A Traditional Gordian Knot

[PoetMary]

Jesus doesn't argue with His bride (the church) and demand we submit to Him. He opens His arms and says, "Come to me, My Beloved." He is our Loving Shepherd and says, "Beloved, follow Me." We love Him because He first loved us.

A husband arguing with his wife and demanding she submit to him is the opposite of that.

That's a slight mischaracterization of what I meant. The #1 definition for "argue" is "to state reasons for or against a thing."

So, choose the verbiage that appeals to you the most: He could point out; he could lovingly redirect; he could embrace her and sweetly murmur

etc.

The point is that he's presenting his reasons to his wife. I didn't address methodology.

 

[ServantStrike]

This would be the time you'd find out it's not your baby... Er...

(I'm trying to reference Solomon here, not establish paternity.)

Ooh, CC turns into Jerry Springer!

 

[PoetMary]

Ooh, CC turns into Jerry Springer!

And the real father is........

TRADITIONAL

 

[seoulsearch]

Ooh, CC turns into Jerry Springer!

I'm gonna head on over to the Traditional Lawnchair thread, pick up a few, and bring them over here... Because I want to at least have a good stockpile of ammo when the chairs start flying!

 

[gypsygirl]

i would insist that we seek the counsel of a pastor, a counselor, or someone who is qualified to help us discuss this matter further, and do so in a productive, loving way where i feel i am being heard, and the concerns my husband is expressing are being fully understood as well.

to me, that kind of stalemate, along with the seriousness of the issue requires help from outside source to help avoid prevent creating a serious injury (or further injury) to the trust and "teamship" of the couple. often these stalemates occur because one or both parties are failing to hear or understand the driving motivation or concerns being expressed, and/or there are other issues at play that are "leaking" in.

 

[ServantStrike]

I'm gonna head on over to the Traditional Lawnchair thread, pick up a few, and bring them over here... Because I want at least have a good stockpile of ammo when the chairs start flying!

And I need a can of gasoline for the arson segment!

 

[Mitspa]

Except the husband in my scenario isn't yielding to her desire. Perhaps you would characterize this as inherently "ungodly"...which is actually beside the point. According to the bible, isn't a woman meant to be submissive to her husband even if her husband is say...an unbeliever, so that she might win him through her wifely behavior?

So, even if you call this man ungodly, the woman is still left with a choice:

Submit to her husband OR
Follow her conscience

Follow her conscience

 

[Olerica]

I'm gonna head on over to the Traditional Lawnchair thread, pick up a few, and bring them over here... Because I want to at least have a good stockpile of ammo when the chairs start flying!

I'm in one of my two kitchens popping us popcorn. How do you want YOUR popcorn topped, Sweetness? ;D

 

[VioletReigns]

That's a slight mischaracterization of what I meant. The #1 definition for "argue" is "to state reasons for or against a thing."

So, choose the verbiage that appeals to you the most: He could point out; he could lovingly redirect; he could embrace her and sweetly murmur

etc.

The point is that he's presenting his reasons to his wife. I didn't address methodology.

Sister PoetMary, I wasn't referring to your use of the word argue. I am sorry for not clarifying my comment, dear. I was pointing out to those who justify arguing with their wives that they are in error to demand their wives submit to them.

 

[Mitspa]

Let me just ask you Mary...is there any situation where the husband could be right in a marriage?

 

[VioletReigns]

I'm out of here.

And now.... I am right behind wise KenThomas27. Have a nice day, folks!

 

[PoetMary]

Let me just ask you Mary...is there any situation where the husband could be right in a marriage?

I find it curious that you would ask me such a question. It seems to be based on the idea that I'm presuming that a husband is always wrong.

Are you presuming that I believe a husband is always wrong?

 

[gypsygirl]

Let me just ask you Mary...is there any situation where the husband could be right in a marriage?

okay, now i'm confused.

is the point to be RIGHT?

i think your post (perhaps unwittingly) is touching on a problem that both genders have. it's when the matter becomes about being right, and tied to our pride, instead submitting to one another, unselfishly, with the egos checked at the door.

i have always been a big believer of the adage, "never win an argument with someone you love". the point is never to prove you're right, or establish who is wrong. the point is resolution that is amenable for both, and maintaining mutual respect and love in the process.

the very act of needing to be "right" is at the cost of someone else being "wrong". or to lose. when you operate from this objective, you will very quickly deplete the emotional "account" you have with that person. and soon, every battle is represented as "who is going to have to play martyr to make this go away?".

 

[maxwel]

okay, now i'm confused.

is the point to be RIGHT?

i think your post (perhaps unwittingly) is touching on a problem that both genders have. it's when the matter becomes about being right, and tied to our pride, instead submitting to one another, unselfishly, with the egos checked at the door.

i have always been a big believer of the adage, "never win an argument with someone you love". the point is never to prove you're right, or establish who is wrong. the point is resolution that is amenable for both, and maintaining mutual respect and love in the process.

the very act of needing to be "right" is at the cost of someone else being "wrong". or to lose. when you operate from this objective, you will very quickly deplete the emotional "account" you have with that person. and soon, every battle is represented as "who is going to have to play martyr to make this go away?".

Are you implying that BOTH genders might have problems?

You realize "both" would include men?

I figured you like to make some kind of correction.

 

[VioletReigns]

okay, now i'm confused.

is the point to be RIGHT?

i think your post (perhaps unwittingly) is touching on a problem that both genders have. it's when the matter becomes about being right, and tied to our pride, instead submitting to one another, unselfishly, with the egos checked at the door.

i have always been a big believer of the adage, "never win an argument with someone you love". the point is never to prove you're right, or establish who is wrong. the point is resolution that is amenable for both, and maintaining mutual respect and love in the process.

the very act of needing to be "right" is at the cost of someone else being "wrong". or to lose. when you operate from this objective, you will very quickly deplete the emotional "account" you have with that person. and soon, every battle is represented as "who is going to have to play martyr to make this go away?".

I'm very blessed by this post. You certainly express a lot of wisdom here. Praise God! \/

 

[Mitspa]

I find it curious that you would ask me such a question. It seems to be based on the idea that I'm presuming that a husband is always wrong.

Are you presuming that I believe a husband is always wrong?

No I don't think you believe that but for some reason it seems very hard for some ladies on this forum to admit that a husband might actually be right about things?

 

[gypsygirl]

Are you implying that BOTH genders might have some kind of problems?

oh sir. i've never implied that fact. i would straight out say it. : D

in fact, when i get married, i hope to resolve all differences with squirt guns, and occasionally nerf gun battles.

 

[Mitspa]

okay, now i'm confused.

is the point to be RIGHT?

i think your post (perhaps unwittingly) is touching on a problem that both genders have. it's when the matter becomes about being right, and tied to our pride, instead submitting to one another, unselfishly, with the egos checked at the door.

i have always been a big believer of the adage, "never win an argument with someone you love". the point is never to prove you're right, or establish who is wrong. the point is resolution that is amenable for both, and maintaining mutual respect and love in the process.

the very act of needing to be "right" is at the cost of someone else being "wrong". or to lose. when you operate from this objective, you will very quickly deplete the emotional "account" you have with that person. and soon, every battle is represented as "who is going to have to play martyr to make this go away?".

I think I just used that term in a general way to express the frustration at the ability to turn any situation into a chance to prove how wrong men are.

 

[PoetMary]

No I don't think you believe that but for some reason it seems very hard for some ladies on this forum to admit that a husband might actually be right about things?

It seems like you may be lumping me in with "some ladies...." but may be backing away from this when I ask you about it directly.

As to the idea of a husband being right or wrong....let me reframe this.

I don't really see it as an issue of right or wrong...not in the sense that you mean. Like it's a zero-sum game. It seems more a matter of both parties being loving and self-sacrificing toward each other. (gypsygirl explained this well in her post).

I'm curious about the need to have women admit that men are "right?" I don't even get what that means. Do you mean that women should affirm men more? Or that some women don't affirm men enough? Or that some women think men unworthy of affirmation no matter what a man's behavior?

 

[PoetMary]

I'm very blessed by this post. You certainly express a lot of wisdom here. Praise God! \/

I'm glad you stuck around VioletReigns! Gypsy is quite good at slicing through various Gordian Knots