@usuallypregnant Stop settling for poorly researched, cherry-picked theology that reduces adult women to children just to fit a modern traditionalist aesthetic. Do the actual reading.
@usuallypregnant The short, biblically accurate answer? NOT. 🧵
A husband doesn't have a 'God-given right' to act as censorship police for a grown woman unless you base your theology on 16th-century English mistranslations instead of the original text.
@usuallypregnant Want the actual biblical standard for a wife? Look at Proverbs 31. She was an autonomous merchant who evaluated & bought real estate on her own because "the heart of her husband safely trusts her" (Prov 31:11). He didn't treat her like a toddler needing monitored reading.
@usuallypregnant The original Koine Greek of Ephesians 5 commands MUTUAL submission (v. 21). It defines a husband's headship (kephalē) as a self-sacrificing, life-giving source—not a dictatorial ruler (archon). (2/4)
@imcoolchristian@usuallypregnant to fit what you want it to say today. Maybe spend less time trying to ban books and more time reading a Strong’s Concordance.
@imcoolchristian@usuallypregnant Oh, look, another 'theologian' who bases his entire household dictatorship on a cherry-picked English translation. Since we're making bold claims about our 'God-given rights,' let's actually do the research and look at the original Koine Greek, shall we?
It’s incredibly telling
@imcoolchristian@usuallypregnant you to be a commanding dictator policing an adult woman's reading material, he would have used archon (ruler) or despotes (master). He didn't.
Restricting a grown woman’s access to information isn’t biblical leadership; it’s just fragile insecurity dressed up in adapted theology
@imcoolchristian@usuallypregnant And before you try to use the 'I am the head' (kephalē) argument to justify this—in Paul’s 1st-century context, kephalē meant 'source' or implied life-giving, self-sacrificial nourishment (Remember Ephesians 5:25, where you are literally commanded to die for her?). If Paul wanted
@imcoolchristian@usuallypregnant King James Version relied on. Modern translations just keep supplying the verb because it reads smoother in English. You aren't quoting the original text; you are quoting a 16th-century translation choice that completely severs the original grammatical link to a two-way street.
@imcoolchristian@usuallypregnant mutual submission established in verse 21. Scribes didn't start shoehorning the standalone command verb into the Greek text until centuries later. That altered version got permanently locked in when Erasmus compiled the Textus Receptus in 1516, which is exactly the text the 1611
@imcoolchristian@usuallypregnant earliest and most reliable Greek manuscripts—like Papyrus 46 (around 200 A.D.) and Codex Vaticanus (around 340 A.D.)—Ephesians 5:22 doesn't even contain a verb. The text literally just reads: 'Wives, to your own husbands as to the Lord.' It is grammatically forced to rely on the
@imcoolchristian@usuallypregnant that you conveniently skipped right over Ephesians 5:21, which sets the foundation for the entire passage: Hypotassomenoi allēlois—a command for MUTUAL submission. You literally cannot demand submission from a partner without equally submitting to her.
Even better? In the
@lovefortexasatx@NoKings65@RyanPohle@d0wnsideofme literally posted, 'We did it!! #Trump2024... Welcome home to MY President!'
So are these the 'tears of joy' or the 'we have NO income and are desperate' tears? You just need to wake up, 'take the L,' and 'get over it.
@lovefortexasatx@NoKings65@RyanPohle@d0wnsideofme What's wrong? I thought we were 'crying tears of joy' because 'MY President' won?
Now you're screaming 'I didn’t vote for ANY OF THIS SHIT' and telling people to 'FUCK RIGHT OFF'? How can your lips speak so much injustice when the truth is right in front of your face? You