Let's talk about the elephant in the room

You take it the way you want to take it, not in the actual intent of what it is saying. Christ would never condone rape in any instance whatsoever. A wife does NOT belong to her husband like a piece of property!

PS You are completely evading the issue--we're not discussing in what instance a wife would withhold sex-- the main question is it wrong for a man to force sex on his wife--and OF COURSE it is in every single case regardless of what the wife's motive might be. No more would a husband have the right to beat his wife, for overspending, etc.

Goodness. I don't even know where to start--I dare you to show what you've written here to your wife.

You said:

1. Man and women are property with regards to sex< Nowhere in scripture is either a husband or wife considered 'property.
2. Crying "rape" means that she is not submitting to her husband when it comes to sexual relations. < Seriously?
3. If he is a born again Christian, then he has already stopped sinning. < Really? then why was Paul always telling the believers to STOP SINNING? You and every other Christian sin every single day. We are being conformed into the image of Christ as we surrender daily to His Lordship--sin is only done away with when we are with Him at the end of the age in our immortal bodies.
4. A woman who refuses her husband his right to sex is causing him to take things into his own hands...<that is like extreme muslims saying it's the woman's fault she was raped because she wasn't covered completely by her burka.

The context of this directive speaks to incontinence, not to any gain of leverage. ...and likewise also the husband hath not power... in other words she has the privilege of 'turning off his power switch," figuratively speaking, in equal capacity to his 'turning hers on.' And 'likewise, 'do not depriving each other, except by mutual consent," speaks, albeit indirectly, to mutual consent in the other case as well, for the purpose of devoting yourselves to God. Why should performance of duty be considered mandated devotion on the part of the wife but Paul feel it necessary that abstinence (on the part of the husband) be especially addressed?

The wife should never be left even 'feeling' raped anymore than the husband should be left feeling neglected. Open, and intimate, communication of one another' desires, and especially without neglect of spiritual needs, should be better practiced among husband and wives should be habitual and of more cardinal concern with only the more so intimate relationship and communication with God's desire taking precedence.

That is what is missing in the pandemic of porn. It is the 'vaccine' that addresses only the physical symptoms of a spiritual anemia without true cure of a much needed infusion of a true love. The vaccine doesn't cure the disease as much as it, idk, makes it more tolerable?

Indeed, to eliminate it entirely is the cure of it.

I would agree with you on everything here; but would also say that it is a sin for a wife to withhold sex from her husband.

Consider what it says here.

1Co 7:4, The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.

So, I'll concede that the wife is not his property and that the husband is not her property;

But would contend that this scripture plainly states that the wife does not have power of her own body but the husband has power over her body.

For her to withhold sex therefore is a sin for her that she is committing if she withholds sex from him and cries "rape" when he forces the issue.

Again, she does not have to remain married to him and is free to leave if she doesn't like this scriptural arrangement. If she doesn't love her husband enough to submit to him when he desires intimacy, then maybe they shouldn't be married.

If the husband says, "let's have sex" and she says "no", then and only then is it rape for him to have sex with her anyway.

If she is submitting to him she will not say "no".

How then is it rape for him to have sex with her if she is submitting to his request for her to have sex with him?

Paul told people to stop sinning probably in two places in the Bible (1 Corinthians 15:34 and Ephesians 4:26). If you can show any other scripture where that is spoken, I will be surprised. But in those two instances, I do believe that there were unbelievers in the audience.

I think that, being a woman, you don't understand the sex drive of a man. That is the bottom line.

It is not like the muslim situation that you are speaking of. Solomon spoke of it plainly that it was a situation in a marriage where the wife is contentious; that the ointment of her man's right hand bewrayeth itself.

That "stuff" builds up in the testicles of a man and there has to be release sooner or later.

If the wife is withholding sex from her husband, that is going to happen on his own. It is like an itch that has to be scratched until you have relief. And if the wife is withholding sex from her husband, I don't see him as being inclined towards thinking of her while he is getting that release. He will be thinking of the last woman who gave him a becoming look.

I say therefore that for the sake of preserving marriages, it is expedient for the woman to submit to her husband when he requires sex from her.

It has been said that the sex life of a husband and wife is practicing spiritual warfare against the enemy.

Because the enemy would love to come in and create a situation where either party is committing adultery in their heart.

Its it typical, tho, of such a dismissive man would think it sin that a with have no understanding his motivation and be totally dismissive of hers at the same time. Meh, so much for due benevolence.

Ok, good but, are you not defending the 'right' to 'force' the issue? I'd just like to make sure so I don't misunderstand....

Coincidently, however, the www suggested I watch a clip (the web seems eerie in that way that it seems to know every venture that I might engage in...) which advised of the futility of trying to use logic with the cognitive dissonant which would only result in the proliferation of even more contradictory reasoning to fortified the adopted lunacy. But perhaps I should come to terms with my own lunacy because I have to ask anyway. What part of love has anything involvement with the directive to love. And before anyone answers with even more lunacy, it is only a rhetorical question.

"which advised of the futility of trying to use logic with the cognitive dissonant which would only result in the proliferation of even more contradictory reasoning to fortified the adopted lunacy...

Yureka--that's it! I had defined it as nonsense, but this nails it!

Oh

I love this pic. It's worth a thousand words!

I have spoken what I have spoken.

I believe that what I have said is understandable so that you do not misunderstand what I am saying.

Which is, that, while I do not believe that a husband should force his wife to have sex with him, it is also true that she does not have power over her own body but the husband has power over her body; and vice versa.

The wife is to submit to her husband. If she submits when he requires sex from her, then there is no such thing as "rape" within a marriage because in order for that to occur, the female must be saying "no" to sex.

If she does not submit then he would be in the wrong to force sex; but she would also be in the wrong for withholding sex.

So, that would place the sin on both parties. Of course if the husband is more spiritual than the wife, he will not force the issue and in that case it will only be the wife who is sinning.

As I was saying earlier....

What does this picture have to do with the subject at hand?

Is the little girl angry with her father for begetting her without the permission of her mother?

I think that she should be happy that she is alive.

I believe what paul is also referring to is to not withhold sex as a form of punishment.
Many couples make this mistake.
My body my choice is the chant of the pro choice people which goes totally against Gods word.
To punish your spouse or to make them submit to your demands by using sex as the instrument goes against Gods word. For women was made from man for man and man is not good to be alone so God created women.
Shall we say we will not have personal private time with God untill he does my bidding.

The intimacy between a married couple should never be a tool to rule.

Unwanted children are everywhere, and they will put two and two together when they grow up because of their parents attitude toward each other in the marital bed, there is a spiritual difference the blessed (products of love) or cursed (children of rape or bastards) .

Also you can easily witness how Jacob favoured his sons Joseph and Benjamin from his first love Rachel over the sons of his other wife Leah and their maidservants. Jacob didnt love Leah. She bore his children anyway.

Even the blessings that Jacob pronounced over his twelve sons, some of them sound more like curses! Plus, nothing was even said to Dinah, his daughter. Was she unwanted simply because she was female?