Christianity Is Based On Astrology

[Deva]

Unlike the forums where I moderate and am accused of censorship, this one does not allow all members to start threads.

 

Is this a snide insinuation that you are not being treated fairly on this site? Moderators, please address this.

 

it is blatantly unfair for people to make accusations from ignorance about my wife and daughter when it is within their power to get the truth on the matter. But bigotry does prefer ignorance as labels are so much more convenient than treating people as individuals.

 

Stop whining. We need not point out all the posts where you say that in Christian marriage the wife should be subservient. That strongly implies that the man is superior. Do you deny that you said it? If so, you are forgetful or some kind of split personality.

 

As far as bigotry goes--you are the one that compared us to the KKK. No one here is a bigot as far as I can see. Certainly not Grandpa Harley. I resent your insinuations and accusations and dislike your mixed up religion.

[The-Captain]

I am a Bible believing Christian and I would be a liar if I said that the Bible does not teach that homosexuality is a sin.

 

Is that what you believe, and if so why would you single this out as right or true? You dont take all parts of the bible as true or god inspired right?

[Kratos]

Deva,

 

I never used the term subservient. Like the term inferior and second class, these are your words and not mine.

 

Doc,

 

I don't just choose certain Bible teachings to focus on. I was asked point blank if I believed that this was true by a member who holds this doctrine as an offense against all Christians. I do not pick and choose by convenience what I hold as true. If I did, I would fit in with the crowd and say that all sex is holy so no one will be offended with me. I have not had anything revealed to me to indicate differently than what the Bible plainly says on this subject, but remain open if God were to teach me differently.

 

John

[Kratos]

Also, I do not care that I cannot start threads or PM. I believe in submitting to the "laws of the house" wherever I go or do not go there. I am just saying that I do not have the power to open threads on domestic order or homosexuality. This is probably best and shows wisdom on the part of the Mods. But, another member made mention of some forums censoring inappropriate posts like it is not done on every forum. That is why there are Mods and should be. I do feel bad when I get an email that I have received a PM and cannot respond. It most likely would not be a complimentary PM, but I hate to have others think I ignored them reaching out for any reason.

 

John

[The-Captain]

Deva,

 

I never used the term subservient. Like the term inferior and second class, these are your words and not mine.

 

Ok lets clear this up, what is your position. Are women equal to men? Do men deserve authority over them in public life or in married life?

 

Doc,

 

I don't just choose certain Bible teachings to focus on. I was asked point blank if I believed that this was true by a member who holds this doctrine as an offense against all Christians. I do not pick and choose by convenience what I hold as true. If I did, I would fit in with the crowd and say that all sex is holy so no one will be offended with me. I have not had anything revealed to me to indicate differently than what the Bible plainly says on this subject, but remain open if God were to teach me differently.

 

John

 

Well I guess all I can do with that is ask again how would God teach you differently? What would indicate to you that the Bible is wrong on this, what form would that indication take. I'm assuming that this has happened for you in the past, so how does that whole thing work for you?

[Deva]

Deva,

 

I never used the term subservient. Like the term inferior and second class, these are your words and not mine.

 

No, you didn't use the words, but you used the example of a chain of command in the military. You implied, if not outright stated, that women are to be of a lower rank in the home than the man. If that is incorrect, then, as Doc says, clear the decks and tell us exactly what you think Christian marriage should be, whether it applies to us or not.

 

Yes, subserviant and inferior were my words. They are the implications of your own statements. If the woman is to obey the man in marriage, why is that? What, other than Paul's writings on the subject, would justify such a position? Or, do you just blindly obey whatever Paul says? Let's do clear this up.

[Antlerman]

I have not had anything revealed to me to indicate differently than what the Bible plainly says on this subject, but remain open if God were to teach me differently.

John, What critirea do you use to judge that it's God teaching you?

[Kuroikaze]

I am a Bible believing Christian and I would be a liar if I said that the Bible does not teach that homosexuality is a sin.

 

Actually this is not actually true, homosexuality is only mentioned in 3 passages in the bible, Leviticus 18, Leviticus 20, and Romans 1. The word used in Leviticus literally means "man bed" and many scholars believe it is a reference to male prostitutes. The passage in Romans is actually delivered in a sarcastic tone, which become obvious if one reads into chapter 2.

 

If a person is not a Christian especially if they do not even think that God exists, why should this bother them?

 

Because it is bigotry? Christians used to think black people were inferior as well, should that not offend me either?

 

This does not make me a "homophobe" as a phobia indicates fear and I do not fear a persons sexual orientation.

 

Do you honestly NOT believe that homosexuals are destroying society, do you not thing that allowing gay marriage would some how have a negative effect on the rest of culture. You keep complaining that we misrepresent your position, then clear up our misunderstanding, as far as I can see, I'm just going by what you have said in previous posts. If you don't show me where I am wrong I am left to assume that I am correct about your views.

 

I believe in all being treated fairly in a secular society, but I also believe that government should not be allowed to dictate to religions what they must believe.

 

I agree, ( I have never even suggested the government should censor you, but I am not the government, and I don't see what is wrong with me, as an individual, pointing out that your beliefs are incorrect.

 

Finally, I have mentioned several times that I would participate on threads on these subjects if anyone is interested and understand if they are not. Unlike the forums where I moderate and am accused of censorship, this one does not allow all members to start threads. That is fine, but it is blatantly unfair for people to make accusations from ignorance about my wife and daughter when it is within their power to get the truth on the matter. But bigotry does prefer ignorance as labels are so much more convenient than treating people as individuals.

 

Again, I'll point out that it takes some serious gall to call us the bigots, considering all you have said since you came here. We can only get the truth if you are willing to tell us what you think, it does no good to tell us "that isn't what I believe" and leave it at that. Are we supposed to just keep guessing until we get it right?

 

And can you really say that if I showed up on one of your forums you wouldn't ban me? I used to frequent christian forums quite often to debate and in almost every case I was banned in fewer than 10 posts, by comparison our forum is much more open.

[Neon Genesis]

I am a Bible believing Christian and I would be a liar if I said that the Bible does not teach that homosexuality is a sin. If a person is not a Christian especially if they do not even think that God exists, why should this bother them? This does not make me a "homophobe" as a phobia indicates fear and I do not fear a persons sexual orientation. I believe in all being treated fairly in a secular society, but I also believe that government should not be allowed to dictate to religions what they must believe.

 

 

 

John

But you said in the Colesseum thread that you believed that all religion was made up, but now you're saying that you are a "bible-believing Christian." Which one are you? In case it hasn't occurred to you, the bible is a product of RELIGION. It is a collection of stories that were compiled together by a RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION. RELIGION dictated what went in the bible and what didn't make it in the official canon. Whether you like it or not, the bible is heavily influenced by RELIGION, therefore you cannot be both a "bible believer Christian" and believe that "RELIGION is made up" at the same time, unless you are admitting to us that you lied when you said you thought religion is made up. Or maybe you somehow think you're superior to religion? And in case you haven't noticed, you've pretty much been starting your own religion here. Furthermore, we don't believe in your bible, so when you say that you just believe what the bible says about homosexuality being wrong, to us that is the same as you saying you think homosexuals are wrong. And unless you have some evidence besides your out-dated fairytale that homosexuality is somehow wrong compared to heterosexuality, to us you are nothing more than a homophobe. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." So, where's your extraordinary evidence that proves your extraordinary claim that homosexuality is somehow magically more evil than heterosexuality? And as I said before, if there is a right and wrong way to read the bible, why can't Christians agree on what the bible says? Why is this such a difficult question for you to answer?

[Kratos]

I will try to be brief which almost guarentees that there will be questions after I post, but I know as a reader of forums, I prefer back and forth interaction to long filibuster. These are my beliefs only so don't bother with the whole "why is your way right" thing because these are my beliefs today. Our relationship with God is meant to be dynamic and not static so I have no problem changing my views as I go.

 

First off, God is neither male or female. Perhaps it would be more correct to say both male and female. In the beginning, Adam was made in the image of God with both male and female traits, but God separated them by taking the female out of Adam. So, to say that man is superior or woman is inferior is nonsense. They are two halfs of the same person. I am no more complete without my wife than my wife is complete without me. When I get in touch with my feminine side, I reach out and touch my wife. She is my completion and I am hers.

 

Now to the matter at hand. The story of the fall teaches that man followed the serpent or carnal mind and decided to exalt himself above God. They no longer wanted to be subject to God, but wanted to be as God themselves. Thus, mankind's soul was exalted over his spirit and the world we see with all of the wars and sickness and hatred are the results of what man has created without God. The first Adam became a living soul through his choice to be who he wanted to be and not what God has created him to be.

 

Jesus came to show us the way back. As the last Adam, He became a life-giving spirit by denying what He wanted and submitting to what God had chosen for Him. Sorry for the foundation, but it is needed to answer the question.

 

Rom. 13 tells us how to be Christians or Christ-like. It says let every soul be subject to the higher powers. In other words, we are challenged to not be like the first Adam by doing what we think is right, but to deny ourselves to be who God chose for us to be. It is like I spoke of Zen training methods as a way or means of enlightenment. If you focus on the tea ceremony or the flower arranging, you miss the point. It is not about the way we are trained to deny ourselves and live unto God, but that we do.

 

God has ordained as the one who sets the ordinances that a husband is over the wife in the Lord within a godly marriage. Not because one is better than or less than the other. But because both do not want to submit to God and what He has chosen. The truth is that there are way more husbands that do not want to lead and be the head of their home than there are women that do not want to be submitted to her husband.

 

I really believe that if God arbitrarily ordained that a wife is the head of her husband and a husband must submit to his wife, the wives would not want to be in authority and the husbands would not want to submit. It is about the rebellion in the heart of mankind to do the opposite of what God wants and has ordained.

 

My wife is the other half of me. I would be a fool to make any decision without her input because I would be operating without half of what God created mankind to be. My wife and I choose to submit in our souls to what God has chosen. This is between us and God. We seek Him and His Kingdom. Like I said before, if another person does not want to do it God's way in their marriage, that is their right. I just hate it when people assume that God's way as we see it is not valid, too. Submittion is in the heart of the one under and never can be demanded by the one over. God does not demand that I be the head of my home, He just reveals in His Word that this is His will and I submit to Him in it. I do not demand or even ask my wife to submit to me as her head in the marriage. She chooses to as her submittion to God. She was this way long before I met her and would be this way if she had never met me. It is totally between her and God. My daughter does not believe this part of the Word, and although single still, I doubt she will choose to have this kind of relationship and this is between her and God. I never treated my daughter and my son any differently because headship strictly deals with the order between a husband and a wife. It is not about men and women or sons and daughters, but only about husbands and wives.

 

John

[Dhampir]

First off, God is neither male or female. Perhaps it would be more correct to say both male and female. In the beginning, Adam was made in the image of God with both male and female traits, but God separated them by taking the female out of Adam. So, to say that man is superior or woman is inferior is nonsense. They are two halfs of the same person. I am no more complete without my wife than my wife is complete without me. When I get in touch with my feminine side, I reach out and touch my wife. She is my completion and I am hers.

Where does it say that? My bible, and every other bible I've ever read says he took a rib, not a vagina, cervix, uterus, and fallopian tubes, ovaries, not to mention the propensity by and large to grow breasts, and the peculiar functionality of the brain, as well as the nearly 180 degree visual acuity of a female as opposed to the male's 140. Unless the Hebrew word that was translated as "rib" was actually supposed to be:

 

vagina, cervix, uterus, and fallopian tubes, ovaries, the propensity by and large to grow breasts, and the peculiar functionality of the brain, as well as the nearly 180 degree visual acuity of a female as opposed to the male's 140.

[The-Captain]

So in short "yes", but its not your rules its God's?

[Kratos]

Actually as I understand it, the Hebrew means 'a side'. God removed one side of Adam and presented this other side or other half back to him. It is not good that a man should be alone and when a man finds a wife, he finds a good thing. In my life this has proven to be true.

 

John

[Grandpa Harley]

BTW, the 'not being able to start threads' is a bandwidth thing applied to people in the Fundamentalist group, I seem to recall... it stops them shit bombing forums with "Jesus loves you, and will send you to hell"... TBH I've not seen any evidence of anything less than that in you...

 

oh, and the word is submission, not submittion, unless Webster played hob with that too...

 

Otherwise, my esteemed colleagues are doing a fine job of having you damn yourself out of your own mealy mouth... "God said it, I believe it, no argument" really isn't supporting your position... effectively, you're just demonstrating that you're a tokenist bigot rather than an out and out one... 'Dun't git me wraung, bwah, sum o mai best friends iz fagguts n feminists....' nice.

[Grandpa Harley]

I have not had anything revealed to me to indicate differently than what the Bible plainly says on this subject, but remain open if God were to teach me differently.

John, What critirea do you use to judge that it's God teaching you?

 

I'd like to see this answered... how do you Cherry pick? Fasting and prayer? Flagellation? Reading the entrails of a goat?

[Deva]

First off, God is neither male or female. Perhaps it would be more correct to say both male and female. In the beginning, Adam was made in the image of God with both male and female traits, but God separated them by taking the female out of Adam. So, to say that man is superior or woman is inferior is nonsense. They are two halfs of the same person. I am no more complete without my wife than my wife is complete without me. When I get in touch with my feminine side, I reach out and touch my wife. She is my completion and I am hers.

 

Setting aside for a moment your attitude of God said it in the Bible therefore it must be true.....this paragraph brings a question to mind. If men and women are "two halfs of the same person" and later on you say "my wife is the other half of me" what is your attitude toward single people? Are they incomplete as human beings?

[Kuroikaze]

The truth is that there are way more husbands that do not want to lead and be the head of their home than there are women that do not want to be submitted to her husband.

 

I'd be interested in any statistics you have to back up this claim, otherwise it is just your unfounded opinion. I'll point out once again, for someone who claims to respect reason and logic, you have a big habit of making unsubstantiated claims.

 

 

I really believe that if God arbitrarily ordained that a wife is the head of her husband and a husband must submit to his wife, the wives would not want to be in authority and the husbands would not want to submit. It is about the rebellion in the heart of mankind to do the opposite of what God wants and has ordained.

 

Pardon my language but I think this is bull shit. I would not jump off a cliff just because I thought god was telling me not to. I just don't put much stock in what the bible says one way or the other. I use reason to decide right from wrong, and I tire of you treating us as some rebellious children who just won't listen to god.

I could care less what God says one way or the other, what matters is the results of ones actions, not the words of some ignorant shepherds from two thousand years ago.

 

My wife is the other half of me. I would be a fool to make any decision without her input because I would be operating without half of what God created mankind to be. My wife and I choose to submit in our souls to what God has chosen. This is between us and God. We seek Him and His Kingdom. Like I said before, if another person does not want to do it God's way in their marriage, that is their right. I just hate it when people assume that God's way as we see it is not valid, too. Submittion is in the heart of the one under and never can be demanded by the one over. God does not demand that I be the head of my home, He just reveals in His Word that this is His will and I submit to Him in it. I do not demand or even ask my wife to submit to me as her head in the marriage. She chooses to as her submittion to God. She was this way long before I met her and would be this way if she had never met me. It is totally between her and God. My daughter does not believe this part of the Word, and although single still, I doubt she will choose to have this kind of relationship and this is between her and God. I never treated my daughter and my son any differently because headship strictly deals with the order between a husband and a wife. It is not about men and women or sons and daughters, but only about husbands and wives.

 

I'll be honest, I don't really think you answered the question, at least not in the way I mean. Ok, you say that a wife is supposed to submit to her husband, but you don't really explain what that entails.

 

On one extreme, submission would mean I have the right to beat the hell out of her if she doesn't do what I want, and on another extreme submission is only meant metaphorically and means practically nothing.

 

So what exactly do you mean when you say, she submits to you. Do you pick out her clothes? Does she do all the house work and cooking while you sit on your ass and do nothing? What exactly does this sort of relationship look like on a day to day basis, is the question I am asking.

[Neon Genesis]

I will try to be brief which almost guarentees that there will be questions after I post, but I know as a reader of forums, I prefer back and forth interaction to long filibuster. These are my beliefs only so don't bother with the whole "why is your way right" thing because these are my beliefs today.

I'd still like to have an answer to this question sometime before the next millennium.

 

First off, God is neither male or female. Perhaps it would be more correct to say both male and female

Where is your proof of this? "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." So, where is your extraordinary evidence to support your extraordinary claim that God is a hermaphrodite? And no, you can't use the bible to prove that God is a hermaphrodite. I want psychical evidence that God is a hermaphrodite, so where is it?

 

In the beginning, Adam was made in the image of God with both male and female traits, but God separated them by taking the female out of Adam.

How do you know what Adam was like when he was made? Where you there when it happened? And I'd like to see some proof that Adam even existed.

 

So, to say that man is superior or woman is inferior is nonsense. They are two halfs of the same person. I am no more complete without my wife than my wife is complete without me. When I get in touch with my feminine side, I reach out and touch my wife. She is my completion and I am hers.

So, what if your wife was a tomboy? Who would you reach out to for your feminine side? Why must women be feminine and men be masculine? That sounds like a sexist stereotype to me.

[Neon Genesis]

Now to the matter at hand. The story of the fall teaches that man followed the serpent or carnal mind and decided to exalt himself above God. They no longer wanted to be subject to God, but wanted to be as God themselves. Thus, mankind's soul was exalted over his spirit and the world we see with all of the wars and sickness and hatred are the results of what man has created without God.

That's not what Isaiah 45:7 says, "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." So, according to the bible you claim to believe in, GOD CREATED EVIL, so it is God's fault and God's fault alone that wars and sickness and hatred exist in the universe.

 

Jesus came to show us the way back. As the last Adam, He became a life-giving spirit by denying what He wanted and submitting to what God had chosen for Him. Sorry for the foundation, but it is needed to answer the question.

Why did God need a human sacrifice to appease his wrath? Why couldn't God just forgive Adam and Eve for their sins since ultimately that's what God demands of us? And I fail to see how Jesus' human sacrifice fixed anything since there is still wars and sickness and hatred in the world.

 

Rom. 13 tells us how to be Christians or Christ-like. It says let every soul be subject to the higher powers. In other words, we are challenged to not be like the first Adam by doing what we think is right, but to deny ourselves to be who God chose for us to be.

So, was it a sin for America to rebel against the UK? And are you saying that you think you are a higher power than your wife?

 

God has ordained as the one who sets the ordinances that a husband is over the wife in the Lord within a godly marriage. Not because one is better than or less than the other. But because both do not want to submit to God and what He has chosen.

So, in other words, it's humanity's fault that God is sexist? And how does it make this any less sexist again?

 

I really believe that if God arbitrarily ordained that a wife is the head of her husband and a husband must submit to his wife, the wives would not want to be in authority and the husbands would not want to submit. It is about the rebellion in the heart of mankind to do the opposite of what God wants and has ordained

Wait, just above you said that there are more men who want to submit than there are women, now you're saying that it's the opposite? Please stop with the dishonest flip-flopping already. And how do you know what every woman and what every man wants, anyway? Have you met every single man and woman on Earth and asked them what they want in their marriage life? Unless you have met every man and woman and asked them all what they want in their marriage life, you have no right to make assumptions about what men and women want in their marriage. And are you saying that God demands that women SHOULD WANT TO BE SUBMISSIVE TO YOU? How is this not sexist again?

[Neon Genesis]

My wife is the other half of me. I would be a fool to make any decision without her input because I would be operating without half of what God created mankind to be.

Why is it not sexist for only men to make decisions and for the wife to be regulated to only offering advice? What if a man couldn't make a decision but the wife knew what the right decision was? Would she still only be forced to offer advice and not make decisions? What if a man wanted the wife to be the one to make decisions? If a female became president of the U.S., should she be forced to only offer advice and her husband be the one to make the decision?

 

My wife and I choose to submit in our souls to what God has chosen. This is between us and God. We seek Him and His Kingdom. Like I said before, if another person does not want to do it God's way in their marriage, that is their right.

If it's between you and God, why are you here preaching to us that this is the right way for men and women to behave in marriage?

 

I just hate it when people assume that God's way as we see it is not valid, too.

Funny, you seem to be the only one who insists that your way is the only right way.

 

Submittion is in the heart of the one under and never can be demanded by the one over.

So, why did God demand Adam and Eve to submit to him? Why did God care if Adam and Eve became like gods if he didn't demand their submission? I thought you said that this was all Adam and Eve's fault for failing to listen to God's demands and submitting themselves to him yet now you're saying God didn't want them to submit after all? You make no sense.

 

God does not demand that I be the head of my home, He just reveals in His Word that this is His will and I submit to Him in it. I do not demand or even ask my wife to submit to me as her head in the marriage. She chooses to as her submittion to God. She was this way long before I met her and would be this way if she had never met me.

So, you're saying women should want to bow down and worship you? Isn't that rather conceited of you?

 

It is totally between her and God.

Then, please kindly leave it between her and God, and stop trying to convert us to your ways already.

 

My daughter does not believe this part of the Word, and although single still, I doubt she will choose to have this kind of relationship and this is between her and God. I never treated my daughter and my son any differently because headship strictly deals with the order between a husband and a wife. It is not about men and women or sons and daughters, but only about husbands and wives

So, it's ok for your daughter to disobey men if she's not married but she can't disobey men if she is married? How is this not sexist?

 

It is not good that a man should be alone and when a man finds a wife, he finds a good thing. In my life this has proven to be true.

That's not what Paul says in 1 Cor 7:25-33. "Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I give judgment as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy. I suppose therefore that this is good because of the present distress—that it is good for a man to remain as he is: Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed. Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife. But even if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Nevertheless such will have trouble in the flesh, but I would spare you.

But this I say, brethren, the time is short, so that from now on even those who have wives should be as though they had none, those who weep as though they did not weep, those who rejoice as though they did not rejoice, those who buy as though they did not possess, and those who use this world as not misusing it. For the form of this world is passing away.

But I want you to be without care. He who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord—how he may please the Lord. But he who is married cares about the things of the world—how he may please his wife." Here Paul says that it's better to not be married and not to seek a wife because those who are not married cares for the things of the Lord, and nowhere does Paul say it is good for a man to not be alone. And I thought you worshiped Paul yet now you're picking and choosing what verses of Paul you want to follow and which ones you want to ignore?

[The-Captain]

So, to say that man is superior or woman is inferior is nonsense. They are two halfs of the same person. I am no more complete without my wife than my wife is complete without me. When I get in touch with my feminine side, I reach out and touch my wife. She is my completion and I am hers.

So, what if your wife was a tomboy? Who would you reach out to for your feminine side? Why must women be feminine and men be masculine? That sounds like a sexist stereotype to me.

 

For that matter masculinity/femininity are by and large cultural. Not some god-ordained set of traits, the concrete differences are not as many as some would think.

[Kratos]

There are too many questions for me to get to them all now, but I will start here.

 

What makes me think that there are more Christian men that do not want to be the head of their home than there are women that do not want to be in submission? I worked in ministry for 20 years and part of that was to help those who wanted to do it God's way to do so. Once a couple accepts the Bible as their standard, we found that more of the men had a problem stepping up to be responsible and lead than we saw women not willing to submit. In fact, the most common situation was women who wished that there husband would take it and they unwillingly lead the home because if she did not, it would not get done. This put the wife in more of a mother role to her husband instead of that of a wife.

 

I have well over 20 years of a happy marriage as proof that this system does work. I wonder how many years of peaceful marriage any here can submit as proof that their way is better?

 

As far as day to day working, just look at the way families for the most part worked until the last 50-100 years. It was not a bit uncommon in the WWII generation to see 50+ years of marriage. Compare that to today. The balancing principle that makes it work we call "responsible to = responsible for". My children are responsible to submit to my rules in the house and I am responsible to provide for them. My wife is free to work outside the home and make her own way if she wanted to, but since she is responsible to me, I am responsible for her so she does not have to. I go out into the world and "bring home the bacon" and she remains and keeps the home fires burning for us all. Call it old fashioned, but it works great for us. It is far better than we see so often where both go out and work and then fight over whether each is doing their share at home. Plus, we never have a problem where a move is necessary for the success of one career and the other must either move also or try to maintain a long distance marriage relationship.

 

Those who think being responsible for the decisions is a power trip just demonstrate that they have never been in this position. I have been both an employer and an employee. Employee is easier by far. As an employer, I would bear the responsibility to make the right decisions so there was a living to be made by all. As an employer, all I had to do was do what portion of the work that was delegated to me. This is not a good analogy for husbands and wives because my wife is certainly not my employee, but the principle remains the same. There is a heavy weight to be the one who is responsible to see to it that we make it as a family. That is why most men do not want it.

 

You cannot do it half God's way and half man's way and expect good results. I see this where a man expects his wife to bring in her share of the finances and to take care of the home. This is blantantly unfair. I may be the one responsible to God to lead, but I treat my wife like queen none the less. The Bible says that if a man does not provide for those of his household, he is worse than an infidel or unbeliever. This is the part of the headship principle that is so often overlooked by those who oppose this way of ordering a marriage.

 

John

[The-Captain]

As far as day to day working, just look at the way families for the most part worked until the last 50-100 years. It was not a bit uncommon in the WWII generation to see 50+ years of marriage. Compare that to today. The balancing principle that makes it work we call "responsible to = responsible for".

 

Well a large reason for that is that women weren't always able to be self sufficient. Women didn't have as much of an option outside of the marriage, they would put up with more b/c they were placed in a dependent position. Not that it worked better.

 

 

You cannot do it half God's way and half man's way and expect good results. I see this where a man expects his wife to bring in her share of the finances and to take care of the home. This is blantantly unfair. I may be the one responsible to God to lead, but I treat my wife like queen none the less. The Bible says that if a man does not provide for those of his household, he is worse than an infidel or unbeliever. This is the part of the headship principle that is so often overlooked by those who oppose this way of ordering a marriage.

 

Again we come to that its not your rules but God's. I know you have a lot of questions to answer, but would you please answer me and Antlerman concerning the nature of the direction you get.

[Kratos]

By the way, God is a spirit. He does not have a body as we have so He was not a hermaphrodite. He just has both what is usually considered masculine and feminine traits. He is both a ruler and a comforter.

 

This is speculation, but I doubt Adam had physical traits as male or female either. God removed the female DNA from Adam and made Eve with it. Again, just how I see it. Not expected to be proof to anyone else.

 

Remember, I was asked out of the blue what my views on headship and husband and wife relationships should be according to the Bible. I am only answering these questions for understanding of each other and not to try to get others to see or do it my way.

 

John

[Skankboy]

By the way, God is a spirit. He does not have a body

 

Then what's spirit? In my mind spirit = imaginary...