In what ways are husbands encouraged to love their wifes? What examples of Jesus' treatment of his diciples illustrate how a husband should exercise Christlike headship?
2007-05-19 10:00:17 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
dont you agree that a marriage is a good thing? what if we just all screwed nonchalantly? with no commitments?what if we just did sex like the dogs? sniiff the behind and slam it home? come on people are we dogs or humans? how nice do I need to be or how rude? does anybody out there know anything about marriage? their has to be a head of any marriage.
2007-05-19 14:02:27 · update #1
Your question sounds like you already have the answers.
2007-05-19 10:08:04 · answer #1 · answered by Uncle Thesis 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It may or may not be important at all, depending upon who you are and what you believe. If marriage is understood to signify love and mutual commitment, compassion and lovingkindness toward one another, well that is very beautiful. Unfortunately marriage can also imply attachment and possession, which are ego-centric poisons. Marriage is not inherent to Buddhist practice; yet many who come to Buddhism are already married and their practice can, in fact, deepen and strengthen their marriage by reducing selfishness and encouraging compassion and deeper love toward their partner.
The whole sexist notion of the husband being a Christ-like head of the relationship is mysoginistic crap, best left to the illiterate goat-herders who thought it up and put it in the Bible as a tool for controlling their women-folk. Men and women are no different except for their plumbing. Let's get over it, stop trying to control others, and learn to love with happiness and joy, putting others ahead of ourselves.
2007-05-19 17:16:43 · answer #2 · answered by buddhamonkeyboy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First of all, marriage has been constantly changing. Talk about "preserving marriage" is nonsense, because chances are the people saying it are hypocrites, involved or thinking of a marriage arrangement which is modern and rare when you look at the whole thing top down timeline-style.
Marriage for love was an extreme rarity at its 'origin;' it was originally an arrangment for chattel, property--it was purely a 'business' arrangment.
Oh yeah, also, one man married to many women is by FAR the most common marriage arrangment, historically speaking. So ask people who talk about the 'tradition of marriage' why they're talking about their modern variant of marriage instead of polygamy marriage for chattel, instead of their newfangled (bonus points for using that word) two-people-for-love marriage. See how they react.
2007-05-19 17:28:07 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Marriage....
Well, I suppose it all depends on which type of marriage you are referring to.
Biblical marriage: In the church.
Civil union: Marriage in the courthouse.
The lines are blurred.
Not many care about a biblical marriage anymore. Including me. As a matter of fact, I don't care about a courthouse marriage anymore either.
Husbands can exercise whatever they want. They aren't going to exercise it with ME.
Have a great day!
2007-05-19 17:09:26 · answer #4 · answered by dancing_in_the_hail 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
it's not important to recognize the origins of marriage. it's important to realize what marriage means.
and my husband is not the head of the family. there is no head of our family. we all work together and all take responsibility.
2007-05-19 17:04:58 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Christianity is NOT the origin of marriage.
http://marriage.about.com/cs/generalhistory/a/marriagehistory.htm
2007-05-19 17:08:57 · answer #6 · answered by ZER0 C00L ••AM••VT•• 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋