Pastors vs. Husbands

[another_poster]

may be secular but it is also scriptural. The bible does tell us to resolve conflict.

Yes, the Bible does tell us to resolve conflicts and to be at peace with all men.  At the same time, the burden of conflict resolution does not fall upon one man.  God has ordained that a plurality of elders handle the oversight of the flock.  Furthermore we have a clearly laid out procedure in Matthew 18:15-17, where the burden is primarily on those in conflict with each other, and ultimately involves the whole church.

As to contemporary music and worship, I believe you should do a little more research. Check out this website, which has a lot of good information on this subject. http://www.wayoflife.org/

 

I have done my research and know what I'm talking about. Funny thing about that site is that in one article it talks about myths that people believe about why others are against contemporary music (CM) yet in a different article someone lists several of those exact reasons as to why it is wrong. They make all kinds of assumptions. They quote one verse from here and there yet fail to explain how they relate to the topic. Short answer is several of them don't. I didn't look at others after that. Not hard to gauge the kind of arguments they have.

The funniest one is that modern songs aren't scriptural. I remember one lady walking into a bookshop and saying that. Person in charge picked up a CM songbook and turned to song after song which was nothing but scripture in the same way that liturgy is scripture. Then grabbed the traditional hymn book and turned to several songs which all appear to have been based on emotion rather than scripture. Some hymns are based on one verse of scripture yet have six verses plus a chorus! From one verse? Not likely.
All that still ignores what I said earlier about those songs being described the same way as CM is now described by some people. One of the articles actually didn't realise it but from their argument then all traditional hymns are wrong and should not be used. Sometimes I wonder if people actually read what they write in their eagerness to condemn.

[another_poster]

 

I am aware of your opinion on the subject and I believe your response represents the narrow mind and lack of empathy for anything that was gained for women from the feminist movement that gained the right for woman to vote, go to school, become a doctor or a lawyer, and for conviction of sexual offenders.

If you believe that Butero's view is narrow-minded then you would have to conclude that the apostle Paul and the Lord were narrow-minded. As to the "gains" from the feminist movement, if you were to dig deeper you would find that the majority of those women who became doctors or lawyers or what have you were not feminists, and would reject feminist notions.

Um, I don't you think you really understand what you are talking about either, because Paul is one of my favorite writers of the Bible.  I also cited very specific aspects that are historical milestones in the woman's movement that were won by woman who did not always believe in God.  The ism of the woman's movement usually means that these woman are not saved and their endeavor is not a spiritual one but a more practical one.  It was woman from the ism of the woman's movement who first published The Courage to Heal, in the 1970's, which is still a very popular book that has help a countless number of women heal from the effects of sexual abuse because the rape crisis movement was largely led by woman who were not of faith, probably because their husbands would never have let them participate in the fight for justice from sexual assault.  It was a woman name Judith Herman who identified a similar traumatic pattern between women who were victims of rape and the early research on the subject of PTSD in soldiers in the book Trauma and Recovery.  It was Diana Russell that challenged the statistics for sexual assault and published the findings in The Secret Trauma, which is an essential piece of the treatment that is now available for women who have been assaulted.  All of these endeavors had nothing to do with the church, and I find the broad stroke of the pen claiming that I am in disagreement with the Bible for my opinion towards the women's movement that has taken place outside the church to be very narrow minded.  It is like saying we should take back all this progress because the Bible says the husband should be able to tell his wife what to do and what not to do and reflects being very poorly informed on the subject.  

In conclusion, it would appear in some ways, that these women who pursued these accomplishments have done more to restore the dignity of women, than 2000 years of male leadership in the church.  

 

 

The problem with everything you said is it isn't Biblical.  Where are those of us who disagree with you misinformed?  I am saying that the Bible is in opposition to the things feminism stands for, and this is easily proved.  My position is when the Bible takes a position opposite of the direction society is going, the Bible is right and society is wrong.  To believe otherwise shows that you cannot believe the Bible is the Word of God, or you don't care.  I absolutely am saying we should "take back all this progress because the Bible says the husband should be able to tell his wife what to do."  God is right and you and the culture are wrong.  Rebellion isn't progress.  Are you going to seriously try to tell me the Bible supports your views?  If you are, I will be glad to debate you one on one on that subject, but if you are siding with the heathen culture over God, I stand with God. 

Really so allowing women to be beaten senseless by their husbands is biblical is it?
Allowing rape is biblical is it?

Sorry but I think you really need to look at your bible again. These are things started by feminisim which actually started in christian church. Just like there is a wide variety of views amongst christians there is a wide variety of views amongst feminists. There are more radical ones and others who you wouldn't know are feminists unless they tell you as well as everything inbetween. The rape & domestic violence was known about by the church but they failed in their duty to protect those least able to protect themselves as the bible commands. 

You are partly correct in that the bible does tell wives to submit to their husbands but it also tells husbands to submit to their wives (its there in the KJV). It also tells husbands to love their wives as Jesus loved the church. Now Jesus did not want to die on the cross but submitted to the Fathers will. To what the Father wanted. So no way in the world is the husband supposed to order his wife around. Any husband who does that has no love in them. I don't say that lightly. Read 1 Cor 13 to find out what love is.

[AllTheGoodNamesAreTaken]

Oh never mind. just ignore this since i cant find the delete post button

  No wait this we can argue about

LOL!

[seabrook]

God given authority is surely a given in the Church and the pastor does have a certain amount of authority.  But the wife is to submit to her husband even as the husband is to love the wife as Christ loved the church.  That does not mean that both don't acknowledge the authority of their pastor.  Some pastors do need to be called to account by God for their  abuse of that authority by over-stepping their limitations in this. Yet,  likely more often because they are so busy with church projects, programs, sermons, finances, etc. don't show enough concern about couples who need pastoral care and counseling.  Blessed is the congregation who has a pastor or pastors who exercise their authority with wisdom and love and who care!!  

[Guest Butero]

 

I am aware of your opinion on the subject and I believe your response represents the narrow mind and lack of empathy for anything that was gained for women from the feminist movement that gained the right for woman to vote, go to school, become a doctor or a lawyer, and for conviction of sexual offenders.

If you believe that Butero's view is narrow-minded then you would have to conclude that the apostle Paul and the Lord were narrow-minded. As to the "gains" from the feminist movement, if you were to dig deeper you would find that the majority of those women who became doctors or lawyers or what have you were not feminists, and would reject feminist notions.

Um, I don't you think you really understand what you are talking about either, because Paul is one of my favorite writers of the Bible.  I also cited very specific aspects that are historical milestones in the woman's movement that were won by woman who did not always believe in God.  The ism of the woman's movement usually means that these woman are not saved and their endeavor is not a spiritual one but a more practical one.  It was woman from the ism of the woman's movement who first published The Courage to Heal, in the 1970's, which is still a very popular book that has help a countless number of women heal from the effects of sexual abuse because the rape crisis movement was largely led by woman who were not of faith, probably because their husbands would never have let them participate in the fight for justice from sexual assault.  It was a woman name Judith Herman who identified a similar traumatic pattern between women who were victims of rape and the early research on the subject of PTSD in soldiers in the book Trauma and Recovery.  It was Diana Russell that challenged the statistics for sexual assault and published the findings in The Secret Trauma, which is an essential piece of the treatment that is now available for women who have been assaulted.  All of these endeavors had nothing to do with the church, and I find the broad stroke of the pen claiming that I am in disagreement with the Bible for my opinion towards the women's movement that has taken place outside the church to be very narrow minded.  It is like saying we should take back all this progress because the Bible says the husband should be able to tell his wife what to do and what not to do and reflects being very poorly informed on the subject.  

In conclusion, it would appear in some ways, that these women who pursued these accomplishments have done more to restore the dignity of women, than 2000 years of male leadership in the church.  

 

 

The problem with everything you said is it isn't Biblical.  Where are those of us who disagree with you misinformed?  I am saying that the Bible is in opposition to the things feminism stands for, and this is easily proved.  My position is when the Bible takes a position opposite of the direction society is going, the Bible is right and society is wrong.  To believe otherwise shows that you cannot believe the Bible is the Word of God, or you don't care.  I absolutely am saying we should "take back all this progress because the Bible says the husband should be able to tell his wife what to do."  God is right and you and the culture are wrong.  Rebellion isn't progress.  Are you going to seriously try to tell me the Bible supports your views?  If you are, I will be glad to debate you one on one on that subject, but if you are siding with the heathen culture over God, I stand with God. 

Really so allowing women to be beaten senseless by their husbands is biblical is it?
Allowing rape is biblical is it?

Sorry but I think you really need to look at your bible again. These are things started by feminisim which actually started in christian church. Just like there is a wide variety of views amongst christians there is a wide variety of views amongst feminists. There are more radical ones and others who you wouldn't know are feminists unless they tell you as well as everything inbetween. The rape & domestic violence was known about by the church but they failed in their duty to protect those least able to protect themselves as the bible commands. 

You are partly correct in that the bible does tell wives to submit to their husbands but it also tells husbands to submit to their wives (its there in the KJV). It also tells husbands to love their wives as Jesus loved the church. Now Jesus did not want to die on the cross but submitted to the Fathers will. To what the Father wanted. So no way in the world is the husband supposed to order his wife around. Any husband who does that has no love in them. I don't say that lightly. Read 1 Cor 13 to find out what love is.

As far as I know, assault was a crime in this nation before feminism came along.  Whether or not those laws were enforced in marriage is another matter, but they needed to be.  1 Corinthians states that in marriage, the husband doesn't have control over his own body, and neither does the wife when it comes to sexual relations.  That means there is no Biblical right to refusal by either, so if they are following scripture, you can't possibly have rape in marriage.  I looked into this as a result of a previous debate, and the rape exception in marriage was based on 1 Corinthians and existed in every state until the 1970s.  The other issue is the difficulty that exists in trying to prove a rape in marriage took place.  I oppose the change in the law. 

Husbands are not told to submit to their wives.  We are told to submit to each other in the sense of assisting each other as brothers and sisters in the Lord.  The mutual submission argument to make null and void the wife's command to submit to their husbands is made up.  There is no scripture that says "husbands, submit to your wives."  It doesn't exist, and if you are going to claim it does, please provide that KJV scripture.  I would love to examine it.  Husbands are told to love their wives as Christ loved the church, so he is the example.  We see him loving the church in dying for us, but he never gave up his Lordship.  As a matter of fact, he made it clear he is master and Lord.  I can easily back all of this up. 

[Guest Butero]

God given authority is surely a given in the Church and the pastor does have a certain amount of authority.  But the wife is to submit to her husband even as the husband is to love the wife as Christ loved the church.  That does not mean that both don't acknowledge the authority of their pastor.  Some pastors do need to be called to account by God for their  abuse of that authority by over-stepping their limitations in this. Yet,  likely more often because they are so busy with church projects, programs, sermons, finances, etc. don't show enough concern about couples who need pastoral care and counseling.  Blessed is the congregation who has a pastor or pastors who exercise their authority with wisdom and love and who care!!  

I would have to assume you are blessed to have a good Pastor at your church.  I am happy to hear there is someone who feels the desire to defend their own Pastor.  There are still some good ones out there, but there are many bad ones too. 

[Esther4:14]

 

I am aware of your opinion on the subject and I believe your response represents the narrow mind and lack of empathy for anything that was gained for women from the feminist movement that gained the right for woman to vote, go to school, become a doctor or a lawyer, and for conviction of sexual offenders.

If you believe that Butero's view is narrow-minded then you would have to conclude that the apostle Paul and the Lord were narrow-minded. As to the "gains" from the feminist movement, if you were to dig deeper you would find that the majority of those women who became doctors or lawyers or what have you were not feminists, and would reject feminist notions.

Um, I don't you think you really understand what you are talking about either, because Paul is one of my favorite writers of the Bible.  I also cited very specific aspects that are historical milestones in the woman's movement that were won by woman who did not always believe in God.  The ism of the woman's movement usually means that these woman are not saved and their endeavor is not a spiritual one but a more practical one.  It was woman from the ism of the woman's movement who first published The Courage to Heal, in the 1970's, which is still a very popular book that has help a countless number of women heal from the effects of sexual abuse because the rape crisis movement was largely led by woman who were not of faith, probably because their husbands would never have let them participate in the fight for justice from sexual assault.  It was a woman name Judith Herman who identified a similar traumatic pattern between women who were victims of rape and the early research on the subject of PTSD in soldiers in the book Trauma and Recovery.  It was Diana Russell that challenged the statistics for sexual assault and published the findings in The Secret Trauma, which is an essential piece of the treatment that is now available for women who have been assaulted.  All of these endeavors had nothing to do with the church, and I find the broad stroke of the pen claiming that I am in disagreement with the Bible for my opinion towards the women's movement that has taken place outside the church to be very narrow minded.  It is like saying we should take back all this progress because the Bible says the husband should be able to tell his wife what to do and what not to do and reflects being very poorly informed on the subject.  

In conclusion, it would appear in some ways, that these women who pursued these accomplishments have done more to restore the dignity of women, than 2000 years of male leadership in the church.  

 

 

The problem with everything you said is it isn't Biblical.  Where are those of us who disagree with you misinformed?  I am saying that the Bible is in opposition to the things feminism stands for, and this is easily proved.  My position is when the Bible takes a position opposite of the direction society is going, the Bible is right and society is wrong.  To believe otherwise shows that you cannot believe the Bible is the Word of God, or you don't care.  I absolutely am saying we should "take back all this progress because the Bible says the husband should be able to tell his wife what to do."  God is right and you and the culture are wrong.  Rebellion isn't progress.  Are you going to seriously try to tell me the Bible supports your views?  If you are, I will be glad to debate you one on one on that subject, but if you are siding with the heathen culture over God, I stand with God. 

and I am saying that feminism does stand against injustice done against them.  Hence the title of the book The Courage to Heal because many women are afraid of being rejected in their struggle with sexual assault they may have experienced.  They need courage to heal and to be able to say that a crime was done against them, and knights in shining armor don't seem to be jumping out of fairy tales willing to slay this dragon of silence for them.  

You think that we should take back all progress.  You do realize that when you saying this to someone like me, you are saying that should have died rather than heal because these women have done a whole lot for me to be able to live today.  But, you are saying I should give it all back.  It is a wonder that church attendance is declining and pastors are becoming more seeker sensitive because they are protecting new converts from people like you.  

""Because of the devastation of the afflicted, because of the groaning of the needy, Now I will arise," says the LORD; "I will set him in the safety for which he longs." (Psalm 12:5).  

"For I the LORD love justice; I hate robbery and wrong; " (Isaiah 61:8).  

There are really too many verses to quote about how He feels about injustice to support what I am saying in my support of women who are opposed to injustice who may identify themselves as feminists because men like you would crucify them if they identified themselves as Christians.  You are shutting the door in the face of many who need Jesus to heal from their suffering.  Good job!  

Edited October 16, 2015 by Esther4:14

[enoob57]

God given authority is surely a given in the Church and the pastor does have a certain amount of authority.  But the wife is to submit to her husband even as the husband is to love the wife as Christ loved the church.  That does not mean that both don't acknowledge the authority of their pastor.  Some pastors do need to be called to account by God for their  abuse of that authority by over-stepping their limitations in this. Yet,  likely more often because they are so busy with church projects, programs, sermons, finances, etc. don't show enough concern about couples who need pastoral care and counseling.  Blessed is the congregation who has a pastor or pastors who exercise their authority with wisdom and love and who care!!  

I believe this is good wisdom!  

[Guest Butero]

 

I am aware of your opinion on the subject and I believe your response represents the narrow mind and lack of empathy for anything that was gained for women from the feminist movement that gained the right for woman to vote, go to school, become a doctor or a lawyer, and for conviction of sexual offenders.

If you believe that Butero's view is narrow-minded then you would have to conclude that the apostle Paul and the Lord were narrow-minded. As to the "gains" from the feminist movement, if you were to dig deeper you would find that the majority of those women who became doctors or lawyers or what have you were not feminists, and would reject feminist notions.

Um, I don't you think you really understand what you are talking about either, because Paul is one of my favorite writers of the Bible.  I also cited very specific aspects that are historical milestones in the woman's movement that were won by woman who did not always believe in God.  The ism of the woman's movement usually means that these woman are not saved and their endeavor is not a spiritual one but a more practical one.  It was woman from the ism of the woman's movement who first published The Courage to Heal, in the 1970's, which is still a very popular book that has help a countless number of women heal from the effects of sexual abuse because the rape crisis movement was largely led by woman who were not of faith, probably because their husbands would never have let them participate in the fight for justice from sexual assault.  It was a woman name Judith Herman who identified a similar traumatic pattern between women who were victims of rape and the early research on the subject of PTSD in soldiers in the book Trauma and Recovery.  It was Diana Russell that challenged the statistics for sexual assault and published the findings in The Secret Trauma, which is an essential piece of the treatment that is now available for women who have been assaulted.  All of these endeavors had nothing to do with the church, and I find the broad stroke of the pen claiming that I am in disagreement with the Bible for my opinion towards the women's movement that has taken place outside the church to be very narrow minded.  It is like saying we should take back all this progress because the Bible says the husband should be able to tell his wife what to do and what not to do and reflects being very poorly informed on the subject.  

In conclusion, it would appear in some ways, that these women who pursued these accomplishments have done more to restore the dignity of women, than 2000 years of male leadership in the church.  

 

 

The problem with everything you said is it isn't Biblical.  Where are those of us who disagree with you misinformed?  I am saying that the Bible is in opposition to the things feminism stands for, and this is easily proved.  My position is when the Bible takes a position opposite of the direction society is going, the Bible is right and society is wrong.  To believe otherwise shows that you cannot believe the Bible is the Word of God, or you don't care.  I absolutely am saying we should "take back all this progress because the Bible says the husband should be able to tell his wife what to do."  God is right and you and the culture are wrong.  Rebellion isn't progress.  Are you going to seriously try to tell me the Bible supports your views?  If you are, I will be glad to debate you one on one on that subject, but if you are siding with the heathen culture over God, I stand with God. 

and I am saying that feminism does stand against injustice done against them.  Hence the title of the book The Courage to Heal because many women are afraid of being rejected in their struggle with sexual assault they may have experienced.  They need courage to heal and to be able to say that a crime was done against them, and knights in shining armor don't seem to be jumping out of fairy tales willing to slay this dragon of silence for them.  

You think that we should take back all progress.  You do realize that when you saying this to someone like me, you are saying that should have died rather than heal because these women have done a whole lot for me to be able to live today.  But, you are saying I should give it all back.  It is a wonder that church attendance is declining and pastors are becoming more seeker sensitive because they are protecting new converts from people like you.  

""Because of the devastation of the afflicted, because of the groaning of the needy, Now I will arise," says the LORD; "I will set him in the safety for which he longs." (Psalm 12:5).  

"For I the LORD love justice; I hate robbery and wrong; " (Isaiah 61:8).  

There are really too many verses to quote about how He feels about injustice to support what I am saying in my support of women who are opposed to injustice who may identify themselves as feminists because men like you would crucify them if they identified themselves as Christians.  You are shutting the door in the face of many who need Jesus to heal from their suffering.  Good job!  

You haven't shown in the Bible all of these injustices.  You will need to be more specific about what you mean by "sexual assault."  If you are speaking of sex in marriage, there is no Biblical right to refusal, so I don't see how you could be speaking of that.  If you mean someone jumping a woman and raping her, there were already laws on the books concerning that.  Unlike you, I will prove my position from scripture. 

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.  1 Corinthians 7:4

This is speaking of sexual relations, so anyone who makes the claim that you can have rape in marriage is denying a Biblical truth.  You can't believe this scripture is of God, because you have no right of refusal.  There is the issue of a legal separation, and something needed to be done there, but I oppose the removal of the marital exception in rape laws. 

I see you as a false teacher.  You are false as you are teaching things contrary to the Bible.  I see the ministers you are speaking of as either spineless wimps who are afraid to speak the truth, or people who care more about getting all the tithes and attendance they can at the expense of truth.  Either way, I have the Bible on my side, and you clearly do not.  Not one scripture you have provided shows any injustices are taking place that were righted by feminists.  I know the Bible very well.  I have studied it all my Christian walk, and I know when someone is speaking things contrary to scripture.  You can't just claim an injustice without showing exactly what it is and giving scriptural support.  Emotional nonsense won't work on me.  I deal in facts. 

[Esther4:14]

 

You haven't shown in the Bible all of these injustices.  You will need to be more specific about what you mean by "sexual assault."  If you are speaking of sex in marriage, there is no Biblical right to refusal, so I don't see how you could be speaking of that.  If you mean someone jumping a woman and raping her, there were already laws on the books concerning that.  Unlike you, I will prove my position from scripture. 

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.  1 Corinthians 7:4

This is speaking of sexual relations, so anyone who makes the claim that you can have rape in marriage is denying a Biblical truth.  You can't believe this scripture is of God, because you have no right of refusal.  There is the issue of a legal separation, and something needed to be done there, but I oppose the removal of the marital exception in rape laws. 

I see you as a false teacher.  You are false as you are teaching things contrary to the Bible.  I see the ministers you are speaking of as either spineless wimps who are afraid to speak the truth, or people who care more about getting all the tithes and attendance they can at the expense of truth.  Either way, I have the Bible on my side, and you clearly do not.  Not one scripture you have provided shows any injustices are taking place that were righted by feminists.  I know the Bible very well.  I have studied it all my Christian walk, and I know when someone is speaking things contrary to scripture.  You can't just claim an injustice without showing exactly what it is and giving scriptural support.  Emotional nonsense won't work on me.  I deal in facts. 

You clearly do not know what you are talking about and I think that this is because you are so hardened to listening to anything a woman would say because you are in a stronghold where your pride would never allow you to see a different perspective of the issue.  I will try to be brief about the subject of sexual assault.  

Sexual assault is mentioned in the Bible.  The Bible describes a situation where a women would have to marry the man who raped her which can be somewhat controversial (Deuteronomy 22:29).  This verse gets used by people teaching from a male perspective that the Bible is encouraging a women to submit in the case of rape to a man who rapes her.  However, what He is actually doing is discouraging rape.  This verse is more directed towards men to prevent them rape because there is a financial penalty that will be placed on them for committing this act.  Therefore, a man should see this verse as, "I want to have sex with her, but I don't want to buy her dinner for the rest of her life, so I will leave her alone."  The Bible is not supporting a woman having to marry the man who rapes her.  He is discouraging a man from raping a women.  

There are other verses that could be cited according to the law, as well as the more violent offenses that would more than likely be considered difficult cases according to the law that I would imagine would lead to stoning at some point for the violation of idolatry and worshiping other Gods because at the root of any violent offender is going to be idolatry of some kind (Deuteronomy 17:2-7).  

So, that is how I believe the Bible would address the subject of assault according to the Old Testament and the sphere which the woman was created to exist, and is one of the reasons why I think a man ruling over her husband according to the curse of Eve (Genesis 3:16), is the greater of the two curses because I could go out on a limb and suggest that a man has conveniently never consider how the passage about marrying the woman that was raped applied to them.  We have been dependent on their interpretation, which could skew this to mean that rape is not that bad because a woman is supposed to marry the man even though he has raped her.  Therefore, rape is not that great of an offense.  

Outside of this, the verses that you cite do not provide a argument that clearly states that anything I have said cannot be considered injustice.  If something causes suffering, it is injustice.  If a woman suffers, it is still injustice even if she is a woman and created as a help meet.  

There have also been laws concerning assault that have been clouded by a man favoring another man.  So, while someone like Artemisia Gentileschi was able to bring her offender to trial during the Renaissance.  She was scrutinized and the court actively try to prove that she was promiscuous as a defense for the man, which was a very trying ordeal that was invasive and traumatic rather than showing simple concern and rebuke for a violation made against a woman that has caused suffering.  The victim was questioned as the perpetrator.  

There is also another documentary called Girl 27 about an extra in the movie industry who was raped by the man who was employed to travel and sell movies to local theaters.  The man was protected by the studio and she lost her career in the industry.  So, part of the problem that feminists were angry about was the complacency and the absence of the application of the legal system in regard to legislation regarding sexual assault, which I have cited that the Bible discouraged.  Therefore, women are in the right to pursue greater recognition of the laws and respect for victims.  

I also don't know why you keep bringing up about how rape doesn't exist in a marriage.  It is also not true.  A woman could be married to a wicked man and be raped the same way as if she were not married to the same man.  Maybe even more so, because sex within marriage should never be forced, which is what the definition of rape is-being forced to have sex.  This is different scenario that some may experience, and maybe this is also a difficult case that the verse that you have cited does not identify a conclusion for.  However, I do not know why you keep bringing this up.