An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. Winston Churchill link
I have a number of drafts on the back burner and decided to give you all a smorgasbord to read during the weekend.
Doug Wilson's Reluctant Support and the Hidden Heartache of Tall, Beautiful Women.
The American Conservative allowed Doug Wilson to respond to Rod Dreher's Scandal in Moscow. You can read his entire response at this link. However, I would like to focus on this section of Wilson's response. For the life of me, I cannot understand why he felt the victim's height and beauty were relevant to the discussion. After this, he stated that his observation is obviously irrelevant to the criminal behavior of Jamin Wright.
Since I do not have the scholarly mind of Wilson, I felt it might be nice to convey to you how this might appear to a yahoo like me who has been brainwashed by radical feminism..It seems to me he might be implying that she could have overpowered Jamin when he became understandably overwhelmed by passion in the presence of her superior beauty. I'm interested what the rest of you fellow clodhoppers think.
The reason we did not want it treated as pedophilia is that her parents had bizarrely brought Jamin into the house as a boarder so that he could conduct a secret courtship with Natalie. So Jamin was in a romantic relationship with a young girl, her parents knew of the relationship and encouraged it, her parents permitted a certain measure of physical affection to exist between them (e.g. hand-holding), Natalie was a beautiful and striking young woman, and at the time was about eight inches taller than Jamin was. Her parents believed that she was mature enough to be in that relationship, and the standards they set for the relationship would have been reasonable if she had in fact been of age and if the two had not been living under the same roof.
But please note well: Things like her height, apparent maturity, and parental knowledge of the fact of a relationship are simply irrelevant to the morality of Jamin’s behavior. They are irrelevant to the criminality of his behavior. They are irrelevant to whether Jamin was selfishly manipulating a young girl, preying on her for his own selfish ends. They are irrelevant to whether it was statutory rape or not. But such things were not irrelevant to whether it was pedophilia.
RHE made the following comment to Beth who sweetly remarked how much she loved RHE. I would not have responded in the same way.
Beth, you said, "I don't want to demonize or dehumanize you, because I love you!" I'm gonna get a little vulnerable here and gently push back: You don't love me, Beth, because you don't know me. This is what is most challenging about having a somewhat high profile public persona. People tell me every single day that they either love me or hate me, that I am a good person or I'm a bad person, that I have integrity or I have no integrity – based entirely on what I write (or don't write!), not who I actually am. This is what is so dehumanizing. Whether it's someone gushing about how amazing I am or piling on the shame about what a horrible person I am, it's disorienting and unsettling to hear these things from people who have never met me and who have know idea what sort of experiences, relationships, and struggles are happening behind the scenes. I don't know how to fix this. Sometimes I think maybe I'm just not cut out for this kind of work. But when it comes down to it, it's this sense of "access" people think they have that is most unnerving.
I guess I'm just not sure the anger, guilt, grace, and love that is necessary for true, transformative reconciliation can happen in a meaningful way outside of an ongoing, flesh-and-blood community or relationship.
Rochard Beck agrees with RHE and says the following.
Unless you've handed the bread and wine to a sister or brother, over and over and over, with the words "The Body of Christ broken for you" and "the blood of Christ shed for you" you're not in the position yet to see that person with the eyes of Christ. Loving is an intimate, face-to-face practice.
Beth then gently pushes back.
OK, we'll lower that. I have met you briefly, and you seem very kind, like someone I would grow to love as a friend if I spent a fair amount of time with, based on similarities in our thinking and lives, given what little bits I have read. But even if I hadn't met you, do you not think you can be cared for from afar? I love Jesus, for instance, and haven't actually met him. There are many people in the Bible I adore and I certainly will never have the access to them that I have to you – Simeon, for instance, has a much smaller platform and fewer words out in the world than you have had, and I can't *wait* to meet him in Heaven.
Devin agrees with RHE.
I think this is a particular problem with blogging. People read the same author's thoughts on a variety of subjects and begin to feel like there is a relationship there that has meaning and value for them. This is why bloggers can develop loyal audiences in the first place. However, what most people miss is that there is no reciprocity to that relationship. Love requires a relationship, hatred in fact requires some relationship to break. What happens on the internet is normally just affinity or distaste, but we find those terms less satisfying so we use words that pretend mutuality.
I think it would go a long ways for everyone to admit that you do not know anything about the complicated inner lives and intentions of those you disagree with on the internet, and those inner lives are what makes that person valuable and unique, gives them dignity and reflects the image of God. Internet commenting often strips away all those things and merely lets ideas fight to the death. Its destructive for everyone involved.
I am not a talking head. I did not start blogging in order to become some sort of celebrity blogger who would write books and get to speak all over the place. I have turned down a number of interviews simply because I do not have time. Time for what? Relationships with those who come to this blog. That was the original idea of the Deebs. We prayed we might find around 40 or so people who would like to discuss things with us.
Comments are not words. They are the outward representation of people who really care about something. We never, ever forget it. We try to meet with readers face to face. We spend hours on the phone. We have visited them in their homes. We have made dear friends with those we have gotten to know. Obviously it is hard. We don't do it well. But, we try.
I have taken communion with lots of people in my life. However, many of my closest friends are not those with whom I have shared communion. We may attend different churches. I believe that RHE is missing out on the greatest gift in her life. It is the dear people who reach out to her, trying to connect and share their lives with her. She has made it. She speaks in churches and conferences. She writes books. But somehow, she has decided that those people who reach out to her are not *real* friends. Some of them could be if she wanted them to be.
So, have you ever wanted to be sure that you are in a true complementarian church? Can you imagine the horror of finding yourself in a church that allows women to read Scripture from the pulpit? Even worse, can you imagine finding yourself in a church in which women think John Piper's view on muscular women was wrong?
CBMW is here to help you avoid the trauma of such situations. They will vet churches and let you know which ones would never, ever allow a woman to force her female form on any unsuspecting males.
Ministry Partnerships with CBMW
Below is an interactive map and directory of churches and ministries that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood has endorsed as solidly evangelical and thoroughly complementarian in both their beliefs and practice. Each church and organization subscribes to the Danvers Statement and has partnered financially with CBMW for the advancement of the complementarian movement and the gospel.
You get their expertise if you are willing to part with some hard cash. Here is link to your application form.
Platinum ($5000) | Platinum level partners receive:  CBMW Partnering Churches Directory Listing  JBMW Subscription for pastor  JBMW Subscription for pastoral staff and church library  Admission to CBMW National Conference for pastor +5  Full box of brand-new CBMW books when published (with additional option for a special discount price for more books)
You may fill out the secured form below in order to initiate a CBMW ministry partnership. After the form is completed, a CBMW staff member will contact you shortly.
Gospel Doctrine; Gospel Culture by Ray Ortlund.
Did you know that gospel doctrine as been rediscovered? Did you even know it had been lost? Are you aware that this rediscovery will lead to a revival? (Does anyone know exactly how many revivals are currently ongoing?) Did you know that the gospel as culture has not been discovered? But, when it is, divine power like has NEVER BEEN SEEN, will be unleashed? Something new, something exciting and something totally tied to the gospel in community exhibiting the following attributes. Sad thing is this….I have yet to see this lived out by Ray Ortlund's glitterati BFFs.
- The doctrine of regeneration creates a culture of humility (Ephesians 2:1-9).
- The doctrine of justification creates a culture of inclusion (Galatians 2:11-16).
- The doctrine of reconciliation creates a culture of peace (Ephesians 2:14-16).
- The doctrine of sanctification creates a culture of life (Romans 6:20-23).
- The doctrine of glorification creates a culture of hope (Romans 5:2).
- The doctrine of God creates a culture of honesty (1 John 1:5-10). And what could be more basic than that?
…The current rediscovery of the gospel as doctrine is good, very good. But a further discovery of the gospel as culture — the gospel embodied in community — will be infinitely better, filled with a divine power such as we have not yet seen.
I expect it’s what revival will look like next.
Tim Bayly wrote Rachel Miller and Valerie Hobbs: where is the Apostle Paul when we need him? Did you know it is against the creation order for women to critique pastors? Did you know that those who do are rebels?
Currently, there are several pieces out there on the web that display the depth of rebellion against God's Order of Creation that has taken over the Reformed church today. Let's start with two women who have gone to the internet to correct and rebuke a number of church officers including Pastors John Piper and Doug Wilson.
…Read Dr. Hobbs and Ms. Miller's corrections and rebukes of these men who are church officers set apart to the work of shepherding God's sheep and it's hard to imagine women doing anything more directly contrary to the command of God above. Their correction and rebuke of Pastors Piper and Wilson is a public act flaunting their disobedience of God and the worst response we could have would be to avoid pointing out that rebellion, and condemning it.
And why are these women in rebellion?
This is not women's work. So says the Word of God. So says God's Order of Creation.
They are rebels and need to be avoided.
Second, Dr. Hobbs and Ms. Miller are women and women are forbidden by God's Order of Creation and Word from teaching or exercising authority over men.
Whether you are a woman or man, discipline yourself to recognize such rebels and to avoid them like the plague.
Fascinating. Now, if I weren't a submissive woman I might say that Tim Bayly is pulling a fast one here. You see, the quickest way to get your gospel™ doctrine accepted is to disregard the thoughts of over 50% of the community. Then it is merely the matter of disciplining a few errant men and you have the vote.
One other thing I would have pointed out if I were not wedded to the utterly biblical™ doctrine of the Creation Order is this. The menfolk were in charge when slavery was the rule of the day. They have been in charge as churches have covered up the sex abuse of children and domestic violence against women. If I were not disobedient, I might overlook all of this and go ziplining with Tim Bayly's wife because this is proof positive that Tom Bayly's wife is godly. Oh yeah, I forgot the 21 grandchildren which totally guarantees godliness.
A little while ago, my dear Mary Lee stopped her car next to where I was mowing and said "goodbye." It seemed a bit formal for the middle of Saturday afternoon, so I asked if she was going somewhere special, given her special goodbye?
She said, yes, she was going ziplining over in Brown County with three of her friends.
"Ziplining? Seriously?" I said.
"Yeah, ziplining" she answered, and off she went.
She left me home, alone, working, sweating, dirty, lonely, hot and bothered, thirsty, and slightly envious.
Another day in the life of this godly woman I love. And a pretty normal day, at that.
PS: She has twenty-one grandchildren.
It seems like Ravi Zacharias is in a bit of a pickle. I apologize that I didn't have time to consult Tim Bayly to see if a woman is allowed to point out pastors who lie. It appears that MR. Zacharias may have been fudging things his entire ministry. My question is simple. If he lies about this, what else does he lie about?
We are two atheists and a Christian who are concerned that a prominent evangelist, Mr. Ravi Zacharias, has engaged in misconduct that undermines academic integrity and misleads the public. We issue this press release with two primary goals in mind. First, we wish to draw attention to what we believe are the dishonest practices of Ravi Zacharias.
Their stated concern:
We believe that the problem of professional evangelical Christians exaggerating their academic credentials deserves much more media attention and public discussion than it currently receives. There is much grumbling even within Christian circles about the practice of honorary degree recipients using the “Dr.” title '
They credibly dispute the following claims of Ravi Zacharias:
- He was not a visiting scholar at Cambridge.
- He refers to himself as Dr Zacharias yet has no earned doctoral degree.
- He claims to have lectured at the world's most prestigious universities.
- He claims to be a scholar yet has published nothing in scholarly journals and does not have peer reviewed research.
Have a great weekend.