Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ENDANGERED SPECIES: GODLY WIVES AND MOTHERS
Hepzibah House ^ | Unknown | Dr Ronald Williams

Posted on 08/01/2003 1:56:57 PM PDT by Commander8

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-78 last
Comment #61 Removed by Moderator

Comment #62 Removed by Moderator

To: Maximilian
There are precious few parents who are capable of raising devout Christian children in the midst of a pagan culture.

I am a strong diciplinarian and believe if you start teaching from birth, they will at least have the 'background' to base their 'free will' on. That's obvious.

The most devout Catholic family I ever knew, had one son who declared he was an athiest, proving even the best of parents can't be sure of the outcome.

In my first post, I was dissaproving of a parent letting a child lay around, instead of helping with the chores.

63 posted on 08/01/2003 9:56:29 PM PDT by potlatch (If you want breakfast in bed - - - sleep in the kitchen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
It's really time you took a look inward rather than blaming women for the problems of the entire world.

I'm afraid you have it backwards. King David took responsibility for his sin. He blamed himself fully and did penance. But what about Bathsheba whose immodesty started the trouble? How often do women take responsibility for their sins?

Let's look at the biggest example staring us in the face today: the murder of tens of millions of unborn babies. Every one of those unborn children are murdered by his or her own mother, the one person in the whole world who has the greatest obligation to love and to cherish and to protect that child. Yet I hear talk about how "every abortion has 2 victims, the mother and the baby." Sorry, every abortion has 1 victim, the child, and 1 murderer, the mother. When are women going to take responsibility?

You can and are only meant to control yourself, not the entire female gender. The sooner you come to terms with this the better off you will be.

That's just not true. I have responsibility for my wife and my daughters. That is the point of the original article. God has placed upon me the authority of leading them to heaven and preventing them from going astray into paths that lead to hell.

64 posted on 08/01/2003 9:59:11 PM PDT by Maximilian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian
But what about Bathsheba whose immodesty started the trouble?

She was taking a bath and King David decided to peek.....hellooooooo? So women should bathe with their clothes on? Go back and read the Scripture.

Your wife is not a child, she is an adult. She is responsible for herself. When your daughters become adults they will be responsible for themselves. You overreach. When they die they will give their own accounts of their decisions and their lives. Your opinion won't count.

65 posted on 08/01/2003 10:11:00 PM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian
When are women going to take responsibility?

I have responsibility for my wife and my daughters. That is the point of the original article. God has placed upon me the authority of leading them to heaven and preventing them from going astray into paths that lead to hell.

You just answered your own question here.

66 posted on 08/01/2003 10:12:44 PM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
Your wife is not a child, she is an adult. She is responsible for herself.

I don't think the concept should really be that difficult. There can be more than one with an obligation and responsibility for each person. My wife has responsibility for herself, while I also have responsibility for her as the person in a position of authority. Children have their own consciences, and go to confession to confess their own sins, yet at the same time their parents also have responsibility for them. Parents will have to answer to God for the job they have done. Priests will be held accountable for their parishioners, although the parishioners have their own consciences as well. I will have to answer to God for the job I have done in upholding my authority and responsibility in my family. If my wife and children go to hell, then it will be on my conscience as well.

67 posted on 08/01/2003 10:21:17 PM PDT by Maximilian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: ejo
***and so full of contradictions. ***

that's the case with Amyraldians!
68 posted on 08/01/2003 10:28:02 PM PDT by drstevej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
He needs to go back and read the Song of Songs. Christianity is not a sexually repressive religion, just a sexually ethical one.

Any minister who talks about marriage and does not include God's plan for uninhibited and enthusiastic sexual expression within marriage should be ignored. I am comming to the conclusion that there are more and more Christian men who are inhibited in the area of sex as they get older and women seem to become uninhibited, assuming they come to realize God's real plan for sex within marriage. Song of Songs is not an allegory about God's relationship to man, although there is some illustrative value; it is pure and simple about sexual love between a husband and wife.

69 posted on 08/01/2003 11:47:16 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: drstevej
That's reallly an old joke. Surprised you had not heward it.
70 posted on 08/01/2003 11:52:19 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian; Canticle_of_Deborah
The Song of Songs is allegorical.

Man, you don't have a clue.

Canticle_of_Deborah, I don't have my Bible handy, but could you post the portion of Song of Songs that is a direct reference to the pleasures of oral sex. It's the part that talks about the north an south wings and grazing in the wife garden of honey and spices. I'd like to see Maximilian explain how that portion is merely an allegory.

71 posted on 08/02/2003 12:01:06 AM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Lil'freeper
ping
72 posted on 08/02/2003 8:51:55 AM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("When do I get to lift my leg on the liberal?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
While I can't answer the specifics of your post, I will say this. Catholics interpret Scripture in three ways, explicit (literal), implicit (deeper layers of spiritual meaning) and in historical context. A literal interpretation of Song of Songs conveys the sacredness, depth and passion of the marital union. An implicit understanding of Songs paints a picture of the soul's mystical union with God with additional metaphorical pairings of Christ and his Church and the Holy Spirit/Virgin Mary.

Solomon is classically credited with Songs but some attribute it to an unknown poet. As an aside, many college courses study the Bible not in a religious context but solely for its historical and cultural information.

73 posted on 08/02/2003 12:45:47 PM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah
Catholics interpret Scripture in three ways, explicit (literal), implicit (deeper layers of spiritual meaning) and in historical context. A literal interpretation of Song of Songs conveys the sacredness, depth and passion of the marital union. An implicit understanding of Songs paints a picture of the soul's mystical union with God with additional metaphorical pairings of Christ and his Church and the Holy Spirit/Virgin Mary.

Aside from the bold portion above, this evangelical Christian has no disagreement. Many Christain, and non-Chriatians, do no realize that wherever the Bible mentions or refers to the sexual bond between a husband and wife, it is associated with the relationship between God and his Church. The only conclusion one can make is that the sexual relationship between and husband and wife is not just physical, but also 'spiritual'.

74 posted on 08/03/2003 10:00:39 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: VOA
Tha's fascinating. Arkansas even before Bill the Beast was known as the divorce capital of the mid south. Someone explained in this fashion. "If you have no money and live in small town or rural Arkyland then swapping spuses via divorce every once in a while is the most excitement available."
75 posted on 08/04/2003 5:02:08 AM PDT by robowombat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Maximilian
Uh, let's see Bathseeba's 'immodesity' led to David setting up the death of her husband Uriah the Hittite. According to scripture 2 Sam 11Verse 2 states "One evening David rose from his siesta and strolled on the roof of the palace. from the roof he saw a woman bathing and she was very beautiful." Seems more like the royal peeping tom initially violated Bathseeba's privacy and from this event rather than her 'immodesty' there grew the relationship that would in time nearly destroy David's kingdom. Certainly Bathseeba bears the responsibility for being complicit in adultry (although saying 'no' to a middle eastern despot is not like brushing off the water cooler lothrio at work) but Daivid's roving eye and determination to geet what he wanted and use whatever means necessary is the crux of this sorry tale which is really more about the abuse of power and its consequences than sexual immorality.
76 posted on 08/04/2003 5:17:53 AM PDT by robowombat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: potlatch
The most devout Catholic family I ever knew, had one son who declared he was an athiest, proving even the best of parents can't be sure of the outcome.

Don't stop praying. Read about Solomon's son Manassah in I Chronicles, and the prodigal son.

77 posted on 08/04/2003 7:42:02 AM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
Thanks for the refferences, CTD. Sadly the parents are 'gone' now, and I have lost track of the son. As you said, I can keep praying!
78 posted on 08/04/2003 12:38:19 PM PDT by potlatch (If you want breakfast in bed - - - sleep in the kitchen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-78 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson