limitation
or life choice.

Look at Tinubu, do you think he has the energy to lift cement bags at building sites?
Does that make him inferior to other men who can?

What Adichie is saying that a woman shouldn't be discouraged or stopped from doing what she wants because she is a woman.
It is all about choice.

and u think we don't no that already? Or who is preventing women from doing what they want apart from themselves?

Zoroaster:
Lol.. She cited the Bible?.. Laughable

and she even added salt, maggi and garlic

alBHAGDADI:
You quoted the Bible out of context. That verse says we are to submit as Christians when we are together. But you twisted it to mean husband and wives should submit to each.

The Bible proved you wrong in the following verses when it stated what a wife should do, which is to SUBMIT, while the husband is to LOVE his wife. If that verse you quoted out of context was really talking about the marriage scene, then the succeeding verses would have stated that men should submit to their wives also, but it didn't.

lexy2014:
he took time out 2 spell out his position&didn't relent despite u don't agree with him. Y are u hesitating in doing same?

Wisdom is knowing when to continue to engage lest one being thought of as being the opposite.
he said and I quote "That verse says we are to submit as Christians when we are together. But you twisted it to mean husband and wives should submit to each."

You have the liberty to go read the particular scripture yourself (Ephesians 5)
assuming the sole verse 21 that I quoted was talking about Christians submitting when they're are together (I hope you are starting see the illogicality of this inference)

why would an instruction be given in once instance and then contradicted in another?
"so as christian brothers and sisters we are to submit when we are together"
but as Husbands and wives (while still Christians by the way).....only the woman should submit?

Daeylar:
I can't support her first statement on Jesus and feminism, but I do support her second statement right here.
She made a lot of sense

pls are there activities men can perform that women can't perform?

tevinsolt:



Wisdom is knowing when to continue to engage lest one being thought of as being the opposite.
he said and I quote "That verse says we are to submit as Christians when we are together. But you twisted it to mean husband and wives should submit to each."

You have the liberty to go read the particular scripture yourself (Ephesians 5)
assuming the sole verse 21 that I quoted was talking about Christians submitting when they're are together (I hope you are starting see the illogicality of this inference)

why would an instruction be given in once instance and then contradicted in another?
"so as christian brothers and sisters we are to submit when we are together"
but as Husbands and wives (while still Christians by the way).....only the woman should submit?

because there again u read just verse 21 and not d preceding verses to no y& to whom d instructions in verse 21 was given. Let's assume 4 once that u are correct that verse 21 says we all should submit irrespective of where we are. Let's say u are in d same church with ur boss. In church u both submit to each other. When u get 2d office will u still expect him 2 submit 2u cos d Bible said "submit to one another out of reverence 4 Christ"?

lexy2014:
because there again u read just verse 21 and not d preceding verses to no y& to whom d instructions in verse 21 was given. Let's assume 4 once that u are correct that verse 21 says we all should submit irrespective of where we are. Let's say u are in d same church with ur boss. In church u both submit to each other. When u get 2d office will u still expect him 2 submit 2u cos d Bible said "submit to one another out of reverence 4 Christ"?

"because there again u read just verse 21 and not d preceding verses to no y& to whom d instructions in verse 21 was given."
There you go jumping the gun by concluding I read verse 21 by itself.
Some translations of the bible if you had taking note have verse 21 attached to 20, Some others have it just before verse 22 subheading "Instructions for Christian household".
The church (instituted by God) and I mean the coming together of believers is not a location defined engagement.
Marriage (also Instituted by God) is a secondary label some Christians bear - a representation of Christ and the Church.

Your Job and the relationship you have with your boss is a human construct. In which I'd hope the rules of engagement is well defined in the employment contract.

Yes In marriage God as called wives to submit and Husbands to love, but to think the wive is not required to also love and for the Husband to submit is to have ones head in the sand.

tevinsolt:


"because there again u read just verse 21 and not d preceding verses to no y& to whom d instructions in verse 21 was given."
There you go jumping the gun by concluding I read verse 21 by itself.
Some translations of the bible if you had taking note have verse 21 attached to 20, Some others have it just before verse 22 subheading "Instructions for Christian household".
The church (instituted by God) and I mean the coming together of believers is not a location defined engagement.
Marriage (also Instituted by God) is a secondary label some Christians bear - a representation of Christ and the Church.

Your Job and the relationship you have with your boss is a human construct. In which I'd hope the rules of engagement is well defined in the employment contract.

Yes In marriage God as called wives to submit and Husbands to love, but to think the wive is not required to also love and for the Husband to submit is to have ones head in the sand.

In d translations u are referring to, did verse 21 come under d heading " Instructions for Christian households "?

U talked about "rules of engagement" as defined in d employment contract. Am sure u referring to conditions of employment and job description. Am sure d analysis I will provide below will clear this up. D question I asked was would u expect ur employer who is ur church member to submit to u in d office just because d Bible says "submit to one another"?

Work r/ships aren't just human constructs. They have deep spiritual significance. God worked and d first set of instructions to man was b fruitful, multiply, replenish d earth, till it and have dominion over it. This involves work and 4u to work u will have work r/ships. because of this, God set out guidelines 4 this r/ship. In Colossians 3:22-25 it talks about how our work to our employers is also service to God(u c its not just a human construct) but it went further to outline in Col 4:1 what d employer must do 4 his employee with its own spiritual significance. Also check 1 Tim 5:18 and Deuteronomy 24:14-15. D employee & employer both have a burden to carry 4 each other.

Now let's bring this to marriage in Ephesians 5. If u noticed, theres something common in d above r/ship: roles&responsibility. 4 every role, comes responsibility. That means cos u are this, u must do this. But it also comes with entitlement. As d employee is expected to work, he or she is expected to b paid.

Same thing in marriage. Husband: love, wife:submit. Roles&responsibilities. Its that simple (Ephesians 5:33). D question is this: is a wife submitting 2 her husband any less dignifying than d husband loving her? This is y I talked about selective reading earlier. Pls check Eph 5:28-29. If that is d responsibility assigned 2a man toward his wife, then what else do feminists want? I ask again, is a wife submitting to her husband any less dignifying than a man loving her?

lexy2014:


In d translations u are referring to, did verse 21 come under d heading " Instructions for Christian households "?

U talked about "rules of engagement" as defined in d employment contract. Am sure u referring to conditions of employment and job description. Am sure d analysis I will provide below will clear this up. D question I asked was would u expect ur employer who is ur church member to submit to u in d office just because d Bible says "submit to one another"?

Work r/ships aren't just human constructs. They have deep spiritual significance. God worked and d first set of instructions to man was b fruitful, multiply, replenish d earth, till it and have dominion over it. This involves work and 4u to work u will have work r/ships. because of this, God set out guidelines 4 this r/ship. In Colossians 3:22-25 it talks about how our work to our employers is also service to God(u c its not just a human construct) but it went further to outline in Col 4:1 what d employer must do 4 his employee with its own spiritual significance. Also check 1 Tim 5:18 and Deuteronomy 24:14-15. D employee & employer both have a burden to carry 4 each other.

Now let's bring this to marriage in Ephesians 5. If u noticed, theres something common in d above r/ship: roles&responsibility. 4 every role, comes responsibility. That means cos u are this, u must do this. But it also comes with entitlement. As d employee is expected to work, he or she is expected to b paid.

Same thing in marriage. Husband: love, wife:submit. Roles&responsibilities. Its that simple. D question is this: is a wife submitting 2 her husband any less dignifying than d husband loving her? This is y I talked about selective reading earlier. Pls check Eph 5:28-29. If that is d responsibility assigned 2a man toward his wife, then what else do feminists want? I ask again, is a wife submitting to her husband any less dignifying than a man loving her?

"In d translations u are referring to, did verse 21 come under d heading " Instructions for Christian households?"
yes it does. - you should know this, since you read the exchange between the other guy and I.

I have no time to keep going back and forth.
In a nutshell, Submission isn't the issue here, the Issue is you or anyone coming up to me saying wives are to submit and Husbands are not, when clearly the Bible first commands submission to one another in reverence to Christ.
And then goes on to elaborate
It tells me that you deem submission as lesser contrary to what you might be leading on
In a loving, considerate. power-struggle free relationship, submission is displayed in the act of coming together, in the acceptance of dos and don'ts of the other person for a successful union to happen.

If submission is so highly esteemed by you why do you have an issue with a husband equally submitting to his wife?
And no, the relationship between a Wife and her husband isn't analogous to that of an employee and the employer, it is much closer to a partnership where all hand are on deck.

A wife as not been hired neither has the husband. This relationship is as a result of two people making a conscious decision to come together in a spiritual, soul and physical bond.


Feminism has been a movement in response to the ill treatment of women in life. It doesn't take too much to figure out that when a group of people have been taken advantage of for so long, sooner or later they'll fight everyone ideology that allowed for their oppression.

omoelerin1:
Don't misunderstand the man. He knows what he is saying. The fact that he attributed that verse to Jesus as one who was speaking does not make him wrong. Every Christian must believe that every part of the Bible was inspired by God. 'No prophecy of the scripture has hidden interpretation, for men spoke from God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit', says the word of God.
And that is why we call it 'Word of God' or 'Scripture', irrespective of whoever spoke it.

Most of what we practice in Christendom today are Pauline doctrines. There are many things Jesus never thought before he left, He commissioned the Apostle to teach. That is why the Bible says Apostles are the foundation and the pillar of the Church upon whom the whole is built.
' And they stand firm in the braking of bread and the teaching of the Apostles' Acts 2.

If he like, he can say, God says, Jesus says, Bible says, Holy Spirit says.

u forget that some of the things paul spoke about were his own thoughts and he made it clear especially as regards marriage. Lets balance it when we quote the bible. Nothing is wrong in saying the exact thing. Dont quote Jesus whereas it was David or solomon who spoke. If paul said something, since its all inspired by God then we shuld be able to be truthful enough to say paul ,by the leading of the holy spirit said this or that. This is what has brought so much confusion in christianity that christians have become the most divided people of all religions . Pls dont tell me it's not a religion because that's the lie many of these penterascal pastors tell their people. God through John the beloved said in revelation, add to the book and be damned. I hope u know they toyed with the bible from inception by removing some books ? All these are part of the reasons christianity looks vague and so unreal. God is real , Jesus is real, the holy spirit is real, but our christianity especially in africa and USA Is mammon worship and not real christianity.

oruma19:
u forget that some of the things paul spoke about were his own thoughts and he made it clear especially as regards marriage. Lets balance it when we quote the bible. Nothing is wrong in saying the exact thing. Dont quote Jesus whereas it was David or solomon who spoke. If paul said something, since its all inspired by God then we shuld be able to be truthful enough to say paul ,by the leading of the holy spirit said this or that. This is what has brought so much confusion in christianity that christians have become the most divided people of all religions . Pls dont tell me it's not a religion because that's the lie many of these penterascal pastors tell their people. God through John the beloved said in revelation, add to the book and be damned. I hope u know they toyed with the bible from inception by removing some books ? All these are part of the reasons christianity looks vague and so unreal. God is real , Jesus is real, the holy spirit is real, but our christianity especially in africa and USA Is mammon worship and not real christianity.

No, I disagree with you. You're speaking like someone who doesn't believe the Bible or those that believe one part and disregard another part.
You can't tell me that all the speech of Jesus alone, as recorded in the Gospel, when he put aside his divine nature and came to the world is superior to or more important than the rest part of the scripture where he spoke through the mouth of the saints. God can never and will never divide against himself.
A true Christian must believe every part of the Bible as the word of God, irrespective of who was speaking in one part or the other.
The very particular place where Paul was only giving his own opinion, he made it clear. Be that as it may, he was a spirit filled man who would not speak through flesh, corrupt or carnally minded.

tevinsolt:


"In d translations u are referring to, did verse 21 come under d heading " Instructions for Christian households?"
yes it does. - you should know this, since you read the exchange between the other guy and I.

I have no time to keep going back and forth.
In a nutshell, Submission isn't the issue here, the Issue is you or anyone coming up to me saying wives are to submit and Husbands are not, when clearly the Bible first commands submission to one another in reverence to Christ.
And then goes on to elaborate
It tells me that you deem submission as lesser contrary to what you might be leading on
In a loving, considerate. power-struggle free relationship, submission is displayed in the act of coming together, in the acceptance of dos and don'ts of the other person for a successful union to happen.

If submission is so highly esteemed by you why do you have an issue with a husband equally submitting to his wife?
And no, the relationship between a Wife and her husband isn't analogous to that of an employee and the employer, it is much closer to a partnership where all hand are on deck.

A wife as not been hired neither has the husband. This relationship is as a result of two people making a conscious decision to come together in a spiritual, soul and physical bond.


Feminism has been a movement in response to the ill treatment of women in life. It doesn't take too much to figure out that when a group of people have been taken advantage of for so long, sooner or later they'll fight everyone ideology that allowed for their oppression.

which translation are u referring to?

I asked u a simple question twice, "is a wife's submission to her husband any less dignifying to a husband loving her"? All I expected from u was a simple yes or no but instead u are going back &forth even though u said u don't want to go back&forth. I also took u 2d same Ephesians 5 but to 28-29 for further emphasis and to prove d selective reading theory. But obviously, what u are accusing me of, u haven't been able to show that u aren't guilty of it.

Again, u had earlier said that work r/ship is a "human construct" and I was able to prove u wrong with scriptures that it isn't. What makes work r/ship different from marital r/ship? U seem 2b oblivious of d fact that as long as @ least 2 individuals interact with each other, there's a r/ship. U said this about marriage:

"This relationship is as a result of two people making a conscious decision to come together in a spiritual, soul and physical bond."

Does an employee & employer not make a conscious decision to come together? Yes or No? D objectives might b different but there's a word u used up there, RELATIONSHIP. If u don't understand d word r.ship&what it entails, how do u then defend ur position? So whether it is marital, business, diplomatic, political, religious, transient, etc as long as it involves d interaction of at least 2 individuals, it is a r.ship. and I told u that every r.ship has 3 things, roles, responsibilities&entitlement and let me add, expectations.and Ephesians 5 from 22 outlined those roles&responsibilities and emphasized it again in verse 33. That's y I also used d work r.ship 2 help u understand d concepts of roles, responsibilities, entitlement & expectations.

What I expected of u was 2 trash this theory with ur own facts. Critique what I said and let's no if it is not valid. Funny enough, u didnt come near it. instead u seem 2 have a grudge with d word "submission" and anyone u think is promoting it.

In ur previous post, u acknowledged that marriage was instituted by God. If that is ur position, then Gods position is explicit in Ephesians 5:22-33 as to d roles&responsibilities of couples to themselves. If u noticed,d message of verse 21, didn't reoccur in verses 22-33. So if 21 was meant 4 married couples, then it would have been reemphasized between 22-33. But what u have between 22-33 is strictly repetition and emphasis of love&submission between wife&husband without d message of 21.

If that is d case, I don't c where ur claims of oppression or illtreatment are coming from. Ephesians 5:28-29 is unambiguous and puts 2 bed any claims of oppression or ill treatment. With it, there should b no reason 4a woman 2 feel oppressed or ill treated. But as I noted earlier, its just a case of selective reading. Let me conclude with this question again: is a woman submitting to her husband any less dignifying than a husband loving her"?

True

omoelerin1:
No, I disagree with you. You're speaking like someone who doesn't believe the Bible or those that believe one part and disregard another part.
You can't tell me that all the speech of Jesus alone, as recorded in the Gospel, when he put aside his divine nature and came to the world is superior to or more important than the rest part of the scripture where he spoke through the mouth of the saints. God can never and will never divide against himself.
A true Christian must believe every part of the Bible as the word of God, irrespective of who was speaking in one part or the other.
The very particular place where Paul was only giving his own opinion, he made it clear. Be that as it may, he was a spirit filled man who would not speak through flesh, corrupt or carnally minded.

u only know what u v been tot. This is another weakness of christianity many of us v been talking about. I can not be forced to believe because someone believes. I live by what i read from the scriptures and my conscience. Relax and study scripture, clear ur mind and see what God will say to u. Forget all those wofbi or wolbi u people attend, they teach u what they believe and many are wrong doctrines. Bible is out guide, lets use it. It is because of the brainwashing that may of these mega pentecostal churches cancelled sunday school so intelligent people wont ask questions or challenge heresy. It is well anyways. Let everybldy carry his cross.