Have a marriage where you look at each other like Ashley looks at Dave and how Dave looks at Ashley!! Oh my goodness......the sparks are visible between these two......so much love, passion, and respect! You both truly have been blessed with each other and are doing such an amazing job following God's calling!
The divorce and remarriage for adultery doctrine is based solely on the supposed guilt of the wife in Matthew 5:32, and Matthew 19:9. However, the wife in Matthew 5:31-32 is clearly not guilty of fornication because the Jews that Jesus was speaking to were still living under the law, and if fornication was discovered, there was a moral obligation to report the offender according to Deuteronomy 22:13-24. The wife, who would have been found guilty of fornication, was subsequently stoned to death, according to the law, which had still governed the Jews up until Christ's death on the cross. The same for a woman caught in adultery, according to Leviticus 20:10. How could a wife, guilty of fornication, or adultery, under the law of Moses, be given a writing of divorcement and be caused to commit adultery with whosoever marries her, that is divorced? Jesus is clear, in these examples, that the wife is not guilty of fornication, but is still caused to commit adultery if she marries another man now that she is divorced. This is the only way that Matthew 5:31-32, and Matthew 19:9 keep harmony with Romans 7:2-3, and 1 Corinthians 7:39. Unlike the synoptic gospels of Mark and Luke, which were written to evangelize the Gentiles, Matthew was written to the Jews, and has of 24 characteristics that identify it as intended for the house of Israel. The ancient Jews called the betrothed (engaged) "husband" and "wife" according to Deuteronomy 22:23-24, Matthew 1:18-25, and Luke 2:5-7. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage) was never for fornication or adultery. Allowing those guilty of fornication and adultery to remain living and become a prospect for remarriage was against the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22:13-24 and Leviticus 20:10, which commanded that those who were found guilty of fornication and adultery be put away from Israel, and stoned to death. The law of Moses was not given to the world, only to the Jews. From the exodus, to Christ's death on the cross, the law of Moses governed the Jewish people. But when Jesus died on the cross, he caused the Jews to be dead to the law of Moses so they could be joined to Christ under a New Covenant. This is what Jesus's fulfillment of the law of Moses, including Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage), means. Paul gave several warnings to Christian believers against keeping the law of Moses over following Christ and his commands under the New Covenant with Christ. Keeping the whole law is no longer possible for those in Israel and that is why Christ prophesied that the temple would be destroyed. These scriptures make it clear that if you choose the law over Christ, that you must keep the whole law: Romans 7:4, Galatians 3:1-9, Galatians 3:10-29, Galatians 4:1-7, Galatians 4:21-31, and Galatians 5:1-15. Being unequally yoked to unbelievers is not a cause for divorce, once two become one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, according to 1 Corinthians 7:12-14. Many one-flesh covenant marriages between unbelievers are recognized by God in the scriptures, most notably the marriage covenants between Herodias and King Herod's brother Philip, Potiphar and his wife, Ahab and Jezebel, and Ruth to her deceased husband Mahlon by Boaz when he took her to be his wife. Some are teaching that 1 Corinthians 7:15 implies that those who are abandoned by the unbeliever, are "no longer bound" in a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The reason this is in conflict is due to the way they word it, which gives it an entirely different meaning, and context. 1 Corinthians 7:15, says, "15But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace." As you can see, the actual scripture says "not under bondage," which means that the husband or wife is not enslaved to sin with the unbelieving spouse, and is free to worship Christ in peace. Subsequent translations have changed the words to imply that they nullify the marriage covenant, when this is not at all the case. The issue that this creates is with 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, which says, "10And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 11But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife." As you can see, those who claim 1 Corinthians 7:15 has the Apostle Paul giving permission to remarry do not understand that the abandoned husband in 1 Corinthians 7:11 is expected to also remain unmarried, in order to be reconciled with his wife. The theory that 1 Corinthians 7:15 nullifies two as being one-flesh in marriage puts the Apostle Paul directly at odds with Christ, by implying that he has issued an opposing command. Some also teach that 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 is referring to both divorced men and virgin women, and not exclusively to men and women (virgins) who have never been married. This has been falsely taught for some time in churches as referring to anyone who is not currently in a marriage, which, for them, also includes those who are divorced. This is a very false assumption, and puts these verses in a different context, that is at odds with both the teachings of Christ and the apostle Paul. We see Paul refer to virgins, which signifies the unmarried who have never before been wed, which is the proper context here. We see Paul saying clearly that it is good for virgins, which is also speaking to never before wed men here, "that it is good for a man so to be." He goes on to say, "Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife." Who is he referring to here? Men who, like himself, have never married. The word "bound", in these verses, is a clear reference to betrothal (engagement) and not to a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The ancient Jews were considered bound as husband and wife during the betrothal (espousal/engagement) before becoming one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, through consummation. This is affirmed by the context of the term "bound" seen in Numbers 30:14-16. The Jewish couples in ancient Israel, who were betrothed (engaged) were also bound together until death, either by execution for fornication, or by other causes. Then Paul says, "But and if thou marry, thou has not sinned", which is who? The men who had never married in the congregation at Corinth. So he begins with verses 25-26 speaking exclusively to men that have never married. Paul then says, "and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned", which is speaking directly in regard to virgin women who have never been married, within the congregation, not divorced women. Notice that verse 34 says, "There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband." Paul speaks plainly when he says "there is a difference between a wife and a virgin." Paul goes on to say, "But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry." This is speaking of a virgin who has become of age to bear children when it says, "let them marry." This is a clear command, to a single man, who has taken a virgin to be his wife. Paul then says, "Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well." This is referring again to the single man who decides it is better not to marry, but to stay betrothed (engaged), under the present distress, by saying that he "hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin." Paul then says, "So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better", which again means single men, in the congregation, who have betrothed a wife, do well if they marry, and those who choose not to marry their virgin brides do better, under the current climate. For more proper context of the word "bound", let's look further down in this chapter to verse 39, which says, "39The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord" (1 Corinthians 7:39). For so long, these scriptures, between verses 25-38, have been twisted and used to enable divorce and remarriage, by wayward churches and teachers, and have caused many to stumble and to be trapped in unscriptural unions. The use of the woman at the well, in regard to marriage, falsely implies that Christ was endorsing remarriage after a divorce. This teaching is in defiance of Matthew 22:23-28, which shows a woman who had been widowed seven times, and entered into each subsequent marriage without any scriptural conflicts with God's law of marriage (one-flesh covenant) seen in Genesis 2:23-24. Mark 10:1-12 and Matthew 19:1-12 both record Christ's teaching that day beyond the Jordan. There is no mention of the words "fornication", "writing of divorcement", or "divorced" in Mark's Gospel, because Mark was not written to the Jews (as Matthew's Gospel was), but to evangelize the Romans and Greeks, who had no knowledge of the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22 or Deuteronomy 24. All of these facts draw a clear understanding that remarriage after a divorce, under the New Covenant with Christ, is a scripturally false and baseless teaching. Please use wisdom when living in any situation against what the scriptures command.
Narcissistic behavior is tough to deal with. No accountability, constantly using and selfish to no end. Only God can make that heart change and renew their mind.
Yes I agree 10000000% I just turned 20 when I got married and has no clue who I was in christ. So now I'm learning my authority and how to stand for truth...needless to say it's become very hard
David and Danielle Rosales it hard very hard. You have to remember that you cannot control other people, not even yourself. That's why we need to submit to Jesus and allow His power and spirit to rule us and guide us every moment of every day.
No where in the Bible does it say that men are to lead their families. Can't find that verse. The Greek word translated into "head" doesn't mean boss, leader or anything of the sort, and doesn't have any connotations for being "leader" in the original Greek text at all. Submission is supposed to be mutual between husbands and wives. Husbands are supposed to love their wives like Christ, and serve them. Jesus said I came to serve, not to BE served. Likewise, women are to serve as well. Mutual servitude, and submission to each other makes for a wonderful marriage. Two selfless people meeting each other's needs. That doesn't mean men get to have the final say on decision making or that they are the boss. Neither are the boss of they are submitting to each other and to Christ.
Stephen S. I suppose there will always be sexist men in the church. You will have to answer to God for that. 1. I am not a feminist. I'm a Patriot, Constitutionalist, Christian. I support families and somewhat believe in traditional roles. I did not say I was a woman. Thanks for assuming, brother. 2. It's one thing to use a word in your own language to describe something, (tri meaning 3, so it's not a leap to use a word like Trinity to talk about the God head, and someone as educated as you probably know what rapture means, and if you do then that explains itself) but it's a completely different thing to interject your own meaning onto the Bible when it's not even there. I'm not twisting any scripture. Jesus actually said in Matt 20:26 "Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave- just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve". It's right there, brother. You are the one twisting it as you please. 3 The word "head" does NOT have a connotation for "leader" in every language. In English, yes, but not in Greek, the language that the N.T. was translated from. Not one verse in the Bible says "men shall hath the finaleth sayeth". That is arrogant MAN putting his own twist on scripture. I have some educational articles you can read, if you have bravery to do so. juniaproject.com/5-myths-of-male-headship/ juniaproject.com/co-leadership-marriage-lets-talk-submission/ juniaproject.com/she-said-he-said-becoming-egalitarian-in-greek/ Enjoy. (Don't respond till you've read them. Otherwise you'll responses will just make you look and sound ignorant)
but its been used that way . men abuse of it specially by christian men. I don't want to be in a relashionship where he controls everything and I have no say so or the right to an opinion. I lived it and I don't want to be married to someone who doesn't know how to respect ,love,value ,care for me and what I love or do as a wife and a woman.that because he is the head or can't even breath cause its what he said only. its a dictatorship not a marriage. so many women have been abused, killed because of the word submit I on it has been abused and men love that word. I dislike when christian men make their wives confess it in public it sound demeaning to me. but they never quot submitte to one another. I believe every wife should know about the finances and desicions concerning the family also. we have to be a team.
Stephen S. i had a feeling it had to be a man saying this. you sir. 1 - im not a feminist. 2- I'm tired of wonen being put down and pushed back by poeple including many churches that say that women are not suppose to preach, they cannot be pastors, leaders or have a say so in the marriage all this comes from legalism, fallen churches that wants to control its members, lies of satan. God took me out of a real controling. abusive marriage and took care of me and my kids and he is restoreing our lives. And where have you been in this world to say that women start the abuse, have you lost your marbles to not know that domestic abuse keeps escalateing by men beating and abusing there wives , girlfriends, fiance. even killed. and its been happening for generations Aand honey God doesnt tolerate abuse, he will never force a women to stay in a very bad situation. but many churches will. and many women have paid with there lives. read the word and ask God for revelation of his word. God himself gave me a new begining and has done with many women. marriage is a beautiful thing when both serve each other, submit to each other in their calling in marriage.Its not a one sided relatioship
All of what you described just assures me that I am praying every single day that God will bring to me a very Godly man, not one of this world or one that is double-minded. There's no way I would stay in a marriage where a man believes he's over every single thing and I don't have a say or role in anything. There would be no point in the marriage. If we are one flesh, it wouldn't make sense for him to hate or mistreat a part of himself.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Have a marriage where you look at each other like Ashley looks at Dave and how Dave looks at Ashley!!
Oh my goodness......the sparks are visible between these two......so much love, passion, and respect!
You both truly have been blessed with each other and are doing such an amazing job following God's calling!
Great teaching on submission!
Absolutely love this! This is TRUTH! Men love your wives, women respect your husbands....this is the key to a successful, happy full marriage!
The mentality of two servants in marriage is the key...
I love the bird analogy. This has always been a tough subject, but especially in today's culture!
The divorce and remarriage for adultery doctrine is based solely on the supposed guilt of the wife in Matthew 5:32, and Matthew 19:9. However, the wife in Matthew 5:31-32 is clearly not guilty of fornication because the Jews that Jesus was speaking to were still living under the law, and if fornication was discovered, there was a moral obligation to report the offender according to Deuteronomy 22:13-24. The wife, who would have been found guilty of fornication, was subsequently stoned to death, according to the law, which had still governed the Jews up until Christ's death on the cross. The same for a woman caught in adultery, according to Leviticus 20:10. How could a wife, guilty of fornication, or adultery, under the law of Moses, be given a writing of divorcement and be caused to commit adultery with whosoever marries her, that is divorced? Jesus is clear, in these examples, that the wife is not guilty of fornication, but is still caused to commit adultery if she marries another man now that she is divorced. This is the only way that Matthew 5:31-32, and Matthew 19:9 keep harmony with Romans 7:2-3, and 1 Corinthians 7:39.
Unlike the synoptic gospels of Mark and Luke, which were written to evangelize the Gentiles, Matthew was written to the Jews, and has of 24 characteristics that identify it as intended for the house of Israel.
The ancient Jews called the betrothed (engaged) "husband" and "wife" according to Deuteronomy 22:23-24, Matthew 1:18-25, and Luke 2:5-7.
Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage) was never for fornication or adultery. Allowing those guilty of fornication and adultery to remain living and become a prospect for remarriage was against the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22:13-24 and Leviticus 20:10, which commanded that those who were found guilty of fornication and adultery be put away from Israel, and stoned to death.
The law of Moses was not given to the world, only to the Jews. From the exodus, to Christ's death on the cross, the law of Moses governed the Jewish people. But when Jesus died on the cross, he caused the Jews to be dead to the law of Moses so they could be joined to Christ under a New Covenant. This is what Jesus's fulfillment of the law of Moses, including Deuteronomy 24:1-4 (Moses's precept of divorce and remarriage), means. Paul gave several warnings to Christian believers against keeping the law of Moses over following Christ and his commands under the New Covenant with Christ. Keeping the whole law is no longer possible for those in Israel and that is why Christ prophesied that the temple would be destroyed. These scriptures make it clear that if you choose the law over Christ, that you must keep the whole law: Romans 7:4, Galatians 3:1-9, Galatians 3:10-29, Galatians 4:1-7, Galatians 4:21-31, and Galatians 5:1-15.
Being unequally yoked to unbelievers is not a cause for divorce, once two become one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, according to 1 Corinthians 7:12-14. Many one-flesh covenant marriages between unbelievers are recognized by God in the scriptures, most notably the marriage covenants between Herodias and King Herod's brother Philip, Potiphar and his wife, Ahab and Jezebel, and Ruth to her deceased husband Mahlon by Boaz when he took her to be his wife.
Some are teaching that 1 Corinthians 7:15 implies that those who are abandoned by the unbeliever, are "no longer bound" in a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The reason this is in conflict is due to the way they word it, which gives it an entirely different meaning, and context. 1 Corinthians 7:15, says, "15But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace." As you can see, the actual scripture says "not under bondage," which means that the husband or wife is not enslaved to sin with the unbelieving spouse, and is free to worship Christ in peace. Subsequent translations have changed the words to imply that they nullify the marriage covenant, when this is not at all the case. The issue that this creates is with 1 Corinthians 7:10-11, which says, "10And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: 11But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife." As you can see, those who claim 1 Corinthians 7:15 has the Apostle Paul giving permission to remarry do not understand that the abandoned husband in 1 Corinthians 7:11 is expected to also remain unmarried, in order to be reconciled with his wife. The theory that 1 Corinthians 7:15 nullifies two as being one-flesh in marriage puts the Apostle Paul directly at odds with Christ, by implying that he has issued an opposing command.
Some also teach that 1 Corinthians 7:27-28 is referring to both divorced men and virgin women, and not exclusively to men and women (virgins) who have never been married. This has been falsely taught for some time in churches as referring to anyone who is not currently in a marriage, which, for them, also includes those who are divorced. This is a very false assumption, and puts these verses in a different context, that is at odds with both the teachings of Christ and the apostle Paul. We see Paul refer to virgins, which signifies the unmarried who have never before been wed, which is the proper context here. We see Paul saying clearly that it is good for virgins, which is also speaking to never before wed men here, "that it is good for a man so to be." He goes on to say, "Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife." Who is he referring to here? Men who, like himself, have never married. The word "bound", in these verses, is a clear reference to betrothal (engagement) and not to a one-flesh covenant of marriage. The ancient Jews were considered bound as husband and wife during the betrothal (espousal/engagement) before becoming one-flesh in a covenant of marriage, through consummation. This is affirmed by the context of the term "bound" seen in Numbers 30:14-16.
The Jewish couples in ancient Israel, who were betrothed (engaged) were also bound together until death, either by execution for fornication, or by other causes. Then Paul says, "But and if thou marry, thou has not sinned", which is who? The men who had never married in the congregation at Corinth. So he begins with verses 25-26 speaking exclusively to men that have never married. Paul then says, "and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned", which is speaking directly in regard to virgin women who have never been married, within the congregation, not divorced women. Notice that verse 34 says, "There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband." Paul speaks plainly when he says "there is a difference between a wife and a virgin." Paul goes on to say, "But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry." This is speaking of a virgin who has become of age to bear children when it says, "let them marry." This is a clear command, to a single man, who has taken a virgin to be his wife. Paul then says, "Nevertheless he that standeth stedfast in his heart, having no necessity, but hath power over his own will, and hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin, doeth well." This is referring again to the single man who decides it is better not to marry, but to stay betrothed (engaged), under the present distress, by saying that he "hath so decreed in his heart that he will keep his virgin." Paul then says, "So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well; but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better", which again means single men, in the congregation, who have betrothed a wife, do well if they marry, and those who choose not to marry their virgin brides do better, under the current climate. For more proper context of the word "bound", let's look further down in this chapter to verse 39, which says, "39The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord" (1 Corinthians 7:39). For so long, these scriptures, between verses 25-38, have been twisted and used to enable divorce and remarriage, by wayward churches and teachers, and have caused many to stumble and to be trapped in unscriptural unions.
The use of the woman at the well, in regard to marriage, falsely implies that Christ was endorsing remarriage after a divorce. This teaching is in defiance of Matthew 22:23-28, which shows a woman who had been widowed seven times, and entered into each subsequent marriage without any scriptural conflicts with God's law of marriage (one-flesh covenant) seen in Genesis 2:23-24.
Mark 10:1-12 and Matthew 19:1-12 both record Christ's teaching that day beyond the Jordan. There is no mention of the words "fornication", "writing of divorcement", or "divorced" in Mark's Gospel, because Mark was not written to the Jews (as Matthew's Gospel was), but to evangelize the Romans and Greeks, who had no knowledge of the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 22 or Deuteronomy 24. All of these facts draw a clear understanding that remarriage after a divorce, under the New Covenant with Christ, is a scripturally false and baseless teaching. Please use wisdom when living in any situation against what the scriptures command.
Please cover narssissism!! How to pray. What does God say?
Praying for you. This is a hard struggle
Ciera Renee' thank you. Its terrible when you see the strong hold of the enemy on someone who is called my God
Narcissistic behavior is tough to deal with. No accountability, constantly using and selfish to no end. Only God can make that heart change and renew their mind.
Yes I agree 10000000% I just turned 20 when I got married and has no clue who I was in christ. So now I'm learning my authority and how to stand for truth...needless to say it's become very hard
David and Danielle Rosales it hard very hard. You have to remember that you cannot control other people, not even yourself. That's why we need to submit to Jesus and allow His power and spirit to rule us and guide us every moment of every day.
No where in the Bible does it say that men are to lead their families. Can't find that verse. The Greek word translated into "head" doesn't mean boss, leader or anything of the sort, and doesn't have any connotations for being "leader" in the original Greek text at all. Submission is supposed to be mutual between husbands and wives. Husbands are supposed to love their wives like Christ, and serve them. Jesus said I came to serve, not to BE served. Likewise, women are to serve as well. Mutual servitude, and submission to each other makes for a wonderful marriage. Two selfless people meeting each other's needs. That doesn't mean men get to have the final say on decision making or that they are the boss. Neither are the boss of they are submitting to each other and to Christ.
V. Martz did you listen to what was said, we know what your issue with marriage is oooooooookay
Stephen S. I suppose there will always be sexist men in the church. You will have to answer to God for that.
1. I am not a feminist. I'm a Patriot, Constitutionalist, Christian. I support families and somewhat believe in traditional roles. I did not say I was a woman. Thanks for assuming, brother.
2. It's one thing to use a word in your own language to describe something, (tri meaning 3, so it's not a leap to use a word like Trinity to talk about the God head, and someone as educated as you probably know what rapture means, and if you do then that explains itself) but it's a completely different thing to interject your own meaning onto the Bible when it's not even there. I'm not twisting any scripture. Jesus actually said in Matt 20:26 "Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave- just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve". It's right there, brother. You are the one twisting it as you please.
3 The word "head" does NOT have a connotation for "leader" in every language. In English, yes, but not in Greek, the language that the N.T. was translated from. Not one verse in the Bible says "men shall hath the finaleth sayeth". That is arrogant MAN putting his own twist on scripture. I have some educational articles you can read, if you have bravery to do so.
juniaproject.com/5-myths-of-male-headship/
juniaproject.com/co-leadership-marriage-lets-talk-submission/
juniaproject.com/she-said-he-said-becoming-egalitarian-in-greek/
Enjoy. (Don't respond till you've read them. Otherwise you'll responses will just make you look and sound ignorant)
but its been used that way . men abuse of it specially by christian men. I don't want to be in a relashionship where he controls everything and I have no say so or the right to an opinion. I lived it and I don't want to be married to someone who doesn't know how to respect ,love,value ,care for me and what I love or do as a wife and a woman.that because he is the head or can't even breath cause its what he said only. its a dictatorship not a marriage. so many women have been abused, killed because of the word submit I on it has been abused and men love that word. I dislike when christian men make their wives confess it in public it sound demeaning to me. but they never quot submitte to one another. I believe every wife should know about the finances and desicions concerning the family also. we have to be a team.
Stephen S. i had a feeling it had to be a man saying this. you sir. 1 - im not a feminist. 2- I'm tired of wonen being put down and pushed back by poeple including many churches that say that women are not suppose to preach, they cannot be pastors, leaders or have a say so in the marriage all this comes from legalism, fallen churches that wants to control its members, lies of satan. God took me out of a real controling. abusive marriage and took care of me and my kids and he is restoreing our lives. And where have you been in this world to say that women start the abuse, have you lost your marbles to not know that domestic abuse keeps escalateing by men beating and abusing there wives , girlfriends, fiance. even killed. and its been happening for generations Aand honey God doesnt tolerate abuse, he will never force a women to stay in a very bad situation. but many churches will. and many women have paid with there lives. read the word and ask God for revelation of his word. God himself gave me a new begining and has done with many women. marriage is a beautiful thing when both serve each other, submit to each other in their calling in marriage.Its not a one sided relatioship
All of what you described just assures me that I am praying every single day that God will bring to me a very Godly man, not one of this world or one that is double-minded. There's no way I would stay in a marriage where a man believes he's over every single thing and I don't have a say or role in anything. There would be no point in the marriage. If we are one flesh, it wouldn't make sense for him to hate or mistreat a part of himself.