Sodom and Gomorrah

[muichimotsu]

Do you know a real life example where a woman constantly look down on her husband as a failure, yet she is really having a happy marriage?

I have seen plenty of woman in very happy marriages who poke fun at their husbands for being fat, for being messy and for being careless. About how they have to keep encouraging him to lose weight, to clean up and to pay attention to details. However they were just poking fun at him and laughing about it. These women are not actually disappointed in their husbands as a person. In fact they actually look up to their husband.

When a woman's remarks against her husband becomes very mean-spirited, you know that marriage is in deep trouble. Divorce comes from the heart. Cheating comes from the heart. When the heart is filled with disappointment, it is only a matter of time before real action happens.

3) My point on submission stands. There is no such thing as a equal marriage. One person will always have to take the lead, either the husband or the wife. You might not realize it. But your mother look up to your father. And your father respect her for it.

I have yet to see a happy marriage where the wife constantly look down on her husband as a failure. He is never good for anything. When he does something good, that is expected or still not good enough. When he does one thing bad, he is a terrible husband and the wife generalize him in the worst light possible in all things.

The wife has every right to be disappointed in particular things. The husband promised to lose weight but didn't, etc. But if the wife starts being disappointed in her husband as a person (e.g. He, everything about him, is such a disappointment!!!), then that marriage will not be happy. She gains nothing by looking down on him.

No one's going that route except you. People who have love can have spats and resolve them in the end, same as friends can.

This isn't an either/or situation. The woman and man can both look up to each other, thus it is love, it's a mutual dynamic. It's not absolutely equal, but that's the legalistic nonsense you rail against in other contexts applied to this, as if I ever claimed such a thing existed. Not sure where you reach the illogical conclusion that a woman cannot respect a man if she isn't submissive to him. Respect is not based on submission, it's based on comprehension of oneself and others as fallible

People can take the lead in different situations. Both my parents are capable in that regard, one is not lesser because they have a few traits the other does not. They respect and admire each other for flaws and virtues each other has, that's how love works. Perfect love doesn't exist, because it cannot come from someone who doesn't want, nor can it be based in a one sided demand in any sense (arranged marriages or the like, where there isn't love, there isn't a dynamic of respect and adoration between the people involved), nor can it be based on a complete sense of equity, rather than give and take on both sides

My mom can take the lead at times and so can my dad; again, this isn't black and white, this is a relationship that's lasted for 30 years and counting, it's not perfect, but it strives towards greatness with exemplars in their lives: my paternal grandparents celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary a few years before my grandfather passed away, that's a union of marriage that people can look up to, can strive to emulate, myself included

 

[muichimotsu]

How sad for you....but you are still young and haven't found your life partner yet. I admired and looked up to my husband and he admired and looked up to me. We brought different talents and knowledge into the partnership of marriage. We were equal as people but someone has to make the decisions in the end...especially when you don't agree. I chose to submit to his leadership as the head of our family but that doesn't mean he didn't put a lot of decision making power in my hands and when he did that, he never asked to micromanage those decisions. The decision was simply to delegate it to me and trust that he picked his wife wisely.

Shared decisions are not lesser because you make a compromise or pool your ideas into it. If anything, it's far better than unilateral decisions that create resentment and a dynamic of dominance rather than respect.

Delegation is not always relevant in terms of a relationship between 2 people: it can apply, but that doesn't mean that one side is the weaker to the stronger, but that they have different capacities, they're different people, but 2 halves of a whole that works better together

 

[muichimotsu]

Alright let's define the terms. How would you define looking up to? Who do you look up to in your life? Why?

What you're focusing on is not that complex an idea except when you have a reductionistic concept that only relies on the bible instead of human reason that can, arguably, complement the bible rather than automatically be a contrary position without any possibility of benefit.

I look up to people, I can love people, but in terms of romance, I haven't found that person yet, though I think I've come close sometimes. Failure is the way we learn, my first girlfriend is happily married now after years of failed relationships where she suffered greatly, but she became stronger because of them and found someone she truly loves and complements greatly.

Respect is not the same as love, though they can overlap. Loving someone romantically is not the same as platonic love, that of friends. I love my best friend like the sister I never had and she loves me in a comparable fashion. I love my parents for raising me to the best of their ability and my family members for trying their best to not ostracize me in spite of being a black sheep since my teens, if not my college years as an outed apostate. But love is not being submissive, that's passivity and being a doormat. Love is dynamic, it's mutual, it's between both parties.

Respect is not as dynamic, though ideally it should have a similar sense of introspection on your part with those you respect. Could they be wrong in some ways, for instance? In which case, you don't lose respect, you merely disagree on some points

 

[muichimotsu]

1) I am not against women working at a job. I don't think I indicated as such.

2) I am not against women speaking their opinion to men or women must always keep silence. In fact it was women who found the empty tomb and tell the men about it. If women must never speak to men, then the women were sinning for telling the men about the empty tomb.

Another obvious example would be a Christian woman speaking to a non-Christian man. Or a 40 year old Christian woman speaking to a brand new 3 days old Christian man. If a woman must never speak to a man, then she cannot even spread the gospel to him or teach him anything.

Some people can be very legalistic when it comes to verse 34, since it mention "churches". So they assume all churches in everything. However when the women ran to tell the Apostles about the empty tomb, was that not the church? And when later Jesus directly told Mary Magdalene to tell (or teach) the Apostles about the resurrection (John 20:17-18), was that not the church? I think that was the church, and Jesus outright told a woman to teach men about Jesus' resurrection in church. So it cannot mean that.

Here is my take: What the bible said in (1 Corinthians 14:34-35) was actually that women should keep silence during church service when the pastor was speaking a sermon. And they should ask their questions after the sermon. As you know, today even men keep silence during sermons. So there really isn't an bias. This is just basic respect toward the pastor when he was speaking. If not the sermon will never be finished and the pastor will keep on having to defend himself.

As we read in 1 Corinthians 5, the Corinthian Church was getting way too lenient with sin. If someone proudly sleeps with his father's wife and boast about it in church, kick him out! Come on even non-believers know this is wrong! The church should have grace and mercy, but not to the point where a so-called believer can be so proud of their sins.

In 1 Corinthians 14 we read that the church was too lenient with chaos and disorder in church. Once again grace and mercy have to be applied with common sense. This is the context. We don't know exactly the situation, but whatever the Corinthian women were doing they were disrupting church service. That's why Paul tell them to stop. If today you see anyone (men or women) obviously disrupting church service, please stop them. This should be common sense.

(This reminds me of Pentecostal churches, where anyone can stand up and start dancing, shaking and screaming during a sermon. And these are not only accepted, but encouraged by these churches. These chaos and disorder shouldn't be allowed. That's why I disagree with the Pentecostal churches.)

You conveniently glossed over the major issue I have: why should a woman not be able to be a minister or the like, though that varies by Protestant denominations anyway. The worst and repressive kinds of Xianity are splintered schisms that usually die out or only maintain existence by indoctrination, cult tactics and general numbers by excessive breeding. Ideally, one could hope that the general mainstream would realize that women are not incapable of having logical and reasoned out arguments and comprehension of the bible, same as men. Major problem is the bible's general lack of strong female role models, the rare ones slipping through the cracks compared to the scapegoats (Eve, the woman caught in adultery, etc, many not even getting a name in the narrative)

 

[Goodbook]

I do think if you have a husband and he's working that as a wife a little appreciation for the hard work he does to support the family goes a long way.

Men can do a lot of things women aren't naturally equipped with the strength or stamina to do.

 

[CCHIPSS]

I'm more curious about how you were defining it, because I was adopting your usage for the sake of communication, and it's possible I misunderstood. My bone to pick is that you only mentioned it going one way in a marriage. You only mentioned him respecting her for looking up to him.

If I looked up to my husband, but he didn't have any reason to look up to me, then that would be an uneven relationship. He should have found someone who had something to offer him in that regard.

1) I define look up as having a "role model to follow".

I want to make it very clear that we are only talking about the context of a whole person, the whole husband and the whole wife. I am not talking about one particular thing that he/she can do or couldn't do.

For example let's say a woman is a doctor and a man is a lawyer. And let's say Billy is very sick. Please send Billy over to the female doctor, instead of the male lawyer. A male lawyer might be very good at being a lawyer, but he won't be able to help Billy here.

The same is true even in a home. Let's say the wife knows how to cook and the husband know how to teach their sons hockey. In dinner time, please get the wife to cook. The husband should "look up" to the wife in terms of cooking. In fact he should probably learn to cook from her (a cooking role model). And in kids' play time, please get the husband to teach the kids how to play hockey. The wife would have no clue.

It should be obvious that the man have things he can and cannot do. And the wife also have things that she can and cannot do. These are not what I was referring to when I said "look up to". These are just strengths and weaknesses.

Here is what I am indeed saying: Does the wife look up to her husband as a whole man?

A husband might be a awesome lawyer and awesome with the kids. He has these strengths. But the wife can totally look down on him. He couldn't do any first aids. He can't cook to save his life. etc. If she wants to look at all the flaws, she can find every single reason to hate her husband. She can easily be disappointed and look down her husband.

I want to make it clear that this is not about focusing on the strengths and ignoring the weaknesses. It is much more than that. It is actually taking great joy in all of her husband's strengths and forgiving every single one of his weaknesses and mistakes.

In the husband's strength, she stands in awe of the power that God has given her husband. All praises be to God! She would learn to be like him in his strengths, especially in his walk with Jesus.

In the husband's weakness, she remembers how Jesus has also forgiven her. All praises be to God! She would learn to be patient and wait upon the Lord.

Long story short: When her husband is strong, look up to him in awe of the power God has given him. When her husband is weak, look up to Jesus' grace and mercy in awe.

Do you see the magic here? She becomes a better person in both the husband's strength and weaknesses! That's how she can leave the ultimate decisions of the home to her husband. This is how she can submit to her husband.

Or, she can choose not to. She can nag against her husband all day. She can gossip against her husband. Let the whole world know how terrible a husband he is. Sure go right ahead. Let's see her getting a happy marriage out of all of this.

2) You said that this is one sided. What should the husband be doing? Sorry, wrong mentality.

What you are saying is that your love is conditional. You are saying wives should only do what God commended them to do, if and only if the husband is a good husband. Isn't this where you are greatly mistaken?

If you truly know Jesus, then being fair would be the last thing on your mind. Why? Because the fair thing would be for sinners to all face the judgement of God. Let's argue against God for a second. How is it fair to Jesus, for the sinless Jesus to die for all of mankind? What did Jesus gain from all of this? Nothing!

Unless you start seeing that Christ's love is unconditional, you will not see why he asked Christians to love unconditionally. And if you understand that we need to love unconditionally, you do not need to worry about what your husband must be doing. You trust and obey God, and let God handle things on your husband's end.

If your husband is abusive, sent him to the police. If he doesn't repent, tell the church to excommunicate him. Why are you debating against the word of God just because people sin? Of course people will sin. But let us not use sin to justify sin, or justify not obeying the word of God.

 

[muichimotsu]

And that matters in the long run, why? The same can be said for women in terms of particular capacities, yet that doesn't make women superior to men overall. They both have advantages and disadvantages.

 

[blackribbon]

And that matters in the long run, why? The same can be said for women in terms of particular capacities, yet that doesn't make women superior to men overall. They both have advantages and disadvantages.

God created both man and woman in HIS image. Neither sex is inherently better than the other...and neither is inherently worse than the other. I hate that we raise our kids with so many "boys against girls" competitions...even at church, "who is going to bring more mission offering money, the boys or the girls?"

 

[CCHIPSS]

And that matters in the long run, why? The same can be said for women in terms of particular capacities, yet that doesn't make women superior to men overall. They both have advantages and disadvantages.

You are greatly mistaken when you mention the words "advantages" and "disadvantages". I am trying to tell you that doesn't even matter.

Why? Because we humans are too dumb to even know what is good for us. What we considered "advantages" might totally ruin us at the end.

I tell you this shocking fact: Only those that doesn't have God need advantages and disadvantages.

Because their faith is on these petty advantages and disadvantages, not God.

A drunk woman literally offers you free sex. Do you "take advantage" or remember God? Do you obey the "advantage", or do you obey God?

Ok go ahead and take the advantage. It pleases you for one night. Then a few years later you meet your future wife. And you have to tell your wife how you took advantage of a drunken woman. And it forever stain your marriage, like a knife to her heart. Or you just never tell her. Or you lie to her. Great, you have some deep secret that you must hide from the woman you love the most, for the rest of her life. All for 1 night of pleasure? Jesus what were you thinking?

The world keep trying to tell us that sex has zero consequences, but we all know it does.

 

[muichimotsu]

You are greatly mistaken when you mention the words "advantages" and "disadvantages". I am trying to tell you that doesn't even matter.

Why? Because we humans are too dumb to even know what is good for us. What we considered "advantages" might totally ruin us at the end.

I tell you this shocking fact: Only those that doesn't have God need advantages and disadvantages.

Because their faith is on these petty advantages and disadvantages, not God.

A drunk woman literally offers you free sex. Do you "take advantage" or remember God? Do you obey the "advantage", or do you obey God?

Ok go ahead and take the advantage. It pleases you for one night. Then a few years later you meet your future wife. And you have to tell your wife how you took advantage of a drunken woman. And it forever stain your marriage, like a knife to her heart. Or you just never tell her. Or you lie to her. Great, you have some deep secret that you must hide from the woman you love the most, for the rest of her life. All for 1 night of pleasure? Jesus what were you thinking?

The world keep trying to tell us that sex has zero consequences, but we all know it does.

You're reducing advantage and disadvantage to a strawman of what you think non Christians believe. I'm talking about aptitudes that people have, not some opportunity we can take in a selfish manner.

I don't take advantage, but that doesn't follow to me obeying your god except in an incidental fashion. I don't regard sex in such a flippant way, but that doesn't mean I have to regard it as a sacred act or invoking anything supernatural.

Sex has consequences, no one in this topic said that. More strawmen don't make a sufficient argument except for the imaginary enemies you tear down.

I don't pretend to have absolute knowledge about what's good or bad for me, that'd be your perspective where you obey a supposedly inspired text and seemingly don't question it because you have some divine aid to consult in terms of confusion. We learn from our mistakes, we observe the world and formulate a general model of behavioral norms and adjust it as new evidence and arguments are presented.

When you create this "us versus them" mentality, you only serve to create more of a wedge between Christians and non Christians, as if there can be no common ground, which is demonstrably untrue.

 

[CCHIPSS]

No one's going that route except you. People who have love can have spats and resolve them in the end, same as friends can.

This isn't an either/or situation. The woman and man can both look up to each other, thus it is love, it's a mutual dynamic. It's not absolutely equal, but that's the legalistic nonsense you rail against in other contexts applied to this, as if I ever claimed such a thing existed. Not sure where you reach the illogical conclusion that a woman cannot respect a man if she isn't submissive to him. Respect is not based on submission, it's based on comprehension of oneself and others as fallible

People can take the lead in different situations. Both my parents are capable in that regard, one is not lesser because they have a few traits the other does not. They respect and admire each other for flaws and virtues each other has, that's how love works. Perfect love doesn't exist, because it cannot come from someone who doesn't want, nor can it be based in a one sided demand in any sense (arranged marriages or the like, where there isn't love, there isn't a dynamic of respect and adoration between the people involved), nor can it be based on a complete sense of equity, rather than give and take on both sides

My mom can take the lead at times and so can my dad; again, this isn't black and white, this is a relationship that's lasted for 30 years and counting, it's not perfect, but it strives towards greatness with exemplars in their lives: my paternal grandparents celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary a few years before my grandfather passed away, that's a union of marriage that people can look up to, can strive to emulate, myself included

As if we are only talking about arguments and disagreements.

I know a wife that trash talk her husband every time I talk to her. He is useless because of this. He is useless because of that. Even their daughter joins in to trash talk the husband.

Jesus, that was a terrible marriage.

 

[Goodbook]

Also women do lots of things men aren't equipped to do! If we were both the exact same, men and women wouldn't need each other or find each other attractive.

and funny to observe in same-sex so called marriages, one has the role of husband and one has the role of wife. Its just God designed men to be husbands and women to be wives which is what actually works.

if its not working there needs to be a change in attitudes. I have yet to see a marriage where the man is truly happy to be the wife and the woman the husband. It becomes like the Jezebel-Ahab union. destructive and unhealthy.

 

[muichimotsu]

Marriages should not be rushed into, it should be done in a way that assesses compatibility in a broader sense.

Some of my good friends were recently married and another couple I consider good friends is engaged. They're both cohabitating, which is still considered somewhat taboo by the older generation. Is it a bad thing for a couple contemplating marriage to live together, especially if the goal is to understand how they function in a shared environment and the like?

Seems to me the issue you see is not just in terms of marriage, but any relationship period, because there shouldn't be this latent negativity. I butt heads sometimes with one of my friends, but it's not as if we don't have things in common and can be respectful in terms of differences, patch things up, etc.

 

[muichimotsu]

Also women do lots of things men aren't equipped to do! If we were both the exact same, men and women wouldn't need each other or find each other attractive.

and funny to observe in same-sex so called marriages, one has the role of husband and one has the role of wife. Its just God designed men to be husbands and women to be wives which is what actually works.

if its not working there needs to be a change in attitudes. I have yet to see a marriage where the man is truly happy to be the wife and the woman the husband. It becomes like the Jezebel-Ahab union. destructive and unhealthy.

Attractiveness is not purely physical by any means, it's traits that are under the skin, between your ears as it were. I'm not saying we should be the same, but if we focus on the differences, it's not getting us anywhere in terms of what is a relationship that transcends physicality, as much as that is a manifestation of intimacy between romantic couples (and I mean anything, which can overlap with being good friends, such as hugs and kisses on the cheek in Europe and the like).

That's more a gendered concept, it's not as if the husband always does one thing and the wife only does one thing herself, even if people can fit into those stereotypes by conformity or the like. My parents aren't so much husband and wife, they're equal partners that have committed their lives together, for the sake of family and for my brother and I, their children. It's not some power struggle dynamic you've insinuated onto married couples, because that's not how a healthy relationship should work EVER.

So a husband that has a more domestic role is going against your god's design, is he? Or a woman like my mother who raised me and my brother and then, when we were older and she had babysitters or the like, she eased into getting a well paying job and supports our family to this day as, technically the major breadwinner? Is she insulting your god by not being a submissive little housewife?

Your perspective is so myopic, I imagine, that I'm not surprised you haven't seen such a relationship, because you only prefer to see those that fit into your perspective rather than seeing that diversity is more enriching than corrupting.

 

[blackribbon]

You're reducing advantage and disadvantage to a strawman of what you think non Christians believe. I'm talking about aptitudes that people have, not some opportunity we can take in a selfish manner.

I don't take advantage, but that doesn't follow to me obeying your god except in an incidental fashion. I don't regard sex in such a flippant way, but that doesn't mean I have to regard it as a sacred act or invoking anything supernatural.

Sex has consequences, no one in this topic said that. More strawmen don't make a sufficient argument except for the imaginary enemies you tear down.

I don't pretend to have absolute knowledge about what's good or bad for me, that'd be your perspective where you obey a supposedly inspired text and seemingly don't question it because you have some divine aid to consult in terms of confusion. We learn from our mistakes, we observe the world and formulate a general model of behavioral norms and adjust it as new evidence and arguments are presented.

When you create this "us versus them" mentality, you only serve to create more of a wedge between Christians and non Christians, as if there can be no common ground, which is demonstrably untrue.

Our views are based on a Christian worldview. Without a similar worldview, we may use the same words to mean entirely different things. I agree with CChips mostly. We aren't going to change how you think because you don't believe in the spiritual aspect of marriage and sex like we do or the role God plays in our lives as a whole. On the same thought process, you aren't going to convince us that God doesn't matter. I don't believe we can make big broad sweeping statements about non-Christians because there are so many different ways to not be Christian, so all we really can do is talk about what we do believe. However, just as you have a preconceived notion of what a Christian is...we each have a preconceived notion of what at non-Christian is.

 

[Cearbhall]

Here is what I am indeed saying: Does the wife look up to her husband as a whole man?

A husband might be a awesome lawyer and awesome with the kids. He has these strengths. But the wife can totally look down on him. He couldn't do any first aids. He can't cook to save his life. etc. If she wants to look at all the flaws, she can find every single reason to hate her husband. She can easily be disappointed and look down her husband.

I want to make it clear that this is not about focusing on the strengths and ignoring the weaknesses. It is much more than that. It is actually taking great joy in all of her husband's strengths and forgiving every single one of his weaknesses and mistakes.

Once again, whoever said anything against this? You're building up this straw man higher and higher. When you talk about the disrespect, you're describing a woman who has a bad attitude toward life in general. A person doesn't have to submit to be better than that.

Do you see the magic here? She becomes a better person in both the husband's strength and weaknesses! That's how she can leave the ultimate decisions of the home to her husband. This is how she can submit to her husband.

Ok, and vice versa. He recognizes the same about her. He's in awe of her God-given power and submits to her accordingly as she makes some of the ultimate decisions of the home. Am I getting it now?

 

[muichimotsu]

Our views are based on a Christian worldview. Without a similar worldview, we may use the same words to mean entirely different things. I agree with CChips mostly. We aren't going to change how you think because you don't believe in the spiritual aspect of marriage and sex like we do or the role God plays in our lives as a whole. On the same thought process, you aren't going to convince us that God doesn't matter. I don't believe we can make big broad sweeping statements about non-Christians because there are so many different ways to not be Christian, so all we really can do is talk about what we do believe. However, just as you have a preconceived notion of what a Christian is...we each have a preconceived notion of what at non-Christian is.

You want to make up new definitions for words that don't need them, that's your prerogative, but don't expect it to sound like anything more than special pleading and goalpost shifting, among other problems in terms of argumentation.

Ah, the word "spiritual". You think I just regard marriage as sex and pleasure, do you? I wouldn't try mind reading, especially if we go with the notion that, unless God gave you those abilities, you'd be channeling demonic powers in doing so

Oh, you "can't make broad sweeping statements," yet you just did in insinuating I'm a theological nihilist or whatever nonsense you think I believe about marriage, as if "spiritual" is a word that means anything in the common lexicon at all. I'm saying that your god is not compelling to everyone, don't act like you know how everyone views the world or that your prescriptive and normative ideas are somehow binding on everyone else by necessity

I have mild preconceptions, but I'm not so biased I don't know that there are as many types of Christians as there are people: some of my best friends are Christians, though you may just as easily accuse them of being lukewarm or the like, and that's your right. But I'd hold your tongue in making judgments like you're in any position to speak for an all knowing entity, because by the same measure you hold others to, so shall it be applied to you. Non Christian seems to have at least 2 categories: those that are already a step closer to the "true religion" of Xianity and those that are steps away through "heathen" religions.

Then again, that's the general M.O. half the time: people just aren't good enough Christians for whatever unrealistic standard people hold them to, so we have no true Scotsman fallacies thrown left and right. But Christianity is the most fragmented religion in the world's history, it's not something I can make generalizations about except within contexts where people invoke thought processes that have a pattern that's quite observable.

 

[muichimotsu]

Once again, whoever said anything against this? You're building up this straw man higher and higher. When you talk about the disrespect, you're describing a woman who has a bad attitude toward life in general. A person doesn't have to submit to be better than that.

Ok, and vice versa. He recognizes the same about her. He's in awe of her God-given power and submits to her accordingly as she makes some of the ultimate decisions of the home. Am I getting it now?

The closest they get to a man "submitting" to a woman is telling him to love her as Jesus loved the church, as I recall. Kind of a weasely method, but we're talking about 2000 years ago, so...

 

[Cearbhall]

The closest they get to a man "submitting" to a woman is telling him to love her as Jesus loved the church, as I recall. Kind of a weasely method, but we're talking about 2000 years ago, so...

Eventually, if I take them around and around in circles enough times, they realize they have no argument when it comes to making it sound like a meritocratic system, so it gets whittled down to "Well, SOMEONE has to make the final decision and get their way if the spouses disagree." Which is true, but then they act as if there was an almighty coin toss that determined that this "someone" is the possessor of a penis, every single time, forever and ever, amen.

 

[muichimotsu]

And more importantly, there's the whole problem of the relationship being unhealthy when that's how you make decisions, because someone is being repressed in terms of autonomy, as well as contributing to the mutual relationship that it supposedly functions as in a healthy functional society