Question about marriage - Page 5

Digging4Truth · #41 12-23-2008, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by franklyn4

You have to be pretty crazy to want a tent full of women. but then again back then women had no rights and did what they were told. there was no such things as womens rights. it would have really stunk to be a woman back then.

Yeah... no fancy perfumes either.

Theresa · #42 12-23-2008, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by franklyn4

You have to be pretty crazy to want a tent full of women. but then again back then women had no rights and did what they were told. there was no such things as womens rights. it would have really stunk to be a woman back then.

women were no more than the animals back then - they served a purpose - to breed - they just talked back, or actually talked amongst themselves

Could you imagine having a tent full of women to tend to?

chickens, horses, cows, those things I can get my mind around...but women?

and you have to wonder why they lived so long back then LOL

franklyn4 · #43 12-23-2008, 01:26 PM

i know some men who honestly believe that women in the OT were more "submissive" than women of today. But i think you can get anyone to submit if the threat of stoning is hanging over their head. Plus i think it speaks to some guys control issues as well when they want a "submissive" woman.

Digging4Truth · #44 12-23-2008, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by franklyn4

Plus i think it speaks to some guys control issues as well when they want a "submissive" woman.

Really?...

Col 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

Theresa · #45 12-23-2008, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by franklyn4

i know some men who honestly believe that women in the OT were more "submissive" than women of today. But i think you can get anyone to submit if the threat of stoning is hanging over their head. Plus i think it speaks to some guys control issues as well when they want a "submissive" woman.

I doubt this..LOL

franklyn4 · #46 12-23-2008, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digging4Truth

Really?...

Col 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

I have been around church long enough to see guys who want a wife that will do what they say and if they express a different opinion or refuse their wishes they label their wife as not submissive and go run to the pastor.

There is a difference between biblical submission and subjugation.

Trouvere · #47 12-23-2008, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by franklyn4

Can someone please explain to me why it was that God "tolerated" polygamy in the OT? In the NT Jesus clearly dealt with this issue (marriage is between 1 man & 1 woman), but i always wondered why God never told the patriarchs of the OT to stick to one gal. (I mean with all those prophets walking around you would think God would have text message, faxed or IM one of them to relay the message

)

Multiple wives was obviously culturally excepted and the norm in OT times, but when you have Godly men in the OT involved with practices that are culturally accepted but wrong in biblical principle, you have to wonder why did God "tolerate" it.

What do you guys think?

I think we can see the problems more than one gal caused them. It would be nice to have some other person to do the housework though.lol. but forget the man..he's mine. I am so glad our culture and society does not include plural marriages. No thanks its just gross to me. I am sure those with an adulterous heart would love a return to that.They could just justify sleeping around.

Digging4Truth · #48 12-23-2008, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by franklyn4

I have been around church long enough to see guys who want a wife that will do what they say and if they express a different opinion or refuse their wishes they label their wife as not submissive and go run to the pastor.

There is a difference between biblical submission and subjugation.

Indeed there is...

Which is why I quoted the scripture.

You used the term submissive... subjected would be a totally different thing.

Trouvere · #49 12-23-2008, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Theresa

women were no more than the animals back then - they served a purpose - to breed - they just talked back, or actually talked amongst themselves

Could you imagine having a tent full of women to tend to?

chickens, horses, cows, those things I can get my mind around...but women?

and you have to wonder why they lived so long back then LOL

Jacob loved Rachel and I believe that he would have been a one woman man if her dad hadn't been so sneaky.
Adam and Eve were made for each other.
God only made one woman for one man. He had the right idea. Society though rally for position and who only knows. They had this idea that the more wives and cattle and land the more power they possessed.

jimmyrrs · #50 12-23-2008, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by franklyn4

i know some men who honestly believe that women in the OT were more "submissive" than women of today. But i think you can get anyone to submit if the threat of stoning is hanging over their head. Plus i think it speaks to some guys control issues as well when they want a "submissive" woman.

My wife tells all the women in church to be very submissive to their husband. By that she means to give the big baby his way.