As men, we are admonished to love our wives as Jesus loved the church and gave his life for it. We are to deny ourselves and pick up our cross and follow him. We are to act like, think like and talk like him. We are dead and He lives through us.
The question is simple. If you are here looking for a husband, are you really looking for Jesus to marry? Will you serve your husband as if he were Christ in your home?
I am simply curious to hear your responses. I seek to find Jesus in my bride. The whole, if Jesus were a woman, what she would be like. What an awesome wife she would be.
The key about Jesus...is he served others, he did not look to see who would serve him. This post seemed slightly self-centered, as brothers and sisters in Christ we should serve each other, and serve the Lord, not look to see what we can get out of each other and what's in it for us. Just my take on it.
Interesting perspective. My goal was to incite self searching upon the reader. I defined clearly that our role as men was to be selfless yet you call my post self centered. I had to reread the post again to see how one might have chosen to see it that way. That is the interesting thing about words, they are perceived by the reader/hearer from their own position. Many accused Jesus of being a Samaritan and having a devil when he in fact was the Son of God. We ought be careful in our judgments or we may find ourselves calling out sin where there isn't any.
It is interesting also to note that you did not answer the question. Do you really want to marry Jesus?
My answer to you is "As he is, not as you'd have him be."
Your words make it seem as though you're insinuating things, when you say "That's interesting." It makes it seem as though you mean to say something you feel might be offensive but replace it with "That's interesting."
Again, I might be drawing conclusions that aren't really there, it just comes across that way.
I just reread the original post, and so far, the first paragraph seems fine.
On to the next paragraph.
O.P. wrote, "The question is simple. If you are here looking for a husband, are you really looking for Jesus to marry?"
My thoughts,
If the O.P. means, are we looking for Christ in another, are we "seeking" God first in the area of marriage, then I would agree that that's a great question. Basically, are people here looking for the attributes and presence of Christ within those they're interested in.
O.P. wrote, "Will you serve your husband as if he were Christ in your home?"
My thoughts,
I can understand how this question might be interpreted as self centered (I'm not saying that I understood it as such), because it takes the emphasis off one's self, and questions the intentions of others.
O.P. also wrote, "I seek to find Jesus in my bride. The whole, if Jesus were a woman, what she would be like. What an awesome wife she would be."
My thoughts,
Obviously, I cannot judge the O.P.'s heart in this statement, but I believe that what's being said here can be a tricky thing for any of us to actually do. First of all, in order to recognize the presence of Christ in anyone, a person must first know the presence of Christ within themselves. Secondly, people's callings, gifts and personalities are so immensely broad, that the presence of Christ could show up in any number of ways within someone, and in such ways that we might not even recognize Him. Thirdly, this statement could come across to some as if the O.P. has a preconceived notion as to what such a woman might be like, which in the end, "can" cause certain people to miss Jesus in others completely. It's a matter of interpretation.
You Wrote: My answer to you is "As he is, not as you'd have him be."
Your words make it seem as though you're insinuating things, when you say "That's interesting." It makes it seem as though you mean to say something you feel might be offensive but replace it with "That's interesting."
Again, I might be drawing conclusions that aren't really there, it just comes across that way.
-------------------------------------------
My response: That's interesting, which means that it was not the response I expected to hear from another and therefore peaked my interest in understanding why the response came back in a way that I did not expect.
My words do nothing but try to covey what I think unto another. In this case, it appears that they did not do so well as they were seen by another as 'self-centered' first and then as words that insinuate things like I am trying not to be offensive.
Your words were direct and easily understandable. Your perception was flawed, which I found interesting because I didn't expect the response. You answered by saying "As he is and not as you would have him" begs the question "How do you know that the two are not one in the same?"
Well actually brother your thought is flawed. No where does scripture encourage women to be christ to their husbands. It does liken them to the church though.
What does this look like. Well if you have spent much time around a woman who trusts you, you would find them vastly flawed. This gives us men the privilage of loving them as Christ loves us the church. Unconditionally.....
I would urge you to rethink your position and what you are truly looking for that you do not always come up dissapointed with the women you do find.
I'd have to add something in as well. I'm not sure if the OP originally was implying this, but I don't think we should serve anyone like we serve Christ. This is by far my favorite viewpoint on the "submission" that a wife should have toward her husband:
"The question is often asked, "Shall a wife have no will of her own?" The Bible plainly states that the husband is the head of the family. "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands." If this injunction ended here, we might say that the position of the wife is not an enviable one; it is a very hard and trying position in very many cases, and it would be better were there fewer marriages. Many husbands stop at the words, "Wives, submit yourselves," but we will read the conclusion of the same injunction, which is. "As it is fit in the Lord." God requires that the wife shall keep the fear and glory of God ever before her. Entire submission is to be made only to the Lord Jesus Christ, who has purchased her as His own child by the infinite price of His life. God has given her a conscience, which she cannot violate with impunity. Her individuality cannot be merged into that of her husband, for she is the purchase of Christ. It is a mistake to imagine that with blind devotion she is to do exactly as her husband says in all things, when she knows that in so doing, injury would be worked for her body and her spirit, which have been ransomed from the slavery of Satan. There is One who stands higher than the husband to the wife; it is her Redeemer, and her submission to her husband is to be rendered as God has directed--"as it is fit in the Lord." When husbands require the complete subjection of their wives, declaring that women have no voice or will in the family, but must render entire submission, they place their wives in a position contrary to the Scripture. In interpreting the Scripture in this way, they do violence to the design of the marriage institution. This interpretation is made simply that they may exercise arbitrary rule, which is not their prerogative."
And also, I do think we are all supposed to be striving to be Christ-like. The union, love, and roles for a man and a woman in marriage are compared to Christ's relationship to the church, but as individual children of God, we're all called to be the same, to build on the same rock, to have the same fruits, to follow the same shepherd, to be one with Christ as He is one with God, etc. Women don't get a free pass to avoid having the character of Christ. Women are "in the Lord" as well.
Another good post by DHTM. I love how he brings another angle on stuff - viewpoints I'd never even considered- not as a way of proving people wrong but illuminating depths of God's mercy and love beyond my own shallow understanding.
