Find A Wife In The Philippines

[theleastofthese]

Again, what if they’re wicked people and squander every dollar on frivolous or wrong things?

I don't necessarily have an answer for that. I was simply pointing out that in some translations, the word "relatives" is mentioned. I believe you can still honor your parents even when they do wrong. I also believe you can still provide for them, to an extent. Obviously, each situation is different, and as the leader of your household, you have to make that decision. I understand where you're coming from; both of my parents had serious additions, and I chose to pay their mortgage and car notes many times to prevent foreclosure and repossessions before they both straightened out again. I don't blame you for tiring of it and cutting it off, just as I wouldn't blame someone for continuing to help because they feel called to do so.

 

[frederick]

And they might just know how to handle a rifle, not something likely to find in a Filipina.

I'd post a photo of a certain filipina with a military M16, but it's not for public viewing. Like a lot of other things; there's more surprises in the Philippines.

 

[NickF]

Just stop it now. I’m too busy for a humanitarian trip to a beautiful island. Don’t tempt me beyond what I can bear.

 

[NickF]

***cough***pm it to me***cough***

 

[frederick]

***cough***pm it to me***cough***

I'll get a cough medicine prescription for you instead.

 

[MemeFan]

I'll get a cough medicine prescription for you instead.

Vitamni D helps with immune system, so it's ancient Greek medicine system.

Mandatory daily sunbathing.

 

[Bartato]

My household does not include extended family. Please show from scripture that household always includes extended family.

My household currently consists of me and two wives.

I just showed you a passage that tells us to help out relatives in general. The phrase "especially for those of his household" indicates that some level of responsibility extends beyond the immediate household.

What if your parents squander every dollar you give them on wicked, immoral, or frivolous things?

I may or may not know something about this.

I think you know the answer. It isn't wise or good to fund or enable wicked, immoral, or foolish behavior. You may have to honor your parents by letting them suffer the consequences of their bad behavior. Tough love is sometimes necessary.

 

[NBTX11]

I just showed you a passage that tells us to help out relatives in general.

I agree. Where we may differ is what relatives. I just told you my household consists of 3 people. I think we both agree we don’t have a responsibility to help our third cousin once removed. The question is, must you help those literally in your household or those living outside of your household, but still relatives, and if so, how close of relatives. Just mother and father? How about sibling? Nieces, aunts, and uncles? It’s subjective, despite the attempt to make it clear cut. It’s not as clear cut as y’all are making it out to be. The verse you presented clearly says household. I have 3 people in my household.

Can you make a biblical argument that in the verse you presented that the word household includes people not actually living in your household.

 

[frederick]

Regarding true faith, James wrote, What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead (James 2:14-17).

How you respond to the genuine needs others have is between you and your God. Wants are not necessarily needs, but there are people with real needs and it is a demonstration of genuine saving faith to give them the things which are needed for the body (v:16). We can each work out our salvation as we will. Shalom

 

[FollowingHim]

Can you make a biblical argument that in the verse you presented that the word household includes people not actually living in your household.

He already did. It's clear in the plain wording of the verse.

The phrase "especially for those of his household" indicates that some level of responsibility extends beyond the immediate household.

We have some responsibility to our relatives, whether or not they live with us.

Now, regarding the details:

I agree. Where we may differ is what relatives. I just told you my household consists of 3 people. I think we both agree we don’t have a responsibility to help our third cousin once removed. The question is, must you help those literally in your household or those living outside of your household, but still relatives, and if so, how close of relatives. Just mother and father? How about sibling? Nieces, aunts, and uncles? It’s subjective, despite the attempt to make it clear cut. It’s not as clear cut as y’all are making it out to be. The verse you presented clearly says household. I have 3 people in my household.

You are being too defensive about this @NBTX11, and this is obviously due to bad experiences you have had, so I understand why you find this upsetting. But your emotions are getting in the way of considering the matter clearly. Because you are trying to defend yourself from being bled dry by deadbeat relatives, you are looking at it legalistically, in order to find a way to argue that you don't need to do it. You are therefore missing the heart of the matter, which is actually love rather than legalism.

I think we both agree we don’t have a responsibility to help our third cousin once removed.

That depends entirely on what needs he has and how God is intending to provide those. If you are the closest person to him who is able to provide the need that he has, and God clearly intends for you to do so, then you do have a responsibility to help him. On the other hand, if you hardly know him and there are a hundred other relatives and neighbours of his who are far better placed to help him, you have no responsibility to him whatsoever. It's not a matter of black-and-white legalism around how close a relative you have responsibilities for.

Consider this wording later in 1 Timothy 5:
"If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed."
How close does a widow need to be related to you for you to have a responsibility for them? We are not told. It doesn't say "take care of your mother or aunt if they are widows". It just says if you "have" a widow you must provide for them. Whether she is your responsibility comes down to practicalities - are you the closest person in a position to provide for her? Then she's your responsibility.

So you have no responsibility for your wife's parents if they don't need your help, and if they do need your help then you do have a responsibility for them.

 

[Joshua]

Regarding true faith, James wrote, What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead (James 2:14-17).

How you respond to the genuine needs others have is between you and your God. Wants are not necessarily needs, but there are people with real needs and it is a demonstration of genuine saving faith to give them the things which are needed for the body (v:16). We can each work out our salvation as we will. Shalom

Frederick, please pause. We have now (I pray not intentionally), turned this into a debate on what “saving faith” is. In simplicity, faith=belief (conviction of truth). If unaccompanied by works, this said faith of a man in James 2 is unprofitable and cannot help both himself and others with earthly matters such as food and clothing. The word “save” means to deliver, protect, preserve, make whole. To deliver himself from what? The context *again* says from earthly matters. Verse 17 tells us this faith is like the body without the spirit, being *ALONE*. (Notice the word alone signifies the existence of said faith, and the analogy of a lifeless body is effective at portraying the lack of said body moving around and helping itself/others). In terms of being “saved” from hell though, we are not helping or saving ourselves, but entirely granted with unmerited grace when God sees our faith. Even if this faith is as small as a mustard seed, and not matured/perfected like verse 22 tells us, it can move mountains, and is certainly acknowledged by our gracious Lord Jesus Christ. Let us rest in the simple gospel of John 3:16. Romans 4:24-25 tells us how to get Abraham’s justification before God. Works gain us the title “Friend of God” from James 2:23, as well as rewards stored up in the kingdom/thereafter, glorify our Father in heaven, bring others joy, help us avoid discipline/chastisement, etc. Please ponder romans 8:30 for a moment, when does one get justified? Of course when they choose to believe, and this verse unequivocally states that all those justified, are glorified (spiritually now, physically to be seen in the resurrection). God bless you sir.

 

[Joshua]

He already did. It's clear in the plain wording of the verse.

We have some responsibility to our relatives, whether or not they live with us.

Now, regarding the details:

You are being too defensive about this @NBTX11, and this is obviously due to bad experiences you have had, so I understand why you find this upsetting. But your emotions are getting in the way of considering the matter clearly. Because you are trying to defend yourself from being bled dry by deadbeat relatives, you are looking at it legalistically, in order to find a way to argue that you don't need to do it. You are therefore missing the heart of the matter, which is actually love rather than legalism.

That depends entirely on what needs he has and how God is intending to provide those. If you are the closest person to him who is able to provide the need that he has, and God clearly intends for you to do so, then you do have a responsibility to help him. On the other hand, if you hardly know him and there are a hundred other relatives and neighbours of his who are far better placed to help him, you have no responsibility to him whatsoever. It's not a matter of black-and-white legalism around how close a relative you have responsibilities for.

Consider this wording later in 1 Timothy 5:
"If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed."
How close does a widow need to be related to you for you to have a responsibility for them? We are not told. It doesn't say "take care of your mother or aunt if they are widows". It just says if you "have" a widow you must provide for them. Whether she is your responsibility comes down to practicalities - are you the closest person in a position to provide for her? Then she's your responsibility.

So you have no responsibility for your wife's parents if they don't need your help, and if they do need your help then you do have a responsibility for them.

I agree! (Gal 6:2, Matt 5:42, prov 28:27, James 1:27, Rom 12:13, Philippians 2:4, etc) within reason not to enable people who will not use the money for basic needs, or purposefully enter poverty to ask for yours and are able to work, or those who you can’t provide for without not having enough for your own household, obviously we know your wives and children are #1! We help others past that when we are ABLE, and know it’s going to a Holy cause.

 

[frederick]

Frederick, please pause. We have now (I pray not intentionally), turned this into a debate on what “saving faith” is. In simplicity, faith=belief (conviction of truth). If unaccompanied by works, this said faith of a man in James 2 is unprofitable and cannot help both himself and others with earthly matters such as food and clothing. The word “save” means to deliver, protect, preserve, make whole. To deliver himself from what? The context *again* says from earthly matters. Verse 17 tells us this faith is like the body without the spirit, being *ALONE*. (Notice the word alone signifies the existence of said faith, and the analogy of a lifeless body is effective at portraying the lack of said body moving around and helping itself/others). In terms of being “saved” from hell though, we are not helping or saving ourselves, but entirely granted with unmerited grace when God sees our faith. Even if this faith is as small as a mustard seed, and not matured/perfected like verse 22 tells us, it can move mountains, and is certainly acknowledged by our gracious Lord Jesus Christ. Let us rest in the simple gospel of John 3:16. Romans 4:24-25 tells us how to get Abraham’s justification before God. Works gain us the title “Friend of God” from James 2:23, as well as rewards stored up in the kingdom/thereafter, glorify our Father in heaven, bring others joy, help us avoid discipline/chastisement, etc. Please ponder romans 8:30 for a moment, when does one get justified? Of course when they choose to believe, and this verse unequivocally states that all those justified, are glorified (spiritually now, physically to be seen in the resurrection). God bless you sir.

You what??

 

[NBTX11]

and this is obviously due to bad experiences you have had, so I understand why you find this upsetting.

Correct. Very bad. I won’t go into how bad and just leave it at that.

 

[Jack P.]

Explain the marrying the family idea. I marry a woman, not a group of people.

The women are taught from a young age that when they become of age thy are responsible for taking care of the parents and any other young siblings

 

[MemeFan]

Maybe best approach is to become programmer in China:



It should be rather easy to wifey personal cheerleader.

 

[Bartato]

Maybe best approach is to become programmer in China:

View attachment 7657

It should be rather easy to wifey personal cheerleader.

That's pretty sad. Many Chinese men will never have a wife since so many female babies were aborted. China has a huge shortage of women.

I suppose that could be a good opportunity for Filipinas and other women (especially Asian ones). They can now choose to marry "rich" Chinese guys as well as "rich" old Western guys. Then again, that in turn leads to a surplus of single Filipino men.

 

[steve]

I suppose that could be a good opportunity for Filipinas and other women (especially Asian ones). They can now choose to marry "rich" Chinese guys as well as "rich" old Western guys. Then again, that in turn leads to a surplus of single Filipino men.

I’m doing my best to make sure that undeserving men in this country are frustrated.

 

[Bartato]

I’m doing my best to make sure that undeserving men in this country are frustrated.

That's one of the potential advantages of polygynous societies. They help motivate men to be better, as the dregs might go wife-less, and high quality men might have several.

Then, again one of the potential drawbacks is that some decent guys might also lose out.

Your average man in a poor country (like the Philippines) might be as good or better than a wealthier man in the West or China, who might get the woman he would have had apart from the "global free trade" marriage market.

 

[phaedrus]

That's pretty sad. Many Chinese men will never have a wife since so many female babies were aborted. China has a huge shortage of women.

I suppose that could be a good opportunity for Filipinas and other women (especially Asian ones). They can now choose to marry "rich" Chinese guys as well as "rich" old Western guys. Then again, that in turn leads to a surplus of single Filipino men.

I wouldn't recommend anyone who isn't Chinese (and preferably not just Chinese but Han) move to China under any circumstances. Being any foreign nationality and trying to immigrate there wouldn't be pleasant IMO.