"Feeling sorry for yourself" about being hit by your husband is not Christian 2/15/12 WT Page 25 P 12

by yourmomma 449 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  sabastious

  Just to be fair it should be noted that the Watchtower's stance on women comes from the Bible:

  Ephesians 5 - 21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

  22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 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. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

  25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

  Vs 22-24 could be taken literally to any level including physical abuse. One of the main reasons these types of high control Christian groups require belief in Biblical inerrancy is so that they can use verses like this however they please.

  -Sab
• 

  sabastious

  Reading through that verse I had to laugh out loud when Paul freely admits he has no idea what "becoming one flesh" actually means. Neither does the Watchtower.

  -Sab
• 

  RosePetal

  These are the very Scriptures they miss apply, Christ was never a woman beater, there is nothing fair about the watchtower society miss applying those Scriptures. The true Church does not beat up wives or women and neither does Christ, as usual cultish religions miss apply these Scriptures to control, and particularly women as they are more vulnerable. Husbands are supposed to love their wives and die for them as Christ did for the Church.

  Headship arrangement is one thing, dominating your wife to her injury is satanic. Women have an equal inheritance with the Lord and anyone hitting his wife is hitting a member of the body of Christ, there is nothing in those Scriptures that are quoted suggest beating the living daylights out of your wife and that she has to accept it, everything means according to love not domination. Any other reasoning on this matter is purely satanic.

  Anyone that can glean any suggestion that a woman has to put up with any violence in a Godly marriage arrangement is not fit to be married. As a former Jehovah's witness for twenty five years and now a Christian, I have never raised my hand to my wife under any circumstances, and I take issue with anyone who does.

  As far as being 'won over without a word' when married to an unbeliever, the advice is to stay with your husband if he is not objectionable, and he if is aggreable, [NOT] if he is beating her. However if you look at the many accounts on this forum of those who have left the organisation and ' so called 'apostates' the organisation will try to seperate them not only from your wife or husband, but from your Children, even if there has been no violence 'THE HIPOCTRITES'

  As far as showing Christian qualities to your husband [or wife] who is an unbeliever which is a good thing, it is the Lord who calls one to repentance and faith, not any man.

  RosePetals HUSBAND
• 

  sabastious

  Husbands are supposed to love their wives and die for them as Christ did for the Church.

  Read vs's 25-30 of that scripture. It clearly (well, maybe it could be clearer) states that an unloved wife is made unholy or spiritually blemished just as humans were before Christ saved them. So, according to that scripture,w a woman's holiness, which is EVERYTHING before God, is directly contingient on her husband's "love." It is describing a master/slave relationship. An unloved wife, again according to Paul, is like a toy that wasn't taken care off, dirty, broken and worthless. Don't fool yourself into believing that the Bible doesn't have sexism in it because it does and it's as blatant as this new Watchtower article.

  -Sab
• 

  sabastious

  Paul has no understanding of women and it's plainly obvious and it was likely because no sexist would understand the opposite sex, male or female. Or, just woman were a whole lot different back then. Woman today don't want to be a spotless vase on the mantelpiece displayed for all to see, maybe woman back then did I don't know. It's funny though, because Paul struggles to explain the "one flesh" concept even though he admits he is ignorant to the matter and his explanation does rely on piety more than reality.

  IT'S LIKE THE CHURCH AND CHRIST! That was the best he could come up with. Can't really blame him though. I bet he avoided reading Genesis because it was so mysterious. Paul seems like a know it all to me because he seems to have an answer to everything even if it ends up being lack luster.

  Genesis 2: ...But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and then closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

  23 The man said,

  “This is now bone of my bones
  and flesh of my flesh;
  she shall be called ‘woman,’
  for she was taken out of man.”

  24 That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.

  Paul misapplied this scripture. Adam was alone, in the story for a time. So, because of this need Adam had, God created woman. He chose to create woman FROM man to teach man that this was not just a helper, but a life-long couterpart: one flesh.

  Paul was a sexist and he liked his sexist ways (it's hard to give up power), so he incorporated them into Christianity by misapplication of scripture and piety.

  Remember, it was after Adam and Eve broke God's law that woman became subservient to man simply because of cause and effect (broader shoulders):

  Genesis 3 -16 To the woman he said,

  “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
  with painful labor you will give birth to children.
  Your desire will be for your husband,
  and he will rule over you.”

  -Sab
• 

  sabastious

  Headship arrangement is one thing, dominating your wife to her injury is satanic. Women have an equal inheritance with the Lord and anyone hitting his wife is hitting a member of the body of Christ, there is nothing in those Scriptures that are quoted suggest beating the living daylights out of your wife and that she has to accept it, everything means according to love not domination. Any other reasoning on this matter is purely satanic.

  Ephesians 5:24 is boldly stated for a reason. Wives must submit to their husbands in everything. But what if they don't submit? If the Bible is the inerrant word of God then the scripture becomes a command from God's mouth himself. Therefore discipline would be necessary for any wife who doesn't submit for any reason. Physical discipline has been accepted for eons and was accepted in Paul's day.

  4 In your struggle against sin, you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood. 5 And have you completely forgotten this word of encouragement that addresses you as a father addresses his son? It says,

  “My son, do not make light of the Lord’s discipline,
  and do not lose heart when he rebukes you,
  6 because the Lord disciplines the one he loves,
  and he chastens everyone he accepts as his son.”

  7 Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as his children. For what children are not disciplined by their father? 8 If you are not disciplined—and everyone undergoes discipline—then you are not legitimate, not true sons and daughters at all. 9 Moreover, we have all had human fathers who disciplined us and we respected them for it. How much more should we submit to the Father of spirits and live! 10 They disciplined us for a little while as they thought best; but God disciplines us for our good, in order that we may share in his holiness. 11 No discipline seems pleasant at the time, but painful. Later on, however, it produces a harvest of righteousness and peace for those who have been trained by it.

  12 Therefore, strengthen your feeble arms and weak knees. 13 “Make level paths for your feet,” so that the lame may not be disabled, but rather healed.

  So, according to Paul, we should treat our wives "just as Christ treats us." I would be a lot of money that Paul had no problem with wife beating, just not beating a woman who didn't deserve the discipline he would probably have a mouthful of piety to say about that.

  -Sab
• 

  NewChapter

  Well to be fair Sebastious, the bible DOES indeed try to control the violence. For instance, you couldn't beat a slave to death---it was important they lingered a day or so.

  Exodus 21:20 “If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies [q] at his hand, he shall [r] be punished. 21 If, however, he [s] survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his [t] property.

  So applying this principal, it is safe to assume that when a man beat his wife in the Christian congregation, he couldn't wound her so bad she died immediately. I apply this principal because female slaves are treated the same as male slaves in this respect, and any god that would let a man beat a woman slave to death---as long as they linger a day or two, surely doesn't flinch when a man beats his wife. Jesus had no problem whatsoever with this proclamation. He was in complete agreement with his father.

  NC
• 

  skeeter1

  And, one wonders why I am agnostic!

  Skeeter
• 

  ShadesofGrey

  Jesus disagreed with the law in several instances. Many of the laws were written while taking into account the people's hard-heartedness.
• 

  sabastious

  Jesus disagreed with the law in several instances. Many of the laws were written while taking into account the people's hard-heartedness.

  The scripture NC quoted speaks about one's physical constitution rather than proverbial "hard-heartedness."

  As for Jesus, you will always have a hard time finding fault with his words. They are there, but few, and much less frequent than the books that surround them. There is very little reason to believe that Jesus condoned physical violence if any.

  -Sab