Should a submissive wife....

Is it so hard to just debate scripture and it's interpetation, and not have to prove or disprove opinions not based on scripture, with not scriptural support?

 

One word. All is Vanity. What is the reward, but to self.

 

Diane, I think I asked what if the husband does not demand she take his name. Your question assumes he has asked her too and she has refused. This is a wide subject, and does indeed include the fact he may not demand her too.
Some people assume women are -0, low guy on the food chain, door mat wipe your muddy feet on them, no right breath unless a man authorizes her too, eat when and what told, cook what told, clean what told today, keep a record of every move, to be approved, if not approved don't wipe your nose today.
A good submisive wife will keep her husbands home quiet without interuptions, at all times, whether he is home or not, no daily distracts that casue trouble or out of the ordinary discord in the home of any kind.
Theres a lot to submission,and some think they have it down pat but do not. Thats pride.

 

I wonder if you lived in Indonesia, where women do not change names when they marry, would you still be arguing for name change. After all it isn't a biblical mandate, but a man made cultural ritualistic pratice. How many time have I seen you argue against obeying culture. Now all of the sudden we are to obey culture, even though the bible is silent on the topic in question. Culture changes and is differnet depending on what area of teh country or what country you live in. So whose culture are we to obey? What if we move to another place with a different culture, do we suddenly begin to obey that culture? Stick with scripture and life is a lot easier.
I've given scripture after scripture about names and names changes. But no one has shown any scritpure where we are to ourselves change our names. Which is a foreign pratice not known in scripture. The argument seems to be more opinion based then scripturally based. Then in that instance theres no question, scripture wins out everytime.

 

This is really something to think about.

What if the husband told his wife to get rid of her computer?

What if he forbade her from talking on the telephone?

What if he forbade her to not talk to a man unless he was present?

What if he would not let her leave the house?

What if he would not let her drive her car?

What if he told her should could not read books or magazines?

I guess the next question would be "What is SIN?

Would it be a sin for a wife to do these things if the husband forbade his wife to do them even though in themselves they are not a sin?

 

Betty, we knew a couple who were at our church for about 2 years, he would tell her when she could leave the house, and where she could go. He would write her a list of daily chors and scream at her if they weren't done, and believe me it was some list, plus they had a 4 year old and a newborn to take care of. And she had to obey to the T. She could only buy what he approved from the grocery store. He didn't like beef and she wasn't allowed to buy anything with beef in it.
He would rant and rave for hours abour China, and them invading the US, believed Star Wars charcters were christians and in one scene they were in church(for those who have seen the movie it is the end where the Princes is giving them their medals).
They moved back to Texas,and he got even worse. Tell her he couldn't stand her and throw her out for weeks at a time, she was not allowed to see the girls. Then he'd let her come back home for a while, and od it all over again. Finally they divorced, I don't know who filed. Now he has the girls, he is about half crazy, he's gotten worse. Last week he threatned the 11 year old to put her out of the truck, they were several hours away from home. The kids are affraid of him, and the mother goes months without seeing them. the reason he got the girls was he has money now becasue he now works for a big company, she was waiting on tables at the time. He doesn't even get out of bed to get thme ready for school, 7 and 11 years old and they fend for themselves. He doesn't want the girls, he just doesn't want her to have them. Believe me the man is dangerous. he used to beat her all the time. She thought she was being obedient by taking the beatings.

 

Eph 5:22-25 (KJV1611 edition):

Wiues, submit your selues vnto your own husbands, as vnto the Lord.
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, euen as Christ is the head of the Church: and he is the sauiour of the body.
24 Therefore as the Church is subiect vnto Christ, so let the wiues bee to their owne husbands in euery thing.
25 Husbands, loue your wiues, euen as Christ also loued the Church, and gaue himselfe for it:

What loving Christ would make unreasonable demands upon
the Beloved Church; what loving husband would make
unreasonable (non-sin) requests of their wife?

 

Apparently Diane, you mean she should submit to beatings too.

 

So apparently 'good' christians don't sin. Becasue if they do, then theres always the chance he may sin against her by beating her(or something else). There is no one who does not sin, there is none who are 'good' (says scripture).
The verse you used abouve you highlighted that she is to submit in everything when I posted about the woman being beaten.

What if a woman has married before becoming a christian? And she is married to a man who beats her?
It's not a woman's fault if her husband sins, and beats her.

 

Then a 'good' christian man isn't going to sin?

 

And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
mark 10:18

 

According to Jesus there is no 'good' christian man.

 

ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE
Ro 3:12

 

Just answering you Diane.
You made a statement, I showed scripture that differs with you, and you call it silly.
ok

 

I tried to discuss the topic but you ignored my scripture about names being changed, and only God changing a name. And in scripture names meant something, a name was who you are, you statement was that your name is not who you are.
So i was on topic of names, and you ignored that.