Biblical Women™ of Southwestern Seminary (SWBTS) ‘Going Social’

"Sadly, many times our efforts to define our values lead to misunderstanding and even negativity. Here at Biblical Woman, we’ve encountered these misunderstandings about what we believe about women and what we teach at Southwestern Seminary. And we decided to do something about it."

Biblical Woman – Exciting News Coming Soon

http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=42302&picture=eyes-of-woman-clipart

Eyes of a Woman

It appears that the women's programs at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (SWBTS) have been misunderstood by the general public.  Perhaps the homemaking degree introduced in recent years has contributed to what seminary officials believe to be misconceptions.  That's just a hunch… 

In order to correct any misunderstandings, the women of Southwestern are 'going social'.  They have launched a website called Biblical Woman (BW) and have set up both Facebook and Twitter accounts. 

Candi Finch, an Assistant Professor of Theology in Women's Studies, wrote an article entitled Biblical Womanhood 101:  What We Really Teach at Southwestern to set the record straight.  Here is an excerpt:

So, to start off, let me share a few things we don’t teach in our programs (based on a few things people have erroneously said):

– We don’t teach that women are less valuable, less intelligent, or less important in God’s plan…

– We don’t teach that women should not be involved in ministry, though we do believe there are some passages in Scripture that give specific guidelines to women involved in ministry.

– We don’t teach that women should not be thoroughly trained and equipped for ministry. We encourage women to study hard to be prepared for whatever area of ministry God may be calling them…

– We don’t teach that the only way to honor God as a woman is by being a wife and mom, though we do believe that being a wife and a mother is a high calling, which unfortunately is often ridiculed in today’s world…

Another post on the BW website defines Who We Are.  It goes on to state that the women who are studying at Southwestern are:

Distinctly feminine.
Doctrinally faithful.
Devotedly fearless.

At Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, we are training women to be just that!

In recent days the BW website featured the Biblical Woman Statement, which lists 12 aspects of biblical womanhood, and on April 1 it featured a post by First Lady of Southwestern 'Dottie' Patterson.  She plans to write an article periodically to be featured on the website. 

Perhaps you will want to spend some time perusing Southwestern's BW website.  Should you decide to comment, the Biblical Women™ request that you 'keep it classy'.   

Bob Allen of the Associated Baptist Press recently reported on developments in Southwestern's Biblical Women™ program.  In his piece he shared the following information:

Southwestern, a Southern Baptist Convention-affiliated seminary, boasts “the largest women’s programs faculty of any evangelical seminary.” It offers courses of study ranging from certificate to the Ph.D. specializing in women’s studies, women’s ministries and, since 2007, homemaking.

Here at TWW we have been so busy covering pressing news in Christendom that we failed to mention an SWBTS conference held last fall that caught our attention.  It was called The Art of Homemaking, and it plugged a Crossway book entitled The Christian Homemakers Handbook, co-authored by Dorothy Patterson.  "Dottie" Patterson and Michelle Duggar were two of the speakers at that event. 

It will be interesting to follow the social media of the Biblical Women™ of Southwestern to see how their positions and viewpoints are being received by both Christians and non-Christians.  Should you decide to leave a comment on their website, Facebook account, or Twitter, we respectfully request that you do so tactfully

So what do you think about this 'social media' campaign to improve the image of the women's programs at Southwestern Seminary?

In closing, one of our readers shared a funny video earlier this week, and although it is satirical, there do appear to be some elements of truth…

Lydia's Corner:  Lamentations 4:1-5:22   Hebrews 2:1-18   Psalm 103:1-22   Proverbs 26:23

Comments

Biblical Women™ of Southwestern Seminary (SWBTS) ‘Going Social’ — 220 Comments

  1. I am curious as to what someone defending their doctorate dissertation in homemaking would look like.

  2. Though we do believe that being a wife and a mother is a high calling, which unfortunately is often ridiculed in today’s world

    So, just out of curiosity, who exactly is ridiculing being a wife and mother? I know it is easy to find some bozo on the internet, but who really ridicules this in real life? I've never seen it happen and I live in a pretty non-conservative state. Am I just missing it or is this a fake "threat"?

  3. srs wrote:

    I am curious as to what someone defending their doctorate dissertation in homemaking would look like.

    Martha Stewart?

  4. I am glad they are feeling enough pressure to believe they must attempt to defend this silliness.

    I believe I know what they mean by “doctrinally faithful.” Just do what they are told by their male leaders.

  5. This ties into SBC conservatism. I oftentimes wonder how much of this conservatism is actually Southern conservatism that was given biblical credence with proof texting. Traditionally, the SBC was complementarian before the modern movement. Women teaching in assemblies where there were men present was frowned upon, and women working outside the home was shameful for some of these conservative women. I don't have a problem with this because I am familiar with this culture, but I wonder how much of it is as much or more cultural than actually biblical.

  6. W A Criswell relates a story that when he was a young pastor he asked a women to pray, and she refused because there were men in the assembly. This is just an example of this conservatism. I have a friend, a Baptist pastor, who felt his wife was a very gifted Bible teacher. He wanted her to teach the Sunday school lesson, but the class was mixed. She refused on biblical grounds. These are examples of this conservatism.

  7. Dorothy Patterson wears the pants at SWBTS. She’s as powerful as any corporate executive could ever be. There’s no doubt who’s in charge. Her husband, Paige Patterson, the seminary president, obeys her commands. I’ve seen it up close and personal.

    Does the Biblical Woman initiative have a course for helping men say, “Yes, dear”?

  8. Ok, seriously??? SERIOUSLY??

    This is hilarious: “OUR efforts to define OUR values lead[s]….to negativity.” Um, maybe because your values themselves lead to pretty freaking negative outcomes?????
    Maybe because those values aren’t exactly Biblical????
    Maybe because John Piper tells women not to get too muscular, or that the very existence of female prophets means that prophets are fallible?
    Maybe because you’re guilty of actually adding to the Bible??

    Sorry, tell me to shut up if I blog-share too much, but I JUST wrote on the dire consequences of some of their teachings the other day: “How Quiverfull Speech Can Crash Airplanes.” http://taylorjoyrecovers.wordpress.com/2014/04/02/quiverfullspeechcrashesairplanes/

  9. burntnorton wrote:

    What does it mean to be distinctly feminine?

    …the opposite of distinctly male? 🙁

    How absurd. You can’t make these things up.

  10. Beakerj:

    Distinctly Usurping
    Doctrinally Bewildered
    Devotedly Truthful

    Oh how I love these snappy three liners.

  11. @ TW:
    Yah but even that young woman writes in her “About Me”: “The real story is that I used provocative language to start a conversation.”

    I taught for years at an art college (secular, expensive) and I’d hear this occasionally, but mostly it was push-back against familial pressure and/or a stubborn insistence that she, a woman, can become as good an artist as any fellow male student, since everybody knew that an art career was going to be a hard road, that it would take all one’s energy/sturdiness, plus a willingness to live poor on scutt work (for only a lucky few, on inheritance).

    There are a few people who genuinely dislike children (and more men than women) but the women I heard say this, in a place about as liberal as it gets, were young and only attempting to make psychological room for what every man automatically owns, enough time/space for a serious career.

    Patterson et al have rarely heard that kind of hate, and they know they’re attempting to force career-called women to places they’d be unhappy, and they lie like rugs for their values.

  12. @ Mark:

    That’s all true, but the women are the ones who set it up and enable it to continue, to a large degree. That second comment of yours is a good example of it. Think: games women play. Think how to manipulate your man / get him to do whatever. I just can’t honey because I am physically weak, mentally incompetent, and besides I am a woman and it just wouldn’t look right. So you go to do it sweetie. Think how can I make myself appear better (or more righteous) than other women even though they have richer husbands, more and better children, and 40DD on a size 6 body?

    And Mark, if you live or lived in the south, look around and see if you don’t see hoards of us who do not play that game.

  13. Mara wrote:

    Okay. So this is a thing, then.
    How do we expose and fight this?

    I’ve always thought manipulation was a woman’s defense against the man’s power. It’s equally as aggressive and effective in most cases.

  14. Victorious wrote:

    I’ve always thought manipulation was a woman’s defense against the man’s power. It’s equally as aggressive and effective in most cases.

    To add to the above: I think it’s a woman’s “choice of weapons” given the limited arsenal available to her.

  15. Are these women claiming to live like people lived prior to 1900 years ago? Are they claiming to have lived over 1900 years ago? Surely they are not living without the benefit of modernity!

    They really should read the book by the woman who actually tried to live “biblical”. And if that is what they want to do, may God bless the effort. But please do not purport to be Biblical by suggesting that there is something they can’t do as children of God (other than inseminating a woman).

  16. Is Dottie Patterson going to be the SBC’s Ron Burgundy?!?!? Only one person is allowed to say “Keep it classy!!” :-p

  17. I don’t know. Maybe manipulation is here to stay, at least since it is relatively easy and risk free. But the part of this that is pecking order among women? Some sociologists are going to have to address that. Too bad that female on female aggression cannot be directed in some better direction. Too bad that healthy female aggression is so despised by so many people. I mean, really, when “healthy” this or that is suppressed or repressed it may show up in “unhealthy” ways. This is not my area of expertise. Just a thought.

    But I said, maybe too much, to Mark (whose comments I really like) because I do feel the need to defend “the south” when I see all of us getting blamed for what only some of us do.

  18. What a bunch of hypocrites! So here are women like Dottie Patterson and Mary Mohler extolling the virtues of the submissive, stay-at-home wife while holding down cushy and influential jobs at their husbands’ seminaries. If you believe for one minute that these two women have no authority over any men and don’t give any men any orders, then please contact me – I have some waterfront property in Arizona I would like to interest you in.

    As I mentioned in a post on another thread, I think there’s a Wife of Big Shot (WoBS) exception in the SBC’s Baptist Faith and Message and the CBMW’s principles.

  19. @ Patrice:
    Round of applause for this. It is hard in so many areas to allow yourself to stretch your true intellect or talent if you are a woman. It’s easy to develop behavioural quirks (I get a little bit bumbling & absent minded) so that people don’t see how sharp you are, I’m not surprised others develop psychological quirks. You are seen as intimidating or masculine or whatever. I was just having a chat with my supervisor about this the other day (my field, youth & community work) can be a little anti-intellectual, & he is urging me just to say ‘sod you’ to anyone who has a problem with it.

  20. Patrice wrote:

    @ TW:

    I taught for years at an art college (secular, expensive) and I’d hear this occasionally, but mostly it was push-back against familial pressure and/or a stubborn insistence that she, a woman, can become as good an artist as any fellow male student, since everybody knew that an art career was going to be a hard road, that it would take all one’s energy/sturdiness, plus a willingness to live poor on scutt work

    I got my doctorate at Bryn Mawr College and taught for several years in a business college and in neither place did I hear homemaking denigrated. I am tired of religious conservatives telling people what liberal feminists like me say and think. Either they don’t know any of us or they are setting up straw women.

  21. @ Beakerj:
    Lol, yes! Bumbling/abstracted is charming, so good job on your choice! I’d a habit of being jokey or too-smiley, and I’d over-explain and then swing to silence. Arg!

    People are uncomfortable with intimidating women, no doubt. Women will get dismissed for saying things, which, when men say them, are given respect. It happens all the time, nearly everywhere.

    Plus everyone feels free to get down on women (for imagined/actual flaws) much more than they do on men. It is not just that we don’t criticize male leaders when we should, but that we pick on females at every turn for being themselves.

    “Sod off”—a necessary internal mantra, IMO (well, I used the eff word). How else to push it all back? And it can be surgically inserted into reality to great effect lol

    Women such as Dorothy Patterson are obviously made for running organizations. Ok!

    If I was Dorothy’s pastor: “Yay, Dorothy, for being a strong ambitious woman, which is obviously how God made you. But in order to be obedient to God, you need different content for your career. I recommend you simply choose opposite on all that you’ve done. God would be glad of it, I’m sure, and so would the women around you….Oh, and by the way, I had a dream last night in which you were taking a year’s course in logic. What do you think?” w00t

  22. Does anyone know if SWBTS is experiencing a decline in enrollment as a result of women feeling unwelcome and going elsewhere? That would be my guess on the reason for this ‘clarification.’

  23. Marsha wrote:

    I am tired of religious conservatives telling people what liberal feminists like me say and think. Either they don’t know any of us or they are setting up straw women.

    It’s straw women. Almost certain.

    There are many fevered ignorant members sitting in church pews and spewing online, but I’ve seen no signs of fever/ignorance in the top leaders. Although their views are rude, crude and irrational, their moves are always consistent and sometimes clever.

    They read and travel widely. They know very well that they need to listen/watch in order to make accurate pronouncements—they all have relationships that require it: families, pastoring or one sort of organization or another.

    Unless they are all narcissists (not all, right?), they are people who will tell any lie to get others to swallow their idea of truth. None are brilliant but they are good enough for the job at hand.

    I despise propaganda no matter where it comes from.

  24. There is a market for what they do. If the market dried up they would re-direct their energies to some other market.

  25. FYI

    Biblical Womanhood is now being exported…

    The ‘Biblical Woman’ Facebook page shared a link about Dottie Patterson’s latest effort to promote ‘biblical womanhood’.

    Dottie recently traveled to the Ukraine and Republic of Georgia to sell her ideas.

    http://www.bpnews.net/42297/dorothy-patterson-sees-ukraines-burdens

    Patterson, professor of theology in women’s studies at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, spoke at the Ukrainian Baptist Theological Seminary about biblical womanhood. In Georgia, she spoke as part of preparations for a Festival of Hope by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association in June.

    The Ukrainian seminary had invited Patterson, wife of Southwestern President Page Patterson, to assist in adding women’s studies to the curriculum.

    Yarslov Pyzh, seminary president and Southwestern Ph.D. graduate, has led the initiative to add women’s studies at the school in Lviv, a city of 750,000 in central Ukraine.

    Patterson recapped, “We’re working on helping them develop a certificate of study that will give them courses helpful in their woman-to-woman ministries. We’re hoping and praying that the Lord will enable them to get this program off the ground so the women in the churches will have some trained leadership.”

  26. Patrice wrote:

    Unless they are all narcissists (not all, right?), they are people who will tell any lie to get others to swallow their idea of truth.

    To clarify, narcissists do this too, but for those who aren’t, and who truly believe their truth to be One-and-Only in all parts—they will sacrifice truth to keep Truth.

    Not unlike sacrificing the first-born son, really. The very thing that is deepest in one’s value system is what is sacrificed as demonstration of one’s total commitment. For the sincere propagandists, this is at bottom, I think.

    Of course numbers of them are just pretenders and that is where the narcissists/sociopaths are. Rather fascinating, really (if one can manage to set aside the damage being done).

  27. So let me get this correct. Martha was right and Mary was wrong and Jesus should have known that.

    Yes, I know how they characterize the Mary and Martha story, and yes I have read what N T Wright says about what people are missing (in the culture of the day) in that story. And, no, when it comes to such sort of argumentation or reasoning I do not think, ladies of SWBTS, that toe nail polish trumps historical research and academic excellence.

  28. Dottie Patterson has been very much in the news… She is currently overseeing the creation of stained glass windows for the newly built chapel at Southwestern Seminary.

    Here are a couple of excerpts from a Black Christian News article on Patterson’s latest project:

    http://www.blackchristiannews.com/news/2014/01/dorothy-patterson-wife-of-paige-patterson-begins-stained-glass-windows-project-to-honor-leaders-of-s.html

    “The windows will immortalize Baptists who helped effect the culture change to more conservative attitudes in the Southern Baptist Convention, Patterson said.

    “My dream was to portray the 20-year history of the conservative resurgence of the Southern Baptist Church,” said Patterson, wife of seminary President Paige Patterson.”

    And this…

    “Dorothy and Paige Patterson will be portrayed together in a window set to be made next year…”

    Will Jesus and his disciples be depicted in theses stained glass windows? Guess we’ll just have to wait and see…

    But we know for sure that the architects of the conservative resurgence will be immortalized at SWBTS.

    This article first appeared in the Star-Telegraph.

    http://www.star-telegram.com/2013/12/13/5415582/stained-glass-windows-honor-leaders.html

  29. Sabrae wrote:

    ” Distinctly feminine.
    Doctrinally faithful.
    Devotedly fearless. ”
    And entirely Mormon.

    Buahahaha! That was a coffee spitter! I say as the Mormon’s are approaching my door. 😉

  30. Nancy wrote:

    Martha was right and Mary was wrong and Jesus should have known that.

    Oh but they are also being Marys because after cooking, they sit and listen at the feet of the Great Male Oracles. And just like the prostie who poured the expensive perfume on Jesus’ feet, they spend mucho moolah on their nails, cosmetics, perfumes, hair and clothing so that they can offer themselves up as PURRRFECT while doing so.

    The conservative Evangelical *wealthy* female Christians do it all, just like the secular moderns (except that silly boy-stuff), and do they ever look righteous!

    Pffft.

  31. @ Beakerj: :applause:

    Sadly, it’s all true. I’ve done the “quirk” thing myself, and found it very hard to stop once started.

    Then again, a clergy person (male) got upset with me when I asked why the Nicene Creed wasn’t part of his church’s statement of faith, so there you go…

  32. TW wrote:

    srs wrote:
    I am curious as to what someone defending their doctorate dissertation in homemaking would look like.
    Martha Stewart?

    I just want to know if she would be wearing an apron or her prison orange?

  33. @ Deb:

    Can I say woop-di-doo? 🙄

    And aren’t these the same folks who would mock Catholics for cathedrals with their stained glass windows depicting the life of Jesus, Apostles, and others of the Christian faith? Maybe I missed something.

  34. Victorious wrote:

    Mara wrote:
    Okay. So this is a thing, then.
    How do we expose and fight this?
    I’ve always thought manipulation was a woman’s defense against the man’s power. It’s equally as aggressive and effective in most cases.

    Just want to add my 2cents here. The more a woman put her submission on display as a an example to follow, the more skilled I noticed she was at manipulation … no matter how meek she appeared on the outside.

    I read an article that really caught my attention. It chides women for not being respectful enough of their husbands to treat them like an adult. How silly to feign compliance when we know we are the drivers in so many areas of life. No one person can run it all, lead it all, and initiate it all, be it man or woman.

    http://www.jennyraearmstrong.com/2013/01/23/faking-it-why-you-should-stop-treating-your-husband-like-a-toddler-and-actually-respect-him/

  35. @ Deb:

    You know the phrase, “Give ’em enough rope to hang themselves.”?
    We don’t have to give it to them. They are taking it hand over fist.

    I think Driscoll is there, or at least almost.

    The Pattersons are getting there quickly.

    We see what they worship. They worship themselves and their ubber conservative takeover of SWBTS and the SBC. Not Jesus. Not God. Just their version of the way things ought to be propped up by their personal eisegesis of the Bible.

  36. @ Patrice:

    Yeah. They try to. But NT says (and I am sorry, I do not have the reference) that the text does not support that understanding. He says that the term –sat at Jesus feet– is the same term that Paul used to describe himself sitting at the feet of Gamaliel. And the term, he says, was understood to not mean adoring glances from a pillow on the floor, but rather it meant–was a student of. But student of a rabbi was reserved for men in that day. She had crossed a line, therefore, and was being or acting like a student of a rabbi. Further, NT says, this would have been taking place in the men only section of the home.

    And now I am saying; No wonder Martha was upset. Not only was she left with the housework (which Jesus said was excessive) but also Mary was crossing too many lines which were forbidden to women. And that, if correct, is a whole different matter.

  37. When I attended an IFB college as a brand new Christian, I found the other girls had been trained how to run a home, whereas I had not. They had a homemaking class for those of us who found boiling water disinteresting and challenging. I took this remedial class and discovered I liked it after all. Who knew? But because it was an IFB school, it was understood that the woman’s place was in the home. That’s not where I wanted to spend all my time.

    I’m saying this because I can see how this class for the women at the seminary could be a big draw. These women are most likely married now and realizing they need some help with how to run a home. Many are like I was, arriving into life clueless about some basics. Unfortunately, when we are young we desperately want to have an identity; so identifying as “Susie Christian Homemaker” becomes WHO one is.

    Those leading such classes suddenly see the response and realize they have an opportunity here they can capitalize on and become important by creating a brand, and making some money. Well, this is my imagination of how it can happen, anyway.

    We must be careful in our youth to not hold our image too tightly, as well as we must be careful in midlife not to hold our being significant for all to see too tightly, as well.

  38. I find it interesting that in the Martha and Mary scenario it is the other woman who is complaining to Jesus about Mary and not the men.

    @ Nancy:
    @ Nancy:

  39. So what do they do with Galatians 3:28?

    There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

  40. We don’t teach that women are less valuable, less intelligent, or less important in God’s plan…

    – We don’t teach that women should not be involved in ministry, though we do believe there are some passages in Scripture that give specific guidelines to women involved in ministry.

    – We don’t teach that women should not be thoroughly trained and equipped for ministry. We encourage women to study hard to be prepared for whatever area of ministry God may be calling them…

    – We don’t teach that the only way to honor God as a woman is by being a wife and mom, though we do believe that being a wife and a mother is a high calling, which unfortunately is often ridiculed in today’s world…

    Yes they do. It’s just denied that they teach it while they teach it. Article after article has been on what we cannot do with a small list of what we supposedly can do. The list of can’t do outweighs the list of what women can do. It’s just publicized with the words “we are not teaching”, but it is exactly what they are indeed teaching.

  41. @ Bridget:

    Well, I’m sure that Martha was shamed into her responsibility as oldest daughter i.e. caretaker of all. It is a position with a lot of responsibility and little to no authority. I’m sure she could have used a bit of help from another born-to-be-caretaker-with-no authority. So she tried to do what was done to her. She tried to shame Mary and even Jesus into getting Mary to fulfill her role. And I love the response of Jesus back. Though Martha tried to shame, He used no shame in return. I’m sure he understood the suffocating pressure on women in that culture. He wanted Mary AND Martha to be free.

  42. Katie wrote:

    I just want to know if she would be wearing an apron or her prison orange?

    Katie, katie, katie… of course it depends on which one better matches her shoes and other accessories…

  43. TW wrote:

    srs wrote:

    So, just out of curiosity, who exactly is ridiculing being a wife and mother?

    I would think this is not the majority view in feminist camps, but it’s not that uncommon to hear:

    http://thoughtcatalog.com/amy-glass/2014/01/i-look-down-on-young-women-with-husbands-and-kids-and-im-not-sorry/

    I wonder if this woman has ever walked in the other shoes? Has she given birth and raised children without extra help (nannies, cleaning help, etc.)?

    I worked for 20 years, had three children at the end of that time, worked full-time after one child, part-time after two, and was pregnant with the third shortly after I stopped working. I homeschooled for 12 years as well. The experiences were completely different. For me, anyway, being home and raising children was far more fullfiling, but also more taxing, than the pressures of a job. We had no outside help and no family near us. I wasn’t a single mom and we have had above normal income for the majority of our married life. Every exprience is different for every person.

    The blogger sounds like she has blinders on.

  44. Question on the woman infighting/manipulation bit – it this something that the we guys can help out with or is it something better brought up by the fellow women (when it shows up in a church context)? I’ve often gotten the impression that if I called out a gal on her manipulation that I would be deemed “unchivalrous” and considered inappropriate (maybe not the most precise word) to speak to the issue.

  45. Dorothy Patterson is actually well educated. This kind of education I don’t believe would allowed in the modern SBC:

    http://www.dorothypatterson.info/about.cfm

    She was educated to preach. I wonder if she ever did preach since preaching is part of a theological education? And she had to preach before men to receive these degrees such as Masters of Divinity, and a Doctor of Ministry?

    have read the comments and it is all true.

    There is a certain degree of manipulation that is part of women submissiveness in complementarianism. These submissive woman aren’t really all that submissive in some cases. They rule the roost.

    There is also a certain degree of male chivalry of placing women on a pedestal. I open doors for men and women but mainly for women. It just is how I was raised and it isn’t because she is the weaker vessel. It’s being nice.

    The stained glass window project at SWBTS is glorifying men rather than God, and saddens me. Some of the men they are placing in their memorial might have problems with this kind of memorial. They are no longer among us so we can’t ask them. The conservative resurgence may be a dismal mark in baptist history. So many good people were casualties in the upheaval. It isn’t worth a memorial but a mourning bench.

  46. @ Mara:

    I have wondered about the “choice” aspect of it all. Jesus said that Mary had chosen to.. . How did Mary know or come to think that she had a choice? Did Martha also have a choice, and if so did she know that?

    And why did Jesus not say to Martha, “come join us.” There is no record that he said “hold everything, folks, and let me see if Martha wants to get in on this?” Nor did He say, up front, “don’t put yourself out, we love PB&J” as far as we know.

    So you have said, I think, that He understood Martha and her situation and was handling it really kindly and graciously. That sounds good. I had not thought of that.

    it is also possible that this was not the first time the situation or idea had come up, seeing He was a regular visitor at that house. Perhaps what is recorded in the gospel is just one part of some ongoing issue between them. If so, that might explain why Jesus’ answer was brief and straight to the point. It almost sounds like He was saying “you made your choice so back off.” I do like your take on it better, though.

  47. @ srs:

    Would the dissertation for this crowd by making 2 dozen chocolate chip cookies or popping out 5 kids in one year?

  48. Mark wrote:

    The stained glass window project at SWBTS is glorifying men rather than God, and saddens me. Some of the men they are placing in their memorial might have problems with this kind of memorial. They are no longer among us so we can’t ask them. The conservative resurgence may be a dismal mark in baptist history. So many good people were casualties in the upheaval. It isn’t worth a memorial but a mourning bench.

    Agreed. The more history has played out, the more the conservative resurgence looks like a political power play. If it had been ordained by God, we would see much fruit. Instead, the SBC is shrinking with each passng year.

  49. srs wrote:

    Katie wrote:
    I just want to know if she would be wearing an apron or her prison orange?
    Katie, katie, katie… of course it depends on which one better matches her shoes and other accessories…

    Oh, but of course! Silly me.

  50. Nancy wrote:

    @ srs:
    Do not get into the middle of a cat fight. Save yourself.

    The defensiveness would be hard to overcome. I was defensive. It’s a human reaction. However, it was far easier for me to get it, immediately, when it was presented in a neutral setting. I heard guys say it to other girls in college; I read it in books; I read it in blogs; and I had to face the music.

    But the biggest effect was reading how the manipulation was like treating my husband as if he were a child. I realized I just wanted us both to act like adults and make decisions like mature adults. We each give and take, but it’s out in the open.

  51. Nancy wrote:

    But I said, maybe too much, to Mark (whose comments I really like) because I do feel the need to defend “the south” when I see all of us getting blamed for what only some of us do.

    And defend the South you should. If there is any chance of our nation rebuilding its manufacturing base, it lies in the South (she just might rise again). Sorry if this comment is a bit tangential to the topic at hand. Potter will henceforth restrain himself from further tangent lines to the curve on this thread. Honest injun.

  52. @ Nancy:
    IMO, absolutely correct. To be academic, these people are full of B*#@S%*!.

    They take tales of grace and freedom and turn them into treatises on hooks and chains. They spread frosting on a cowpie and serve it for Easter dinner. They stand on their heads and call it walking. They blindfold themselves and when they bump into trees, insist that they’re being persecuted….I mean, really.

    w00t

  53. @ Bridget:
    Yeah, and at least the Catholics had the sense to center the windows, mostly, on biblical stories. Plus they had the sense to hire good glass artists. These windows are crappy art–which maybe is appropriate, since “the medium IS the message”.

  54. Ok…I mean no disrespect…but what is it with Baptists and alliteration? Do you make your point better if all your snappy little sentence fragments begin with the same letter?

  55. Eagle wrote:

    Would the dissertation for this crowd by making 2 dozen chocolate chip cookies or popping out 5 kids in one year?

    Paging Dr. Octomom

  56. Sabrae wrote:

    So what do they do with Galatians 3:28?
    There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

    I believe the best exegetical approach to this passage – based on the broader context of Galatians as a whole, and also the immediate context of Chapter 3 in particular – is to understand it as primarily addressing soteriological issues. In other words, Paul is saying that each and every human being is restored to a right relationship with God in exactly the same way. He did not intend this to be a treatment of ecclesiology and/or leadership roles.

    I am a burgeoning egalitarian, so I am supportive and encouraging of women in ministry. I just don’t think one should use this verse to support that position. (And I don’t believe we have to . . . we have plenty of other evidence that does speak directly to the issue).

  57. Katie wrote:

    But the biggest effect was reading how the manipulation was like treating my husband as if he were a child. I realized I just wanted us both to act like adults and make decisions like mature adults. We each give and take, but it’s out in the open.

    Yes, it’s so lovely and simple, really.

    Adult humans need to be able to manage their own lives. They’re created that way. When doctrine says you can’t have that, the need will squeeze out sideways/underneath and look particularly awful because of it. I think cat-fighting one form of it.

    Another form is turning a husband into a child. It’s the way some women trump the doctrines that tell them they themselves are only children.

    There’s also “Uncle Tom” syndrome. Some people become convinced that they are indeed only worth 2/3 of other humans, and will try their best to garner self-respect within the givens.

    And because it’s so wretchedly difficult to try to be inhuman in such ways, women will get cranky, and some will become judgmental of others’ failures because so much rides on it.

    It’s rotten, top to bottom but unless the system is restructured, passive-aggression won’t stop, no matter how often we point it out to those who do it. That’s because it is a response to the problem, not the problem itself. IMO

  58. Catholic Homeschooler wrote:

    Ok…I mean no disrespect…but what is it with Baptists and alliteration? Do you make your point better if all your snappy little sentence fragments begin with the same letter?

    I laughed at this. It’s funny because it’s true! (I grew up in a Baptist context).

    We baptists also like lists in our sermons. “Five Things Paul Says about Salvation,” or “Ten Lies about Love (1 Corinthians 13),” etc.

  59. Patrice wrote:

    Lol, yes! Bumbling/abstracted is charming, so good job on your choice!

    Haaa! It also has the massive advantage of covering for the times when due to ridiculous levels of multi-tasking & all the womanly strains of managing a mostly male team, I am actually bumbling & abstracted. Win-win.

  60. Catholic Homeschooler wrote:

    Ok…I mean no disrespect…but what is it with Baptists and alliteration? Do you make your point better if all your snappy little sentence fragments begin with the same letter?

    They’re secret Bronies trying to speak like Twilight “the Alliterator” Sparkle.

  61. Mr.H wrote:

    We baptists also like lists in our sermons. “Five Things Paul Says about Salvation,” or “Ten Lies about Love (1 Corinthians 13),” etc.

    N-point checklists are more characteristic of Chinese classics — I remember Sun Tzu and Confucius, and half their “Art of War” and “Analects” seemed to be organized as bullet-point checklists.

  62. Bridget wrote:

    I find it interesting that in the Martha and Mary scenario it is the other woman who is complaining to Jesus about Mary and not the men.

    You’ll find women are no slouches at lobsters-in-a-bucket cutting down of an uppity rival. “Why should SHE have it easy — I didn’t!”

  63. Sabrae wrote:

    So what do they do with Galatians 3:28?
    There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

    Oh they do with it what they wilt alright. I’m not sure what’s more respectful, to believe that the people of SBTS are bewitched or are bewitching. What is sure in my mind though is they are just like the Galatians of Paul’s day.

  64. Debbie Kaufman wrote:

    It’s just denied that they teach it while they teach it. Article after article has been on what we cannot do with a small list of what we supposedly can do. The list of can’t do outweighs the list of what women can do. It’s just publicized with the words “we are not teaching”, but it is exactly what they are indeed teaching.

    KYLE: But Dad, isn’t that Fascism?
    KYLE’S DAD: No, it isn’t son. Because we don’t call it Fascism. Do you understand?
    KYLE: Do you?
    South Park, “Sexual Harassment Panda”

    (Had a laugh-or-groan typo while keying that in. Spelled “Kyle” as “Kyke”. Must have been channeling Cartman or something.)

  65. @ Patrice:

    The actions by the top leaders, including their orations, are entirely political in nature, rhetoric to sway the masses.

  66. In other news:

    As much as I care passionately what the lassies of SWBTS think * about Life, the Universe and Everything, I was pretty chuffed with my pan-fried salmon with lime and coriander couscous and cheese and lemon sauce tonight.

    * May be less than totally true. Each set sold separately. Can aid slimming only as part of a calorie-controlled diet.

  67. Beakerj wrote:

    I live about 15 miles away from Chichester Cathedral where they have a heart-breakingly beautiful Chagall window, mostly in reds.

    Oooooo! I’ve always enjoyed Chagall’s work (I like stories, even broken ones) and it’s almost unheard of to be able to do gorgeous work in stained glass as well as in paint. The cubist influence translates nicely into the windows’ lead caming, and the glow is a little surreal all on it’s own, so it makes sense, I guess, but still that’s sooo good….

    The blue at the peak, with the two tablets—very Jewish, really. How I would love to sit there for an hour, ten different times over a year or so!

    Thanks for reminding me how it can be—I get lost in the ick too often.

  68. An Attorney wrote:

    The actions by the top leaders, including their orations, are entirely political in nature, rhetoric to sway the masses.

    So An Attorney, there are those who are narcissist/sociopathic, and the few who are genuine purists. In your opinion, how do we understand the rest of them? Or are all the crude rude church politicians narcissists to one extent or another, with a sprinkle of sociopathic among them?

    Sometimes, when I listen to Piper, for eg, I wonder whether he’s simply delusional. As if something went wrong way back in his life, and he invented parts of reality so that it would work for him. As if he mixed this together with actual reality (some of it useful), and the incongruent blend causes everyone’s eyes to cross but for some unknown reason, they aren’t aware that they’re seeing double. Some people call him poetic but it’s actually twisted repetitions that rhyme, of things that aren’t really there at all.

  69. Patrice wrote:

    As if something went wrong way back in his life,

    I try very hard to avoid stigmatizing mental health issues, so the following is in no way meant to be some sort of insult or derogatory name-calling. John Piper really does seem to suffer some severe psychological problems regarding gender issues (and possibly other issues as well). If one were to create a collage of all of the strange, disturbing comments he has made over the years regarding gender, it would create a very disturbing picture indeed. The poor man would definitely benefit from professional therapy. The problem is twofold, however: (1) he advocates a largely anti-psychology approach to counseling, and (2) even if he weren’t anti-psychology, he exhibits characteristics of someone suffering from a personality disorder; PDs are notoriously difficult to treat, and some therapists actually refuse to work with PDs because of this. (For example, one of the characteristics of a PD that make it hard to treat would be that, by their very nature, people afflicted by them are inherently defensive, low-insight, manipulative, etc.).

  70. Patrice wrote:

    The blue at the peak, with the two tablets—very Jewish, really. How I would love to sit there for an hour, ten different times over a year or so!

    For sure. I guess it makes sense because Chagall was Jewish. 🙂

    I had the opportunity to visit Zurich and was able to sit in the Fraumunster for an hour or so simply enjoying the famous set of Chagall windows there. Absolutely beautiful.

  71. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    N-point checklists are more characteristic of Chinese classics — I remember Sun Tzu and Confucius, and half their “Art of War” and “Analects” seemed to be organized as bullet-point checklists.

    I’m not familiar with Chinese literary conventions, but perhaps there is some secret Baptist-Chinese connection? 🙂

  72. @ Mr.H:
    Yeah, Mr H, no stigmatizing. I spent most of my life deeply mentally awry from early experience and it’s been a long slow trip out. Most humans have something, lesser or greater. On personal issues, empathy and accuracy required in equal dollops—for others as for self.

    Ok, glad you think my observations aren’t off-base. I am delighted to leave final evaluation to God, confident that He’ll be both just and merciful. It’s hard to swallow the near-immovability of personality disorders. (I wish they’d find a different term for them but they are def something real.)

    The hard part is how to handle such disorders inside community….

  73. Mr.H wrote:

    Patrice wrote:
    The blue at the peak, with the two tablets—very Jewish, really. How I would love to sit there for an hour, ten different times over a year or so!
    For sure. I guess it makes sense because Chagall was Jewish.
    I had the opportunity to visit Zurich and was able to sit in the Fraumunster for an hour or so simply enjoying the famous set of Chagall windows there. Absolutely beautiful.

    Same with me when I saw Chagall’s windows at Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem – absolutely stunning

  74. Deb wrote:

    But we know for sure that the architects of the conservative resurgence will be immortalized at SWBTS.

    In a chapel? Isn’t that bordering on blasphemy? Graven images? There just seems to be no end to the self-righteousness and self-importance of current SBC Big Shots (BS)

  75. JeffT wrote:

    What a bunch of hypocrites! So here are women like Dottie Patterson and Mary Mohler extolling the virtues of the submissive, stay-at-home wife while holding down cushy and influential jobs at their husbands’ seminaries. If you believe for one minute that these two women have no authority over any men and don’t give any men any orders, then please contact me

    Good comment.

  76. @ Marsha:
    The problem is that all of the SBC based seminaries are going down the road. So, if you an SBCer (Deb is, I’m not) where do you go?

  77. @ JeffT:
    I spent the morning in a beautiful sanctuary which is known all over the US for its architecture and stained glass windows. How I loved those windows! They are all about Jesus and the apostles. The thought of Paige Patterson staring at me in those windows makes me consider the Orthodox church!

  78. @ dee:

    Yes, I know the place well. It’s where my hubby and I exchanged our vows. I can’t imagine the CR leaders enshrined in colored glass.

    BTW, I have a friend who does magnificent stained glass art, and her work outshines that of the artisan working for the Pattersons. Just sayin’…

  79. numo wrote:

    Am not a huge Chagall fan (early work, yes; later work, no), but that window is absolutely stunning.

    I don’t either care much for his last stuff, somewhat as I don’t care for Kandinsky’s last stages. But some of his pics are in my head for good. And welcome too (unlike some other artists’ pieces lol)

  80. @ Deb:
    The Wartburg Watch memorial stained glass window pictured on a billboard outside of a certain church! Featuring chocolate, cute shoes, and a mouse….

  81. dee wrote:

    Today, when I heard a nutso sermon from a supposed world class mega church NeoCal, I started to think that liturgy with a short homily was sounding more and more attractive.

    The twenty-minute sermon was standard practice when I was young, in the Christian Reformed church. Did it change over the years, or was that a practice only in some places?

    Some of these guys go on for an hour as if it’s a test of spiritual strength for the audience. I can’t endure them even when only online while doing housework but maybe it’s because of the material, not sure.

    It’s as if they think preaching is a college lecture. Has it always been so for some, or has there been a return to it ala Puritan era?

  82. @ Patrice:

    Most have returned to the Puritan era. This is because they honestly believe that no one can comprehend the Gospel unless they “sit under the teaching” of the preacher. It’s as if some mystical essence is supposed to descend when they preach and I sit in a pew/chair. They (those who believe this stuff) are close to delusional in my book.

  83. Deb wrote:

    Will Jesus and his disciples be depicted in theses stained glass windows? Guess we’ll just have to wait and see…

    But we know for sure that the architects of the conservative resurgence will be immortalized at SWBTS.

    Because they (and their Correct Biblical Doctrine) are Far More Important.

    And those windows don’t look like stained glass. They’re photographic etchings against a Mondrian-style abstract background.

  84. @ dee:

    This is becoming my concern. I have thought about it: what is happening in the SBC is what is happening throughout evangelicalism. I don’t fit in the mainline and the corruption and doctrinal strife in SBC is bleeding into other denominations such as the Evangelical Free Church and the Baptist General Conference and even the Nazarenes. I don’t think it is possible to escape what we see in SBC by going to another evangelical communion. And separating out from perceived corruption and doctrinal strife is not the answer? So what is the answer?

  85. Patrice wrote:

    dee wrote:

    Some of these guys go on for an hour as if it’s a test of spiritual strength for the audience. I can’t endure them even when only online while doing housework but maybe it’s because of the material, not sure.
    It’s as if they think preaching is a college lecture. Has it always been so for some, or has there been a return to it ala Puritan era?

    I couldn’t agree more…..and it’s like the sermons are getting longer and longer…..it’s like narcissism has hit the pulpit of a growing number of churches……15 minute sermons stretched into 1 hour and 20 minutes of pablum….

  86. I was just thinking of something. Remember the TV show Designing Women? I loved that show and I don’t think I missed an episode. I recall one where Charlene’s pastor was leading the fight in their denomination to keep women from preaching. She and her friends try to persuade him that he is wrong using Bible verses but he is adamant. After much soul searching she decides to leave his church. He tells her she shouldn’t question God’s wisdom and she tells him she isn’t, she is questioning his. I googled this episode and it aired in 1988. It has been a long battle.

  87. Some of these guys go on for an hour as if it’s a test of spiritual strength for the audience.

    it’s like the sermons are getting longer and longer

    My LCMS pastor average 18-21 minutes (because when you’re the organist you have nothing to play during the sermon so you time it for laughs). A couple weeks ago he said his wife edited the sermon and it dropped down to 15 minutes. 😉 I recently told a friend raised Calvary Chapel that our pastor’s longest sermon ever was 21 minutes and she’d never heard of such a thing. At her church, service was 90 min to 2 hours long – 30 minutes of singing and then “talking” for the rest of the time.

    Personally, I think we should introduce the phrase “you’ve been Strunked” for these guys who preach sermons an hour or more long. Conciseness can be a virtue sometimes. 🙂

  88. Marsha wrote:

    I recall one where Charlene’s pastor was leading the fight in their denomination to keep women from preaching.

    I, too, loved Designing Women and remember that one well!

  89. @ Patrice: I think he relied on shtick later in his career, but completely agree on the imagery vs. that of many others.

    Btw, I really like early Kandinsky, when he was doing paintings based on/in Russian folklore. The palette alone is quite gorgeous, and the imagery ain’t half bad, either. 😉

  90. @ Bridget: what actually happens is that they put people to sleep. It quickly turns into the equivalent of the adults’ voices in Charlie Brown cartoons – just random noise, signifying nothing.

  91. @ Bridget: And yet… Where are those long, boring sermons to be found in the Gospels? Oops! Jesus went for short, pithy and all that.

  92. Marsha wrote:

    and in neither place did I hear homemaking denigrated. I am tired of religious conservatives telling people what liberal feminists like me say and think

    I have seen instances of it on blogs and forums, where liberal feminists speak ill of stay at home motherhood, or choosing to have children rather than have a career. I have been insulted and shouted down on such sites when I defended women who choose to be wives and mothers.

  93. @ numo:

    Yep! Much preferable to me (the short and pithy). Actually, I'd be happy with just worship and reading scripture and praying for one another most days. I'm tired of the pontificating. On the other hand, I would like to visit the cathedrals of Europe.

  94. Debbie Kaufman wrote:

    It’s just publicized with the words “we are not teaching”, but it is exactly what they are indeed teaching.

    I agree. Especially the part where they insist that they don’t teach that a woman’s only role is to be a wife and mother.

    The majority of material I see on their sites and blogs are articles about how to be a great mother, mom type tips, how to be a great wife, how eeeeviiiiil secular feminists are taking swipes at motherhood and marriage.

    Nary a word or article is written about the experiences or issues of childless or single women.

  95. @ Bridget: liturgical churches have more Bible (readings from OT, NT, Gospels and generally a responsorial reading of a Psalm) Evey week than most other churches have in an entire year of Sundays. The readings are all interrelated… You might enjoy a book of hours and/or lectionary, actually. Would fill the scripture quotient, as well as providing material for reflection.

    Agreed on church services, though I like weekly communion (as central focus of service) as well. It helps, I think, to be able to see and experience God’s giving – and our receiving -as well as putting paid to all the gimmicky “worship band” stuff and more.

  96. Sabrae wrote:

    So what do they do with Galatians 3:28?

    In most gender complementarian material I’ve read, they explain that away by saying it refers only to the fact that men and women are “equally saved” and that it has nothing to do with roles. Which is a weird answer to me.

  97. @ numo:
    Yes!!!
    Except for the Monty Python version where no one could hear that well from a distance. …blessed are the cheese makers. …Instead of blessed are the Peace Makers

  98. @ Nick Bulbeck:
    Sounds miles better than any of Michelle Duggar’s recipes, maybe you should teach the nutritional cooking class (tatter tots just don’t seem all that healthy)… or would that upset the order of the Universe?

  99. @ Daisy: I really don’t want to get into an argument, especially since I don’t know where you’ve been reading and can’t make informed comments on what you’ve read/who said what/etc.

  100. dee wrote:

    @ Catholic Homeschooler:
    Today, when I heard a nutso sermon from a supposed world class mega church NeoCal, I started to think that liturgy with a short homily was sounding more and more attractive.

    I’m noticing more start-up churches are moving to liturgical services around here. The idea is to have a service where the focus is on God and the people actually participate in the worship in various forms, not just singing. They read through a significant amount of scripture from all over the Bible in a year; and the church calendar makes sure the major ideas are covered.

    The idea is this: The focus in not on one man, the preacher. Then even if the preaching sucks, church was still good.

  101. Hester wrote:

    I recently told a friend raised Calvary Chapel that our pastor’s longest sermon ever was 21 minutes and she’d never heard of such a thing. At her church, service was 90 min to 2 hours long – 30 minutes of singing and then “talking” for the rest of the time.

    True. It’s a very passive service. Sometimes it was rich, but when a man has to do that week in and week out, eventually he ebbs and starts filling his “sermons” with stories about his kids, jokes, and whatever will stretch the time. My last CC pastor got so bad, I started timing how much time was actually spent on the sermon which was consistently about 10 minutes, out of 60 to 70 minutes of talking. This was the same man (as is usually the case in CC’s) who had no time for announcements or missionaries.

    Gotta say that after awhile, you realize that you go to church, Bible study, and whatever meeting is held, only to realize that you can’t know and be known with other church attenders since it’s all one way communication from mostly one man. Real Body life cannot be developed this way. It’s unhealthy to have that much influence from just one person.

  102. Hester wrote:

    I recently told a friend raised Calvary Chapel that our pastor’s longest sermon ever was 21 minutes and she’d never heard of such a thing. At her church, service was 90 min to 2 hours long – 30 minutes of singing and then “talking” for the rest of the time.
    Personally, I think we should introduce the phrase “you’ve been Strunked” for these guys who preach sermons an hour or more long. Conciseness can be a virtue sometimes.

    I believe it was Pascal who once apologised to a friend for writing him such a long letter, but “I did not have time to write you a short one”. Detail has its place, but that would only be on a Sunday morning if nobody in the congregation is capable of studying the Biblescriptures for themselves.

    If access to Bibles is limited and/or dangerous, as it was behind the Iron Curtain back in the day, there is every reason to teach for as long as you dare when the church comes together. If the problem is literacy, then perhaps on a Sunday morning the people should teach one another to read. In the medium-to-long term, this would give them much greater knowledge of the bible, and they’d have to learn to listen to the Holy Spirit. Result!

  103. Here is Nick's recipe (under “Interesting” at top of website), which I plan to try this week :-)

    Following a request from Estelle, here’s my cheese and lemon sauce recipe (goes well with oily fish like salmon, and sea bass to a lesser extent).

    Finely grate the zest of two lemons, then squeeze the juice.

    Then, take about a heaped serving spoon of cornflour (or cornstarch – it’s a very fine off-white powder made of complex carbohydrate, in short. Oh, and a serving spoon is slightly too big to fit comfortably in the average mouth). Mix in with 3/4 pint of milk and bring to the boil (microwave is easiest) so that it thickens.

    Grate enough mature cheddar cheese until your pile of cheese is the same volume as the milk – when you’re sure you’ve got too much cheese, you’ve got about the right amount of cheese. Then add the cheese to the sauce over a low heat until it all melts in; then add the lemon zest + juice; then add a biggish pinch of salt to taste.

    And that, as they say in Glasgow, is you.

    You can either pour it over salmon filets, or else you can keep it over a low heat and add the uncooked salmon – it flakes nicely into the sauce and the result goes well with spaghetti.

  104. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    @ Katie:
    I think we are barking up the same hymn-sheet here. Sunday sermons are less about feeding believers and more about teaching them to feed themselves.

    There’s just something about that corporate gathering where we worship God in various forms: responsive reading (saying out loud together what our faith is built on,) communion, singing, communal prayer, etc… Together we are focusing on God.

    Then in the other meetings there needs to be a way to know and be known. I’m currently in a Sunday School that does this so effectively, which is why many have been in it for 20+ years.

  105. So what do you think about this ‘social media’ campaign to improve the image of the women’s programs at Southwestern Seminary?

    Someone’s probably already said this (I haven’t had time to read any of the comments), but I think they’re trying too hard.

    Why does any institution of higher learning need “women’s studies” or “black studies” or “any-other-special-group studies,” etc.? If they had classes called “men’s studies” or “white studies” the outcry would be deafening, but because a group (in the case of secular institutions) has been maligned in the past or (in the case of SWBTS and other seminaries) has to continue to be relegated to their “gawd-ordained roles,” all we hear is crickets. Well, of course, TWW and Bob Allen occasionally chime in and now apparently we’re hearing from the women at SWBTS who are trying (too hard) to convince themselves and everyone else that they ARE equal to men, just “different” (beyond the biologically obvious). They remind me of a little child stamping his foot crying, “I am TOO equal!”

    How about just plain old “studies” and letting people enroll in whatever courses they’re interested, gifted, or led?

    Off topic somewhat, but if you can’t tell I feel the same way about hyphenated Americans. If you’re an American citizen you’re an American. Period.

  106. Daisy wrote:

    Nary a word or article is written about the experiences or issues of childless or single women.

    Daisy, I’m worried for you. You and I are very similar in many ways but I have embraced the fact that I am single and childless. It gives me a lot of freedom to use my gifts in other ways. And if you want a different message from your church, find another one. I don’t know where you live but i’m sure there is at least one church that would accept and value you. And if you can’t find an organized church that supports you, have your own personal worship.

  107. notastepfordsheep wrote:

    Off topic somewhat, but if you can’t tell I feel the same way about hyphenated Americans. If you’re an American citizen you’re an American. Period.

    sounds nice, but since many of us non-male, non-white american citizens have not been treated equally for centuries, why not let us celebrate our subculture as well?

  108. @ notastepfordsheep:
    The reason there arent as many mens por white studies classes and departments is that womens studied, black studies, etc. examine history and culture through lens that have traditionally been neglected. The default perspective in our culture has trafitionally been tje whit christian male persective. Everyone else has traditionally been viewed as an “other”, a deviation from the norm. Womens and minority studies challenge and examine this paradigm and have actually paved the way for scholarly analysis of aspects of malehood and whiteness that have traditionally been neglected.

  109. Katie wrote:

    There’s just something about that corporate gathering … Together we are focusing on God.

    That’s certainly true, much as I continue to declare myself a None. (Which need not, of course, mean we don’t assemble with other believers; and in fact Lesley and I do.)

  110. @ nmgirl: your culture is part of American culture, so… I think you and others deserve equal time, at the very least. The country would be nothing without the presence and contributions of “minority” people, who are every bit as American as the stereotypical WASPs.

  111. In other news, Liverpool remain top with 5 games to go, the first of which is a massive 6-pointer against narrow title favourites Man City. Commiserations are due to Dr Fundystan’s West Ham, at whose expense we progressed today, but I think we needed the points more than they did!

    I hope this is helpful.

  112. Marsha wrote:

    She and her friends try to persuade him that he is wrong using Bible verses but he is adamant. After much soul searching she decides to leave his church. He tells her she shouldn’t question God’s wisdom and she tells him she isn’t, she is questioning his.

    That is a great comeback line.

  113. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    In other news, Liverpool remain top with 5 games to go, the first of which is a massive 6-pointer against narrow title favourites Man City. Commiserations are due to Dr Fundystan’s West Ham, at whose expense we progressed today, but I think we needed the points more than they did!
    I hope this is helpful.

    And my Arsenal stunk it up today…..and believe it or not, my satellite carries all the EPL games….

  114. @ burntnorton:

    Good explanation.

    I took a few minority studies classes during my undergrad years, and one of my profs gave a great explanation. A student one day pointed out that in the US we have Black History Month but not White History Month. He responded “The other eleven months of the year are white history months…”

  115. @ Mr.H:
    Without women’s studies, it is doubtful that there would be any scholarly study of the ways cultural norms and ideals of masculinity damage men.

  116. numo wrote:

    @ nmgirl: your culture is part of American culture, so… I think you and others deserve equal time, at the very least. The country would be nothing without the presence and contributions of “minority” people, who are every bit as American as the stereotypical WASPs.

    My point, which apparently I didn’t clearly make, is that special classes should not be necessary IF the people who write the textbooks and teach the classes would include the contributions of ALL Americans, regardless of color, race, or sex, and IF they would allow ALL academically qualified students to enroll in ALL classes. Obviously we aren’t there yet, but IMO these sorts of classes have served their purpose. As long as people continue to distinguish and divide themselves based upon those characteristics and bemoan their “disenfrachisement,” or allow others (such as seminaries) to differentiate among them in those ways, the goal of true equality will never be realized. Eventually we have to stop living in the past and move forward which seems to be the very thing Al Mohler, David Platt, and the patriarchs fear the most.

  117. Mr.H wrote:

    @ burntnorton:
    Good explanation.
    I took a few minority studies classes during my undergrad years, and one of my profs gave a great explanation. A student one day pointed out that in the US we have Black History Month but not White History Month. He responded “The other eleven months of the year are white history months…”

    I’ve heard this before. In the past that’s been true, but this is the 21st century. I haven’t read a U.S. history book since college (and that was a long, long time ago), but are you saying that no progress has been made to include the contributions of Americans of all races in today’s history textbooks? I long for a country where no one thinks a “black history month” is needed OR appropriate BECAUSE the contributions of black (and every other color) Americans are simply… U.S. history.

  118. It’s sad to hear that Southwestern has become so oppressive toward women over the last few years; I attended in the early ’80, and while it was definitely conservative, it was NOT a place that suppressed women!!! I found a diverse, thriving community of students, and the women among them, for the most part, to be sharp, intelligent and creative. It’s my understanding that things turned sour in the mid ’90s..

  119. @ notastepfordsheep: I don’t believe this country is anywhere close to *not* needing these kinds of courses, this kind of study – and greater equality in practice (not just in law) for all people.

  120. @ Marie:
    Marie wrote:

    Powerful point…keep speaking up to help refute that common refrain.

    Hi Marie, from Marie2…..Yes, Yes, Yes, Amen!!
    Thank you for sharing here, and I love your name!!!

    Best,
    Marie2

  121. numo wrote:

    @ notastepfordsheep: I don’t believe this country is anywhere close to *not* needing these kinds of courses, this kind of study – and greater equality in practice (not just in law) for all people.

    Not directed at you personally… just a thought… instead of continuing to pump resources into developing separate, special classes, why not channel all that energy and effort into getting ALL people included in “American” history? As I said, I LONG for a country where no one thinks a “black history month” is needed OR appropriate BECAUSE the contributions of black (and every other color) Americans are recognized simply as… U.S. history. We may not be there yet (obviously we aren’t), but to characterize the conditions in the U.S. today with those of 100 or even 50 years ago (“centuries” of inequality as someone characterized it as if nothing has changed) is ignoring the progress that we have made.

    Maybe I’ve just had my craw full of all the “us and them” mentality right now as we in Memphis have spent the last few days being bombarded with the sainting of MLK (with the reopening of the Lorraine Motel civil rights museum). MLK’s words were pretty and truly a dream to aspire to. The way he lived his life was not.

  122. Daisy wrote:

    The majority of material I see on their sites and blogs are articles about how to be a great mother, mom type tips, how to be a great wife, how eeeeviiiiil secular feminists are taking swipes at motherhood and marriage.

    Nary a word or article is written about the experiences or issues of childless or single women.

    Because in their world single women don’t exist. It’s beyond their comprehension that a woman could actually be happy and lead a full, rewarding life without being the helpmeet to or “under the authority of” a man. I mean, she’s a woman and therefore “subject to deception” and all that bull.

    Heh. I say that as I sit here watching My Five Wives. On this episode we see one of the five wives telling their hubby that she would like to have another baby. They already have 24 kids among them! I hate to admit this and can’t begin to wrap my head around the whole concept, but however right or wrong you may think polygamy is, this family and the Browns actually are more egalitarian than any of the current leaders of the SBC, even with their emphasis on being baby machines. Interestingly, one of the wives in either of these families seem to be as beaten down and “submissive” as Michelle Duggar or any of the other “must keep sweet” women.

  123. Daisy wrote:

    I have seen instances of it on blogs and forums, where liberal feminists speak ill of stay at home motherhood, or choosing to have children rather than have a career. I have been insulted and shouted down on such sites when I defended women who choose to be wives and mothers.

    Why is it that when some folks get into a label and become part of a group-think they seem to lose their ability to live and let live? I’m a liberal and an old school FDR style socialist to boot and I don’t look down my nose at women who want only home and children and a decent man who’s not a jerk. The femi-nazis you speak of are just as rigidly dogmatic as the ideologues at CBMW, but at the other end of the spectrum.

  124. @ notastepfordsheep:

    If you are interested to learn more about this issue, I highly recommend two books, in the following order:

    (1) “Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America” by Michael Emerson & Christian Smith

    (2) “More Than Just Race: Being Black and Poor in the Inner City” by William Julius Wilson.

  125. notastepfordsheep wrote:

    Maybe I’ve just had my craw full of all the “us and them” mentality right now as we in Memphis have spent the last few days being bombarded with the sainting of MLK (with the reopening of the Lorraine Motel civil rights museum). MLK’s words were pretty and truly a dream to aspire to. The way he lived his life was not.

    I assume that you are referring to his adultery, which we only know about because J. Edgar Hoover surreptitiously taped him. Perhaps we should go back and pry into the personal lives of white heroes and find out if they ever cheated on their wives because if they did, that just invalidates anything else.

    Martin Luther King risked his life and eventually lost it so that African Americans could be equal, could sit anywhere there happens to be a seat on the bus, sit at any open place at the lunch counter and actually vote without having their churches blown up and their children murdered. He is a hero of mine. It wasn’t right of him to be unfaithful of course, but none of us are sinless.

    And I don’t consider this to be a ‘us and then’ issue. I consider this to be an ‘us’ issue in that all of us must be free to vote and be served at any establishment open to the public and to be hired and paid based on our qualifications and job performance. Otherwise none of us are free.

  126. Mr.H wrote:

    (1) “Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America” by Michael Emerson & Christian Smith
    (2) “More Than Just Race: Being Black and Poor in the Inner City” by William Julius Wilson.

    These look like terrific books. Thank you for sharing them. I’m excited to get them on my Kindle, when my finances improve.

    http://www.amazon.com/Divided-Faith-Evangelical-Religion-Problem/dp/0195147073/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1396842320&sr=1-1&keywords=divided+by+faith+evangelical+religion+and+the+problem+of+race+in+america

    “Through a nationwide telephone survey of 2,000 people and an additional 200 face-to-face interviews, Michael O. Emerson and Christian Smith probed the grassroots of white evangelical America. They found that despite recent efforts by the movement’s leaders to address the problem of racial discrimination, evangelicals themselves seem to be preserving America’s racial chasm. In fact, most white evangelicals see no systematic discrimination against blacks. But the authors contend that it is not active racism that prevents evangelicals from recognizing ongoing problems in American society. Instead, it is the evangelical movement’s emphasis on individualism, free will, and personal relationships that makes invisible the pervasive injustice that perpetuates racial inequality. Most racial problems, the subjects told the authors, can be solved by the repentance and conversion of the sinful individuals at fault.
    Combining a substantial body of evidence with sophisticated analysis and interpretation, the authors throw sharp light on the oldest American dilemma. In the end, they conclude that despite the best intentions of evangelical leaders and some positive trends, real racial reconciliation remains far over the horizon.”

    http://www.amazon.com/More-than-Just-Race-Issues/dp/0393337634

    “A preeminent sociologist of race explains a groundbreaking new framework for understanding racial inequality, challenging both conservative and liberal dogma.
    In this timely and provocative contribution to the American discourse on race, William Julius Wilson applies an exciting new analytic framework to three politically fraught social problems: the persistence of the inner-city ghetto, the plight of low-skilled black males, and the fragmentation of the African American family. Though the discussion of racial inequality is typically ideologically polarized. Wilson dares to consider both institutional and cultural factors as causes of the persistence of racial inequality. He reaches the controversial conclusion that while structural and cultural forces are inextricably linked, public policy can only change the racial status quo by reforming the institutions that reinforce it.”

  127. Mr.H wrote:

    (1) “Divided by Faith: Evangelical Religion and the Problem of Race in America” by Michael Emerson & Christian Smith
    (2) “More Than Just Race: Being Black and Poor in the Inner City” by William Julius Wilson.

    OOPs I just wrote a very long comment, made it to moderation. Found those two fascinating looking books on Amazon. Look forward to getting them on my Kindle. Thank you for sharing them, Mr. H.!!!

  128. @ Marsha:

    Hey Marsha, I bet the simple issue is that the comment was fairly long. I look forward to reading your words in support of MLK.

  129. @ notastepfordsheep: sorry, but your words about Dr. King are offensive to me, and I dont think I need to explain why. What he did as a leader of the Civil Rights movement can’t be lessened by the problems in his personal life. One is public, the other private; one is definitely for the benefit of others.

    The recent gutting of the Voting Rights Act by the Supreme Court shows that we still desperately need men and women who will follow the path that he and others pioneered.

  130. I don’t know most of you, but I doubt a lot of the people who practically worship MLK lived through the 1960s. History has been revised. A lot. If you’re offended by the truth, the bad as well as the good, then perhaps you should talk to people who experienced that period in our nation’s history firsthand and read more than just the sanitized “I have a dream” versions of MLK’s life and legacy. If after that you’re still offended, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I was there. Were you?

    By the way, the “white guys” who’ve been the subjects of U.S. history books for years weren’t the saints revisionists like David Barton have made them out to be either. History tends to be kind to legendary figures. Too kind sometimes.

  131. numo wrote:

    @ notastepfordsheep: sorry, but your words about Dr. King are offensive to me, and I dont think I need to explain why. What he did as a leader of the Civil Rights movement can’t be lessened by the problems in his personal life. One is public, the other private; one is definitely for the benefit of others.

    The recent gutting of the Voting Rights Act by the Supreme Court shows that we still desperately need men and women who will follow the path that he and others pioneered.

    I think those types of “problems” in one’s personal life are very important. My aunt was on a commercial flight from Florida to Memphis in the ’60s, and MLK and his large entourage were on board that day. She said they were loud and disruptive and drank the entire trip. By the time they landed in Memphis MLK was so drunk he had to be physically carried off the plane by his “handlers” because he was too impaired to stand on his own. His womanizing is legendary. Pretty words (and I agree with his dream) don’t equal substance. He was an empty suit in that respect.

    As for the “gutting” of the Voting Rights Act, I don’t know if this is the part you’re referring to, but can anyone tell me why having to present a photo ID to VOTE in the U.S. is in any way “discriminating” against someone? You have to have a photo ID to fly, to drive, to present a check at most businesses, to see a doctor, or to buy Sudafed in most states. No one protests that. So what’s wrong with requiring a photo ID to vote? Is it because in certain parts of certain cities there is a problem with some people voting multiple times? Or with dead people voting? Again, I don’t know if that’s the issue of concern to you. I’m just throwing out the question because you mentioned the SCOTUS decision, and I really and truly don’t understand how this discriminates against anybody.

  132. … on April 1 it featured a post by First Lady of Southwestern ‘Dottie’ Patterson.

    Returning to the topic at hand… and apologizing to D&D for veering off topic earlier (but not for my political incorrectness), perhaps the date is a clue to the contents? No?

    How do they define “distinctly feminine”? Sticking to your “gawd-ordained” roles (as defined by the big, important manly men)? Not working outside the home, especially in what they would consider “male” jobs? Marrying and popping out as many children as nature will allow? (I’ve noticed Al Mohler, who advocates marrying young and having lots of kids has only two of his own.) Following the skirts-only, long-crinkly-hair, and my-spiritual-authority-casts-the-deciding-vote rules? Not following that loony ESS doctrine? (Wasn’t that Russell Moore’s baby?) Because by ALL of those definitions, I’m anything but “feminine.” Goodness, I’m soooo going to hell (which some of you may very well wish on me after tonight)!

    I’ve often said women are their own worst enemies. There’s nothing wrong with choosing to marry, have children, and be a SAHM. There’s nothing wrong with choosing to marry, having or not having children, and working outside the home. And there’s nothing wrong with remaining single and childless either. I question the appropriateness (actually more than just question it) of women choosing not to marry but then choosing to get pregnant. I realize there are cases of rape, but I know single women who’ve intentionally gone out and gotten pregnant for financial gain or the “companionship” they think a child will offer. (Hint: Get a pet.) At least they don’t abort their children, but if they got pregnant intentionally… I think that’s just wrong thinking.

    It doesn’t seem men are under nearly as much pressure as women to marry and reproduce. Why can’t people (and women are often worse than men about this) just accept that everyone, male and female, is entitled to choose his or her own path in life and that one size does not fit all? They make unmarried or childless women feel guilty when God may have other plans for some women besides marriage or motherhood. How many women (and men) have been “guilted” into marrying someone they didn’t really love because of this pressure? A SAHM is no more or less valuable than a woman who works outside the home. And a man whose wife might have more earning power who chooses (with his wife’s blessing) to be a SAHD should not be demeaned and ridiculed for his choice in life either. I say live and let live.

  133. Marsha wrote:

    I was just thinking of something. Remember the TV show Designing Women? I loved that show and I don’t think I missed an episode. I recall one where Charlene’s pastor was leading the fight in their denomination to keep women from preaching. She and her friends try to persuade him that he is wrong using Bible verses but he is adamant. After much soul searching she decides to leave his church. He tells her she shouldn’t question God’s wisdom and she tells him she isn’t, she is questioning his. I googled this episode and it aired in 1988. It has been a long battle.

    I remember that episode vividly, and Designing Women was my all-time favorite sitcom. (The “moon” episode was one of my favorite episodes.) In fact, DW and Mama’s Family were, IMO, that last two good sitcoms produced.

    I remember the pain in Charlene’s voice when she told the pastor that. It has been a long battle, and it’s one that’s far from over.

  134. notastepfordsheep wrote:

    I say live and let live.

    That would be a lot easier if it weren’t for a special class of people who know everything: They know science better than the scientists, public policy better than anybody, and what’s good for your life better than you do yourself.

    I’ve often wondered how callously some pastors give “advice” to people they are supposed to serve, based on “biblical principles”, but not at all based on that person’s situation. Their incredible know-it-all attitude that exempts them from actually listening to people, from actually understanding them, allows them to give short shrift to the real needs of their parishioners and everyone else.

    I am thankful for those pastors I have met who are different.

    I don’t know, maybe it’s the seminaries. Maybe instead of teaching them discernment they teach them passing judgement.

    But then again, in the IFB they have no (real) seminaries and they are quite good at passing judgement as well.

  135. Ironically, whilst trying to post comment no. 2 above, I was presented with the following error message:

    Sorry, but you are commenting to fast.

    I can promise you all that fasting is not on my agenda today.

  136. On a slightly more serious note, before I go and change the wheel on the car (just found a very dodgy-looking split in one of the back tyres, which would explain why it keeps losing pressure) so that I can take 2 cwt of turves doon the cowp to the local recycling centre – the “PhD in homemaking”.

    I, too, find the idea of a PhD in homemaking bizarre – exactly what useful original research are you going to do in that area?

    Two points here.

    1 of 2
    To be scrupulously fair, the quote in the post above doesn’t say that SWBTS offers PhD’s in homemaking, it says that it offers qualifications from certificates right up to PhD, and subjects that include homemaking. However, if someone who has researched this tells me that in fact they do offer a PhD in homemaking, I won’t argue!

    2 of 2
    Actually, the whole PhD thing is interesting to my mind. I think what it’s really about is the title of “Dr”. Whether you want to sell books or promote yourself as a speaker with it, the title adds gravitas, kudos and cool. (NB – “cool” can be used as a noun these days.) Years ago, I heard that the leaders of the (British) denomination I was part of were now studying for PhD’s. Oddly, the denomination had grown a strongly anti-intellectual culture, though I don’t think that was directly the leaders’ fault, but the thing was that they were trying to work in the States and had found that you couldn’t get anywhere unless you could introduce yourself as “Doctor…”.

    3 of 2
    This must be frustrating for people who have worked hard, on little money, doing genuinely original research to earn their doctorates. It has certainly made it harder to take the title seriously when I read it on the cover of a Christian book.

  137. @ notastepfordsheep:

    Yeah, because several centuries of oppression and marginalization were just erased but a couple of decades of hard fought legal reforms and increased scholarly studies. Having read your subsequent comments on MLK Jr, I'm pretty confident you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to race and gender studies.

    We still live in a society where the white male voice is treated as the default. Women and minorities are still dismissed as biased when it comes to discussing race and gender issues. Serious thinkers (TM) can still argue that the underrepresentation of women in certain fields is because of inherent intellectual inferiority because there have been no great female thinkers of note. Where a black candidate for president who showed more evidence that he was born in this country than any other candidate ever (including his opponent, who actually was born abroad) can still have a large percentage of the population question citizenship. And where a commenter on a blog can dismiss a man with a long record of fighting, being imprisoned, and finally dying for civil rights as an empty suit because he had affairs and apparently freaked your poor auntie out by getting drunk on a flight the poor biddy once shared with them. Tell me, do you think the slave owning and raping founding fathers were empty suits because of the human wreckage they wrought among the people they enslaved?

  138. I was there also during the 60s. Grown and married with kids and working in “a man’s profession.” It was a mixed bag, the 60s, like things always are. For myself, I think that making too much or too little of Dr. King is off base. Dr. King was one of the best orators this nation has produced, and as the central media focus of the civil rights movement at the time, he was good in front of the camera. But to think that he single handedly did the civil rights movement would not be correct. And to think that there were not “problems” in his personal life, or that such “problems” had no effect on him or the people with him, would be incorrect also. And choosing to fight about it now is a distraction.

    I understand the purposes of this blog. I value the Deebs a lot. But we as people, and we as a nation have really big problems right now which have nothing to do with Dr. King or Dorothy Patterson. We should not let ourselves get too distracted lest we step on the proverbial land mine because we were not watching where we put our feet.

    In my former profession there was a saying (modified I think from Goethe). “You see what you look for. You look for what you know to look for.” Meaning: expand your knowledge about what to look for so that you will know it when you see it. Let us not miss the current realities and fail to see what we need to see by getting too distracted by issues of race and gender, important as they may be.

  139. burntnorton wrote:

    Yeah, because several centuries of oppression and marginalization were just erased but a couple of decades of hard fought legal reforms and increased scholarly studies. Having read your subsequent comments on MLK Jr, I’m pretty confident you don’t know what you’re talking about when it comes to race and gender studies.

    We still live in a society where the white male voice is treated as the default. Women and minorities are still dismissed as biased when it comes to discussing race and gender issues. Serious thinkers (TM) can still argue that the underrepresentation of women in certain fields is because of inherent intellectual inferiority because there have been no great female thinkers of note.

    Struck a nerve, huh? Why is it that Obama supporters (of which I must assume you’re one) can dish it out but they can’t take it?

    Actually I agree with the second part of your quote (about the “male voice” and dismissal of women). If you knew me (you obviously don’t) and had actually read what I’ve written, both here and elsewhere, you’d realize that. Instead, you had what appears to be the typical kneejerk reaction to anything that tarnishes the illusion you’ve chosen to believe about MLK and then had to bring Obama (who is more “white” than “black”) into it.

    My aunt was no “old biddy” nor was she “freaked out” by what she witnessed. She was merely relating what many other people who lived at the time knew. That’s another tactic people like you use… they can’t argue substantively, so they resort to name-calling.

  140. Nancy wrote:

    It was a mixed bag, the 60s, like things always are. For myself, I think that making too much or too little of Dr. King is off base. Dr. King was one of the best orators this nation has produced, and as the central media focus of the civil rights movement at the time, he was good in front of the camera. But to think that he single handedly did the civil rights movement would not be correct. And to think that there were not “problems” in his personal life, or that such “problems” had no effect on him or the people with him, would be incorrect also. And choosing to fight about it now is a distraction.

    I understand the purposes of this blog. I value the Deebs a lot. But we as people, and we as a nation have really big problems right now which have nothing to do with Dr. King or Dorothy Patterson. We should not let ourselves get too distracted lest we step on the proverbial land mine because we were not watching where we put our feet.

    Thank you for one of the most thoughtful, balanced comments I’ve read in this comment string. The “race issue” is likely to be with us for a long time, just as long as some people continue to look down on others because of their color (today I think it’s more about group behavior… the bad apples giving the good people a bad name) and other people continuing to stir the pot of racism. The good people and strong women have found ways to rise above it. The rest seem content to sit around and whine about how “disenfranchised” they are.

  141. When I said earlier “live and let live” I was referring to people in general. I was not saying to never point out inequity when one sees it, just that as far as I’m concerned everyone should accept whatever decision a woman (or man or couple) has made regarding the way they choose to pattern their lives as long as it doesn’t involve me perpetually supporting that way of life financially… which I’m sure someone will scream is racist, too, although there are more “white” people on welfare than “black” people. Anyway, I have to get ready for work now so I can help support myself and my “fair share” of our country’s disenfranchised souls.

  142. I am really stupid…because when I started watching the video I took the title to mean…no woman, well, then a man has no drive…as in WE NEED A WOMAN to be complete….I thought it would be mocking a sexist attitude…oh well…..

  143. @ notastepfordsheep:

    I agree on MLK. He did a lot of good but he also had his faults. The FBI knew he was a womanizer who had multiple affairs and recorded him having sex in motels. That said, we do the same thing with so many people…we deify them. Geroge Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, etc…

    Washington, was a slaver owner, Thomas Jefferson fathered a couple of children through a couple of salves. Linclon’s law partner in Springfield, Illinois wrote about hwo Lincoln patronzied a prostitute and couldn’t pay the fee that she wanted to charge, and Lincoln backed away. I’m trying to remember I think those are the Jefferson papers (?)

    But the point is that history is messy and many people have mixed fact with lore, and created mysths. And that isn’t to knock on Jefferson, Lincoln, etc.. either. Historically they were significant.

  144. Speaking of plagiarizing MLK was said to have plagiarized his PHD thesis. A note went into his file over the issue in the 1990’s (?)

  145. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Sorry, but you are commenting to fast.

    That phrase is likely buried in a plug in somewhere. I’ll see if I can find it and submit a bug report. The purpose of that trigger is to keep computers from doing automatic comment posting. SPAM or otherwise.

    As to a preview, got a recommendation for a plugin that doesn’t require a log in for the preview to work? And itself is well written. There are a million WordPress plugins. About 200,000 are useful. About 10,000 of those are well written and don’t break other things. The problem is to find one that does what you want and figure out if it is in the pool of 10,000.

  146. @ GuyBehindtheCurtain:

    It didn’t look like one of yours! I assumed it was part of the WordPress infrastructure somewhere. My own award-winning blog * is also WordPress-powered, so I’m loosely familiar with such things.

    * Winner: Special Award For Services To Nick Bulbeck’s Ego

    I hope, during this calendar month (note to posterity: April 2014), to get familiar with the workings of WordPress plugins, but at the time of writing I’m afraid I have none yet…

    🙁

  147. Eagle wrote:

    we do the same thing with so many people…we deify them. Geroge Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, etc…

    Exactly. Never idolize any individual. Instead, we can appreciate and respect what they have done, but if you take it a step farther, you are bound to be let down. As far as MLK goes, yes, he had some deep character flaws, but he also galvanized a nation to begin the process of stamping out the racism that ran rampant in this country – and which still remains, along with every place in this world.

    Also, let add MLK’s namesake, Martin Luther, who had a side that was extremely dark. He advocated killing participants in the Peasants Revolt. He published a screed entitled “On the Jews and their Lies” that became a ‘bible’ for anti-antisemitism and a document used by Nazis to justify the Holocaust. It begins “I had made up my mind to write no more either about the Jews or against them. But since I learned that those miserable and accursed people do not cease to lure to themselves even us, that is, the Christians, I have published this little book, so that I might be found among those who opposed such poisonous activities of the Jews and who warned the Christians to be on their guard against them.” It goes downhill from there.

  148. @ JeffT: thanks, Jeff – very balanced appraisal of both men.

    There is no flawless person, no matter how much we might wish otherwise.

  149. Off topic but I don’t know where else to post this Dee & Deb….

    I’m concerned about your post in the box above “RICO!! Just why are Mark Driscoll…shredding documents”

    It worries me that this is close to a libelous statement…..when references to their activities are linked in the same sentence as “RICO”…assuming your referring to the Federal RICO laws about racketeering…..

    Not a lawyer, but worried!

  150. @ Molly245:
    It’s a reference to a suit that’s being filed against MH church. If you follow the link provided in the header (using cut and paste), you can see for yourself. Deb and Dee are referring to something that’s very real…

  151. Pingback: Does the Christian Newswire Support the Subjugation of Women? The Freedom for Christian Women Coalition Censured by the Agency | Spiritual Sounding Board UNITED STATES

  152. numo wrote:

    @ Molly245:
    It’s a reference to a suit that’s being filed against MH church. If you follow the link provided in the header (using cut and paste), you can see for yourself. Deb and Dee are referring to something that’s very real…

    Yes, I know the lawsuit is real. I do follow current events on this and other blogs.

    I have read the letter referred to. Thank you for the lesson on cut and pasting…I am not sure why so many assume that an individual with a differing opinion must be stupid.

    However, there is a difference between the reporting the text of an official lawsuit once it has been filed, and the connecting of names with specific criminal acts that haven’t yet been alleged.

    Even once the lawsuit is filed, assuming the text of the filing is made public, most times you read of “Alleged” crimes in newsreports, etc.

    I think I little caution is still advisable….

    Are there any lawyers who can comment on this?

  153. Molly245 wrote:

    Off topic but I don’t know where else to post this Dee & Deb…. I’m concerned about your post in the box above “RICO!! Just why are Mark Driscoll…shredding documents” It worries me that this is close to a libelous statement…..when references to their activities are linked in the same sentence as “RICO”…assuming your referring to the Federal RICO laws about racketeering….. Not a lawyer, but worried!

    @ Molly245:

    @ numo:

    Dee will be addressing this in today's post. Stay tuned…

  154. @ Molly245:
    Molly, I didn’t intend to convey that at all. Apologies for the offense, which was entirely unintentional. A lot of people don’t get the whole concept of shortened links, and I’ve seen some folks post here asking for help with that, or even how to get to the bit.ly link, so…

  155. @ numo:

    Re: tiny link….
    Thanks for the apology! I’m unusually short-tempered today (even for me) and I’m sorry I was rude. Some hard things in my life right now, but that’s no excuse.
    🙂

  156. @ Molly245:
    Hey, no hard feelings – ikwym, as I’ve had a rough time with some stuff over the past week, and have found my nerves are somewhat frayed, too.

  157. @ notastepfordsheep: I watched the coverage the night Dr. King was murdered, and as much as I could during the following days. I was just a kid, but knew that his death was a terrible thing and that it would cause crises within the Civil Right movement.

  158. Laura Ingram stated on her show that the male unemployment rate was 23%. Not really believing this is anything serious at SWTBS.

  159. JeffT wrote:

    Look at all the scared white guys at #CBMW14 learning how to convince women to be their slaves
    https://twitter.com/CBMWorg/status/453511421947822080/photo/1

    Saw that too. So many greying and balding white heads. It’s a veritable ocean of greying and balding white heads. (And I’m saying this as an older white guy myself.)

    Like the “Christian Leaders Concerned about America’s Moral Decay” in a newspaper story cited in some book on my shelves (Yancey?). All old white men in expensive suits with vinegar-grim expressions.