Why? Why would they choose to use different synonyms if, as you suggest, it's a simple matter of looking up the transliteration in a dictionary?
The reason is for clarity. The King James is written in old English amd hardly anyone speaks this way any longer. It tends to be difficult for younger people to read it. So, the NIV or the New KJ offers a more present-day vernacular so as to allow the reader the most clarity. Changing 'thou' to 'you' does not change the meaning portrayed in the original Scripture.
No, but it means I'm a less experienced person; a person with less of a record of proven judgement; a person with less professional contacts; a person with less of a proven ability to manage others, work from a budget, and do all the other stuff my boss does.
For some bosses its all about connections and not about experience. But yes, these attributes are what typifies what a boss is.
The assertion of the Bible is that men are superior to women in life. Not specific to any context, but just in general. How does that not carry a negative connotation? It's a negative statement.
I disagree. I think its just recognizing that God bestows certain qualitative personalities and physical and mental attributes that are better suited for certain situations. For instance: Why is are the sexes separated in sports? Why is there women's basketball and women's tennis? Why not just tennis or just basketball. Its probably because there really is a disparity between men and women physically. This doesn't mean that all women are incapable of playing sports beter than men. Not at all. Its just saying that on average, men are built differently than women. Its true. If it weren't then we'd have no basis for distinguishing between men and women. We'd all be one lump of androgenous flesh if it were any other way.
Having said that, women obviously excel in some areas where men just aren't as good, by nature, in certain aspects. We don't know why exactly, but women are just more verbal than men and they tend to score higher on tests than men in this area. Its just the way it is.
What do you think goes on in a home that needs to be "overseen"? Isn't it a little ridiculous to assert that homemaking is so complicated that you need a whole command structure to make it work?
Well, by the home, I meant the family. Matters of the physical 'home' have been traditionally overseen by women, and their attention to detail has allowed for them to excel in superiority. Females are typically more attentive to the needs of others, whereas men tend to be a bit more oblivious to that. However, men tend to be a bit more pragmatic on monetary matters. They tend not to inject as much emotion into critical matters as women. And again, this isn't the case for every home or for every person. I think the message is that its ideal this way whenever possible.
Have you ever gone out to eat with some friends? Who usually picks the restaurant? I presume you all do. Somehow you're all able to do that without one person needing to take the role of an overseer. Why do you think it works differently when you're married? What do you think happens in a home that two adults can't deal with as partners, without needing one person to be master and the other to be subordinate?
When you're on a date, who usually picks up the tab? When you are on a date, who opens the cardoor for the other person? When you are on a date who typically drives their own vehicle and basically chauffeurs their date? Men and women naturally fall into these roles. Yes, I believe that society has alot to do with establishing these roles and perpetuating them. I also believe, however, that these are natural inclinations that should not be dismissed. You can look at this from an anthropological standpoint. According to evolutionary anthropological history of mankind, males were the hunters and females were the gatherers. Even in the animal kingdom, males tend to rule the roost. Thats just the way nature tends to sort things out. I don't know what more I can say about it, other than I believe the Biblical perspective to correct in its assessment.
Show me in the Bible where it says that a man should submit to his wife as he submits to God. It doesn't, right?
It says it in the verse I provided. There are other verses in the Bible that speak about it. I found a great article that elucidates the point of
mutual submission.
"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt
™ Version 4.2