10 Things Men Need in a Woman

[bèlla]

I've had difficulty finding suitable content in the trad sphere. It's a mixed bag and the messages aren't always biblically sound or the delivery is not to my liking. But I happened upon two people on a platform I rarely visit and they're what I've been seeking.

This little nugget was worthy of sharing. The author is male and I don't believe he's married and he's Christian. Sometimes I wonder if we spend too much time on the wrong things and not enough on what matters most.

~bella

 

[Lost4words]

11. Make sure the bowl is always full.

 

[timewerx]

Two things that can be removed or should be given further explanation from that list:
2. Beauty and 10. Submissiveness.

Beauty is subjective and some are born with faces that aren't subjectively beautiful to most people.

However, there are things we can do to make ourselves look more attractive like making ourselves physically fit and adopting healthy lifestyle and why not? Being healthy is good unless you're doing it solely for vanity purposes.

Sadly, not even everyone can do it. Disabilities that prevents one from doing things. Life can be so unfair.

Submissiveness. No. I know it's written in the Bible but I think the cultural context involved doesn't make applicable in our time. Jesus did not require it. The Proverbs 31 wife isn't that kind of woman. And for that, the Bible says that women would be in an advantageous position if she never marries at all (unless the culture of that day or the man did not require the woman to submit or simply gave her absolute freedom)

 

[bèlla]

Two things that can be removed or should be given further explanation from that list:
2. Beauty and 10. Submissiveness.

Beauty is subjective and some are born with faces that aren't subjectively beautiful to most people.

However, there are things we can do to make ourselves look more attractive like making ourselves physically fit and adopting healthy lifestyle and why not? Being healthy is good unless you're doing it solely for vanity purposes.

Sadly, not even everyone can do it. Disabilities that prevents one from doing things. Life can be so unfair.

If the man has chosen her for a spouse would that suggest he's aware of her imperfections beforehand? More importantly, the absence of culturally approved attractiveness doesn't lessen his willingness to see the whole (internal and external) while encouraging her efforts.

Submissiveness. No. I know it's written in the Bible but I think the cultural context involved doesn't make applicable in our time. Jesus did not require it. The Proverbs 31 wife isn't that kind of woman. And for that, the Bible says that women would be in an advantageous position if she never marries at all (unless the culture of that day or the man did not require the woman to submit or simply gave her absolute freedom)

That's a controversial position but I appreciate your candor. I would posit otherwise and propose most Christian men are desirous of a spouse who's willingly yielded to him as unto the Lord. I have yet to encounter a man who'd prefer the norm. But perhaps I haven't met enough! ;-)

~bella

 

[Sketcher]

I've had difficulty finding suitable content in the trad sphere. It's a mixed bag and the messages aren't always biblically sound or the delivery is not to my liking. But I happened upon two people on a platform I rarely visit and they're what I've been seeking.

This little nugget was worthy of sharing. The author is male and I don't believe he's married and he's Christian. Sometimes I wonder if we spend too much time on the wrong things and not enough on what matters most.

~bella

View attachment 343629

Yes.

Loves Relentlessly.

You could put this under loyalty, but it's not just that - it's having the gas in the tank to remain loyal and to do the next thing that her husband or her kids need from her, and going to God every time it needs to be refilled.

Two things that can be removed or should be given further explanation from that list:
2. Beauty and 10. Submissiveness.

Beauty is subjective and some are born with faces that aren't subjectively beautiful to most people.

Beauty can be subjective, but for a man who subjectively finds a woman beautiful, she should maintain that as much as is in her power. Things happen, but she shouldn't just let herself go once she's got the ring on her finger or when she's had her first baby. Perfection may not be realistic here, but that doesn't justify zero effort. I was scrolling on my Facebook feed some time ago and I came across a familiar name, I knew she had gotten married and had kids, but long story short, she had gotten so fat that I couldn't recognize her. The eyes and the skin & hair color were the only things that resembled the person I once knew, the face didn't anymore. That shouldn't happen.

Submissiveness. No. I know it's written in the Bible but I think the cultural context involved doesn't make applicable in our time. Jesus did not require it. The Proverbs 31 wife isn't that kind of woman. And for that, the Bible says that women would be in an advantageous position if she never marries at all (unless the culture of that day or the man did not require the woman to submit or simply gave her absolute freedom)

Industriousness isn't incompatible with submission. In fact, an industrious woman who is submissive to her husband will channel that energy in a way that benefits him and the family, but he's providing the direction. A woman who is not submissive will renege on agreements that she has made with her husband because she feels like it, even if she's in the wrong and knows it. I've seen that happen. I'd rather stay single than marry someone like that.

 

[timewerx]

A woman who is not submissive will renege on agreements that she has made with her husband because she feels like it, even if she's in the wrong and knows it. I've seen that happen. I'd rather stay single than marry someone like that.

I think you're missing the context of "submission" from the time of the Roman Empire.

The more original Greek word (hupotassó) used in Ephesians 5 puts it in the context of "blind obedience" like taking orders from a superior officer if you're an officer or a soldier. Obedience without questioning nor doubt.

Or let me put it this way, like taking orders from Jesus Himself.

It probably assumes the husband is going to be far more experienced and far more capable of making the right decisions. Like Jesus or your much older commanding officer if you're a soldier or an officer

That is likely to be true during the Roman occupation because women had less rights and less opportunities to get educated compared to men and it would serve their best interest to treat their husband like a commanding officer.

But is that arrangement still true today? Are women still inept compared to men in making the right decisions, in leading?

Do you consider it impossible for two people to equally lead? Like running a business or leading a team or a work project. I know it works because I've seen it work. It just don't work in a Christian family because the husband and wife tend to confuse their actual roles in the relationship and often the lack of respect / professionalism with one another.

 

[DragonFox91]

A man is called to love his wife like he loves himself & like Christ loves the church. A woman called to be submissive doesn’t mean the man’ a tyrant & has free reign.

I Googled hupotassó: says "a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden.” The military context is in regards to how an army is united working for a common goal. Sure, there’s a concept of blind obedience in there. If you don’t think there’s times where you’ll have to have blind obedience in a relationship, you’re not gonna get far in that relationship.

The man is the head but the head can't get anywhere w/out the body!

I remember a sermon on Ephesians 5. The context also refers to how the woman is bound to the man, not other men. Her union is with him, not other men. (Then verses 25-33 say the same is true for the man) She submits to him, not other men. The man must love her like Christ loves the church, not love other women like Christ loves the church. Scandalous, right?

Verses 22 – 24 are to the woman, 25-33 are to the man. God has more to say to the man than to the woman. The man has a great responsibility.

The verses are more arguing a ‘listen to each other’ (why golly, isn’t that what marriage counselors today say?), be courteous, respectful, loyal, unified, etc

God holds the man & the woman BOTH to incredibly high standards that can be achieved thru the grace of God.

The cultural context is as relevent today as it was then b/c truth doesn't change.

 

[bèlla]

Circumventing Paul requires copious misalignments in other texts. The topic is reinforced by Peter and references the old testament for a reason. He's grounding the principle in its initial intent and providing an example of its expression.

There's no ambiguity in his statement. Sarah's obedience is lauded and held as a worthy example deserving of emulation. It doesn't ignore Abraham's failings. It attests to her response in light of them and her constancy of deference and respect whether he succeeded or failed.

The Kingdom bears a consistent pattern of order in everything the Lord created. And we cannot set aside His condemnation of Adam when taking that position. He wasn't corrected for partaking as Eve had done. He was judged because he heeded her suggestion when He knew the Father's position and didn't uphold it.

The Son entrusted Himself to the Father. The church is entrusted to the Son. Man honors them both. Wives are entrusted to husbands. Children are entrusted parents. The needy are entrusted to communities (neighbors) and the church.

God was conscious of modern changes before they began. He knows the beginning and the end. We cannot decry the solutions He established in one breath and lament our condition in the next. Choices have consequences.

~bella

 

[GodBeMercifulToMeASinner]

Seeking the Kingdom of God above all else would be good for the list. Too many people these days have been caught up in the rat race of the Baal system. They seek pleasure, mammon, validation, status, all this and that, worldly things. God will provide all needs if we seek His Kingdom above all else and place full trust in Him. Christ said not to worry about the things which the carnally-minded are after in Matthew 6.

Intelligence is also very desirable. Honesty and good communication skills are a must.

A man is called to love his wife like he loves himself & like Christ loves the church. A woman called to be submissive doesn’t mean the man’ a tyrant & has free reign.

I Googled hupotassó: says "a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden.” The military context is in regards to how an army is united working for a common goal. Sure, there’s a concept of blind obedience in there. If you don’t think there’s times where you’ll have to have blind obedience in a relationship, you’re not gonna get far in that relationship.

The man is the head but the head can't get anywhere w/out the body!

I remember a sermon on Ephesians 5. The context also refers to how the woman is bound to the man, not other men. Her union is with him, not other men. (Then verses 25-33 say the same is true for the man) She submits to him, not other men. The man must love her like Christ loves the church, not love other women like Christ loves the church. Scandalous, right?

Verses 22 – 24 are to the woman, 25-33 are to the man. God has more to say to the man than to the woman. The man has a great responsibility.

The verses are more arguing a ‘listen to each other’ (why golly, isn’t that what marriage counselors today say?), be courteous, respectful, loyal, unified, etc

God holds the man & the woman BOTH to incredibly high standards that can be achieved thru the grace of God.

The cultural context is as relevent today as it was then b/c truth doesn't change.

Well said, the truth never changes. The last thing we should do as Christians is adjust in order to be more in league with modern decadent western culture. In these hyper-feminist times there is too big a deal made out of the dreaded ‘s’ word. As if it means the wife is going to be chained to the stove and forced to be pregnant for 15 years straight. A genuine Christian is not going to abuse and twist those verses from Ephesians 5 into some sort of entitlement to pepper their wife with poor behavior and toxicity. Maybe a false convert would, who knows..but someone submitted to Christ wouldn’t.

Somebody is going to have to lead, and by forfeiting his God-given role for the sake of the imaginary socialist utopian pipe dream of ‘equality’, the man is by default submitting to the woman. Not good. And not ‘equal’ doesn’t mean one is better than the other either. A marriage should have complimentary elements.
This modern Baal system has indoctrinated many women into resenting their God-given role and encouraged them that competing against men and trying to be more like them is the path. If we are entirely honest we will see that there isn’t a single solitary trendy feminist ‘modern woman’ who is truly happy. Whether they be married or single. I’ve never seen one.

 

[timewerx]

Circumventing Paul requires copious misalignments in other texts. The topic is reinforced by Peter and references the old testament for a reason. He's grounding the principle in its initial intent and providing an example of its expression.

All scriptures are good for teaching. But we don't do everything written in there like many teachings from the Old testament.

Punishments for certain misconduct is death. Ironically, Jesus didn't say He came to abolish any law. When Jesus stepped in to save an adulterer from being stoned to death, He did not explicitly say the law is no longer in effect, He only implied those who are executing the judgement (the people who surrounded the woman to stone her are probably guilty of bigger sins than the adulterer they're about to stone to death.

Peter is generally supportive of Paul but in one passage, he described some of Paul's teachings as "not making sense at all" or nonsensical, jibberish if you try to understand it from its Greek studies. English translations tend to 'water down' the extent of what is being said in the more original Greek translation of the New Testament because Greek is a context-rich language.

Even Paul himself said he adapted himself to the culture of his audiences (1 Corinthians 9:19-23).

If you're carefully studying Paul's epistles, you will notice in some of his writings, he speaks to those not possessing the character of a righteous person are unsaved. So you still need to actually stop sinning or at least try your best not to sin. Apparently contradicting Paul's other statements that salvation is by faith alone.

Yet, they are not contradictions. Paul is merely speaking in a way that his audiences of various cultures will understand and break down the barriers of the mind that has blocked their understanding of the truth.

I'm not trying to filter out the easy vs hard teachings in the Bible.

I'm a man and who wouldn't want a perfectly submissive wife and not just a submissive wife but a wife who is actually happy submitting to her husband? I'd love that!

I really do but after having deeper studies of the Bible and knowing Paul and the other apostles much better now, I don't think it is what is being taught in the Bible.

You have pay very close attention to whatever you're reading. Never adopt any biases when reading if you must see the truth or what is truly being said in the Bible.

The people who tried to eliminate, destroy the Bible may surprise you that it's not for the reasons you're expecting and at some points in history, the Orthodox Christianity is involved. This is why never read the Bible with any bias because often that biases isn't yours. It did not originate from your mind but pressed into your mind by someone or something else. Your parents, even your church, the system, the world.

 

[bèlla]

I'm a man and who wouldn't want a perfectly submissive wife and not just a submissive wife but a wife who is actually happy submitting to her husband? I'd love that!

How is it possible for anyone to have perfection? The bible says otherwise. A righteous man falls seven times and rises again and no one is good [by nature] except God alone. A perfectly submissive wife cannot exist. But the second portion is doable.

I really do but after having deeper studies of the Bible and knowing Paul and the other apostles much better now, I don't think it is what is being taught in the Bible.

If that is genuinely your conviction it isn't my intention to sway your mind. Only the Lord can.

This is why never read the Bible with any bias because often that biases isn't yours. It did not originate from your mind but pressed into your mind by someone or something else. Your parents, even your church, the system, the world.

My position on marriage existed well before my homecoming. I am the product of a lengthy tenure of marital bonds. Outside of my parents, I can't recall another parting within my immediate or extended family. They built unions in faith and stayed the course.

I was not the recipient of lengthy teachings on the subject. Nor did I hear the terms commonly found in Christian settings. I saw unions where both were honored, valued and respected. Their deference wasn't obsequious. They were worthy of their trust. I recognize that may not hold true for others. But that is my experience.

~bella

 

[DragonFox91]

I can see successful marriages. I see what they are doing. I then look in the Bible what does it say for a successful marriage. Intentionally or not, the way they do marriage is following what the Bible outlines for a successful marriage. They understand what submissive means.

The Bible confirms for the genuine what they know to be true because they have the Spirit.

I would not want someone to be perfectly submissive, no, & I'm not even looking for someone who would WANT to strive to be that submissive. I see successful marriages as more complementarian & think that's what the Bible's saying. I don't think it's right to go in having a mindset one will be only submissive & the other only dominant

Moving on: I’d question sexual passion on that list. @peaceful-forest & I were discussing how the trad sphere often gloats or boasts of their sex life & then they toss in a Bible verse or other Biblical truths to justify their talk about sex. ("we have sex every day b/c the Bible says you can have sex!") I’m not surprised Bella is struggling finding decent content from that group. There's other areas I find problems w/ them. Sexual passion on the list being included on this list reminds me of something the trad sphere would do.

I don’t understand why it’s included on this particular list. The other 9 are all attributes, & that one is what she likes. It's like “I’d like her to be kind, funny, caring, compassionate, & she needs like to have sex like me.” Like, what? You don’t want her to have any other passions? Of all the passions she needs to have that needs to be on there over all the others? Don’t get me wrong, nothing wrong about sex in a marriage relationship, I understand different desires can lead to problems, but that one feels tacked on. Would be good for a ‘what would we do’ ‘what does she like’ etc. kind of lists, tho, but I don’t think it really belongs on this one.

Also while I know pagans often struggle w/ the ‘women be submissive’ line, I think genuine Christian women struggle more w/ the ‘quiet spirit’ line. ‘We can’t be outgoing?’ ‘We can’t have fun?’ The context of submissive line is easy, but the spirit one can be harder for the more outgoing & the context is harder to find

 

[bèlla]

Moving on: I’d question sexual passion on that list. @peaceful-forest & I were discussing how the trad sphere often gloats or boasts of their sex life & then they toss in a Bible verse or other Biblical truths to justify their talk about sex. ("we have sex every day b/c the Bible says you can have sex!") I’m not surprised Bella is struggling finding decent content from that group. It being included on this list reminds me of something the trad sphere would do.

The marriage bed is sacred and sexual union is an important component. It may surprise you to learn that many aren't blessed in that area and have no physical intimacy at all with their spouse or limited instances.

That was not what the Lord intended. Nor should lengthy absences be present without compelling reasons and mutual agreement. Weaponizing intimacy is a common complaint which opens the door for Satan's entry. The bible warns against abstinence for this reason.

For what it's worth, I expect healthy marriages to be vibrant. Ideally, discussions are appropriate for the demographic and audience they're engaging with. Respectful discourse on sex isn't bothersome.

My difficulty in finding content within the trad sphere is largely due to their over emphasis on politics and feminism, propensity for cosplaying certain periods (content creators), competitiveness or mild displays of oneupmanship towards others, preachiness and passive aggressiveness towards women and disconcerting tone.

For the most part, I find them too aggressive, perfectionistic and uncharitable. Which might be improve if they spent less time on the Internet and invested their energy in more profitable pursuits. There's a fanaticism in this space (the Internet) that's unbecoming. Mean-spiritedness is never cool. To see women adopt the same is sad. We should be dignified.

Also while I know pagans often struggle w/ the ‘women be submissive’ line, I think genuine Christian women struggle more w/ the ‘quiet spirit’ line. ‘We can’t be outgoing?’ ‘We can’t have fun?’ The context of submissive line is easy, but the spirit one can be harder for the more outgoing.

The gentle and quiet spirit Peter mentions isn't related to activity. It's a hallmark of a loving disposition and sweet temperament. Which reveals itself by what she consumes, what she entertains (in her mind and heart), the company she keeps, discourse and time with Lord.

Discrimination is a necessary component for its attainment. You can't fill your mind with garbage and be surprised when it comes out elsewhere. You can't engage in coarseness and expect to be soft. You can't delight in gossip and expect to be compassionate. You aren't doing the things to nurture the qualities it espouses.

Intention is the other prong. You need to be intentional about your thoughts, behavior, associations and so on. That includes verbal and emotional restraint. You have to tame your tongue and stop excusing poor behavior. Which includes blaming others for your response. Ownership is part of it as is accountability.

Consideration is a hallmark. You have to move beyond yourself and weigh your actions in light of others. We should endeavor to leave others bettered through our presence. There's a way to say things and decorum matters. A gentle and quiet spirit isn't a treatise against liberty. It's a much needed counterbalance to its abuse. Sometimes less is more and silence is golden.

'A woman who neglects the useful and the elegant, which distinguish her own sex, for the sake of obtaining the learning which is supposed more peculiar to the other, incurs more contempt by what she foregoes, than she gains credit by what she acquires.' --Samuel Richardson, Clarissa

~bella

 

[bèlla]

Also while I know pagans often struggle w/ the ‘women be submissive’ line

That isn't necessarily true. Nor am I relegating that remark to pagans alone. It's best applied to non believers as a whole. When you've done so you're forced to confront the elephant in the room. There are several subcultures which we needn't discuss where women are willingly engaging with the opposite sex within a hierarchy. Or more candidly put. They enjoy submitting to their companion and acknowledge his leadership and the merits of following him.

You'll find them touting traditional values, submission, homemaking and related pursuits. They're sprinkled within trad communities and it's probable you've encountered them without realizing it. While I'm not advocating their lifestyle I'd be remiss to ignore their sincerity. The most eloquent example I've encountered came from that world.

The biggest challenge Christian women face is the lack of accountability. They don't have a community to turn to devoted to the subject. No place that offers instruction, feedback and kinship. Bible studies are fine but it's not enough. Daily living presents its challenges. Having a network of likeminded women to draw from is helpful. They're more likely to question your behavior, challenge your beliefs and offer encouragement when you're struggling.

I was fortunate to experience that. We set goals every month and had a mentor. Each participant did. There were subcategories addressing beauty, health, home, communication, intimacy, etc. We had to provide a weekly update and the members assigned to the group offered feedback. There were varying degrees of depth which accommodated those who wanted more and others in a different season.

I was in an advanced group that required more reflection, vulnerability and engagement. I posted everyday and had to respond to others doing the same. There was a spiritual component to my instruction. Contemplation was part of it. We read desert fathers and probed ourselves in different areas. Relational discussions were commonplace but we were challenged more. We confronted rejection, reactance, behavioral struggles and so on. Things that hinder obedience and surrender. That's the goal.

Whereas the majority are on their own. They draw from books, messages, social media and the like. But they don't have anything along the lines like I experienced. If they aren't instructed at home it's hard. They figure it out as they go. It's understandable to some degree why they're behind and influenced by the culture. That's the loudest voice.

I'm not suggesting the church should recreate my experience. Nor am I oblivious to the merits of its undertaking for me and my future spouse. While I don't believe social media is a substitute the right influence is a start.

~bella

 

[GodBeMercifulToMeASinner]

All scriptures are good for teaching. But we don't do everything written in there like many teachings from the Old testament.

Punishments for certain misconduct is death. Ironically, Jesus didn't say He came to abolish any law. When Jesus stepped in to save an adulterer from being stoned to death, He did not explicitly say the law is no longer in effect, He only implied those who are executing the judgement (the people who surrounded the woman to stone her are probably guilty of bigger sins than the adulterer they're about to stone to death.

Peter is generally supportive of Paul but in one passage, he described some of Paul's teachings as "not making sense at all" or nonsensical, jibberish if you try to understand it from its Greek studies. English translations tend to 'water down' the extent of what is being said in the more original Greek translation of the New Testament because Greek is a context-rich language.

It wasn’t Peter, or any of the others within God’s ekklesia who find the teachings of Paul confusing. That passage is in reference to the wicked. It is they who are confused, and to whom the things of God do not make sense to. The pagans, the atheists, the tares, the wolves, the goats, etc.

“As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.”
—2 Peter 3:16-17

It is those outside God’s set apart ekklesia who wrest with (distort the meaning of) the scriptures. Seen it a thousand times. Usually it is done to conform scripture to a manmade denominational bias. While those in Christ remain in steadfastness. You’re right though, there are things under the Torah law which we are not held to under the New Covenant such as stoning people to death, sabbath keeping and all the laws which that entails, etc.

You have pay very close attention to whatever you're reading. Never adopt any biases when reading if you must see the truth or what is truly being said in the Bible.

The people who tried to eliminate, destroy the Bible may surprise you that it's not for the reasons you're expecting and at some points in history, the Orthodox Christianity is involved. This is why never read the Bible with any bias because often that biases isn't yours. It did not originate from your mind but pressed into your mind by someone or something else. Your parents, even your church, the system, the world.

Oh it doesn’t surprise me at all haha, I expect it in fact. One reason would be, C_O_N_T_R_O_L_!_!_! After all, the modern western religious system and its unbiblical hierarchy was modeled after the pagan Roman governments. The other reason, well I cannot get into all that here. All I can say is that many of the formalities, traditions, dogmas, symbolism, holidays, and beliefs of the modern religious system have nothing to do with the biblical Christian Faith, but were incorporated from the Ancient mystery religions.

Absolutely, never read the scriptures with any preconceived notions. There are so many corrupt teachings today within modern organized religion, because it is under the reign of the Baal system. Always let the Holy Spirit lead, 1 John 2:27.

 

[timewerx]

“As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.”
—2 Peter 3:16-17

The English translator of that passage did not pick the best word.

If you review that passage in Greek. It's not exactly "hard to be understood" what Peter said but more like "not making any sense" or "impossible to understand".

Huge difference there. Perhaps, some of the things Paul teaches would make sense to some people but certainly not to everyone.

Perhaps because of 1 Corinthians 9:19-23

Where Christian denominations are divided, at the core of these divisions are doctrines that were taken from Paul's teachings. Perhaps because not of all of these teachings are meant for everyone but only for specific people and time, thus 1 Corinthians 9:19-23.

Makes it very clear people are still making these big mistakes on theology that Peter noted already happening all the way back in his time.

The irony is that Jesus meant this to happen, to divide. People will pick what they want to hear, some will make the right choices, some will pick the wrong choices, hence why divisions will happen.

 

[d taylor]

=
​

Seeker of truth and one who has a high standard of truth of themselves and their boyfriend, fiance, spouse

 

[bèlla]

=
​

Seeker of truth and one who has a high standard of truth of themselves and their boyfriend, fiance, spouse

This many times over. This really hit home in 2020. Not that it wasn't important. But the distinctions you noted are what I'm referencing. That's the difference between prayerfully addressing a subject and believing what you're told. We've entered a period where the former never mattered more.

~bella

 

[GodBeMercifulToMeASinner]

The English translator of that passage did not pick the best word.

If you review that passage in Greek. It's not exactly "hard to be understood" what Peter said but more like "not making any sense" or "impossible to understand".

Huge difference there. Perhaps, some of the things Paul teaches would make sense to some people but certainly not to everyone.

Perhaps because of 1 Corinthians 9:19-23

Where Christian denominations are divided, at the core of these divisions are doctrines that were taken from Paul's teachings. Perhaps because not of all of these teachings are meant for everyone but only for specific people and time, thus 1 Corinthians 9:19-23.

Makes it very clear people are still making these big mistakes on theology that Peter noted already happening all the way back in his time.

The irony is that Jesus meant this to happen, to divide. People will pick what they want to hear, some will make the right choices, some will pick the wrong choices, hence why divisions will happen.

Yeah, impossible to understand or not making sense would be a better way to put it in 2 Peter 3:16 actually.

“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
—1 Corinthians 2:14

“For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.”
—1 Corinthians 1:22-25

That is true, Jesus even said His teachings weren’t for everyone to know, (Matthew 13:11-13, Mark 4:11). God requires faith (Hebrews 11:6). The Lord Jesus Christ used parables to hide the secrets of the Kingdom and spiritual truths from the masses, while revealing them to His disciples. That was prophesied in Isaiah chapter 6 I think?

A lot of the denominations of the modern religious system are due to failure to understand Paul’s writings as you say, but not all. And some are far more dangerous and misleading than others for reasons I can’t get into here. The main problem is, too much focus on manmade theology (religious theory) while not enough focus on a biblical gospel to eternal life for the lost out in the world. Also not enough focus on Galatians 5:14. That’s an easy teaching from Paul and Christ both. That verse is in fact related to 1 Corinthians 9:19-23, Paul was willing to be accommodating to and be understanding of different types of people in hopes it would persuade them to respond positively to the gospel message. Love for his neighbor, putting those in need above himself. That would be another good quality to add to the list at the top, practicing Galatians 5:14.

This many times over. This really hit home in 2020. Not that it wasn't important. But the distinctions you noted are what I'm referencing. That's the difference between prayerfully addressing a subject and believing what you're told. We've entered a period where the former never mattered more.

~bella

Ahh yes, 2020..where all the sudden, one of Clown World’s most beloved mantras, ‘mUh bOdY mUh ChOiCe’ no longer applied. Funny how that works. I ‘identify’ as fully vaccinated and double boosted. But the bastions of inclusivity, oddly enough, refuse to be supportive of me, as I courageously live out my own truth!

 

[bèlla]

Ahh yes, 2020..where all the sudden, one of Clown World’s most beloved mantras, ‘mUh bOdY mUh ChOiCe’ no longer applied. Funny how that works. I ‘identify’ as fully vaccinated and double boosted. But the bastions of inclusivity, oddly enough, refuse to be supportive of me, as I courageously live out my own truth!

I read a lot as a child and some stories remained etched in my mind. The Pied Piper is one within that group. There were a lot of voices during that period. Lots of shouting, bickering and threats. I watched it unfold and heeded the voice within and it served me well.

Some people follow because they don't know the way and require assistance. They're lost.
Some people follow and don't know the way and prefer to rely on others instead.
Some people capitulate to pressure and follow the crowd.
Some people resist and do otherwise.
Some people go their own way guided by something else.

In most instances the majority want others to follow suit. They're not content with their decision. They need others to join them to validate their choice.

If a mind is a terrible thing to waste one devoid of discernment is dangerous. He doesn't utilize the tool as prescribed. I value a thinking man who anchors himself in the word and has an ear for the Spirit. Who doesn't lean wholeheartedly into hunches or suspicions but tests them.

We don't hear much about that these days. Declarations are made and when they fail to materialize we're left with a summer's eve and the gentle sound of crickets. That's the realm of ego and need to be rightisms. Give me the spiritual man any day. As Nee would say. The one who understands his composition and doesn't esteem the lesser above the greater.

~bella