Charlie Kirk talks to girls about submitting to their husbands' ft

[@MichelleMissyMartinezjunco]

Married 39 years and still praying 🙏🏼 for him to put Jesus Christ first!!

[@kare7840]

Maybe change your prayer to" please help me see when he is following thee" Remember, husband's are a work in progress, same as wife's.

[@dforbach]

Your husband is smart enough not to believe in the fictional book of short stories to entertain the illiterate and uneducated people. Religion is evil and divisive, the cause of most wars so don't say you are pro life.

[@squatch70]

Amen, Charlie makes an excellent point. I agree with him fully.

[@Cindilc]

If I didn’t trust a man enough to submit to him I wouldn’t marry him!

[@jdee1891]

Good point

[@WuchtaArt]

That's true, but sometimes people hide their character until after marriage, hide addiction, their past, become abusive. Then the marriage may be anulled, because it was founded on a lie.

[@indianahoneybee8852]

You guys are doing Gods work. Bless you

[@mcoach818]

😂 Amen Charlie, you are correct. Men when discussing this topic conveniently skip over that truth that the husband should submit to Christ as well as the husband should love his wife sacrificially.

[@GodSoLoved.Yeshua]

The wife must still submit even if the husband does not follow Christ. "wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct”.

[@jamiethomson7780]

No, it was a completely false claim about what the Scripture says from Charlie Kirk. The Bible does not say "women submit to your husbands as husbands submit to Christ"! That is a complete misquotation and falsehood. In fact, the Scripture even makes a point of explicitly refuting Charlie Kirk's view: "Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; while they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear." 1 Peter 3:1-2 KJV Peter agrees with Paul in not making the subordination of the wife to her husband conditional on the husband's behavior: "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing." Ephesians 5:22-24 KJV The alteration of the Bible's teaching on women being subordinate to their husbands is solely to suit the selfish and rebellious attitudes of modern, feminist women. It is also a completely empty and unworkable alteration to put a condition on women being subordinate to their husbands, for then any wife who is feeling rebellious can simply tell herself that her husband is not good enough for her to have to obey the commandment of the Lord that she be subordinate to her husband. Charlie Kirk tries to justify his feminist false teaching by saying that goodness is not served by women being subordinate to husbands that he and/or they deem as not good enough/not submitting to Christ enough. But the Bible says the opposite: "That they [elder women] may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed." Titus 2:4-5 KJV It is wives doing all these things, including being subordinate to their husbands, that helps the word of God to not be blasphemed.

[@AurelianLilly]

I wasn’t submissive to my husband and don’t regret it. If I didn’t my child would not been able to get help for his disability.

[@omnivore2220]

AA does NOT say, "Submit to Christ". They're non specific. Rather, they say nebulous things like, "Find your higher power".

[@monicamisky]

Actually, the wife’s submission to her husband is not based on the husband’s submission to Christ. Peter writes a whole section on this very topic. “Wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the Word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct.” 1 Peter 3:1-2 If the husband asks you to sin you should not obey (ie shoplifting, lying, etc) but barring that, there is no qualifier. Sorry, Charlie.

[@TheLocalJesusGirl]

Yeah I am aware of that too

[@danw6014]

To me it's a partnership. Sometimes she has 51% control over thing and sometimes I have 51% control over things

[@daledonnell8155]

And he asked if in dating. This is for marriage.

[@danhamilton7064]

As a manager of mental health institutions, I can tell you this Charlie that AA is statistically the least effective treatment modality with a recidivism rate over 80%!

[@karenswart-b4y]

but perhaps u shud not b a manager

[@danhamilton7064]

@@karenswart-b4y It figures a Karen gets triggered with facts. Perhaps you should get educated on the subject before you make an ignorant comment. TIP 35 Treatment Intervention Protocol . The government does research on mental health interventions and they rank AA last in terms of efficacy. You can open your mouth and change your feet now.

[@poethepoetspoet]

This dude photoshopped ear buds he was wearing out of a photo because people made fun of him online. He should not be taken seriously at all when it comes to masculinity.

[@DarkSeresutia]

what about the husband being an atheist? the outcome is just the entire model collapsing or they have different idea for it? edit: i see, so the atheist will fail to build a family... then what about buddism, hinduism, shinto etc? will their believer fail as well?

[@cliffordlily]

Ah! He tweaked the scripture a bit by adding one word in there, making one submission conditional on the other. We may want it that way, it may sound logical, but that’s not what that bible verse says.

[@jamiethomson7780]

Completely false claim about what the Scripture says from Charlie Kirk. The Bible does not say "women submit to your husbands as husbands submit to Christ"! That is a complete misquotation and falsehood. In fact, the Scripture even makes a point of explicitly refuting Charlie Kirk's view: "Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; while they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear." 1 Peter 3:1-2 KJV Peter agrees with Paul in not making the subordination of the wife to her husband conditional on the husband's behavior: "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing." Ephesians 5:22-24 KJV The alteration of the Bible's teaching on women being subordinate to their husbands is solely to suit the selfish and rebellious attitudes on modern, feminist women. It is also a completely empty and unworkable alteration to put a condition on women being subordinate to their husbands, for then any wife who is feeling rebellious can simply tell herself that her husband is not good enough for her to have to obey the commandment of the Lord that she be subordinate to her husband. Charlie Kirk tries to justify his feminist false teaching by saying that goodness is not served by women being subordinate to husbands that he and/or they deem as not good enough/not submitting to Christ enough. But the Bible says the opposite: "That they [elder women] may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed." Titus 2:4-5 KJV It is wives doing all these things, including being subordinate to their husbands, that helps the word of God to not be blasphemed. What Charlie Kirk says about AA is also false. People in AA do not have to admit God. AA speaks about a general higher power: " In AA, higher power refers to God or a spiritual principle in which members completing the steps can put their faith." Also, AA is actually one of the least effective methods of breaking the addiction to alcohol. The decency of the Bible's teaching is not to tell women they can obey God's commandments less and be subordinate less, but rather to tell men and women to obey all God's commandments and be subordinate to all those exactly whom the Scripture teaches them to be subordinate. For the Bible also tells men and women to be subordinate to God and obey God's commandments. Therefore, if husbands violate their obligations to their wives or do things against their wives that God's law forbids them to do, then wives may take these unlawful actions to court and have them remedied there, and if these matters are serious enough then a wife may obtain a divorce without her husbands' consent. Furthermore, each person is to obey God's commandments over any order of any human being. So, if a husband orders his wife to break one of God's commandments (e.g. steal, commit adultery, murder, etc.) then it is the wife's moral duty to obey God rather than men as the Bible says. And if a husband orders his wife not to do something that God has commanded her (e.g. as a general individual, or as an adult, or as a woman) to do, then it is her moral duty to obey God rather than men as the Bible says. Likewise, in God's law the preservation of life always wins out when their is tension between two laws (e.g. it is lawful to save a life by violating the Sabbath commandment, and it is lawful to save a life with medical intervention that violates laws of modesty). So, a wife is expected to act in ways that will preserve her health/life if her husband is endangering her health/life. But even while obeying God rather than their husbands, wives are still to be subordinate. Every wife is commanded to be subordinate to her husband, not necessarily to unconditionally obey each of her husband's orders. Every wife is commanded to obey each of her husband's orders that does not violate God's explicit commandments. Another example of God's law is that a wife has a right to her own property and money. So, if a husband ordered his wife to spend her money in a certain way or ordered his wife to sell or destroy or damage her property, then these are examples of when a husband's orders are violating God's commandments by violating his wife's right to her own property and money. A woman is not commanded to obey her husband in such a case. But a woman is always to be subordinate to her husband, just as she is always subordinate to Christ who outranks him. When someone is subordinate to a senior officer over them, they can refuse to submit to orders that violate known orders of an even higher-ranking superior which override the lesser orders of their lower ranking superior officer.

[@kare7840]

His orders, wow I read somewhere we were a helpmate, partners together with God. Where does it really say the husband gives orders?

[@jamiethomson7780]

@@kare7840 So because you read somewhere women are helpmates, partners together with God, you then reject the Word of God which plainly and explicitly says that the husband/man is the head of the wife/woman? And what do you mean by "partners together with God"? Are you saying that women are helpers of men in the same way that the beings of the Godhead are helpers of men and thus that women are part of a divine team with divine beings and men are inferior to them? I have heard that exact same argument from a feminist woman who like you claimed to be Christian. But no feminist is a believer in God or in Christ, since they do not believe the commandments of God or the Word of God, and feminists reject that Christ has authority over the church as the Bridegroom. Woman is said to be a "helpmeet" for man, which is two Hebrew words. The Bible calls God a help(er) of man, which is from only one of these Hebrew words. The Bible does not equate woman's role as man's "helpmeet" to God's role as man's "help(er)". And God is not just a help(er) of men, but also of women and children too. But how is a woman helpful to the man who is her head by refusing to work in harmony with his decisions and his authority? Women do not know better than men, and at best they know only as well as men; and, therefore, any opposition to a man's decisions and authority within God's law is not helpful to men. God, however, does know better than men and women and children; and, therefore, God can be and is helpful to men no matter whether God works in harmony with man's decisions or contrary to them. The feminist challenge "Where does it really say the husband gives orders?" is no different than the serpent's question to Eve: "Hath God really said ...?" The Bible very clearly says that men give their women orders. In Ephesians 5:21-22; Colossians 3:18; and Titus 2:5, Paul three times uses the same Greek word hupotassó to write God's commandment that women/wives be subordinate/obey the men/husbands pertaining to them. This word means "to place or rank under, to subject, mid. to obey". It is also significant that Paul refuses to say that men are "their [women's] men" but instead writes that the husbands of women are merely men "pertaining to" them, meaning the women do not own the men in marriage; but in contrast, Paul does write that women are "their [men's] women". This is consistent with the law of the man: "For the married woman is bound by law to the living husband; but if the husband should die, she is cleared from the law of the husband." There is no reciprocal "law of the wife" in the law of God. The law of God is not secular humanist or politically egalitarian or feminist. In Ephesians 5:24, Paul uses the same Greek word hupotassó to write God's commandment that the church be subordinate/obey Christ. The church is not a partner of Christ in any of His roles, works, or authorities. Christ is the head and the lord of the church. In Titus 2:9, Paul uses the same Greek word hupotassó to write God's commandment that slaves are to be subordinate/obey the masters pertaining to them. In Romans 8:7, Paul uses the same Greek word hupotassó to explain that "the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." This is why feminists rebel against the Word of God on the matter of the authority of men over women, for the feminist mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

[@twentyfourseven7988]

100 %

[@GodSoLoved.Yeshua]

You must submit whether he is following Christ or not, "Wife submit to your husbands as unto the Lord" If I don't have to, I won't. The Word says we must. ,"wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct”.

[@jillybean9071]

If the husband is leading his wife or his family in a way that is opposing of submission to Christ, then no the wife needs to remind him of truth. Spouses are a partnership and when one of the partners are lacking in their faith, the other is responsible to restore that person, remind them, encourage them and correct them, when necessary. We each need to listen to Holy Spirit in each circumstance.

[@GodSoLoved.Yeshua]

@jillybean9071 You can remind him of Truth, but he doesn't have to listen to you. You as a wife must still submit to your husband as unto the Lord as the scriptures say, that choice is yours.

[@kare7840]

So if the wife is always submissive, is the husband then held accountable for any wrongdoing before the Lord?

[@jamiethomson7780]

Yes, it was a completely false claim about what the Scripture says from Charlie Kirk. The Bible does not say "women submit to your husbands as husbands submit to Christ"! That is a complete misquotation and falsehood. In fact, the Scripture even makes a point of explicitly refuting Charlie Kirk's view: "Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; while they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear." 1 Peter 3:1-2 KJV Peter agrees with Paul in not making the subordination of the wife to her husband conditional on the husband's behavior: "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing." Ephesians 5:22-24 KJV The alteration of the Bible's teaching on women being subordinate to their husbands is solely to suit the selfish and rebellious attitudes of modern, feminist women. It is also a completely empty and unworkable alteration to put a condition on women being subordinate to their husbands, for then any wife who is feeling rebellious can simply tell herself that her husband is not good enough for her to have to obey the commandment of the Lord that she be subordinate to her husband. Charlie Kirk tries to justify his feminist false teaching by saying that goodness is not served by women being subordinate to husbands that he and/or they deem as not good enough/not submitting to Christ enough. But the Bible says the opposite: "That they [elder women] may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed." Titus 2:4-5 KJV It is wives doing all these things, including being subordinate to their husbands, that helps the word of God to not be blasphemed.

[@jamiethomson7780]

@@kare7840 Don't you believe the Word of God? The Bible says: "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." Ezekiel 18:20 When I stated the Bible truth that the wife is always to be subordinate to her husband, you then asked if the wife is then held accountable for any wrongdoing before the Lord? But when @GodSoLoved.Yeshua states the same Bible truth that the wife is always to be subordinate to her husband, you then ask if the husband is then held accountable for any wrongdoing before the Lord? You don't seem to know or believe anything firmly except for feminism and its rejection of the Word and law of God.

[@donaldboomer6313]

No Charlie! All the women has to do is say her husband is not following Christ and she doesn’t have to submit! That’s what non- submissive wife’s say already to justify not listening to him! According to you it’s her opinion that counts not God’s establish authority. Anyone under authority has to respect that authority whether or not they think that authority is doing the right thing or not, according to their opinion! That’s not how God’s order works! Your formula is chaos. It’s what we already have in our broken society!

[@pastorclhill788]

A.A. Believes in every God, not necessarily Jesus. All gods are accepted

[@Fctsdntcarebouturfeelings]

I don't agree with Charlie on giving women an out, just because a man doesn't submit to Christ and I'm a Christian. It's kind of like Adam blaming Eve and Eve blaming the snake. We're all accountable to God, for ourselves, when it comes to what we're supposed to do or not do, individually. The scripture that talks about marrying a non believer or non Christian. Sorry, please research and fact check me. I don't remember exact book and verse(s). It tells us that if they, our spouse, wishes to stay with us, then stay. Obviously if abuse or danger is involved then ok, common sense. But I've seen cases where women stood by their husbands as good and faithful, Christian wives, and it resulted in their husband's eyes being opened and being saved, and becoming a Christian themselves. That lead to them being better husbands and fathers, ect. You have to study the Bible in it's entirety. We get one go around at life. Make sure we do it right. Souls are at stake.

[@jamiethomson7780]

Yes, it was a completely false claim about what the Scripture says from Charlie Kirk. The Bible does not say "women submit to your husbands as husbands submit to Christ"! That is a complete misquotation and falsehood. In fact, the Scripture even makes a point of explicitly refuting Charlie Kirk's view: "Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; while they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear." 1 Peter 3:1-2 KJV Peter agrees with Paul in not making the subordination of the wife to her husband conditional on the husband's behavior: "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing." Ephesians 5:22-24 KJV The alteration of the Bible's teaching on women being subordinate to their husbands is solely to suit the selfish and rebellious attitudes on modern, feminist women. It is also a completely empty and unworkable alteration to put a condition on women being subordinate to their husbands, for then any wife who is feeling rebellious can simply tell herself that her husband is not good enough for her to have to obey the commandment of the Lord that she be subordinate to her husband. Charlie Kirk tries to justify his feminist false teaching by saying that goodness is not served by women being subordinate to husbands that he and/or they deem as not good enough/not submitting to Christ enough. But the Bible says the opposite: "That they [elder women] may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed." Titus 2:4-5 KJV It is wives doing all these things, including being subordinate to their husbands, that helps the word of God to not be blasphemed.

[@kare7840]

So then God has given women an out by being always submissive the husband is accountable alone for any wrongdoings in the marriage?

[@jamiethomson7780]

@@kare7840 That does not follow. Christ is the head of the husband and the husband is commanded to be subordinate to Christ. This does not mean that the husband then bears no responsibility for any wrongdoing he does! The husband bears responsibility for his own wrongdoing. Likewise, the husband is the head of the wife, but the wife still bears responsibility for her own wrongdoing. The fact that you would make such an argument is a perfect illustration as to why God commands every woman to be subordinate to the man who is her head.

[@ArtisticEclectic]

​@@jamiethomson7780 1.) I think you misunderstood @kare7840. The question wasn't whether the husband bears no responsibility. But rather, whether the wife, by submitting, is then left in a position of the husband bearing the responsibility for the outcome, as the one who led his wife into whatever it is she's submitting in. Which is a valid question and one that some/many teachers would answer with a yes. 2.) Let me know if I misunderstood your last sentence. Otherwise, if you and some others would please stop kicking women in the teeth, so to speak, by insinuating that any comment or question you disagree with implies that women are somehow lesser in capacity/ability/leadership qualities/spiritual insight/etc., as a sex, and therefore that that is why God put them under submission to men, you would go further in being persuasive. Let's just have a healthy dialog, instead of using insult to try to make a point. It is a false reading of Scripture that puts women as submissive to men *because of some purported fatal flaw inherent to women.* Again, the whole must be understood, in context, not just running with one passage in such a way that it distorts one's view of other passages. And yes, I am familiar with the arguments and teaching you're probably basing that idea on. Again, if I am unbeatable what you said correctly. It is a view that some teach, but I believe it to be a misreading of Scripture. I'm not saying Scripture doesn't teach wives to submit to their husbands. It does. I'm talking about the idea that it is because the wife is inherently inferior in key ways. Weaker in position culturally? Generally yes (less so currently in certain countries than has been historically the case). Weaker in physical physique? Yes. Different in how we process, think, etc.? Yes. Different in certain aspects of the call of God on our lives? Yes. Men can't bear children, for instance. But again, let's leave out the insults, please. Relying on that to make a point is a logical fallacy, anyway. And it pushes people away from God and the Bible. That's not something to take lightly.

[@maddiefanzieglerfan6214]

What you're claiming is that women agould take the abuse, emotiobal or physical hoping the men would see the ,ought?No freaking way.Even Christ didn't say that.

[@daveg1052]

I don't think I've ever read in the scriptures that the wifes submission is based on what she perceives as her opinion of weather or not her husbands submission to Christ meets her standard. The wife is to submit unto her own husband as unto the Lord. Submission is purley voluntary for husband and wife. Your theology is rather twisted Charley. What altered Bible version are you reading?

[@KJJellema]

Putting someone you dont know exists on top of the umbrella, just live life as good as you can and in the end you will see, If its true you will be accepted if its not you did not devote your life to an illusion

[@multideltwd]

Well, Christ _does_ exist. It's the Holy Trinity as a whole what is not historically nor scientifically ascertainable

[@GodSoLoved.Yeshua]

Don't know? He does exist, I'd be a great benefit to you to get to know Him✝️❤️ He is the Truth.

[@KJJellema]

@@GodSoLoved.Yeshua no i dont know and also you dont, you believe but you dont know for sure

[@KJJellema]

@@multideltwd then its an assumption, it can be but nobody knows for sure, i do respect your believe

[@daveg1052]

I have listened to your false teaching twice just to make sure I heard you correctly. That is no where in the Bible. In fact the Bible promises the wife special considerations for submission to a disobedient or unbelieving husband. Not every one is Biblically illiterate.