Fine, be that wayJust wanted to say that with the summer here I'll be outside a lot more and I'll be on the computer a lot less.
Last edited:
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Just wanted to say that with the summer here I'll be outside a lot more and I'll be on the computer a lot less.
I would love to be outside more than I am but I need to move some clouds in front of the sun so I don't explode from too much sun.
Send some sun here and I'l send you some cloud. I could even throw in some torrential rain for you if you like. If you're really lucky I might even send the snow we're due for next week...
Just wanted to say that with the summer here I'll be outside a lot more and I'll be on the computer a lot less.
You'll be missed.
*slams a gavel down* SOLD!
The shipping might be expensive
It's the packaging I'm wondering about. Shipping will be simple by comparison.
No.
No, no, no.
You are a parent from the moment that baby is conceived. The idea that you don't become a mother or a father until the baby is born means that the baby is not really your child until it's born, therefore abortion is perfectly acceptable.
The bidding is over: we now have our Single Issue Voter! I say this as a pro-life libertarian. You're being too literal this time, @FollowingHim2; there is nothing stopping one from interpreting the statement that the baby and the new parent are born on the same day to mean that the 'born'-ing starts on the day of conception. It's just semantics in this case: it's the sentiment of the fact that the new child begins to exist simultaneously with its parents becoming new parents, spoken in a beautiful fashion.
Just imagine how clunky it would be to say, "I heard the other day that a zygote and a new birthing-person/sperming-person pair are both brought into existence at the same time?"
It's time for some real Vitamin B-12!
I've posted a number of Kevin Samuels clips here: this one addresses polygamy, but you have to go to about 1:19 into it to listen to his conversation with a 26-year-old woman about why women have to accept their men being with another woman without expecting the same privilege for themselves if they want to keep a high-value man:
I think you missed the point of the quote. It is meant as encouragement to new parents who afraid of the responsibility of parenthood. That basically you learn the baby just like the baby is learning you. It means that all parents start out with a sort of blank slate and learn how to be parents. There was nothing physiological about it.
Every time I hear these absurd phrases I’m reminded how desperately wicked the heart of mankind is and how desperate he is to remove God from his conscience.
(I know you were using it ironically, which makes it sound even more absurd and usually gets a laugh out of me, when you do so)
It's not like I won't be around just not so much. I might miss a few days too. Just don't want people thinking there's some dramatic reason why I'm not on here so much. I'll just be outside.
The thing here is that women don't have to accept this. I don't have to accept a Honda Accord either.
Even though there's over 100 parts of Scripture that says the Apostles were of one Accord I still prefer a GMC.
I wanted this life and I wanted it and didn't care about Scripture when I came to it. I did not need a Biblical argument for what seemed to me a perfect thing.
My point is that this always comes back to the man.
The first thing is to put Jesus on the throne of your heart.
Then act like Jesus is on the throne of your heart and do so boldly and with confidence.
Such a man is very, very attractive and if he wants to have more than one wife he may well find himself having to pick and choose. He may even be attractive to women who'd normally reject poly and maybe even reject a typical modern marriage.
Even if a man never finds a second wife then in the course of putting Jesus as the King of his heart that man will become a better husband and father to the family he already has.
I guess this is where I find myself at odds with Mr. Samuels is that he emphasizes the submission of women to men as a priority when in fact the submission of women to men is a result of men FIRST submitting to Jesus and then striving to be good men.
You don't win wars by citing Scripture. You win wars by being better soldiers than the other side. But the best soldiers hold Scripture in their hearts. But these same soldiers are not going to fight so hard for a general who doesn't exemplify faith and the qualities of leadership. Anyone can give an order. A true leader like the Centurion (Matthew 8:5-9) also demonstrates faith and the qualities of leadership.
The best military leaders of our times hold Jesus as the Lord of their hearts.
Soldiers will naturally follow such a leader even to their deaths.
Their submission to their leader is a result of their leader's example and inspiration.
The same principle applies and MUST apply between wives and husbands.
A man cannot be the leader of his house if his leadership qualities hinge on his wives submission to him. He must be a leader anyway.
Be a man and the rest will come in God's time.
Many great points above, @MeganC, but always remember that Kevin Samuel's program began because his high-value-male clients were telling him that they're being pursued by hundreds of women but that very few of those female pursuers were high-value women, and now low-value women are voluntarily calling into Kevin's program to try to prove that they should get to remain low-value women and still be entitled to snag high-value men. They wouldn't label themselves low-value women, but all they're really describing themselves as having to offer a man is to meet some of his sex needs, whereas they're expecting him to protect them, organize their world, pay for twice as much work on their hair and their nails as they're currently wasting their money on, and generally greatly improve their standard of living. The evidence that the high-value men are already demonstrating more leadership than the women who are pursuing them in droves are ready to submit to is tautological: they are highly sought after. They're not begging women to pursue them. They haven't reached the highest levels of Christ followership themselves yet, but they are far closer to it than the pool of women are to demonstrate that they're ready to submit to such a highest-level man.
What we're discussing are men who are new Buicks looking for new female Buicks who look around, realize there are insufficient numbers of new female Buicks, instead are hounded incessantly by used tricked-out Kia Souls. Of course, no woman is required to become a new Buick, but does a man have to have already become a Cadillac fresh off the factory floor to demonstrate that he's worthy of something better than to share his garage with a used Kia Soul?
Are you asserting that a man has to reach the pinnacle of perfection before he should have the right to expect some submission?
I've never asserted that at all. Let's look at what I did assert:
I've never asked my husband to reach the pinnacle of perfection. But at least he tries. He strives to be a better man and in doing so quite often shames me into trying to be a better woman, wife, sister, and mother.
And you're right that too many women are low-value women. They're looking for a man to be the solution to their needs or problems and they think that meeting some of his sexual needs is all it takes to fulfill their part of the marriage bargain.
I say you're right because I was one of them.
I wanted a safe and secure home and I wanted to have kids. My thoughts about Steve were almost indifferent to him (poor grammar but I can't think of a better way to say this). I selfishly gave little thought to the man I was marrying and I think he knew this. Our first couple years together were really about him setting out his expectations for me and me discovering that my choice was to accept what he wanted or leave. The door was always open for me to leave.
I chose to submit. It wasn't easy but it was my choice and no one ever beat me over the head about it.
But it started with his decision to put Jesus as the King of his heart and to submit to Jesus as the Lord of his life. Everything Steve did to fix the broken, low-value Megan who came to him followed from his own decision to strive to be a better man. He is truly the person in this world I most admire. I am deeply blessed and you are right that Steve sets for me a very high standard for what I expect from men.
I don't expect them to get there because everyone is different.
But what often makes for a remarkable man is his insistence on trying.
This quote from Teddy Roosevelt comes to mind:
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”
A good man tries.
And a good man can inspire a low-value woman to be a high-value woman.
What we're discussing are men who are new Buicks looking for new female Buicks who look around, realize there are insufficient numbers of new female Buicks, instead are hounded incessantly by used tricked-out Kia Souls.
Demanding that the Kia Souls submit and start acting like Buicks is kind of silly, don't you think?
But maybe a Buick could meet an old VW and inspire her to improve herself.
This is now on my mind like a song that won't go away! 
Okay, so the reason I am so intent that husbandly leadership comes before wifely submission is because the sum of Scripture makes clear that the path of God's authority in the family is...
Jesus
\/
Husband/Leader of the House
\/
Wife
\/
Children
Within the family my relationship with my Savior is imperfect unless it comes to me through my husband. And if my relationship with Jesus comes through my husband then there is no reason to ask me to submit to my husband because it becomes a given.
So to me this becomes a very simple thing to accept that my husband is my leader because Jesus is my husband's leader.
No one needs to convince me of this. It simply is.
At the same time when a man makes too big a deal about a woman railing against the man's claim to leadership that typically tells me of a man who is not a leader.
A real leader doesn't need a woman's permission to lead because he would have obtained his authority from God through Christ Jesus. If he is bold and confident in his faith he will neither need her approval nor permission to lead. He should not ask for her approval, permission, or submission because that to me questions the authority that God through Christ Jesus has given to the man.
Moses wasn't supposed to hit the rock twice, right?
Okay, so the reason I am so intent that husbandly leadership comes before wifely submission is because the sum of Scripture makes clear that the path of God's authority in the family is...
Jesus
\/
Husband/Leader of the House
\/
Wife
\/
Children
Within the family my relationship with my Savior is imperfect unless it comes to me through my husband. And if my relationship with Jesus comes through my husband then there is no reason to ask me to submit to my husband because it becomes a given.
So to me this becomes a very simple thing to accept that my husband is my leader because Jesus is my husband's leader.
No one needs to convince me of this. It simply is.
At the same time when a man makes too big a deal about a woman railing against the man's claim to leadership that typically tells me of a man who is not a leader.
A real leader doesn't need a woman's permission to lead because he would have obtained his authority from God through Christ Jesus. If he is bold and confident in his faith he will neither need her approval nor permission to lead. He should not ask for her approval, permission, or submission because that to me questions the authority that God through Christ Jesus has given to the man.
Moses wasn't supposed to hit the rock twice, right?
Now about the women.
A woman who wants to be a successful wife will also have to put Jesus on the throne of her heart. She must first submit to Jesus before she can truly submit to her husband and then receive the blessings of God's authority in the family.
Just like the men, the women must also strive to improve themselves.
Such women will be prepared to open their hearts to the leadership of a good man and if they do then submission becomes an eventuality.
But if a woman will not first put Jesus on the throne of her heart then all the Scriptural arguments about submission will be in vain. She will not hear them because she is unable to hear them.
Let's say despite her spiritual shortcomings (like me) she miraculously finds herself with a man she does not deserve. She is the Kia Soul married to the Cadillac.
Then unless he's a fool the man will have entered into this marriage only with the determination to work on this woman until she puts someone other than herself on the throne of her heart. Even if she will only submit to her husband he will have prepared the way for Jesus.
Not every man is up to that. Not every woman can make this work.
I agree with Keith that the majority of women are low-value and that their values are also low. Some are willing to improve but what would motivate them to do so?
What happens when the woman is the Buick and the man is the Kia Soul?
Does she submit to him when doing so sets her further apart from the authority of God?
It's really not a good thing when the woman is holding up the faith (leadership) in the family because she becomes the exemplar of Godly authority in the home.
Women must do their part too. But we do a better job of it when we are led by a good man.
A woman who wants to be a successful wife will also have to put Jesus on the throne of her heart. She must first submit to Jesus before she can truly submit to her husband and then receive the blessings of God's authority in the family.
Just like the men, the women must also strive to improve themselves.
Such women will be prepared to open their hearts to the leadership of a good man and if they do then submission becomes an eventuality.
But if a woman will not first put Jesus on the throne of her heart then all the Scriptural arguments about submission will be in vain. She will not hear them because she is unable to hear them.
Let's say despite her spiritual shortcomings (like me) she miraculously finds herself with a man she does not deserve. She is the Kia Soul married to the Cadillac.
Then unless he's a fool the man will have entered into this marriage only with the determination to work on this woman until she puts someone other than herself on the throne of her heart. Even if she will only submit to her husband he will have prepared the way for Jesus.
Not every man is up to that. Not every woman can make this work.
I agree with Keith that the majority of women are low-value and that their values are also low. Some are willing to improve but what would motivate them to do so?
What happens when the woman is the Buick and the man is the Kia Soul?
Does she submit to him when doing so sets her further apart from the authority of God?
It's really not a good thing when the woman is holding up the faith (leadership) in the family because she becomes the exemplar of Godly authority in the home.
Women must do their part too. But we do a better job of it when we are led by a good man.
While it's true that both the man and woman doing things right is ideal, it's the woman that is told she can win her husband by her behavior. It doesn't say the reverse. Maybe us gals are more stubborn then men....or then we think? 