JehovahsWitness wrote: ↑Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:32 pm
So her submission is modified by the expression "as (or in the same manner as) she submits to the Lord. Scripturally
, in what way/manner does a Christian woman submit to Jesus (The Lord) ? Is it absolute or relative?
I've been reading "the Lord" as God, not Jesus. Is that incorrect? People sometimes call Jesus "Lord" but my thinking has been when it says "the Lord" it probably means God.
But I don't think it makes a difference whether Jesus or God is limited or effectively limited in what they may do, because this problem is specifically addressed in the story of Abraham and Issac. No, God won't murder you. Maybe he effectively can't, since he's so perfect he'd never do it. But as to the degree of submission required
, you absolutely are required to submit to murder even if that would never actually happen. That's why my answer is absolute, not relative. You are required to submit to anything, even the stuff God would never do.
It's a good question and I'm glad the story of Abraham and Issac addresses it. Submitting to God is too easy, if you know he's loving and wouldn't hurt you. At that point you're basically being selfish. That's the whole reason for this story: Even though it would never happen, to truly worship God, you'd have to be willing to submit to murder for him. You'd have to be willing to submit even if it hurt or killed you.
However, that's why the quote from Ephesians is so troubling. Requiring that same degree of submission
to a mortal, imperfect man just because he married you will sometimes get you raped, beaten, or murdered, because mortal men sometimes rape, abuse, and kill.
I'm not trying to win a debate here and frankly I don't think you ought to be in the corner you're in. This feels like me using the taboos of a society I don't trust is right to attain a better debating position, and I don't like it. The Bible is structured around a patriarchy and it's possible that really is the better system. It's possible females can't make the same quality of decisions males can and that's why patriarchy endures for so long. When given absolute freedom and full rights they do seem to have a lot of children out of wedlock they can't support. It's also possible that, as it was with America and slavery, it's easy to build a morally foul society into a prosperous one simply because when you treat some people like commodities, you have more commodities; everyone working for a few makes the few more prosperous. I want to address every possibility fairly, even if that can't be done here.
If I get that twinge that something I'm doing is wrong, I have no choice but to act on it even though it leads me astray 90% of the time. I'm getting it now. "Patriarchy is the best system" is a legitimate position, but you can't defend it because you'd be eviscerated and you know so. I can't fight someone when they have one hand tied behind their back. I want to give you the opportunity to untie it.
This thread started with an unfounded assertion that females should be treated as the equals of males. I acknowledge that. And it wasn't fair.