“I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.
"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.” ― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring link
Owen Strachan: Bruce Jenner is transitioning because of male inferiority
In Desperately Seeking Womanhood: Bruce Jenner & Masculine Inferiority, Owen Strachan puts forth the theory that Bruce Jenner is seeking to become a woman because feminists have driven him to it. His post purports a theory that no one else is proposing, except Calvinistas. He says it all started in Genesis 3:1-7 and Genesis 3:16
Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”
2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.’”
4 “You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.
7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.
…16 To the woman he said,“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.”
Without blinking an eye, Strachan goes on to interpret this passage as the beginning of women usurping the role of men. Here he is writing for Answers in Genesis.
Adam was called to exercise dominion over animals, and yet an animal mastered him in the Fall. Adam was the head of his wife, but he relinquished his headship when he allowed Satan to tempt his wife, and when he let his wife lead him to eat the forbidden fruit. While she was duped about the consequences of her rebellion, she knowingly led her husband into this sin of disobedience.
…The sexes were also put in competition, and Eve, the Lord said, would now have a desire for her husband. This word is also used in Genesis 4:7, where God tells Cain that sin’s desire is for him, which means that evil is seeking to master and rule over him. So the woman will now seek to lead and dominate her husband. When we listen to Satan, pain and brokenness follow, and the gender roles laid out for us in Scripture are undermined and attacked.
With these limited passages, Strachan *proves* that the Bible says that women are now engaged in a battle to dominate men. Satan made sure of it because Satan apparently hates gender roles…
We feel great compassion for those who are suffering this trial. These are the effects of the fall before our very eyes. Satan himself targeted Eve and encouraged her to own a role that was not hers (Gen. 3:1-7). The outcome of the curse is further hostility and confusion between the sexes (Gen. 3:16). The very root of the death of the human race, then, was a Satanic disruption of God’s plan for men and women. Satan promised Eve that she would be like God. In other words, he offered her a false gospel, one that creates untold pain and harm.
In the article on Jenner, Strachan has this to say:
Satan himself targeted Eve and encouraged her to own a role that was not hers (Gen. 3:1-7). The outcome of the curse is further hostility and confusion between the sexes (Gen. 3:16). The very root of the death of the human race, then, was a Satanic disruption of God’s plan for men and women.
An opposing complementarian view
It is important to be aware that there is significant disagreement, even within complementarianism, with this interpretation of Genesis 3. Wendy Alsup, a complementarian, wrote on A New Wave of Complementarianism. In this she takes on the view that seems to be expressed by Strachan.
Strong disagreement with Foh's interpretation of Genesis 3:16 that the woman's desire for her husband will be a desire to control him. This new wave of complementarian believers notes that Foh's interpretation of Genesis 3:16 has no history in the Church. Before 1970, no Church father/theologian had suggested her interpretation of Genesis 3:16. Instead, this new wave embraces Genesis 3:16 as reflecting an inordinate longing by the woman for the man, an idolatrous longing that is often the root of very bad choices on the woman's part. The answer to which is greater dependence on God, not the man, which then frees the woman to help the man as God originally intended.
Strachan moves into uncharted waters and blames feminists for Jenner's wish to transition. He forcefully makes the following statement.
First, transgenderism is a logical–if remarkable–outcome of feminism.
Proofs and a study
He then offers *proof.* Well, sort of…
There is a narrative at play here that is bigger than a mere desire to change the body. Manhood has been demeaned as an institution for decades now. Men are seen as inferior to women, less mature than women, ignoble, stupid, less relationally skilled, and less evolved. In such a context, it begins to make sense for men to want to be women. The church cannot affirm this behavior based on unbiblical thinking–not by a country mile.
Then he quotes a study.
Some limited research suggests that there are more than three times as many male-to-female transgender people as the reverse. That is most assuredly an important–but undiscussed–statistic. Something is happening with modern men, and few seem to be noticing it.
Here is a link to the original study in the Netherlands.
Note that the starting data points were from 1975 and the last was collected in 1992. This study is 23 years. It is safe to say that views on transitioning, gender dysphoria, etc. have changed in the culture at large, becoming far more accepted. This study in no way *proves* that more men are becoming women as opposed to women becoming men. And, even if it were true, it does not prove that feminism and an incorrect understanding of Genesis 3 is the reason of this change. There must be a comprehensive study on biological and psychological factors that may be present in gender dysphoria before blaming this all on those darn women.
The data were collected from 1975 to the end of 1992. Over 95% of the Dutch transsexuals have been treated at the study center. Between 1975 and 1984 the annual number of female-to-male transsexuals increased, stabilizing thereafter. In the male-to-female transsexuals this trend continued up to 1989, declining slightly thereafter.
In fact, if Strachan had done his research, he would have discovered that Jenner felt like a woman from the age of 5. Bruce Jenner was born in 1949, and had these feelings in 1954, hardly the age of feminism.
Start focusing on the men
Strachan, continuing on in the theme of feminists being to blame for Jenner's transition, makes some suggestions and throws in his opinion on tattoos while he is at it. (Folks, I am having trouble playing this straight.) I guess women shouldn't invest in their sons. (Darn undercover feminist women are going to turn all the boys into women??) Yep-Christianity needs a masculine feel. Where have we heard that before? John Piper, perhaps?
- The church must freshly call fathers to love their children, and to invest in their sons.
- The church must never teach that men are inferior to women, or vice versa.
- The church must not problematize manhood, but celebrate it in appropriate ways.
- The church must make clear that the body is not a script upon which to express our identity, but the gift of God, and the temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:19). (This is why many Christians have had trouble with tattoos–not because they’re directly addressed by Scripture, but because the pagan understanding of the body as a vehicle of self-gratification, and the modern understanding of the body as an outlet of self-selected identity, grate against the biblical portrait of the natural body as a divine blessing.)
- The church must preach on Jesus Christ becoming a man and see his incarnation as an endorsement of humanity and his cross as the genesis of godly manhood and womanhood.
This sort of thinking is becoming the status quo in many circles.
Women are to be helpers to men.
Scot McKnight quoted a question and answer from a blog at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. The writer, a woman, appears to believe that even single women must find men to help.
Question 1: As a young woman, if you have a desire to make disciples outside of America, does it mean you are called specifically to overseas missions?
Maybe, but not always. A desire should not be misunderstood as a calling. It may simply be a feeling. This feeling may be from God, or it may be an impulse of your own heart. What is clear is what is revealed in God’s Word. Before looking at your specific calling, let’s look at God’s calling for women in general.
According to God’s Word, God’s highest calling for most women is being a wife and mom (Genesis 2:18; Titus 2:4). As a wife, I am designed to help my husband be the best man he can be as he lives out his calling to make disciples. So this means that if I am married, I can be confident that I am following God’s calling when I support my husband in his calling.
If you are called to singleness, you are still created to be a helper in a general sense to the body of Christ, but you are also able to maximize your giftedness in a unique, devoted way (1 Cor 7:32-35). So if you are single, I would encourage you to find a ministry that you love with leaders that you can work under and help. Then devote yourself to helping them be the best they can be as they further the kingdom.
[She then explores singleness and missionary work and you can read the rest of the piece at the link above.]
Complementarianism is crucial to discipleship, the gospel, and all sorts of other things.
Jonathan Leeman or 9 Marks had much to say on this subject.
…When a church holds up models of biblical masculinity and femininity, therefore, it makes the gospel easier to comprehend.
…Without such models, the gospel is simply harder to explain, almost like the Bible translator who wants to a describe Jesus as the “lamb” of God in a jungle culture that’s never heard of a lamb or a sacrifice. Is it any surprise that the devil, who hates the gospel, would want to homogenize men and women as well, thereby blurring one set of images for picturing the gospel?
…In general, complementarian is crucial to Christian discipleship because it gives discipleship a goal. As a man, I want to help the other men I spend time with know what it means to be a leader and initiator, to have courage, to be protectors, to make sacrifices for those weaker than myself, and so on. My wife, on the other hand, wants to help the women she spends time with know what it means to be a supporter, a helper, a facilitator, a counselor, a fan, occasionally a rebuker, and so on.
…Instead of a church filled with passive men, who quickly rush their families to the car when the service ends, imagine a church full of men charging ahead to promote the ministry of the Word. Imagine the men doing this in the pulpit, in the music ministry, in the children’s ministry, in after-church events, in evangelistic work, in caring for outsiders. I dare say, that would be a church in which it would be easier for a godly woman to be a godly woman.
…In other words, women are often stuck having to take initiative and leadership in churches because men fail to do so. But to the extent men work hard in the garden of the church, sowing the seed and tilling the dirt, Christian women have good work to do by helping those men. They do this by following the leadership of worthy men, by extending the Word’s work into areas in which it can be more difficult for men to travel, as in the lives of children or younger women.
To me, this whole thing boils down to a few points.
Male complementarian leaders appear to believe:
- It's women who are causing men to want to become women.
- Women must find a man so she can help him gets his job done.
- Complementarianism has risen to a Gospel level issue. Believe in Jesus and follow your role(women as helpers to males) and you will truly understand the Gospel.
- Christianity is a masculine religion and must remain that way.
No wonder Christians are becoming wary of signing membership contracts. One things is for certain. I would never sign one of those things if any of these men were in leadership. I would be disciplined on Day 1. Also, did Strachan ever apply the gender divide from the other point of view? Maybe he, along with his buddies, are the one who are causing the divide in gender relationships…
@ Bridget:
Exactly. He keeps changing the subject rather than dealing directly with the replies we have posted.
Let the record show…
@ Sopwith:
I hope you will check the other links I have posted about AIDS orphans in Africa.
@ Bridget:
I appreciate the moral (ha!) support that you, Numo, Victorious, Dee, and many others have offered. While I don’t understand the impetus behind the trolling, it’s not a mood killer. Matter of fact, right now, I’m humming a few lyrics to a(n in)famous Mel Brooks tune… “The inquisition, what a show; the inquisition, here we go!” It seems rather fitting. 😀
@ Bridget,
which is?
Sopwith wrote:
@Sopy,
I share your love for all of those beautiful unborn babies. I think it’s great that crisis pregnancy centers are moving to strategic locations across from Planned Parenthood clinics to offer pregnant women a whole host of support to have their babies. (And it’s awesome to be at the fundraising dinners and to meet the great young men and women, heading off to college, whose lives were saved by the help their moms received!)
I think we also have to remember something else: Jesus died for the sins of those who had abortions. And we have to remind them of that in witnessing to them.
@ Michaela:
i have wept with some of them in past dayz.
Please share more…
Thanx.
—
@Mark,
Great posts. I learned a lot from you. Thanks!
@ Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness:
Meanwhile, I am thinking about those places at the Great Banquet, as well as the people who are going into the kingdom of heaven ahead of others….
Sopwith wrote:
What you have been lodging questions about. You can go back and find all your comments with your questions. Many people responded to you. We all have different responses. TWW is not a club of consensus, which I’m sure you have noticed. 🙂 You keep reasking questions without responding to those who have replied to you. Or, you change the subject.
For the record, I don’t think homosexuality is a sin nor do I think it is sinful for the transgendered to have sex change surgery. I have no personal agenda since I am a happily married heterosexual woman born in a female body and I have no gay or transgendered family members.
And again, I think it is wrong to call this point of view a ‘sex free for all’ or equate it with abortion or AIDS.
@ Bridget:
He is, and has been, trolling this thread, and has done the same on others.
No sense feeding him when he’s like this.
Nancy wrote:
Same here, on the other hand enjoy the Greek festival, good food. There has been comment here recently about german cuisine, being german I consider that an oxymoron. It is too heavy for my taste and I hate to admit it, I’m a german that doesn’t like beer, thankfully my father died before he found out.
I’ll agree with Michaela though that a german hamburger is a great way to followup a hike with friends.
Bill M wrote:
There is a little restaurant here in town that advertises itself as having german food. We went there once but it was disappointing. When we lived in MO we used to go to spassfests put on by the lutheran churches as fund raisers, and what they had as allegedly german food was really good. I admit to a terrible attachment to sweet sour red cabbage. And a terrible attachment to church fund raiser festival type things. Of course, they got the beer truck out from St. Louis and people all drank beer out of what looked like small paint buckets. We were fascinated with the whole thing. And then drove home in one of the bitsy cars my husband used to use for weekend autocross racing. (All hum softly, long long ago, long long ago.)
__
Knock! Knock!
hmmm…
…after seven years of faithful devotion to the Wartburg Watch I am now considered a Troll!
hahahahahahahahaha
Wow! What an honor!
BUMP
The question I asked was this:
Is TWW signaling a ‘transitioning’ to a pro-gay mariage position?
Is The Wartburg Watch a Pro-Gay blog now?
Did you all have a commng out party, and I missd it?
-snicker-
It would be nice ta beeeeeeeeeee on da same Pagggggggggggge
ATB
Sopy
—
numo wrote:
That wasn’t my intention. I wanted to understand, but communication is difficult. I’m finished repeating myself now though.
@ Sopwith:
No, i said that *sometimes* you troll threads on certain subjefts. I did not call you a troll, nor do i think you are one at heart, but your baiting of Josh is characteristic of trolling.
Please just be the good and decent man that we have come to know over many years, not this guy who throws comments about dogsex into the ring.
You can do better, because you *are* better.
@ Bridget:
Yes, i have been having the same problem, and, like you, I’m done.
@ Sopwith:
Nobody here is EVER going to be on the same page about everything, and you know that.
Get a grip, dude.
Troll can be an identity, if you’re a monster who lives under a bridge, but generally “to troll” is an action. One definition of “to troll” is to throw inflammatory questions into a group and then run away, returning never to respond to replies but only to throw in more explosive questions before beating a hasty retreat again.
What some of us are pointing out is that, regretfully, this appears to be the course of behavior exhibited in this thread. It is not with glee that we point this out, and it is not because we wish to dismiss legitimate questions; it is simply because we have tried to have conversation over and over again, and so far it has proven impossible. It seems to me that communication has been an entirely one-way phenomenon – and even that one direction hasn’t been entirely clear.
(If at this point it is still not understood why I will not be baited with questions about AIDS, intimacy with animals, polygamy, or whether “TWW” – as if I could answer for the whole set of people here! – is pro- this or anti- that, I can do nothing more to clarify. We’ve been over this several times and several different ways in this thread, and nothing more that I could say seems likely to help. I am done.)
@ Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness:
Josh, thanks, and yes, i was using “troll” as a vetb, *nnot* as a noun.
I can see why you’re done with this thread, but i hope you’re not done with the rest of us. I’m very glad you comment here, and like you and your sense of humor and appreciate your take on things.
It gets rough here for many of us at times.
Hi Josh,
Just a note to let you know that I appreciate your posts and insights. Thank you for sharing about church in your area of the U.S. Have a great week!
@ Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness:
It also goes to show why so many people are Nones, Dones or some other place in between the two.
It does sadden me, but i cannot do anything more to try and reach out at this point. Having one’s replies ignored or used as fodder for demeaning, snarky comments about you (or anyone elseelse) is deeply frustrating and disheartening.
Oh well.
@ numo:
Else. My tablet’s keyboard software sometime fills things in “for” me.
@ Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness:
I hope you aren’t done with coming around TWW and commenting . I don’t know what else to write except “sorry. ”
I came late to this thread and I will go back and read some of the earlier sections. I am basically through with commenting here.
__
“The use of language, whether it’s Greek or English, spoken or written, is a true art form—perhaps the only one we practice every day. Instead of choosing colors from a palette or notes from a scale, we choose from a list of vocabulary, grammar, and linguistic devices in order to create meaning. The possibilities are endless. This variety gives our speech and our writing vibrancy, but it can also cause confusion. How often do we stop and ask, “What did you mean by that?” Even though we practice the art of language every day, our messages are not always received as they’re intended.”
-Discourse-grammar expert Dr. Steve Runge
—
Josh, hey fella, only one of my comments was directed at you, and that was when I acknoledge your testimony. Really, ‘Thanks’ for sharing.
ATB
Sopy
—
@ numo:
I’m sorry, I should have been clear: I was only done with those specific lines of questioning (and maybe others I hadn’t thought to disclaim at the time of the writing of said post). I’m not upset, and I’m definitely planning to stick around. I am touched by the apologies, but they are unnecessary. With that said, it’s late, so on that note, I’m done … with everything internet-related … for tonight. 😀
__
@ Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness,
hey,
Found this link, and thought it might help you:
Joel 2:25 International is a Christian community that proactively engages and affirms men and women throughout the world who experience same-sex attraction, providing ongoing prayerful support that encourages relational healing, sexual sobriety, and spiritual growth. Joel 2:25 meetings are held locally in Dallas, Texas and virtually through small groups and video conferences with participants from over 65 countries. http://www.joel225.org
ATB
Sopy
—
Sopwith wrote:
Nope, nope, & nope. Some of us here are more liberal in our views about these issues than others. Sopes, what is with you? This is not a side of you I’ve seen before: closed-minded, obsessive, evasive,mocking. I have a close transgender friend so I know about gender dysphoria from her, I also work with lots of LGBTQ youth (who are a truly vulnerable group of yp, had to take direct action to intercept a suicide attempt the other day, very scary, resulted in hospitalisation). None of this means anything about a sexual free for all: the trans and gay people I know all want quality long term monogamy over promiscuity, their hearts want love, just like all humans do. It also doesn’t mean people don’t care about abortion, that dog does not hunt.
Do me a favour- if there’s a group of people, such as trans individuals, please default to the all-humans-are-made-in-the-image-of-God-&-worthy-of-love-and-respect, rather than a knee jerk ‘stone the sinner’ stance. Just because you don’t get it doesn’t mean it’s sin.
Come on Sopwith, go with mercy rather than judgement.
If I can get a reply in without being rejected as spam …
In saying I don’t believe the mantra of a ‘woman being trapped in a man’s body’ or vice versa, I’m giving an opinion just like everybody else. There are all sorts of reasons why people have delusions about themselves, this is not the only one. One is frequently a delusion of grandeur or competence. There may be all sorts of reasons that go into why people think this way.
As far as so-called transgenderism goes (the subject of the thread), the bible does have something to say over the morality of this, and the sinful nature of rejecting what God has made you. Believing man is made in the image of God, which includes volition, I don’t believe in evolutionary pre-destination; that we are by chance what we are due to our ancestry and can do nothing about it.
Is it really necessary to have to qualify my scepticism of the above mantra by saying I don’t think it right to bully of in any other way harrass transsexuals?
There are two aspects to this as far as the bible goes. One is the mercy of God, and the other is the judgement of God. It is absolutely essential to keep both of these in mind, lest all the church have to say is condemnation, or, and this is more likely these days, to portray a God of mercy who is indifferent to his creatures’ rebellion and autonomy. You know, to tell people that God loves you unconditionally, an idea missing from the bible (at least in the sense in which I have heard it used in churches in the fairly recent past).
Is it pharisaical to state God made them male and female in the beginning, he did not make a continuum of genders? That it is foolish to exchange the truth about God for lie?
Once you have sorted out what the bible reveals of God’s mind on this issue is, you then have to deal with the real flesh and blood of fellow people who are confused, messed up or however you try to describe this. If you start with people, the danger is of both being gullible as to their excuses for their behaviour (we all do this) and to be incorrectly merciful or unconditionally accepting of behaviours God does not accept and/or that are actually very harmful to the individuals concerned.
In practice, I am only ever likely to encounter this at work, where the slightest hint of being unhappy with it could result in me being subjected to discipline for upsetting feelings.
Beakerj wrote:
This sums up what I am feeling, as well.
Hi all
I am currently in Florida on our annual family vacation. All of my kids and my son in law are with us. I apologize for not being able to follow the comment flow as carefully as I usually do. I am sorry for any confusion about the policy of this blog.
I have made my own thinking on this subject clear. This blog is open to all-Christian, non-Christian, Hindu, atheist, whatever. I make my position known in our posts. Then, I open this blog up to the world and I mean that sincerely.
This blog is not in the process of becoming anything. It is as it was when we started back in 2009. I apologize for anyone who feels that they were not welcomed here. Please know this, The Deebs welcome one and all and are humbled that anyone would care enough to comment here.
Ken, my first husband, a devout Christian developed Huntington’s disease because he was born with a dominant huntingtin’s protein gene with an expanded polyglutamine stretch. This gene variant causes progressive involuntary movements, cognitive decline and psychiatric problems ending in death after about twenty years.
Did God create him that way since it is in his DNA? Did God choose for him to suffer? Researchers have developed a way to silence the HD gene that will go into clinical trials this year. Will it be immoral to do that? Should people just accept that God created them with this gene and live with the consequences as horrible as they are? How will God judge the researchers and the people who get this treatment if it works?
Ken wrote:
A quick thought on this matter. God created everything in a certain way but somehow the world fell and everything is not as it should be. God did not plan for my daughter to have a brain tumor, yet she did. We had to accept that the fallen world produces many things that were not intended.
Do you think that we should tell someone who has bipolar disease that they should not feel that way because God didn’t create them that way. It is all a bunch of baloney, right?
Our job is to muddle through the difficulties that are presented to us. My concern is how we treat people who must deal with the reality of who they are. I leave the justice part to God and instead share His love with everyone.
I believe this whole discussion is rather interesting by those within the Christian community. The Bible speaks against living together or having premarital sex. From what I understand, this behavior is far more prevalent, even within the church. Where are the conferences, books, and appearances on talk shows discussing this?
I think that Christians play games with this entire subject. Once society allows for people to live together, divorce due to no fault, etc., then it is on to the next subject. Now it is gay marriage.
IMO gay marriage will be the law of the land in a short while. Then, do we continue conferences, screeds, etc or do we begin to deal with this subject within the church?
Marsha wrote:
Great comment. I say NO to your question. Unfortunately men like John Piper say “Yes.”
dee wrote:
If God chose John Piper to suffer prostrate cancer, as he believes, then what right did he have to take action to heal his body of the cancer? He should have lived with it to be consistent with what he tells other people to do.
@ dee:
unfortunately, people in large segments of the church have been deliberately sticking their fingers in their ears and yelling (in between “Sin sin SIN” pronouncements) “I can’t HEAR you,” when in reality, it’s “I WON’T hear you.”
That kind of behavior always seems to have a way of coming back to bite the people who engage in it, as I’m sure all of us have experienced in our own lives.
@ Beakerj:
i am not sure if anyone has been following Sopy’s comments over the past 5-6 months, but this kind of mocking (complete with “snicker”) started showing up on the Open Discussion thread around Christmas time, and has escalated since.
Sopy, I don’t know why you’re doing this, but please reconsider. You used to be a thoughtful and sensitive commenter, and I would like to see you become that again.
@ numo:
Unfortunately, I have been on both sides of this behavior in my life. 🙁
Our church (I am trying to get used to saying ‘my’ or ‘our’) has on its website a statement of the church’s position on marriage. To wit:
“The Book of Common Prayer defines Christian marriage as ‘a solemn and public covenant between a man and woman in the presence of God’ and this covenant is lifelong. At least one of the parties (husband or wife) must be baptized. If either party has been previously married and that marriage ended in divorce, a marital judgement must be received by the bishop.” There then follow right many “one must do the following” procedural steps if somebody wants to marry in the church and there is no doubt that the church is in control of the whole business including the choice of music.
This way of dealing with the marriage issue may not suit everybody, or perhaps it won’t even suit anybody at all, but I maintain that they are in fact dealing with it.
At the same time, nobody but nobody is turned away at the door if they want to participate in the church, and there are several gay couples who do. I do not doubt but that other sexual issues would be handled in the same way, whether biologically determined or not.
And we are slung in with the hyper-liberal-‘mainline’ denoms in polls, and accused of being the demise of real christianity it seems for lack of being ‘conservative’ enough. May I roll out my favorite saying: It is way more complicated than that.
I am thinking that christian churches and people are in for a roller coaster ride on this when the court decision is announced. And before the attorneys say ‘no way’ let me say that there are lots of ways to have said roller coaster ride other than in a court room.
@ Bridget:
I’m sure we all have, Bridget.
Sopy –
What bothers me most about what you have been doing is pretending you don’t know the Deebs comment policy which she reiterates here @ dee.
As you stated above, you have been commenting here for a long time and yet you asked repeatedly what TWW beliefs were. This seemed disingenuous. Maybe you were really asking something else, or wanted discussion from commentors not Deebs. I don’t know for sure. Also problematic at times is your style of communication on this blog. It is not always clear and can be frustrating to decifer. Many people have to work really hard to understand your style, or they just pass over your comments. Then, again, maybe that is just me.
@ Nancy:
Well, TEC is a very big tent, just like the rest of the Anglican Communion.
I think can be hard for folks unfamiliar with TEC to get that – that some parishes and some priests and some bishops are “liberal,” some are middle-of-the road, and some are conservative. (With a whole spectrum there, which can’t be represented in words, only in subtle shades of color on a graph or some such.)
Bridget wrote:
It not only seems, it is.
@ Bridget:
Nope, though I’ve gotten kinda accustomed to Sopy’s commenting style.
But the “snicker” and all the rest is not something I will never be able to accept, from him or anyone else here. It’s demeaning.
@ numo:
Strike “nope,” as I am not even sure what I was responding to when I typed that! Must take a nap…
Nancy wrote:
Yes, though I can see potential for change in the *way* they are dealing with it, within TEC. Might not happen overnight (and probably would be best if it didn’t, since the Anglican Communion way is to try and work things out, and that takes time).
I wonder how Anglicans in Canada have been dealing with this, since same-sex marriage has been legal up there for nearly 10 years now… hmm. Off to do some Googling.
dee wrote:
That is the way we saw it, too, (that this was not God’s choice). He never complained, just hoped that he had not passed on the gene to our daughter. He got his wish! She tested negative and we have two beautiful, healthy grandsons.
Ken wrote:
Ken, this is great. Do you know for sure however that gender dysphoria is not caused by a biological mishap in utero for example? What if it is? What if your very feminine family member fails to menstruate & medical tests show ‘her’, who has all the outward appearance of femininity, including a vagina & breasts, to have a Y chromosome & full androgen insensitivity syndrome? Their mind & body has only ever been formed under the influence of oestrogen. What gender is that person? How should they act, biblically speaking? Please be really careful with scepticism/incredulity on these topics as they can literally cost people their sanity & their lives.
__
“Riptide?”
hmmm…
@ Beakerj,
hey,
i wanted to see what would happen if I really believed God’s word and how people here would treat me if I believed that homosexuality is sin, and not God’s plan for human sexuality and relationships.
Wartburg Watch reader, thank you for your cooperation.
“This test has been successful.”
I now return you to your regularly televised program…
“The more acute the experience, the less articulate its expression.”
– Harold Pinter, “Writing for the Theatre,” 1962)
🙂
ATB
Sopy
—
Only YOU believe God’s word, Sopy. The rest of us are either non-believers or flat-out wrong, of course.
I followed this thread to see what YOU would do if we attempted to engage with you on this issue and I found out. You deflected onto other issues and you snickered.
You may think the test was successful but I think it is sad and disappointing.
@ numo:
We have one of those Anglican Mission congregations here, and they say that they are evangelical and charismatic. That is seriously different from what we are. And nobody is like St. First Downtown which they say is all about old tobacco money. We have some refugees from there at our place. So if TEC gets too aggressive on this no telling what may pop up in response. I am new to this, but of the people I have met and heard about I don’t see a lot of herd mentality so far. And very few seem to be cradle episcopalians, so one wonders how long it would take for people to move on down the road–again. I am just guessing, but that would be my guess.
At one time the pope made an offer for whole churches in this tradition to unite with the catholic church. There would be some at our church who would want to take the church in that direction I am thinking. Or maybe that offer has expired. Man, I hope this does not all fall apart over this. I do think, though, that for a lot of people in a lot of circumstances decision time is about to come.
Lest you think it is not possible, Ken also has a different perspective than mine but he will engage in discussion and he does not snicker.
@ Sopwith: Sopy, for better or worse you really stirred the pot.
@ Ken:
No, not pharisaical, but it doesn’t account for everything that happened after the beginning, i.e. the Fall and its effects. You’re still not allowing for congenital medical conditions that result in indeterminate sex. The practical result of this are physical states that lie between sexes, i.e. a “continuum.” Once again, this is entirely physical, so we can get to a sex continuum long before we get to the debate over what transgenderism is.
Unfortunately, if your past commenting behavior here is any indication, I won’t get a reply to this comment from you. It’s happened at least three times now that, as soon as intersex conditions come up, you vanish into the woodwork and either never return to the thread, or return after a long period of time without answering questions posed to you on that topic. (And I’m not the only one who’s asked you these questions.) That’s a real shame because I’m actually how what you do with intersex conditions and what practical rules you’d be able to give to someone with one of said conditions.
@ Sopwith: I like you anyway.
@ Ken:
Does this relate to a previous comment you made on this forum last June where you said that you “don’t believe in therapy” because it only makes sinful people behave less badly?
I didn’t say anything at the time because I had to prepare for imminent house guests (which is why I remember the exact date), but since this has come up again, IMO this position is no better than a nouthetic counselor’s. It seems to result in the view that it’s morally worthless to help people better their lives or improve their behavior unless you also convert them. Which is abject nonsense IMO, because it logically makes medical work ethically misplaced, and leaves you in a position of being unable to say “good job” to a murderer who chooses to stop murdering people but doesn’t become a Christian.
I know I’m coming off as extra hard on you here, but in general you seem like a not-unreasonable guy (even I disagree with you about certain things), you’re NOT a troll, and you engage in meaningful dialogue. So seeing you say stuff like “I don’t believe in therapy” and transparently dodging questions about intersex conditions, is really disappointing to me because, sorry to say, it makes the level of respect I’d like to have for you drop a few notches.
I just thought I’d finally say this, because your remark last summer about therapy really bothered me and has tainted my view of you ever since.
@ Nancy:
It is called the Roman Catholic Ordinariate, and yes,it still exists.
@ Nancy:
“Decision Time” began with the acceptance or rejetion of the 1979 BCP and the ordination of women. There have been many relatively minor splits already over these issues.
How can anyone make a blanket statement that they don’t believe in therapy? That is just bizarre.
I went to one to learn coping skills after my first husband’s cognitive and psychiatric problems caused him to blow up at me several times a day over trivia (ie my ice cream cone had more ice cream than his or his ten month old computer was out of date and why won’t I go but him a new one right this minute). My therapist was a lifesaver! So many people have been helped by seeing a therapist, how can someone dismiss it out of hand? Not everything is about sin and not everything can be fixed by praying about it.
My mind is boggled here.
Marsha wrote:
This made me cry. I am so happy for your grand babies.
Sopwith wrote:
Sopy: lots of people here hold that stance, I really don’t get the point of your ‘test’? That’s also not the foundation of how you’ve been treated in this thread- that’s more to do with tome than content. Plus transgender issues are not the same as homosexuality. Why did you need this test? Whilst I may not pass your biblical test, many here would. This whole thing, including your motive seems weird.
@ Beakerj:
I’m glad no one will have to pass Sopy’s secret test to spend an eternity with Father.
Sopwith wrote:
From your perspective, what happened?
__
Understandably, some individuals are unsure of or not adequately trained in how to handle such situations as described here in this post in a sensitive way and may inavertantly turn people off who need assistance.
🙁
__
@ Sopwith:
Oh.boy.
@ Marsha:
I know, i know, but it’s a truism in many evangelical and fundy circles. Of course, the *ddo* see sin as the root of all problems, so…
@ Sopwith:
I appreciate your thoughtfulness. However, therapy – broadly known as “sexual orientation change efforts” – has been shown to be a complete farce. Some programs like that still advertise, but they are much smaller than they were in their heyday a decade or two ago. The reason being, of course, that more and more people have seen that they are ineffective. In fact, Alan Chambers, the former leader of a very large and influential ex-gay group, came out (in more ways than one) and apologized for the mixed messages (i.e. false claims) made by said group.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2012/01/09/alan-chambers-99-9-have-not-experienced-a-change-in-their-orientation/
So nope, groups like that not helpful, but rather often hurtful, and I have not and will never engage the services of such an organization. I also have been and will continue to do everything in my power to communicate to others who are considering such efforts the pointlessness and danger of attempting to de-gay anyone.
@ Sopwith:
Why am i reminded of the way you attacked Orthodox and Roman Catholic (and some high-church Protestant) beliefs on the OD page?
I guess bevause you used the same tactics, complete with “snicker.”
Either talk directly, or quit playing games. I used to admire your defense of abused children, you know, but this is just unacceptable.
@ Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness:
Which is why some of us tend to see the Gay Christian Network as a reasonable go-to for those who have been hurt by the church and so-called “ex-gay” groups, though personally, i think a good therapist is the linchpin of recovery resources for folks who’ve been harmed, and i do NOT mean so-called “xtian therapists.”
But so many posts on this thread are just intended to get things roiling and have zero to do eith any kind of productive fiscussion. In this case, “test” = trolling.
@ Beakerj:
The point is that there is.no.point.
__
Transgender people face difficulties in finding acceptance from their families and getting employment. Some have gotten kicked out of their homes, they are forced to drop out of school and many get rejected by perspective employers. They have to fight to survive…
🙁
—
@ Marsha:
The original context was a discussion about reparative therapy (which is what Josh Dr. is discussing at 6:03). However, IIRC the remark was phrased more broadly than that.
@ numo:
This thread has been very weird.
Sopwith wrote:
Are there 2 Sopwiths posting under the same name?
@ Hester:
Yes, it has.
Sopwith wrote:
What did you learn from your test?
__
“Take care of Sopy, feed him, and make sure he has everything he needs. If he owes you any money after he gets well and leaves, write it down, and I will pay the bill the next time I come by.” -Jesus
—
@ Sopwith:
I guess no answer is coming from you. I didn’t ask you to pretend you were Jesus. I’ve always answered you respectfully and honestly. It’s sad you can’t reciprocate.
__
P.S. Last month, investigators in Ohio officially ruled the death of Leelah Alcorn, a transgender 17-year-old, a suicide. Alcorn walked in front of a tractor-trailer Dec. 28 after leaving a note on her bed that said she had “had enough.” A note posted on her Tumblr blog read, “My death needs to mean something. … Fix society. Please.”
__
@ Bridget:I don’t think anyone will get an answer, at least an answer that makes coherent sense, and if we do will we believe the answer? I am a fairly conservative religious person, conservative enough to believe that playing games with Scripture is kind of a serious issue. Sorry, Sopy, but you implied it was all a game. I don’t know if anything was learned from Sopys test except he is presenting snickering at us.
@ Bridget: I also have other concerns. This has been surreal.
There is a number I would like to share: 18002738255. Hope you will get some help if my hunch is right. Please get some help.
@ Bridget: It’s not you Brigette but someone on this thread. Sorry.
@ numo:
While I have personally never been in any form of “reparative” “therapy,” I have talked to many people at GCN who have. The results have been almost universally devastating, and oftentimes those people have found the services of a [real] therapist to be beneficial as they work through the healing process. With that in mind, I will always raise an objection whenever anything that smells of reparative therapy is mentioned in a positive light.
@ Sopwith:
Poor Leelah. Pain and depression can be helped, including in the face of terrible problems. Was there nobody to care about this child? In some faith traditions within christianity people pray for the dead. I have said a small and appropriate prayer for this child, and for all who hurt in unspeakable ways. And the God of all mercy hears prayer.
@ Mark:
That number is a good one to keep on hand in any situation where it is necessary to refer someone who is having suicidal ideation (in a direct emergency, I am under the impression that calling emergency services instead is preferable… is that correct?).
For children and teens dealing in that situation specifically because of their sexuality, the Trevor Project’s number is another important referral to have at the ready.
@ Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness: This is true but suicidal people don’t always look at their situation as an emergency because they feel so down on themselves and sad about all the harrowing things that are happening around the. What is the Trevor project number?
The Trevor project (8664887386) and the emergency services are also good numbers for someone who feels really depressed. Maybe if Leelah called one of these numbers?
Mark wrote:
Sorry if someone thinking of suicide. There would be one wonderful person still among us.
@ Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness:
I cannot imagine what people feel like after going through the ex-gay/”reparative” wringer, but i used to wonder (way back when i actually supported an Exodus group) how the folks in the program could ever find anything other than self-hatred in the mmessages they were getting.
Which might say more about my own internal conflicts at the time, in trying to fit into the Evsngelical Land pattern, than anything else. But it also speaks to the fact that, even in the face of all those rules about how to think and how not to think, there was something in me that couldn’t live with it all, not really. Looking back, i find that paradoxically hopeful.
@ Sopwith:
That would be the Leelah Alcorn who was told by her parents that they would not permit her to begin the hormone therapies and surgeries that would have let the gender of her body more closely match that of her brain–and furthermore, that if she didn’t have it done right then she could never make the transition, that she would have to endure the rest of her life in a body that felt like an alien thing forced upon her. That was a damnable lie. They restricted her access to information that would have shown them for the liars they were. They told her over and over that she did not belong, that everything she was was bad, that God hated everybody like her, and then they restricted her ability to talk with friends who disagreed. They gave her two choices: live broken to their desires or die free.
And they were surprised by the choice she made?
As someone said, they certainly loved their son. They loved him so much that they drove their daughter to death.
I am a conservative Christian. At my former church I always noticed that the people who did the most talking about gays (anti-gay, rants, etc), including women at ladies’ ministry events/teas/on the phone, did it to deflect from how screwed up they were and how much work they needed to do on themselves.
If they spent that time working on self-improvement they would actually be nicer people to be around, instead of being such a pain to family, friends, neighbors, church members, co-workers and everybody else.
__
@ Jenny Islander,
hey,
Thank you for sharing this.
As you are aware, significant social, personal, and occupational issues may result from surgical sex changes, and the patient may require
psychotherapy or counseling.
Aparrently, this young woman who ended her life so abruptly, failed to receive that much needed care.
Which brings me to point two, which is who among us are adequately trained to assist these individuals? I know know I certainly am not. Heck, I don’t evvn know who I am talking to on this helpful blog, much less aid or assist these kind folk we are discussing here.
(sadface)
ATB
Sopy
—
Oh she received ‘care’ all right. She was sent to Christian counselors who told her she was ‘selfish’ and ‘wrong’ to want the sex change surgery and that if she just turned to God she would be fine.
Bridget wrote:
Because Rank Hath Its Privileges, especially when the rank of ManaGAWD (and heir to the Iron Throne of Calvin) is conferred by Divine Right.
dee wrote:
Fair and honest question: As far as I know there is no explicit proscription in Holy Writ for the above situations. How then are the prohibitions we have all been taught to accept as an iron-clad one-size-fitz-all doctrine derived?
Bridget wrote:
I think I read somewhere that the New England divines (Calvinist clergy) once declared solemnly that Ben Franklin was doing the devil’s work by selling lightning rods abroad in the land. The reasoning being that he was interfering with the Almighty’s judgement and punishment of sinners.
@ Marsha,
hey,
Thank you for sharing this. What do you think they should have done, in your opinion?
What could they have one diferently?
What woul you have done?
Your thoughts would be helpful.
ATB
Sopy
—
@ Muff Potter:
I can totally see that happening. Rome threw Galileo in prison when his findings didn’t align with scripture.
I would start by reassuring my child of my unconditional support. Then I would take her to a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist who specializes in helping transsexuals. I assume there would be a medical work up ordered but if not I would arrange it. The therapist would assess whether my child is genuinely transexual, has a medical problem, or is confused in some way about gender roles. If the assessment shows that she is genuinely trapped in the wrong body, I would approve sex change surgery proceeded and followed by ongoing supportive counseling.
@ Muff Potter:
I hear you. The lovers in SofS aren’t depicted as being married, either… no matter how many stories people create about that set of poems being about Solomon, there is no internal evidence to suggest that. Making the different poems into a “narrative” is pure speculation, and (imo) bad speculation at that.
@ Muff Potter:
The thing is, there are certain assumptions that the original readers would have had about the texts and what they said. Since we are very far removed from the early readers, we fill in gaps with our own assumptions.
I had a good conversation with Sopy. He asked me to tell everyone that he loves you all.
Dee wrote:
Does he sound a little like YODA?
Because like him he posts. Yes, hmmm.
dee wrote:
This I agree with 1000%. This applies to anyone, though really. I know that it is the people who take time, invest and genuinely care who have made a difference in my life. And I am one who struggled with something that most people would stand at a distance from and cast stones at me for.
@ Dee:
i’m so glad to hear this, Dee.
Sopy, I’m not sure what to say, except that I do care about you, even though we’ve only ever “met” via comment threads here and elsewhere, and conversation has tended to be a bit enigmatic. But that’s not a flaw, imo.
Take care of yourself, OK?
@ Bob M:
very true.
@ numo :
Which is why I invariably get leery when I hear somebody say… ‘The Bible says…’, or
‘…Scripture teaches…’ such and such.
I have no doubt that it says and teaches thus and thus to the declarer, but to me it might not say that at all. Ultimately, I keep my own counsel on what Holy Writ says or doesn’t say.
@ Dee:
Glad to hear that! I want the best for him. Hope we continue to hear his voice.
@ Muff Potter:
Yes, ikwym. Unless someone says something direct, like quoting Jesus’ “two greatest commandments,” or similar, I am very wary. And even when passages like the one I just mentioned are cited/quoted, one has to be very aware and alert re. context and interpretation.
Marsha wrote:
Replace “turned” with “surrendered” and “God” with “her parents” to get the actual meaning of the “counsel.”
Sopwith wrote:
Hi Sopy, thankfully there are some experts in gender issues & the spectrum of difficulties that come with these. And my very little self is right on the outskirts, trying trying trying to reflect back to young people in profound pain that they have gargantuan human value & worth irrespective of their gender or struggles. I’ve never yet met a trans YP I didn’t think the world would be the poorer to lose:they can see that in me.
@ Marsha:
Hurrah for you!There is also now, thankfully, a way for trans YP to block the effects of puberty until they are sure they want to change gender, which means their adult appearance is very much more gender typical(shall we say). That’s a huge deal I think.
Dee wrote:
Back at you. I hope all is okay with you Sopwith.
__
“Heaven Can Wait?”
hmmm…
Dis widdle lite o’ mine…
Hum, hum, hum, hum-hum…
Jesus said dis:
“The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me. “Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world…”
SWEET.
🙂
YaHooooooo!
(wherez da popcorn!)
Sopy
—
Dee wrote:
Great. Thanks Dee (and Deb too) for all that you do for all of us.
Wishing “Sopy” the best too.
@ numo:
Agreed.
Muff Potter wrote:
…on the other hand, you might be broadening someone else’s understanding by sharing yours. 🙂
Hester wrote:
It’s rather worrying that anyone should remember anything I said last June!! I certainly don’t …
The background to my ‘not believing in therapy’ is two stints in churches where they just about taught justification by faith, but sanctification by psychological counselling. The pastor of the Baptist church was heavily into this. I thought the world of him, I’m sure he genuinely cared for people and wanted to help them, but there was a marked absence of dealing with sin in that church. The sort of thing nouthetic counselling is a reaction against.
The other church was a Willow Creek outfit. ’nuff said!
What I don’t believe is the church has something to say about how man relates to and is reconciled to God, but precious little about how this is lived out in changed behaviour. Therapy has become a substitute for this, it is trying to obtain perfection through the flesh, to echo Gal 3. If someone is born of the Spirit, a new creation in Christ, this must result in changes in lifestyle (not pefection I hasten to add) over time.
Now you may want to argue there are medical conditions that therapy can help, but it can’t deal with sin or change where someone stands before God. It can’t say what is right or wrong. I don’t personally think the bible needs to be supplemented with it, and it should certainly never become a substitute for the traditional battle for a holy life that we all have to wage.
Just an opinion, but psychology seems to flourish where a truncated gospel is taught, where you can sit comfortably for years without your sin being seriously challenged, where the church membership is virtually indistinguishable from the world around it. The Willow church certainly was into self-love and self-esteem, and God’s unconditional love, something that has long since started alarm bells ringing with me.
Perhaps this at least gives a bit of background for my ‘absence of faith’ in therapies.
dee wrote:
I couldn’t agree with you more. The church’s general failure to deal with its own immorality (for example) neutralises its voice when it speaks against the immorality in the world or defends the life of the unborn.
A conference bashing charismatic silliness will be a sell-out, but try organising a Dealing with your Lust, Financial Greed and Bad Temper in 2015 conference (replete with tapes and books, blogs and tweets) and I’m not so sure you would be on to a winner! Let me know how you get on …
@ Ken:
Ken, don’t you think people have real-life mental health issues that often require professional help? (And I am not talking about “nouthetic” anything, let alone Willow Creek.)
Ken wrote:
I think that you do not understand what therapy and the therapeutic process are about.
Would you recommend that people refrain from going to MDs for physiological problems/diseases? Because, by your reasoning, that seems like a given – because illness and suffering is “meant to” lead us to some sort of holy living.
I honestly think you need to get out more, away from church and in the real world. I don’t understand why you are so extremely negative about so many things that genuinely exist (like transgender peple*) and/or that really can help people, like therapy.
Sigh (not meant sarcastically, either, just feeling drained by your opinions and our attempts to try and give you some food for thought). I also noticed that you have not responded to anything said further upthread in reply to your misguided posts on trans* individuals and gender dysphoria.
@ numo:
So much this.
The “take five prayers and three chapters and see me again next week” attitude to so-called Bible-based therapy does not help with genuine medical conditions such as bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, clinical depression, or being a transgender person. Repeating the idea that Scripture is Sufficient ™ over and over does zilch to help people in the aforementioned situations, and only serves to make the person saying it look out of touch with reality – besides being a risk to people struggling with the aforementioned, should they actually take such bad advice and reject the services of qualified medical professionals.
Ken, you do not understand therapy. You seem to believe that behavior is either sinful, in which case it is bad, or not sinful, in which case it is fine. What about the issue of effectiveness? When I saw a therapist to cope with my first husband’s dementia and anger outbursts, my behavior was not sinful beforehand nor afterwards. The result instead was that it became more effective.
And how about someone who was molested as a child who suffers from depression and feelings of worthlessness. They were sinned against, they aren’t sinning. Can’t they go and see someone who will help them to feel better?
A good therapist is a blessing. Everything is not about sin.
This reminds me of my mother in law who pitched a fit when she saw my husband reading a book about how to deal with difficult people at work (which happened to be written by a Christian). She insisted that the Bible contained everything he needed to know on the topic. Uh no, the Bible says nothing about employment law in the U.S.
Ken wrote:
Oh dear, are you ever wrong about this. Some of the worst cases of psychological trauma come out of churches in which the gospel™ is supposedly revered and taught. One of the leading teachers/pastors of this so called non-truncated gospel movement has had much pain and suffering in his church. I know because I have the letters.
Finally, next week you will be introduced to another one of these so called gospel churches with its gospel leaders and their inability to deal with trauma is breathtaking.
Finally, it is obvious to me that you have never worked with excellent counselors. Cognitive behavioral therapy is an example of how well the Christian beliefs can be integrated into a secular approach.
One of the greatest psychiatrists of our generation was Bill Wilson of Duke University Medical School. His love for the Lord combined with expert training in psychiatry produced a generation of psychiatrists who are doing an excellent job in integrating faith and practice.
Marsha wrote:
I totally agree with your assessment.
Therapists aren’t religious counselors, Ken; they’re brain-rewiring assistants.
In Marsha’s example of someone who was molested as a child, that person may have developed behaviors that let them get through a horrible time in their lives. However, the same behaviors may be limiting their lives as adults. Dissociation is one example. Dissociation isn’t a sin. It’s a habit that needs to be stopped. A good therapist has the necessary tools and can teach their client how to apply them.
Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness wrote:
You are absolutely correct. In fact, Scripture is insufficient for treating all diseases. If we take Scripture at its absolute literal, people would just go to the church, get anointed with oil by elders and wait for the healing.
@ Ken:
Here is my story. Why don’t you tell me that I should have not sinned.
My daughter suffered for years with a malignant brain tumor. Every day, for years, I expected the tumor to return. her prognosis at the time was very bad.
Now, being a Christian, I prayed, read Scripture, spoke with my pastor, etc. I refused medication. to treat my anxiety,. However, over the years, anxiety was a chronic part of my life. When she was considered a cure, after many years, my anxiety did not go away.
Finally, I sought some counseling from a Christian psychiatrist who had trained under Bill Wilson. The first thing he did was insisted I take an anti-anxiety drug. I gave in and did so. My goodness, for the first time in a long time, i was able to relax a bit. Over time, my body got used to its restful state and I was able to go off the medication. That med allowed the constant cycle of anxiety to be broken.
But maybe one of those weekend trained nouthetic counselors would have had the remedy since it is obvious that anxiety is just a sinful state of being in your world, right?
Jenny Islander wrote:
Well said!
Ken wrote:
if I wrote this in a post without any links to prove my point, I would get crushed by negative comments. Please show me proof of your observation because I have not seen that myself. Prove it!
dee wrote:
Based on the astonishing idea that the truth will set you free 🙂 I have no idea why the nouthetic guys can’t grasp this.
Ken wrote:
Hmmm, if I’d not comeinto contact with CBT & counsellors (see above) I would be a fully fledged agoraphobic unable to leave the house. I found healing there. Healing from brokenness, which is different from guilt from sin & a desire to sin, which I believe is the arena of sanctification, although those two circles do overlap. I find myself thinking that you must have a very easy life Ken, as all your woes (if they exist) seem to be removed by ‘gospel living’ and you seem to have very little conflict with a one-size fits all diagnosis. Just because that lifestyle works for you….
Beakerj wrote:
This! In a world that produces, for example, anencephaly, spina bifida, and children born with malignant tumors, is it such a stretch to accept that some people are born with the wrong body for the gender their brains are wired to expect?
This hits home for me because I’m on whatever they’re calling the autism spectrum these days. So there is a piece of brain wiring that I’m supposed to have, that is pre-set to respond to social cues and instil reflexes that let a person exist socially. And I don’t have it. I just plain don’t. I can’t grit my teeth and make myself “normal.” It’s been a long, sometimes excruciating journey for me, as I slowly learned by rote behaviors that most people pick up instinctively. If there were a surgery that would fix my brain, I would jump at it! How could I deny someone else the surgery that makes their body a housing their brain can fit into?
Ken wrote:
Psychology and anxiety medication saved the life of someone dear to me. The counsel of “sinfulness” applied to a child when a pseudo christian counselor had no idea what was going on (as no one did with the child until they were much older) nearly destroyed the child. It made the child’s life so much worse and totally screwed up their view of God. Christian counselors are dangerous when they apply “the sin story” to children that have been harmed.
I believe that God has used psychology and medication to help heal this child(.) God does not need to fit into anyone’s box as to how he should/would/will heal.
Someone who is a Christian is blessed to have the benefits of the work of the indwelling Holy Spirit, fellow believers, *and* the insights and experience of medical and psychological professionals. Why would a Christian not avail themselves of whatever help they can get with whatever weaknesses they have or with facing the challenges that living in a sinful world produces? I certainly do!
Consulting a physician or a psychologist does not negate the value of the Holy Spirit’s work or the value of fellow believers in our sanctification. Consulting with our fellow believers on spiritual matters does not negate the value of medical or psychological professionals. Whatever happened to the idea of common grace which includes both common and grace? We are physical, mental/emotional, and spiritual persons, and each aspect affects the others.
Gram3 wrote:
I don’t know 🙁
dee wrote:
I’m going to have to object to this post. I wouldn’t dream of presuming to tell you what you should or shouldn’t do/should have done. I’m not anyone’s pastor. Anxiety in the face of what you went through is an understandable response to say the least of it, but please don’t try pushing me into making a judgement as to whether this was primarily a medical condition needing a medical solution, or a symptom of an absence of trusting God in an immensely difficult sitution. Or a combination of the two. Visiting a psychiatrist might be an issue of Christian liberty or conscience or which I am an ardent champion, but where sin is genuinely present, there is no secular solution to this.
Regarding the second point relating to psychology flourishing where the gospel is obscured you made later, I would have thought it obvious I’m going by experience. The internet is not real life. It can be a source of much good information, and also a place for people to share their ignorance! I’m not claiming my experience is the norm, but my thinking is not solely based on what I have read in books or on the net, whether Jay Adams or Freud, Jung or even Marx. And people do use what I call psychobabble to excuse themselves from taking responsibility for their actions.
A gospel that produces messed up/traumatised people isn’t the Christian gospel; the real thing puts man right with God, then starts the long process of changing the believer from the inside, and putting people right with each other. If the truth sets you free, and what you are hearing is tying you up in knots (as opposed to challenging you), then it is not the truth but rather a lie.
Beakerj wrote:
On the one hand, I would have to say from family life that I don’t know what it is like not to be loved, something far from everyone can say of this life. I’ve also generally been content with my lot – or tried to be.
On the other hand I’ve had multiple bereavements (including from cancer) thrown at me in a short period of time. I was unemployed for a fair while with the potential for despair that entails. The last job I had in England was topped up to make it better than continue on unemployment benefit, and was the highest salary I ‘enjoyed’ whilst in the UK. I didn’t have a job with a real living wage until I was 44. The money is nice – the stress less so! I’ve been walked over by people ‘in authority’ both in the church and in the world more than once (I seem to have a knack for this), and then fight the self-pity that rears its ugly head coz life isn’t fair.
I married for richer for poorer in sickness and in health, and have known both elements. The in sickness as far as my better half is concerned and without saying too much is long term.
I’ve made mistakes and said and done stupid things, and of course you reap what you sow.
Now this is the stuff that life in a fallen world throws at all of us sooner or later, and many people have had it far worse than I have, especially in other parts of the world, so I try to keep some perspective on this.
Have I had an easy life? In many ways, yes, being brought up in Europe. But this hasn’t enabled me to contract out of the less savoury aspects of life.
When you have seen someone dying of cancer in a hospital corridor with no beds and hardly any medical staff about, how can you ever be in favour of troubled teenage boys (for example) having scarce medical resources allocated to them so they can be mutilated to gain the appearance of being a girl? Wouldn’t it be better to deal with this before it gets to this stage? Don’t put the idea in their head in the first place. Even if you think there is some genuine medical or psychological condition at the back of it, is this the answer? From the little I’ve seen on those who de-transition, it doesn’t lead to happiness or deal with the real underlying cause.
Ken wrote:
And when there are 10 year old children literally dying of hunger and thirst in some parts of the world, why are we focusing any resources on 60 year olds with cancer? Is medical care a zero sum game? And where have you been getting your information about trans* people? Have you read any of the perspectives on trans* people that have been posted here that are different from your own?
Ken wrote:
Ken, is it really fair or wise to compare one type of pain with another? We can’t really imply that one’s suffering or unfortunate circumstances are greater than someone else’s. To do so, elevates one and marginalizes the other.
I’ve not experienced a great deal of physical suffering in my life, but the emotional has gone through the roof. And yet, I dare not share it with my family because I’ve heard, “Get over it” more times than I can count.
My hope is that we are able to feel compassion for anyone who is experiencing physical or emotional pain, confusion, loneliness, isolation, or bigotry and reach out with love.
I hope I haven’t offended anyone by this comment.
Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness wrote:
Who says such needs should be pitted against each other? But in a world of finite resources where difficult decisions need to be made, it is sinful is it not to consume them on things people have brought upon themselves, for example by being overweight by neglect, getting drunk or indulging in immorality, if this means others go without.
You seem to be very angry, and if I’m right in this I don’t see why. My sole crime seems to be I don’t believe the mantra that a woman can be born in a man’s body. I’m not sure I’ve really said much more than that.
My only recent encounter of this was employees wanting this affirmed and recognised rather than being subject to rejection and disapproval, one of whom hypocritically turned out to be a pretty nasty piece of work in his (or her) treatment of those who are not enamoured of this. Not the way to win sympathy from sceptics on this.
I think it would be wise to separate the issues of gender dysphoria and any particular treatment or perceived remedy for it. Same with SSA and gay marriage. The issues get muddled together, and I don’t think that is productive.
I can affirm the worth of every human being and the non-sinfulness of conditions which are too often branded as sinful in themselves while also considering carefully whether any particular remedy is wise in every circumstance or whether that proposed remedy honors God.
Josh, Doctor of Pulchritudinousness wrote:
And while we’re at it, let’s allow the 60-somethings who are terminal, Kevorkianize themselves with opiates if they so choose. It is, in my opinion, the right and humanitarian thing to allow.
@ Muff Potter:
I can almost hear Al Mohler and Denny Burk pitching a hissy-fit if such a thing got any more traction than just the opinion of liberals like Potter.
Bridget wrote:
Aughhhhhhhh!
That was a scream of anguish.
Bridget, BTDT. Going through it now, actually. And, Ken, there was no “truncated gospel” involved, at least where we sat “comfortably for years without [your] sin being challenged, where the church membership is virtually indistinguishable from the world around it.” Oh, no. Our sin was challenged on a regular basis. We were definitely separated from the world. We even homeschooled our children. Our social life revolved around the church.
We got lots of messages like this:
– If you’re anxious, you’re in sin, because there’s a command in the bible to “Be not anxious…”
– Mental illness is a crock. All people need to do is follow the biblical injunction to “take every thought captive.” They’re just lazy. Or not trying hard enough. Or haven’t prayed, believing. They’re double-minded. There’s hidden sin in their life that they’re refusing to deal with. They’re stiff-necked. etc. etc. etc.
In reality, mental illness can be a result of a brain chemistry imbalance (among other things). People suffering anxiety disorders, depression, mood disorders, just to name a few, have a physical problem. Maybe in addition to a spiritual problem, maybe not. (I can tell you that spiritual problems certainly result from piling on the guilt that if they were just spiritual enough, they wouldn’t have mental or emotional problems!)
Let’s think of another medical condition that can be alleviated through medicine. I don’t think this is an apples-to-oranges comparison. Would you suggest that diabetics ditch the insulin and rely more on prayer and having their sin challenged on a regular basis, and being part of a church that is clearly separated from the world?
@ refugee:
(And my scream of anguish was in response to Ken, not Bridget.)
Also screaming in anguish in response to Ken. He cannot see that people can have problems that are not about sin and therefore he would doom people to unnecessary suffering.
Did my seeing a therapist mean that I didn’t trust in God? Nope, He sent me to the right one; two people whom I respected and who did not know each other recommended her.
@ Marsha:
Yes, Marsha.
And furthermore, we have speculated on how much PTSD from spiritual abuse may have contributed, even caused some of the mental health issues, such as anxiety and depression.
@ Ken:
Ken, I am sorry for your loss (truly – i have had close friends and relatives die of cancer, so…), but the false equivalency you propose here is just so off. I cannot understand why you push so hard against learning anything about gender dysphoria, about the extremely high rates of suicide among gay and trans* kids (especially trans* kids – few survive to adulthood, and those who do are at extremely high risk for murder and other violent crimes, but murder especially).
Please stop generalizing about the people in this world, about ilnesses, about mental/emotional anguish and suffering (which often has physical, or partly physical, causes, as others have said).
Between your comments on this thread and some others you’ve made in recent months, I am about to throw in the towel on any attempts at having a meaningful conversation with you. Because you never acknowledge what people say in reply to you, and then go on to make cruelly insensitive remarks, like the one in the comment I’m replying to about trans* kids.
@ Ken:
i have a comment in reply to you that’s on the back burner. Hope you will check back.
(to clarify the above, have read some fascinating brain research that suggests that our thoughts lay down pathways in the brain — so yes, “taking every thought captive” can be a valid concept, but also validates the negative consequences of condemnation (even if you shroud it in the super spiritual term “conviction” which makes it all nice and holy spirity), judgmentalism, legalism, and all that.)
Ken wrote:
Who do you think ‘puts these thoughts in their heads’? My expereience is that peoplemerely find the words to express what they’ve felt all along. And if gender dysphoria was curable (‘dealt with’) easily don;t you think many many people would have done it? I know my friend would, in the same way many gay people have tried & tried to be cured, but it hasn’t happened. Did they just not want it enough?
And of course I’m concerned about cancer patients, I held my Mum’s hand as she died form lung cancer. But far far more money at least in the NHS is wasted on treating drunks in A & E on a Saturday night than spent on gender re-assignment…it’s not a simple equation of cancer vs gender dysphoria & I’m actually a but embarrassed you’d hint it could be. What about cancer vs IVF, or vs treatments for impotence, or vs plastic surgery following burns?
I get that you don’t get it Ken, but you still have never answered what the Biblical option would be for a ‘woman’ who finds she has a Y chromosome? What should she do to be obedient? Would it be sinful for her to have her body altered to match her chromosome?
May I make a general request to one and all. This is a good place where various views are expressed rather than a party line preaching to the choir. This particular issue is one where there is liable to be disagreement. Some of you are imo overreacting to things I have said in comments, and worse reacted against not only against things I haven’t said, but against things I specifically disavow.
Numo – I’ve been aware I get on your nerves sometimes, and if its any consolation on some of the complementarian arguments I’ve at times been getting on my own nerves. Shut up Ken and give it a rest!! In no sense I am having a go at you, but I specifically stated I do not think transgenders should be bullied or harrassed a while back (and for the second time of asking on this thread), and you came back at me with a post saying didn’t I realise how awful life is for transgenders when they are harrassed or bullied as though I don’t care about this. I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me, but please disagree with what I actually think!
Similiarly on the issue of psychology, I’m a sceptic as to its efficacy. I’ve read Freud and Jung (in German to boot!) and, well, we know what Jesus said about the root and the fruit. But where in any comments have I been guilty of heaping condemnation on people who have had treatment with a therapist? I’m not a medic, people have medical conditions (such as being intersex) requiring medical treatment from those trained in the necessary expertise. When there are behavioural problems, I’m not so sure about therapy and its diagoses, but my only axe to grind is where a false gospel creeps in of excusing people from taking responsibilty for their own actions. Or a bit of occultism that can creep in by the back door.
If you think I never take any notice of anything those who disagree with me here say, you’re wrong! The whole point of discussing anything with those you don’t agree with is to make sure your own views are reasonable, and if not, to amend them.
As a far as transgenderism goes, spiritually it’s sinful. I’m profoundly sceptical of the ‘wrong body’ approach because it seems to me to be an excuse for sinning. But I’m not saying something hasn’t gone wrong to cause suffering before the issue of reassignment surgery is on the cards. I’m aware of the high suicide rate in this ‘community’, but wouldn’t it be better to try to get at what’s wrong long before this? Is this suicide rate due to nasty evangelicals and other religious people heaping on condemnation, or is it due to the condition itself, and prevention would be better than cure? As much as it is politically incorrect to say so, some lifestyles are highly destructive.
This doesn’t as a rule impact me in my daily life, and would only do so if I had to share an office with a transsexual and they thought I wasn’t approving and affirming them, in which case I could possibly be subject to sanctions. It ain’t happened yet and isn’t likely to.
numo wrote:
Thank you, I appreciate this. It was all a very long time ago now, not as recent thing. But it remains sad to see lives cut short.
Beakerj wrote:
You don’t actually think I believe gender operations are ruining the budget, do you?
The principle of a perfectly healthy body being cut up unnecessarily is what I am getting at. I once put ‘Controlling’ (= cost accounting) in a search engine to look for vocabulary and goodness knows how came up with a graphic article on a sex change operation. It’s not something I choose to think about, but if the subject is brought up I can still unfortunately remember the before and after pictures.
And it is irritating to NHS staff that drunks keep having to be patched up week after week, more often than not at someone else’s expense.
@ Ken:
Just a note: “trans*” or “transgender” is the correct usage; “transgendered” and “transgenders” isn’t. I mean, this is not only preference on the part of trans* individuals, it’s stylebook stuff (for newspapers and the like).
I am still going to say that you do *not* understand even the basics of what it is that trans* people experience, let alone the spectrum of gender dysphoria. A little education goes a long way, Ken.
@ Ken:
I can say the same, but the losses are more recent.
@ Ken:
I do indeed feel for the pain of your loss, as it is such a very hard thing, no matter the age of the person, but especially acute when the individual who passed is very young.
@ Ken:
are you at all familiar with cognitive therapy (which Dee mentioned in a reply to you upthread)? Because I would be flabbergasted if you thought that was in any way tainted or wrong.
Re. Freud and Jung, surely you are aware that there are very few people practicing today who wholly embrace the ideas of either? Yes, there are hardcore Freudians and Jungians, but their numbers are few, in the US, anyway. I find some of their ideas and means intensely problematic (and often not only weird but wrong, especially when it comes to Freud’s ideas about women). But that they were pioneers is unquestionable.
@ Ken:
I hope I never react in such a way that is intolerant toward your faith and belief system. I respect you greatly Ken because of your courage in the way you express your views, even if they buck the general trend here at TWW. And that’s the beauty of TWW, all are welcome. Even though we are parsecs apart on theology and religion, I’ll wager that based on a shared and common humanity, we could find things we both like!
@ numo:
See, I would suggest that you would benefit from examining some of the common schools of thought and techniques used by therapists today, which are not based on Freud or Jung’s methods and pretty much reject many of their ideas.
I can tell you this: from my own experience, I know that good shrinks are keen on the idea of personal responsibility for wrongdoing. They just are, because it is basic ethics and should be part of any practice, imo. If it isn’t, there are going to be HUGE problems. Does that mean they characterize wrongdoing in the same terms as you do? No. I can also tell you this: the kind of thinking you’re applying to psych issues has not helped me one little bit – in fact, it caused me serious problems, because people assumed that depression and anxiety disorders were sin, not disease. I have found FAR more freedom (the kind Christ promises re. “the truth shall set you free”) via being in therapy and applying the principles that were related to me by a couple of good therapists than I EVER did in church, which was always perfectionistic and made me feel drive and much, much worse about myself every time I tried to do something and, by their lights, fell short.
I do NOT for one second believe now – emphasis on “now” – that what they did, taught and engendered in people is in ANY way an accurate reflection of the Gospel. In fact, it is its exact opposite, and being caught in it is like being stuck on a hamster wheel that keeps spinning faster and faster and there is just no obvious way to get off.
It took the pain – and it was agonizing – of being booted and disfellowshipped by That Church for me to be able to start finding the freedom of the Gospel, and a real, abiding sense of God’s love. I did NOT find it in the evangelical/charismatic world, which are driven by what one theologian has called “wretched urgency.” Guess where I did find grace and mercy and love being offered to me? In the Lutheran church where I grew up, which *knows* people are going to mess up, *knows* that they are going to have problems (physical and psychological) at various points in life, and *never* boots people. Quite simply, I belong because I am a baptized person. No ifs, ands or buts.
Please understand that some of my reactions to you are based on very real, highly painful experiences that I had while in churches that use the rhetoric that you use, and that view all depression, anxiety etc. as sin. It gets on my nerves whenever I see *anyone* brushing off very real pain and issues and problems in the manner (and with the words/phrases) that you have been using, so please, it is not that I hate you or even dislike you, it is what you SAY (and appear to believe) that really, really gets on my nerves. I have heard it all before – so many times; pretty much ad nauseam. And all it does is make people feel worse. I am not saying that *you* are setting out to make people feel terrible, rather that you might want to work on developing more sensitivity to those in need (whose pain you do not, at this point, appear to understand). I know you can do this, because you have shown yourself to be sensitive to the pain of others, and the needs of others, in many of your comments.
Please take a step back from the positions you hold and at least try to learn more. Btw, I rarely say this much personal stuff in comments, but I thought it might help not only to clarify my position but to want to help you to understand that there is more to learn, and that your current views (as stated here, anyway) are not necessarily an accurate reflection of psychotherapy or the therapeutic process as it is today.
numo wrote:
Yes. Therapy is not just about the teachings of these two. Much of therapy is about retraining one’s brain responses. I think we could even find scriptures that support that concept.
Bridget wrote:
😉
@ numo:
Yes. Yes. A thousand times, yes.
@ numo:
I should have said, I “know” we can find scripture that support that concept.
Bridget wrote:
I think the only people who would see both Freud and Jung’s writings and work as “teachings” are the True Believers at NY Psychoanalytic (Freud) and those who are part of various professional associations that are completely devoted to Jung’s work and ideas.
As I said above, these True Believers are few and far between today.
Ken wrote:
Ken, I think you played the cancer card to give the blackest black against which to contrast what you see as the sheer frivolity of gender reassignment. Obviously you do believe it’s misspent money, or you would not have drawn that contrast at all.
What I am puzzled by, when you’ve siad so many times you think transgenderism is sinful, no matter how it happens, that you still haven’t answered the question I posed about a gender issue caused by a clear physical cause, total androgen insensitivity & what the biblical response would be for a ‘woman’ who discovered she had this? I’m certain through history some barrenness in ‘women’ would be down to this – what will happen on judgment day when those who never knew, married men, slept with them & so on discover they are chromosomally men & have been in same-sex relationships? Are their husbands guilty of homosexuality? You seem SO clear on gender dysphoria that I would really like to know the counsel you would give such people?
Ken, here’s a helpful article, which will help you see how very very wrong hormones can go in gender development. Can anyone say that they would know the photos here are chromosomally male? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome
Ken wrote:
@Ken,
I part company with you about therapy (and other helpful programs like those that deal with alcohol and drug addiction and other serious problems). I came out of a conservative church who like you did not believe in therapy and other programs.
Their answers to everything was the sufficiency of Scripture. OK, that’s nice but we still get repairs for everything else in our lives – from our homes, to our cars, to our teeth, to our bodies – from outside professionals that know what they’re doing.
I watched the church’s pastors/elders eat up church members’ time in countless meetings about problem church members instead of referring said problem church members to professional counseling to deal with their very serious and unresolved problems. In seven years the pastors/elders never resolved one woman’s problems and they required other members participate in meetings about her problems. The solution was that she should have been referred to a professional therapist to resolve her tremendous anger about her unresolved childhood issues and her anger toward her mother, which she took out on everyone around her.
In another case, the pastors/elders didn’t refer a woman who is an alcoholic to professional treatment, but required yet more meetings of church members. This harmed the church and that woman’s adult children. (She is a widow.) She’s an alcoholic and that’s what they do.
numo wrote:
I know what getting the left boot of fellowship is like. My experience of evanglicalism and charismaticism for that matter is not American but UK. This whole legalistic approach is foreign to me, although I still remember the bible study in Rom 7 where I was finally set free from “religion” with its God who never approves because we are never up to standard.
I dislike intensely the hypnotic, pharisaical, hypocritical demonic spirit of religion that often infests church life (to quote the favourite phrase of a Vicar friend of mine).
My experiences in a Baptist church made me a lifelong enemy of narrow-mindedness.
On the other hand, I think the bible is usually more clear than we think, and my mind works best with clearly stated conviction rather than the lukewarm mushy mess I was to some extent brought up on. I think you are confusing the idea of being clear (though I hope not blunt) with what you have experienced on your side of the pond.
Alarms go off when I use phrases you associate with culture wars that I have never experienced; public expressions of dissent by the church from the secular status quo are rare in Britain. I don’t doubt this because on one gender thread you were seeing something in a post not only that I hadn’t stated, but had disavowed. Surely you would agree that the NT writers do address many of the social issues going on around us today?
I enjoy interacting with those I don’t necessarily agree with here. I’m not trolling, and have in fact thought of bowing out. Yet there is a conservative evangelicalism that is thoughtful and not woodenly dogmatic that seems to be under-represented here; a Christianity I would argue in favour of (albeit not very well at times apparently!) because it has made the greatest sense to me.
I didn’t feel got at by your post, I much prefer refreshing honesty. I do, believe it or not, try to be sensitive to what I post and how it might be received; and there has been a post or two where my toes have been trodden on.
Beakerj wrote:
Just a quickie to say I don’t like ‘playing cards’ as this is usually moral blackmail or manipulation.
It’s not that I take gender-reassignment surgery lightly; the reverse, it doesn’t seem to solve the underlying problem. More than that, I don’t like such things, that is human suffering (going by the local gender-neutral toilets thing over here recently) being used for political point scoring.
@ Ken:
Ken, the thing is, you talk in exactly the same manner – same concrpts, even the same eords and phrases – that i heard beginning in the mid 70s.
Our culture wsrs rhetoric got to evangelical churches in the UK, clearly. You might have gotten these ideas and terms from Europeans, but they originated right here. I am particularly aware of this due to the fact that the hesd honcho of That Church is from a long line of UK evangelical/charismatic tupes, and ordained CofE. He emigrated here, but his UK buds regularly grace the pulpit down there, and have done so since the 80s. Some of them are “names” in the UK, though primarily in charismatic CofE circles. And they all.talk.alike.
@ numo:
Types. Apologies forphone typos!
Michaela wrote:
Oddly enough, I’ve never really been in a church that was against thereapy, but I have been in two churches that were to a greater of lesser extent in favour of it. Neither church as particularly hot on personal responsibility for sinful behaviour. The second was heavily into Willow Creek, and I spent a lot of time (too much) looking at their background and mode of operation. All truth is God’s truth and build your self-esteem; love yourself and say yes to yourself.
I have read Jay Adams and his nouthetic counselling books, but have not made them my bible. But he is a good antidote to problems that are due to sinning, and he gained some traction in the UK because of this. On the other hand, M Lloyd-Jones thought his approach very dangerous for certain conditions, and he never downplayed sin and was a trained doctor before entering the ministry.
As for my scepticism over therapy, this was not arrived at overnight so is not just prejudice. There is a common perception of psychologists on this side of the pond that they are very gullible.
There are problems people have because they are sinning. There are problems they have because of medical conditions requiring medical help. Is there a set of conditions that falls somewhere between the two, being the traditional area of psychiatry and treating ‘mental illness’? That is where I am sceptical, but I get the feeling some on here are overreacting to this or reading too much into it.
numo wrote:
That’s too far back for my old brain to retrieve them! The constituency I come from did include some well-known charismatic speakers, but more in terms of imput from Anglicans, some of whom were pretty strongly anti-charismatic.
If I’ve picked up anything of a culture wars vocabularly, it might have come from team pyro, but since Phil Johnson has stopped writing there, I haven’t been following very closely at all. You’d have to give examples of what you mean, which I can’t imagine you being very keen on.
I have a suspicion I am fairly different in reality from what you think going by posts on here. It’s difficult to be concise and not appear officious. Things that are obvious to me are not infrequently misunderstood here; sometimes this is a failure to read a post properly or I’ve been put in box with a label that doesn’t actually fit.
Perhaps you should simply not read anything with my name attached to it, or I should stop posting. I remember you getting irriated that I was ‘too preachy’ on a comp thread, but in my defence I try not to bring this up, but have on occasion got somewhat bogged down answering loads of questions aimed at getting me to justify my views on this. (Sometimes this is enjoyable, but sometimes I get very tired of it.)
@ Ken:
Oh, i have no doubt you’re quite different IRL, that you have a good sense of humor, and that I’d more than likely enjoy sitiing down with you and your family at a picnic or restaurant and sharing food and conversation.
The thing is, if you could maybe try to think about not using as much Christianese jargon, or stock explanations, it would likely be good re. your replies here, for you as well as the people you’re talking with. It is HARD to 6nlearn the jargon, hard not to revert to it, and hwrd to find ways of stating or explaining things in ways that anyone who is fluent in English can eadily grasp. But i think it helps a whole lot to try, and not just because a person (not nevessarily me) gets annoyed by jargon. In truth, they are more than likely going to feel confused, even excluded, by the “insider” language being used. And this happens ALL the time amongst evangelicals and the non-evangelicals they talk to. If someone doesn’t know the lingo, or doesn’t understand the way certain words and phrases are being used, they’re justnot going to get what you [plural] are saying.
So, now I’ve gotten very long-winded, and probably sound preachy. But i do believe you would get less pushback here if you were able to word things without resorting to jargon or what sound like canned answers.
I mean, i am still not certain if you and i have the same (or similar) understanding of mental illness and mental health, because there’s a big emphasis in your comments on therapy being, basically, evil, yet no response to, say, the suggestions that several of us have made about looking into techniques/schools of thought like cognitive therapy. I bring this up partly because you used the term “mental illness” in one of your replies today – but i have no idea what you think constitutes mental illness, let alone when or if (in your view), profesdional help is not only a good thing, but necessary. Could you help me understand your thinking o this?
@ Ken:
fwiw, some of Lloyd-Jones’ books are in print over here, and what I read, I liked, though it’s been a few years, and I would need to re-read in order to be able to comment intelligently! 😉 He struck me as being very down-to-earth and sensible, which I liked.
@ Ken:
also, fwiw, the evangelical jargon thst I’m referring to is largely unintelligible to xtians who are not evangelicals.
Muff Potter wrote:
Thank you very much for your kind words. I don’t think I’m really all that far apart from many who post here – I even agree with Gram3 more than I disagree. One thing I don’t like is extremes, this often unnecessarily polarises opinion, and I always think it good to look at what we do agree on rather than always concentrating on differences of opinion.
numo wrote:
Ouch! I hope I don’t spout too much jargon. My assumption is that as this is a ‘religious’ site with a generally evangelical flavour that some of the in-house terminology is readily understandable.
As for the canned answers, I’m not sure whether that might be to some extent inevitable. Many objections to the Christian faith are boilerplate, and so are many of the answers. I’ve read quite a bit of apologetic material more recently, it’s been really useful in answering my eldest daughter’s questions in particular, as well as being edifying for me. And boy she can really think of some difficult things to answer!
Some of the topics on here I have spent years thinking about on and off, and others hardly at all. If the latter is the case, I don’t wish to sound off when I haven’t for any reason given much thought to a matter.
Now about psychology, you’ll have to wait as I’ve got to get home for me tea!