God bless you brother, and I pray the Lord sends you a wonderful and loving wife!

May you be blessed with a gentle and loving Wife🙏

Could you present your better exegesis, please?

@@luminitaman5135 I already pointed out this issues. @2:12 she says "do not let" means the force of gravity makes us focus on the external. As in, if we simply "let" gravity work, that's how things fall. Then @3:16 she quotes "rather let it be the hidden person of the heart". "Let it" is used in the "rather" clause, yet she doesn't draw the same conclusion -- that the force of gravity would make us focus on the hidden person. ἔστω οὐχ is not about "letting" something be, as in a passive acceptance. And coming from a KJV family, she should know better about how the older English works. Other translations make the meaning more clear: "must not be" and "should not consist of" or even "let your beauty not", simply moving the "let" to make it more clear that it's a command against something. The rest of the video lacks any real exegesis to engage with. She makes a lot of claims -- quiet doesn't mean silent, it means reverence, etc. That may or may not be true, but where is that in the text? She says it's invisible to everyone but God. But where is that in the text? In fact, the whole point -- context is everything -- is that your husband may see your behavior and be won over by it (verse 2). So it's not invisible. She says the NKJV adds the word "merely" to make it clear it's not a command against adorning yourself. She doesn't interact with a very similar passage -- 1 Timothy 2 -- where women are told not to have fancy hair, and to learn in submission and quietness. Very similar language being used, yet in 1 Timothy 2, the command against braided hair seems absolute. So she appeals to the NKJV adding the word "merely" to tell us how to interpret the text, but doesn't interact with a similar passage in Scripture which seems more absolute. And the entire passage is about how to win over your husbands, which she really doesn't speak of, and it doesn't inform her interpretation. So we got one woman's commentary that seems to be her own "Let's go around the table and everyone tell us what this verse means to you" take, rather than an informed, biblical take with sound exegesis.

I don’t believe that this text requires that much “exegesis.” It’s pretty straight forward. I don’t see how you can be so critical of her. She was expounding the text. She was encouraging women who live in a world that tells us to live exactly opposite of what this text states. That’s all. I don’t understand your criticism. If it’s not your cup of tea, that’s fine, but I would be willing to bet many women will benefit from hearing this good word.

@@monew632 You don't understand my criticism? It was laid out pretty clearly. I don't see how you can be so critical of me. I was explaining the fallacies. I don't understand your criticism. If it's not your cup of tea, that's fine, but I would be willing to bet many people will benefit from reading a correction of bad exegesis. Apparently feels before reals for you, huh?

eru san I understand now. Thank you for clearing things up.