So that we all understand context here is a video of Rep. Bachmann speaking on this subject.

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0rUBomKvY0&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I am not surprised yet still disappointed in some of the knee jerk reactions and assumptions being made in regards to my question. This term "submissive" has such a negative connotation in today's world and now we have a female running for President. If we do not fully understand the context and examples of its manifestation it certainly is worth discussion. I truly have never understood the verse so that plus my initial point makes it seem legit.

 

So, UKMustang, either jump in with your understanding or move onto another thread. RTS, your understanding and explanation is eagerly awaited.

 

Larry, I appreciate the response.

Been busy today, Clyde. I didn't get the opportunity to post any more earlier.

First off, I didn't make a knee jerk reaction to anything you said, although I'm a bit surprised that you really see anything to this quote of hers. My earlier comment was directed elsewhere.

Her interpretation of that bible quote in the video is different from mine, I always viewed "submissive" being more for reasons of procreation than "ordering" your wife to do things. I'm not really convinced she sees it differently either to tell you the truth. What I see her doing in the video is being a typical politician, "playing to her audience". Just another reason I don't care for most politicians.

I honestly just don't see anything here, much ado about nothing, really. What exactly is it you find worrisome about it, Clyde?

Been busy today, Clyde. I didn't get the opportunity to post any more earlier.

First off, I didn't make a knee jerk reaction to anything you said, although I'm a bit surprised that you really see anything to this quote of hers. My earlier comment was directed elsewhere.

Her interpretation of that bible quote in the video is different from mine, I always viewed "submissive" being more for reasons of procreation than "ordering" your wife to do things. I'm not really convinced she sees it differently either to tell you the truth. What I see her doing in the video is being a typical politician, "playing to her audience". Just another reason I don't care for most politicians.

I honestly just don't see anything here, much ado about nothing, really. What exactly is it you find worrisome about it, Clyde?

 

Worrisome? I asked what it means in today's world because I do not know and it's topical.

Worrisome? I asked what it means in today's world because I do not know and it's topical.

OK, it just seemed like you found it as a problem coming from a presidential candidate. You have no opinion as to how you view the bible quote?

OK, it just seemed like you found it as a problem coming from a presidential candidate. You have no opinion as to how you view the bible quote?

 

Can you point to the comment that led you to think I found it worrisome?

 

I have no opinion which seems evident by my questions.

Can you point to the comment that led you to think I found it worrisome?

 

I have no opinion which seems evident by my questions.

The thread itself? :idunno:

 

You have no idea what it means to you at all?

I don't understand the issue with the verse. If the wife submits to the husband, as he submits to Christ, and we understand that Christ is not oppressive, as husbands we are not to be oppressive to the wife, there is harmony. Because a wife is submissive, the connotation some take is that she's a meek, unheard, yes-dear type that gets bossed around by the guy who brings home the bacon as she cleans house, tends to younguns, cooks with her apron and duct tape over her mouth. Far from what scripture sets as the family structure.

 

:thumb:

I don't understand the issue with the verse. If the wife submits to the husband, as he submits to Christ, and we understand that Christ is not oppressive, as husbands we are not to be oppressive to the wife, there is harmony. Because a wife is submissive, the connotation some take is that she's a meek, unheard, yes-dear type that gets bossed around by the guy who brings home the bacon as she cleans house, tends to younguns, cooks with her apron and duct tape over her mouth. Far from what scripture sets as the family structure.

 

From experience....if the wife is more submissive, or at least makes it appear to her husband that he is in charge and he is the king, the "submissive" wife will reap the benefits of a committed and devoted husband who will do anything for her!

Nope, she's a flake for it. :ohbrother:

She's considered a flake for a lot of reasons ... if someone thinks the comment addressed in this thread is another reason to think so, given her history, I couldn't say I would blame them.

 

Botton line ... Bachmann had made a lot of questionable statements that, shall we say, increase her appeal to some of the dogmatic religious right. But those comments don't always play so well in the mainstream.