Theological Opinions

[Rían]

Originally Posted by inked

(It is distasteful to modern western sensibility to even consider self-denial in any form.)

Too true!
(and they're missing out on the joy!)

[Rían]

And quoting from post 304, I said:

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Excellent point, Lief.

Thinking about the "political" issue, the following verses come to mind : Proverbs 21:1, Romans 13:1, Psalm 2:1-6, and of course, the very profound and relevant Isaiah 3:21!

I just told Nurvi I put a totally off-topic verse in there, just to see if anyone actually looked the verses up - apparently no one did! That's the last time I bother to give verse references!

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

And quoting from post 304, I said:



I just told Nurvi I put a totally off-topic verse in there, just to see if anyone actually looked the verses up - apparently no one did! That's the last time I bother to give verse references!

if i posesed a bible i might have looked it up, but seeing as i dont, i didnt

[Rían]

There's on-line Bibles

Here's a few:

www.BibleGateway.com

www.BlueletterBible.org

www.Crosswalk.com

[inked]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Actually Inked, I think you could accurately say two married people are partners. Why not?

*sneaky bump*

WeLl, NuRv, YoU cOuLd SaY tHe SaMe FoR lEtTeRs AnD wOrDs.

It's a structure thing. Your and my use of partners implies a business-like propositional understanding of marriage. It is a legal entity requiring certain behaviors on the parts of the participants. And while the man and woman are partnered (remember my definition and defense of marriage!), the relationship is not a business venture per se. Partners are lesser subsets of covenanters. But the word covenant is not a popular word these days as a noun or verb. And this is where we get down to the difference between legal marriage and the concept of Christian marriage. The whole morass of Hebraic and Gentile marriage concepts get revivified and essentially redefined in the Pauline imagery of the Church (as she shall be in Him who bought her by His Blood in Eternity) as the bride of Christ. So, I would say, more than partners, much, much more. But you could argue AT LEAST partners as a sort of minimalist definition. But is your marriage partner one for whom you would die or just your main squeeze as you get through life?

When properly proportioned as covenant makers, the relationship is more than just a silly RuLe MaDe FoR tHe IrRiTaTiOn Of MaLeS aNd FeMaLeS iN tHe
TwEnTy-1St CeNtURy, after all!

[Nurvingiel]

I see what you mean Inked, I just use the word partner in more than one situation. According to dictionary.com neither is wrong.

part·ner Audio pronunciation of "partner" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pärtnr)
n.

1. One that is united or associated with another or others in an activity or a sphere of common interest, especially:
1. A member of a business partnership.
2. A spouse.
3. A domestic partner. See Usage Note at domestic partner.
4. Either of two persons dancing together.
5. One of a pair or team in a sport or game, such as tennis or bridge.
2. Nautical. A wooden framework used to strengthen a ship's deck at the point where a mast or other structure passes through it. Often used in the plural.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Too true!
(and they're missing out on the joy!)

I see your point, but I don't think it applies here. I make myself do things I'd rather not, and deny myself things when necessary and/or beneficial, but I still view marriage as something where there does not need to be one leader. This isn't a whim that I'm indulging - it's my belief of what a marriage should be like.

[Rían]

Do you see my point, tho, about how "specialization" leads to a greater whole? Henry Ford found this out. And given my belief that God deliberately designed the two sexes, it makes sense that one would be chosen for the headship, since there's only two in the partnership and a vote won't settle it when they disagree.

I don't look at it as my husband being a "leader" and I'm not a leader. I lead in many areas. And I feel like I'm an equal partner. I have just chosen to allow his decisions to be final when we disagree (again, as long as I don't think he's doing something against the clearly stated will of God). He has great judgement, and if he makes a mistake, so what? So we learn for the next time. And he, more often than not, will give my opinion preference over his, because of his love for me.

It's shameful how many men in the past have abused the verse on submission and conveniently ignored the verse directed at them to love their wives as Christ loves the church. However, that doesn't make the concept wrong, IMO. And when it's done right, it's excellent.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Do you see my point, tho, about how "specialization" leads to a greater whole? Henry Ford found this out. And given my belief that God deliberately designed the two sexes, it makes sense that one would be chosen for the headship, since there's only two in the partnership and a vote won't settle it when they disagree.

Why does there have to be a head? marriasge is more of a partnership and a give and take relationship. It's all about compromise and coming to a consensus. If two people can't come to a consensus on something and there has to be a single person who makes the decisions - then something is seriously wrong in my view.

I have just chosen to allow his decisions to be final when we disagree

That must be great for him then. You basically have given up your say but it seems as if you don't want to admit it. oh well - as long as you are happy with the arrangement of taking second place when you disagree with things - that's fine.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Do you see my point, tho, about how "specialization" leads to a greater whole? Henry Ford found this out. And given my belief that God deliberately designed the two sexes, it makes sense that one would be chosen for the headship, since there's only two in the partnership and a vote won't settle it when they disagree.

Henry Ford did discover this, and look what that contributed to! The most boring assembly-line jobs imagineable, Found On Road Dead (or Fix Or Repair Daily), the Big Three, and bad city planning. But that's a rant for another day.
I did see your points, and you articulate your beliefs eloquently. I wasn't saying that Biblical submission didn't make sense for you - clearly it does. I was saying that based on my own beliefs it doesn't make sense for me.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

I don't look at it as my husband being a "leader" and I'm not a leader. I lead in many areas. And I feel like I'm an equal partner. I have just chosen to allow his decisions to be final when we disagree (again, as long as I don't think he's doing something against the clearly stated will of God). He has great judgement, and if he makes a mistake, so what? So we learn for the next time. And he, more often than not, will give my opinion preference over his, because of his love for me.

If his decisions are final, how is he not the leader?
However, I see that comprimise is required on his part to fulfill his role, so really, the final decision is not always his own, and therefor there isn't one leader.
Except, he has the power (though this would be misuse) to insist on his way all the time. So he is the one in charge.
I've tried to outline my final bit of confusion (I realize we don't want to discuss this forever) internixed with what I understood of your views. I hope this was successful.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

It's shameful how many men in the past have abused the verse on submission and conveniently ignored the verse directed at them to love their wives as Christ loves the church. However, that doesn't make the concept wrong, IMO. And when it's done right, it's excellent.

I agree that abuses or misunderstandings by some doesn't invalidate a concept.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

If his decisions are final, how is he not the leader?
However, I see that comprimise is required on his part to fulfill his role, so really, the final decision is not always his own, and therefor there isn't one leader.
Except, he has the power (though this would be misuse) to insist on his way all the time. So he is the one in charge.
I've tried to outline my final bit of confusion (I realize we don't want to discuss this forever) internixed with what I understood of your views. I hope this was successful.

Well to put id sucenctly on what I think of biblical submission - I think it's a bunch of bull. I have not seen anything that Rian has said that has demonstrated that her husband isn't king of the house and he doesn't have final say and or that she his equal - other than her trying to convince everyone that she does have the power and that it's equal. If he has final say in disagreements - then how is it a partnership? How does she have equal power? If it works for her fine. I grew up in a very different family - and I am very happy with that because my family compromised and discussed thins. If we couldn't agree on something - then it didn't happen. there wasn't one person saying - well fine then - this is the way it is anyway and this is what we are doing.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

same with mine, JD, though if one person were to take charge it would havebeen me mam, cor she has a fiery spirit, and it is quite common in many similar families, south londoners from the irish community, women rule the roost, men do as they're told

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Last Child of Ungoliant

same with mine, JD, though if one person were to take charge it would havebeen me mam, cor she has a fiery spirit, and it is quite common in many similar families, south londoners from the irish community, women rule the roost, men do as they're told

yeah - my mother was irish. If anyone was going to rule the household - it would have been my mother too. Also - Italian mothers are big into being the head of the family also. Generally it's the grandmother who is the head of the household in Italian families. Also - if you say anything diragatory about someone's sister or mother - that can cause a serious fight.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

hehehe irish and italian women have a lot in common
-cooking
-in charge
-dont dare badmouth sister/mother/daughter

[Rían]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

You basically have given up your say but it seems as if you don't want to admit it. oh well - as long as you are happy with the arrangement of taking second place when you disagree with things - that's fine.

"given up my say" and "taking second place"? That just doesn't deserve any response besides this - it seems that you have NO idea what I've been saying all this time. Perhaps you haven't read my posts. Perhaps I don't communicate well. Perhaps the painful situation with your sister doesn't allow you to look at this subject with an open mind. Probably a mix of all 3 along with some other things that I don't know about. But "given up my say" and "taking second place"? - no way.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

"given up my say" and "taking second place"? That just doesn't deserve any response besides this - it seems that you have NO idea what I've been saying all this time. Perhaps you haven't read my posts. Perhaps I don't communicate well. Perhaps the painful situation with your sister doesn't allow you to look at this subject with an open mind. Probably a mix of all 3 along with some other things that I don't know about. But "given up my say" and "taking second place"? - no way.

What hell are you talking about - "painful situation with my sister?" I thihk I hit a nerve here and possibly hit too close to the mark for you.

As for knowing what you have been talking about - I have known perfectly well what you have been talking about - but many people here will agree with me that you are not making much sense. You say you don't take second place - yet you yourself say that your husband has final say in any disagreements. Funny - sounds like second place to me.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Henry Ford did discover this, and look what that contributed to! The most boring assembly-line jobs imagineable, Found On Road Dead (or Fix Or Repair Daily), the Big Three, and bad city planning. But that's a rant for another day.

Boring for factory jobs, but darn efficient! Not that efficiency in itself is a goal, but as far as achieving things, I think it helps to specialize.

I did see your points, and you articulate your beliefs eloquently. I wasn't saying that Biblical submission didn't make sense for you - clearly it does. I was saying that based on my own beliefs it doesn't make sense for me.

OK

If his decisions are final, how is he not the leader?

That's not what I said. I said, "I don't look at it as my husband being a "leader" and I'm not a leader." I just see it as by mutual consent, he has the final say in areas where we disagree. We both lead in areas that we're good in.

However, I see that comprimise is required on his part to fulfill his role, so really, the final decision is not always his own, and therefor there isn't one leader.

Yes.

Except, he has the power (though this would be misuse) to insist on his way all the time. So he is the one in charge.

Well, he can insist, but I can refuse to go along. It's my choice if I go along or not, and I choose to go along unless I think he is asking me to do something wrong.

I've tried to outline my final bit of confusion (I realize we don't want to discuss this forever) internixed with what I understood of your views. I hope this was successful.

Yeah, I think so. Do you feel like your understanding of this concept has changed at all? For example, were you aware of the charge to the husbands to love their wives as Christ loves the church? That's HUGE, IMO.

I agree that abuses or misunderstandings by some doesn't invalidate a concept.

Yeppers.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

Originally Posted by Rian

I just see it as by mutual consent, he has the final say in areas where we disagree. We both lead in areas that we're good in

you might as well hit me with a herring, cos i still dont quite understand
something you agree on, fine
something you disagree, your husband makes final say
please dont take this the wrong way, but does that not imply that he holds the power?
thereby making him an ipso facto leader?

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

That's not what I said. I said, "I don't look at it as my husband being a "leader" and I'm not a leader. " I just see it as by mutual consent, he has the final say in areas where we disagree. We both lead in areas that we're good in.

There you go again - trying to justify the situation. You are equal - but he has final say in disagreements? Come on - I'm sorry but that makes no sense. You do take the backseat in disagreements by your own admission. You may wish to deny it - but if he say final say - then that's the case.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

What hell are you talking about - "painful situation with my sister?"

From this thread:

Originally Posted by jd

I am actually very concerned with my sister - I feel that her husband is into this woman submission thing. My sister assures me he's just joking - but I look out for my sister. I get pissed when she's on the phone and he's there and I hear the baby crying and it doesn't seem like he's helping her at all. She assures me he helps at other times - I just wish I saw some evidence of it.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Rian, are you saying that sometimes you make the final decision and sometimes your husband makes the final decision based on what it concerns?