Hindsite wrote:However, Jesus told the woman caught in the act of adultry to go and sin no more.
(John 8:3-11)
And when the Pharisees accused Jesus of violating the Sabbath:
He replied, "If one of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it and lift it out?
(Matthew 12:11)
"You hypocrites!" the Lord replied, "Does not each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or donkey from the stall and lead it to water?
(Luke 13:15)
No, the pharisees misunderstood the Law and its prosecution and that is why they are condemned. Here is an example of the position of Christ on the matter:
Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”
Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.
Matthew 15:1-6In this text, Christ is refuting the Pharisaical tradition that an elder son is not obligated to care for his parents in their old age if he "dedicates himself" to God (financially). This is considered a violation of the Ten Commandments by Christ because honoring thy father and thy mother implied also in the Law of Moses that the caring for one's parents is subsumed in the double-portion of inheritance which is given to the eldest son (
Deuteronomy 21:17). Oldest sons are obligated to care for the parents as their patriarchal obligation, the double-portion of inheritance is the security of this provision, one cannot dedicate this to God and dump one's parents in a nursing home and think they are being pious, they are actually violating God's law.
With the woman caught in adultery, the pharisees attempted to trap Christ, for if He ordered her executed by the Romans, the Jews would have viewed Christ as a traitor to the Roman occupiers, if Christ had ordered the Sanhedrin carry out the execution (against Roman Law), the pharisees would have turned him over to the Romans for sedition (as the Jews were forbidden by the Roman occupation to carry out an execution, which is why Pontius Pilate had to authorize the crucifixion), if He had said she was innocent of any crime and was not worthy of death, they would have charged Him with blasphemy and His ministry would have been discredited; Especially, since Christ upheld the Law ten chapters earlier in this same Gospel in chapter 5 as being "absolute and binding."
What Christ did here was brilliant, He placed the ball back in their court, Christ was not authorized to execute her anyway and He was aware of their trap against Him, so He turned it back to them for them to cast the first stone if they be blameless (the Greek here does not imply purity is required to punish with death, for the death penalty is upheld by Christ in
Matthew 5:17-19, and by Paul in
Romans 13);
Rather, what Christ did here was essentially this: "if the pharisees were blameless in the legal sense, and the sanhederin was supposed to execute adulterers,
why bring her to him?That is why they only walked away and made no condemnations. He was right according to the Law of Moses, and the pharisees, out of fear of the Romans and the masses, would not prosecute her either by themselves (because the Romans would arrest them), or by turning her over to the Romans to be executed (which would infuriate the Jewish Nationalists).
This is well analyzed by the 16th century puritan scholar, Matthew Poole in his commentary:
Their design was from his answer to take some colourable pretence to accuse, and either to discredit him with the people, or to expose him to the displeasure of the superior powers. If he had directed to send her to be punished by the Roman governors, who administered justice in capital causes, the people would be fired with indignation; for they looked upon them as invaders of the rights of government that belonged to the Israelites. If he had advised them to put her to death by their own power, they would have accused him of sedition, as an enemy of the Roman authority. If he had dismissed her as not worthy of death, they would have accused him to the sanhedrim, as an infringer of the law of Moses, as a favourer of dissoluteness, an enemy to civil society, and worthy of universal hatred. This malicious design, so craftily concerted, our Saviour easily discovered and defeated; whereas they thought it would require his most attentive consideration to extricate himself from the snare. He seemed not at all to attend to what they said, but, stooping down, wrote on the ground: what he wrote, or how he could write upon the floor of the temple, (which was of stone), are very idle questions; the first not possible to be resolved, the second impertinent; for it is not said, that he made any impression upon the ground, though it be said, he wrote upon it. It appeareth plainly to have been but a divertive action, by which our Saviour signified that he gave no ear to them.
Likewise, Christ did not oppose the Sabbath, only that which was not required by the Law of Moses regarding it, but instead added by the Pharisees in their legalism. Christ teaches that works of necessity on the Sabbath are not contrary to the Law of God or works of righteousness, like healing, or petty things like poverty-gleaning grain while walking on that day. Christ; however, followed the Law perfectly, including the Sabbath law, as scripture teaches.
Hindsite wrote:We don’t hear too much about submission anymore. And if we do, it’s usually a command to the wife, to submit to her husband. Still, this is considered a bit archaic in today’s modern culture.
God's Word is absolute. Wives are to submit to the authority of their husbands. They are to be the head of their own households, women are to obey them, within the bounds of Scriptural law. Period.
Its funny that people on PoFo think you are the "fundamentalist," you are actually quite liberal when it comes to the True Faith. Far more liberal than I am.
Hindsite wrote:But let me also be clear about when not to submit. The Bible never instructs us to submit to sin. When there is sin and disobedience, a spouse must respectfully and lovingly confront the sin. To look the other way or to ignore the sin in the name of “submission” is wrong, and actually condones and enables the sin to continue.
No one is contending this, just like obeying our rulers which we are likewise commanded to do (Romans 13), so too a wife may resist her husbands if he requires her to violate the Word of God; however, if his commands are within the bounds of biblical morality, she is obligated to obey, just as the church is obligated to obey Christ.
Hindsite wrote:Yes. Peter says in 3:1, “In the same way, you wives, be submissive." Then, and this is the clincher, he writes in 3:7, “You husbands in the same way.”
Now time to deal with this piss-poor exegesis where you intentional omit relevant portions of the text. Lets take a look at 1 Peter 3:1 and v5-6together:
3 Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives.....
5 For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to adorn themselves. They submitted themselves to their own husbands...
6 like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear.
Now, lets examine your "clincher:"
7 Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.
So, "in the same way" here is not referring to men "obeying women," what a bunch of liberal hogwash that ignores the text. No wonder you did not quote it, are you afraid of what it requires of you? The text is clear, "in the same way," is better rendered in english as "in like manner."
Thus, "in the same way" a wife is to OBEY her husband as her Lord, so too a man must be be considerate of his wife as the WEAKER vessel.
A husband is to be loving, and considerate, and sacrificial towards his wife, but a wife is to both submit and obey to His authority. This is indisputable textually.
Let us reexamine
Ephesians 5:22-33 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
Your cite verse 21 to say that submission is mutual and egalitarian; however, Paul unpacks his meaning in context. He starts with women. Women are to submit, but in what manner? As the church submits to Christ?
How does the church submit to Christ? By obedience to Christ as the Lord and Head and Savior of the Church. Thus, JUST AS the Church submits to Christ, in the same manner the wife is to submit to her husband's headship and authority in EVERYTHING.
Now, for you egalitarian interpretation to hold water, the manner of husbands "submitting to their wives," as you claim, should be in the same manner as the wife's submission above, lets see if it is? Lets see if husbands are required to submit to their wives in obedience to them as the church obeys Christ as LORD:
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— for we are members of his body. “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
NOPE. The husband is to love and sacrifice himself for his wife's good just as Christ did so for the church. Thus, Scripture does not teach that mutual submission is egalitarian. The roles are clearly delineated and are consistent with the patriarchal teachings of the whole Bible.
1. Wives are to obey their husbands and submit to their authority just as the church is to submit to the authority of Christ.
2. Husbands are to love, respect, and be considerate of their wives out of an acknowledgement of their being the weaker sex, and are to sacrifice themselves for their wives, just as Christ did so for the Church.
Hindsite wrote:Masturbation is not the murder of imaginary humans as I have already pointed out. But What if it is used to relieve sexual tension instead of forcing sexual favors from your wife when she is not ready. Forcing one's wife to submit to sex is not love.
You pointed nothing out, you made an assertion that you cannot defend.
Genesis 38 is clear: Onan destroyed his offspring on the ground, so God killed him for it, because it was murder.
Likewise, you are wrong about the obligations of husband and wife in marriage. Husbands and wives are BOTH forbidden from denying each other their sexual rights in marriage:
But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 1 Corinthians 7:2-5