Family Out of Order

[OopsMartin]

K.D. says:

1 Cor. 11:3

[Guest Biblicist]

Really didn't know that. Thanks for explaining. Wouldn't have ever dreamt someone would use it like nigger as you say. It's lightheartedly used for when someone is being roughneck and such around here. Never heard of stump jumper. Any idea what that is? I'm out here in the boondocks around the ocean. Different sort of life from either city or forest land.

Red necks are hard working farmers from the south. It should NEVER be used in a derogatory manner any more than nigger, or wetback should. It's rude and offensive. I don't care what the dictionary says.

Stump jumpers are the hardworking group of people who come from Pennsylvania.

My husband's family comes from West Virginia, they are considered Red Necks. My mother in law's family comes from Pennsylvania, they are considered Stump Jumpers. I am neither but someone using those terms to describe someone dispicable is quite insulting to me. I certainly would never put up with a person calling another a "nigger" in an unkind way. Not sure how you could use that term in a kind way.

hr.jr. if you truly are from the south and you consider Red Necks as inferior or vulgar, then you have some soul searching to do, my friend. I happen to love a Red Neck.

[exrockstar]

That is a good picture. There is hope for you yet.

Aloha Nui

hope for me? actually, what i am saying is support of who is accountable for what.

i think this is something that you are against.

she takes care of one end and i take care of the other.

[OopsMartin]

Really didn't know that. Thanks for explaining. Wouldn't have ever dreamt someone would use it like nigger as you say. It's lightheartedly used for when someone is being roughneck and such around here. Never heard of stump jumper. Any idea what that is? I'm out here in the boondocks around the ocean. Different sort of life from either city or forest land.

Red necks are hard working farmers from the south. It should NEVER be used in a derogatory manner any more than nigger, or wetback should. It's rude and offensive. I don't care what the dictionary says.

Stump jumpers are the hardworking group of people who come from Pennsylvania.

My husband's family comes from West Virginia, they are considered Red Necks. My mother in law's family comes from Pennsylvania, they are considered Stump Jumpers. I am neither but someone using those terms to describe someone dispicable is quite insulting to me. I certainly would never put up with a person calling another a "nigger" in an unkind way. Not sure how you could use that term in a kind way.

hr.jr. if you truly are from the south and you consider Red Necks as inferior or vulgar, then you have some soul searching to do, my friend. I happen to love a Red Neck.

Oh hey, I'm not from the south, never been there. Foreign country to me.

When I was a teen I always made friends with the underprivileged and specifically black kids. I stood between them and racist brats who would call them names. I have never used the word nigger in reference to calling someone that.

I feel so bad about using "redneck" and realizing that it is considered that bad a term. Really had no idea. Just shows you how far out from rascism we are here. Although we do have negative terms for mainlanders, they aren't that bad. Haole's even laughingly call themselves haole. Many years ago we used to have a really bad group of locals that were beating up on mainlanders (haole's) because they were so mad that the U.S. was taking over Hawaii. There are still a few more remote areas where more locals live that are not too friendly to non locals but not as radical as it used to be.

[OopsMartin]

That is a good picture. There is hope for you yet.

Aloha Nui

hope for me? actually, what i am saying is support of who is accountable for what.

i think this is something that you are against.

she takes care of one end and i take care of the other.

Actually, I'm not really against it as much as you think. What I'm against is no choices, pigeon holing. I do happen to think and have stated that primarily the husband is responsible to provide for and protect the wife and family. That is sticking to exactly what Scripture says, paying attention to the original languages. Did you know that the word "care for" (I think that's the word I'm thinking of) in Greek means nurture; so that the husband is to nurture his wife. So the idea that men aren't nurturers certainly flies in the face of Scripture, eh!

How they work all of that out to look in real life is between husband and wife in particular. But there is nothing wrong at all with the picture you painted. It shows consideration, responsibility, adaptability. Unless I read you wrong.

[Kansasdad]

K.D. says:

1 Cor. 11:3

[exrockstar]

Actually, I'm not really against it as much as you think. What I'm against is no choices, pigeon holing. I do happen to think and have stated that primarily the husband is responsible to provide for and protect the wife and family. That is sticking to exactly what Scripture says, paying attention to the original languages. Did you know that the word "care for" (I think that's the word I'm thinking of) in Greek means nurture; so that the husband is to nurture his wife. So the idea that men aren't nurturers certainly flies in the face of Scripture, eh!

How they work all of that out to look in real life is between husband and wife in particular. But there is nothing wrong at all with the picture you painted. It shows consideration, responsibility, adaptability. Unless I read you wrong.

yeah but we're just looking at the surface of everyday life in a family.

eventually there will come major decisions that can shake a home.

ultimately, IF IT IS A MATURE CHRISTIAN MAN, then he makes the ultimate decision.

He makes sound decisions based on his walk.

I'm not talking about selfish decisions but decisions that affect family as a whole.

we can expect blessings if both see eye to eye and accept whats there.

[firehill]

1 Cor. 11:3

[Smalcald]

The key though is commitment to the Holy marriage and to God, who is the person that we also made promises to when we got married.

For me, yeah I think the bible has laid out some ground rules for how this marital relationship can function the best, but as long as a couple have respect for their marriage and don't divorce, I think as long as they work it out between each other it can work as far as roles go within the marriage.

It seems like when ever we have these discussions we always miss the elephants and go for the nats. The elephant is divorce, the nats are all of the different ways families work together to stay together. I see many families where the man or women are NOT in traditional roles and they are staying together, I see many other families where they have very traditional roles and end up divorced.

But I would like to address something else, and that is our support for the many young people who are indeed practicing their faith and living sexually pure lives. Many young people and young adults are not involved in fornication and I think we should be very open in supporting them in this choice of obedience to God's Word, they are the example for others to follow and we should hold them up as such. Of course part of holding them up is for the married among us to also live sexually pure lives.

[OopsMartin]

1 Cor. 11:3