|
Post by ignorantianescia on Mar 23, 2015 8:44:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by unkleE on Mar 23, 2015 10:56:22 GMT
It's been quite well discussed in Sydney these past few weeks, at least in some circles. Your interpretation is fair, though the other (and I think bigger) point made was that some churches including one of Sydney's biggest denominations, support the traditional doctrine of male headship, and this doctrine sometimes leads to bad attitudes and sometimes even abuse.
|
|
|
Post by chavoux on Jul 7, 2015 7:44:15 GMT
I have a really big issue with this. According to the Bible (e.g. Eph.6) the husband should love his wife like (his own body) Jesus loved us and lay down his life for her. There is nowhere any command that he should dominate her, play the boss or any such. Yes, to her there is the command to submit to her husband, but if he is laying down his life for her, is that an issue? Why is it that men so often read what is commanded to the women, but so seldom read what is commanded of men? (And women maybe do the same?) There is no way that I can see hodw the Bible can be read to encourage domestic violence... and how somebody who cannot even rule his own house according to the example of Jesus can even aspire to lead the house of God? Although, maybe I do understand that last motive... thinking to sooth his guilty conscience by trying to impress the Lord with religios works. Truly will Jesus say to people like this, "Depart from Me, I never knew you...!"
|
|
|
Post by himself on Jul 27, 2015 3:12:42 GMT
My grandmother's marriage manual points this out: there is a difference between loving obedience and servile obedience, and the husband's mastery is a managerial, not a proprietorial, one. It chastises men who interpret it otherwise for not obeying the injunction to love.
|
|