Would you marry a woman who was a former stripper or X-rated star if she turned into a Christian ?

[Tropical Wilds]

Are you opposed to Saint Paul who told wives to submit to their husbands?

I am opposed to how some people interpret it and I have questions about it's application. Moreover, I think a not insignificant number of men use that as a Biblical baseball bat to demand blind compliance without the burden of having to do the work required to be a good partner, and another chunk of them use it to justify what is nothing more than overt and covert abuse.

I've seen too many weak, stupid men use that as the watermark another must follow in order for him to hide his weakness and his stupidity, and not a parable to be used as a brick, along with numerous other bricks, to build an overall stable foundation that includes mutual accountability and compromise.

Or where Saint Paul said a woman is saved in childbearing thus tying a woman's worth to her ability to reproduce?

Like above, I think a lot of people interpret it incorrectly and apply it incorrectly. I don't at all believe the message of that scripture is that a woman is "saved" by having babies and her worth is tied to being able to have babies. I think it's an lack of understanding (at best) when people say that, or at worst, another shackle used to engage in abuse and tools used by a bad partner making demands onto another partner without the hassle of having to also be a good partner himself, or worry about little things like consent.

I also think that this portion of the thread was about what we can learn from everybody to have a successful marriage, not Kiwi interrogates Tropical on her specific personal stance related to gender hierarchy and submissiveness in the Bible... For the eleventy millionth time.

Just go ahead and assume that everything I've told you before and that you've known about me for the duration of your time on this forum was what I believed yesterday, what I still believe today, and is overwhelmingly probable I will believe tomorrow.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I am opposed to how some people interpret it and I have questions about it's application. Moreover, I think a not insignificant number of men use that as a Biblical baseball bat to demand blind compliance without the burden of having to do the work required to be a good partner, and another chunk of them use it to justify what is nothing more than overt and covert abuse.

I've seen too many weak, stupid men use that as the watermark another must follow in order for him to hide his weakness and his stupidity, and not a parable to be used as a brick, along with numerous other bricks, to build an overall stable foundation that includes mutual accountability and compromise.

How do you interpret the command for women, such as yourself, to submit to your husband and his authority? Do you interpret it to mean you are equal in authority to him? That the relationship between men and women is egalitarian? Why didn't Saint Paul say for husbands and wives to submit to each other then?

I get the feeling as a modern progressive who wants to move beyond marriage teachings 2000 years ago you don't actually take Saint Paul all that seriously. Which is your right as a modern progressive.

Like above, I think a lot of people interpret it incorrectly and apply it incorrectly. I don't at all believe the message of that scripture is that a woman is "saved" by having babies and her worth is tied to being able to have babies. I think it's an lack of understanding (at best) when people say that, or at worst, another shackle used to engage in abuse and tools used by a bad partner making demands onto another partner without the hassle of having to also be a good partner himself, or worry about little things like consent.

So you've interpreted it to mean something other than what it says? A woman is not saved in having children?

I also think that this portion of the thread was about what we can learn from everybody to have a successful marriage, not Kiwi interrogates Tropical on her specific personal stance related to gender hierarchy and submissiveness in the Bible... For the eleventy millionth time.

I am merely questioning your position which seems radically disassociated from historic Christian views of marriage. You evidently prefer modern secular and non Christian understandings of how marriage ought operate. Which is your right but it is a departure from the faith.

Just go ahead and assume that everything I've told you before and that you've known about me for the duration of your time on this forum was what I believed yesterday, what I still believe today, and is overwhelmingly probable I will believe tomorrow.

I have no idea what you believe about most things. It's not clear.

 

[RileyG]

Correct. Scripture says Mary Magdalene had demons oppressing her...nothing about her being a prostitute.

Yup. That comes from one Pope who wanted more people to go to confession by combining Mary Magdalene, the woman caught in adultery, and Mary of Bethany together. They are three separate women.

 

[RileyG]

If someone is washed clean and repentant, their former sins are gone. They are a new creature.

BUT I assume, open honesty is important in every relationship. You know?

 

[Tropical Wilds]

How do you interpret the command for women, such as yourself, to submit to your husband and his authority? Do you interpret it to mean you are equal in authority to him? That the relationship between men and women is egalitarian? Why didn't Saint Paul say for husbands and wives to submit to each other then?

Are you wanting to discuss the topic, or are you just wanting to have another freakout about the beliefs you know I have? Because I'm happy to do the former, but have zero interest in the latter.

I get the feeling as a modern progressive who wants to move beyond marriage teachings 2000 years ago you don't actually take Saint Paul all that seriously. Which is your right as a modern progressive.

I get the feeling that, had you read what I wrote above, you'd see what I have to say about the matter and thus wouldn't have to wonder about it.

So you've interpreted it to mean something other than what it says? A woman is not saved in having children?

I believe that's how you're interpreting it, because that's what you're saying. I don't believe that's what the message of the passage is, no. Which I stated above. So no need to ask it again.

I am merely questioning your position which seems radically disassociated from historic Christian views of marriage. You evidently prefer modern secular and non Christian understandings of how marriage ought operate. Which is your right but it is a departure from the faith.

For the fifth time:

"I said YMMV because people of all walks have successful relationships. Logically, that means I think that we all have something to learn from everybody in forming successful relationships."

Nowhere in there did I say I prefer any teaching to any other or believe any one group or the other has a better understanding of how a marriage should operate. And saying that is in no way a departure from Christian beliefs. You're arguing with yourself about something I never said.

I have no idea what you believe about most things. It's not clear.

You are the only person on the planet earth who's ever said that they don't know what I believe because I'm not clear about it. I think maybe you should maybe slow down and read what I'm saying before knee-jerk replying. You're wanting to fight with me over things I never said while also complaining you don't know what I believe, which is super weird.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Nowhere in there did I say I prefer any teaching to any other or believe any one group or the other has a better understanding of how a marriage should operate. And saying that is in no way a departure from Christian beliefs. You're arguing with yourself about something I never said.

You don't prefer Christian teachings? Why?

You are the only person on the planet earth who's ever said that they don't know what I believe because I'm not clear about it. I think maybe you should maybe slow down and read what I'm saying before knee-jerk replying. You're wanting to fight with me over things I never said while also complaining you don't know what I believe, which is super weird.

I think its super weird to reinterpret the New Testament to conform to things you believe but it doesn't say. Do you for instance submit to your husband as Saint Paul tells you to? Or are you in an egalitarian relationship which is purely equal and he has no authority over you? Do you believe that childbirth saves you? That giving birth to children is essentially a good thing that women do?

 

[The Liturgist]

Are you opposed to Saint Paul who told wives to submit to their husbands? Or where Saint Paul said a woman is saved in childbearing thus tying a woman's worth to her ability to reproduce?

Forgive me, but it’s not remotely theologically correct to say that a woman’s worth is in her reproductive ability. Taken at face value, your remark has the effect of besmirching pious Orthodox women and mothers who are unable to conceive or give birth due to medical reasons. Also, we must remember that the Orthodox venerate many holy women who were celibate.

In the case of marriage, I don’t see the point of “childfree” marriages of fertile adults and regard these as inappropriate, since the alternative to marriage should ideally be holy celibacy, but in Holy Matrimony a great value can be provided by mothering, since there are many orphans and other children in need of adoptive mothers or caregivers. And a man could be canonically married to such a woman.

Also, recall what St. Paul said in Galatians 3:28.

Traditional Christians venerate the Theotokos above all other saints, who did reproduce, but not with St. Joseph, for their marriage was celibate, for Our Glorious Lady Theotokos and Ever Virgin Mary remained a virgin perpetually, this being the consensus belief of the Orthodox, the Roman Catholics and the traditional Protestants such as Luther, Cranmer, Calvin and Wesley. And in Eastern Orthodoxy we highly venerate many celibate nuns and also some female evangelists such as St. Nino, Equal to the Apostles, who spread the Gospel to the Kart’velli, resulting in the birth of what is now the Georgian nation.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

You don't prefer Christian teachings? Why?

For the sixth time:

"I said YMMV because people of all walks have successful relationships. Logically, that means I think that we all have something to learn from everybody in forming successful relationships."

I think its super weird to reinterpret the New Testament to conform to things you believe but it doesn't say.

I think it's super weird that you think I'm interpreting it to conform to things I want it to say as opposed to just believing I, and legions of other people, believe it says something different based off our use of additional context within the entirety of the Bible and that passage as a whole.

Do you for instance submit to your husband as Saint Paul tells you to? Or are you in an egalitarian relationship which is purely equal and he has no authority over you?

This is like the fifth or sixth time you've singled me out to find out if I submit to my husband and, TBH, it's getting really sus. Why are you so fixated on what the dynamic of my marriage is...?

Do you believe that childbirth saves you? That giving birth to children is essentially a good thing that women do?

No, I don't think it "saves" people in the context you think it does, nor do I think that passage says it does. And I don't think having children is essentially good or bad. Having children is morally neutral, as most baser functions of life are.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I think it's super weird that you think I'm interpreting it to conform to things I want it to say as opposed to just believing I, and legions of other people, believe it says something different based off our use of additional context within the entirety of the Bible and that passage as a whole.

Explain the context of submitting to your husband then.

This is like the fifth or sixth time you've singled me out to find out if I submit to my husband and, TBH, it's getting really sus. Why are you so fixated on what the dynamic of my marriage is...?

I am asking if you abide by what Saint Paul instructed you to abide by. I believe you don't and that's your right as a modern progressive woman.

No, I don't think it "saves" people in the context you think it does, nor do I think that passage says it does. And I don't think having children is essentially good or bad. Having children is morally neutral, as most baser functions of life are.

That's not really a biblical or Christian view. That's a modern view which views autonomy as the primary good in society. Having children for instance is good, per God's instruction in genesis. This is why Saint Paul says having children saves women. This is also why we as Christians oppose abortion and consider it evil. It's a fundamental inversion and rebellion against God's design.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Forgive me, but it’s not remotely theologically correct to say that a woman’s worth is in her reproductive ability. Taken at face value, your remark has the effect of besmirching pious Orthodox women and mothers who are unable to conceive or give birth due to medical reasons. Also, we must remember that the Orthodox venerate many holy women who were celibate.

In the case of marriage, I don’t see the point of “childfree” marriages of fertile adults and regard these as inappropriate, since the alternative to marriage should ideally be holy celibacy, but in Holy Matrimony a great value can be provided by mothering, since there are many orphans and other children in need of adoptive mothers or caregivers. And a man could be canonically married to such a woman.

Also, recall what St. Paul said in Galatians 3:28.

Traditional Christians venerate the Theotokos above all other saints, who did reproduce, but not with St. Joseph, for their marriage was celibate, for Our Glorious Lady Theotokos and Ever Virgin Mary remained a virgin perpetually, this being the consensus belief of the Orthodox, the Roman Catholics and the traditional Protestants such as Luther, Cranmer, Calvin and Wesley. And in Eastern Orthodoxy we highly venerate many celibate nuns and also some female evangelists such as St. Nino, Equal to the Apostles, who spread the Gospel to the Kart’velli, resulting in the birth of what is now the Georgian nation.

Are you saying we should use the exceptions within marriage as a standard and rule for what is good? Did God design marriage as an institution to be childfree predominately or result in children? Nothing I have said besmirches women who haven't had children but we cannot use them as the standard for most women to follow lest the human race perish.

 

[bèlla]

If someone is washed clean and repentant, their former sins are gone. They are a new creature.

BUT I assume, open honesty is important in every relationship. You know?

You’d be surprised what people hold back in that regard. I’ve seen some zingers here. ;-)

~bella

 

[bèlla]

Are you saying we should use the exceptions within marriage as a standard and rule for what is good? Did God design marriage as an institution to be childfree predominately or result in children?

There are many reasons that may be appropriate for a couple and we shouldn’t generalize. Some have health concerns or responsibilities that may overwhelm. We’re living longer now which has its own consequences when it comes to caring for elders and families are smaller.

~bella

 

[RileyG]

There are many reasons that may be appropriate for a couple and we shouldn’t generalize. Some have health concerns or responsibilities that may overwhelm. We’re living longer now which has its own consequences when it comes to caring for elders and families are smaller.

~bella

I don’t think so. I think, spiritually speaking, the sacrament of marriage always brings forth children (unless the couple is infertile) because that is God’s design.

 

[RileyG]

Are you saying we should use the exceptions within marriage as a standard and rule for what is good? Did God design marriage as an institution to be childfree predominately or result in children? Nothing I have said besmirches women who haven't had children but we cannot use them as the standard for most women to follow lest the human race perish.

Marriage is between one man and one woman that brings forth children in the loving union. That has always been the traditional Christian perspective.

 

[RileyG]

Explain the context of submitting to your husband then.

I am asking if you abide by what Saint Paul instructed you to abide by. I believe you don't and that's your right as a modern progressive woman.

That's not really a biblical or Christian view. That's a modern view which views autonomy as the primary good in society. Having children for instance is good, per God's instruction in genesis. This is why Saint Paul says having children saves women. This is also why we as Christians oppose abortion and consider it evil. It's a fundamental inversion and rebellion against God's design.

Abortion is a grave evil because it kills a child in the womb. Per the psalms, children are a gift from God.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

There are many reasons that may be appropriate for a couple and we shouldn’t generalize. Some have health concerns or responsibilities that may overwhelm. We’re living longer now which has its own consequences when it comes to caring for elders and families are smaller.

~bella

Why shouldn't we generalize or normalize the idea of married women having and bearing children? Are you suggesting we should normalize infertility and make that the default standard of society? Why didn't Christians have this standard until modernity?

 

[bèlla]

I don’t think so. I think, spiritually speaking, the sacrament of marriage always brings forth children (unless the couple is infertile) because that is God’s design.

Many people don’t have children because they can’t afford them. Have you forgotten that? Children are expensive and the ones who can afford them usually don’t have a lot.

~bella

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Explain the context of submitting to your husband then.

That submission is mutual, compassionate, not abused by one or the other, and part of a balanced relationship of respect. It’s not a decree that one commands the other and the other obeys blindly.

I am asking if you abide by what Saint Paul instructed you to abide by. I believe you don't and that's your right as a modern progressive woman.

Be shocked, but my answer is the same this time as it was last time and will be the next time. The fact you want to talk about it so frequently is just odd. Literally every discussion is you hijacking the discussion to ask me about submission.

Do I submit like I think the Bible asks? Yes. Do I submit like you think the Bible demands? No.

That's not really a biblical or Christian view. That's a modern view which views autonomy as the primary good in society. Having children for instance is good, per God's instruction in genesis. This is why Saint Paul says having children saves women. This is also why we as Christians oppose abortion and consider it evil. It's a fundamental inversion and rebellion against God's design.

No, it’s what you think the Bible or Christian view is. However, your interpretation is an outlier interpretation. Since I’m a Christian, not a follower of you, your interpretation of the Bible doesn’t particularly matter to me.

Most people interpret that passage very differently than you do, and not in a way that states that women giving birth is what “saves” them. Belief in God saves you. Having children does not impact it one way or the other.

 

[RileyG]

Why shouldn't we generalize or normalize the idea of married women having and bearing children? Are you suggesting we should normalize infertility and make that the default standard of society? Why didn't Christians have this standard until modernity?

No. Married women having children should be the norm. The nuclear family. One man and one woman in holy Matrimony with children. It’s holy. It’s sacred, it’s the BEST for society because it was ordained by Almighty God himself.

 

[RileyG]

Many people don’t have children because they can’t afford them. Have you forgotten that? Children are expensive and the ones who can afford them usually don’t have a lot.

~bella

That’s true. I just meant from a Christian perspective, children usually follow a marriage. Unfortunately the cost of living in most places is horrible.