@ dee:

Thanks! Cat like reflects 😉 [Even if my wife won’t let me get one…allergic]

Paige Patterson: “”And what she didn’t know when we sat down in church that morning was that her husband had come in and was standing at the back, first time he ever came. And when I gave the invitation that morning, he was the first one down to the front. And his heart was broken, he said, ‘My wife’s praying for me, and I can’t believe what I did to her.’ And he said, ‘Do you think God can forgive somebody like me?. And he’s a great husband today.”

I have never, ever believed that this actually happened. I don’t really believe the black eyes part. And I sure as heck don’t believe what Paige claims concerning the husband repenting and being a great husband today.

I fully believe that he made the whole thing up to prop up his aberrant, gender theology.

But I have no doubt that Paige has sent woman after woman after woman back into abusive homes and relationships. No problem believing that at all.

And another thing-

I am sick to death with the notion that a properly submitted wife can save an abusive husband. It places an awful heavy and impossible burden on a woman to be the savior of her husband. And completely unnecessary since it was Jesus who died for His sins.
For all their talk about women being the weaker vessel, they sure don’t believe it.

It’s one thing for the good old boys to continue spouting their misogynistic nonsense, they fear losing power. What truly horrified me were the words spoken by the young man who gave you a pedicure. It’s 2016, for heaven’s sake! Are we really losing ground? So discouraged.

Watched the banquet video.
And then I learned that men need really big bullets.

I have 2 comments in moderation. I guess I should learn to use phrases like “BB thingies” and “fire-whatchamacallemz”.

“Lion Promo” ?????

I didn’t see a lion which I am very glad about. I thought I was going to see this old koot shoot a lion. Glad it didn’t happen, but it was a cape buffalo promo not a lion promo.

I’m so sick of the heeman comp attitude.

Bridget wrote:

I didn’t see a lion which I am very glad about. I thought I was going to see this old koot shoot a lion. Glad it didn’t happen, but it was a cape buffalo promo not a lion promo.

You must have warptched the wrong promo. There is a lion in the promo – a stuffed and mounted FEMALE lion. Yeah, it takes a real h- man to get up close and personal with a stuffed, mounted female lion!

Muff Potter wrote:

I’d love to see a perfectly camouflaged hunter from deep space, stalk Patterson and make a trophy of him.

Why a deer hunter from deep space? Muff, I still have connections with Special Forces 5th Group, 3rd Battalion at Ft. Campbell! But, they don’t take trophies.

Muff Potter wrote:

Ever see the Predator sci-fi flicks?
That’s what I had in mind.

I’ve seen the original.
The stalker wouldn’t have to use a weapon. The heart attack would save ammo.

Hey, is MD signing up for the Patterson boy banquet?

In regards to pedicure guy, did you say anything to him about his un-Christian viewpoint?

patriciamc wrote:

In regards to pedicure guy, did you say anything to him about his un-Christian viewpoint?

Like in, “Do you really believe a man of God should be working at a mani-pedi joint? Isn’t that a bit feminine?”
Paige Patterson? Yeah, take away his boom-boom and see if he can handle a lioness with just a whip and a chair!

The original post:

“What does your church do if a man abuses a woman?” This young man smiled and said “It is usually the woman’s fault because she gets the man angry.”

He then went on to say that they teach the woman how to treat the man better. Can you imagine?
Perhaps you are thinking that this poor man is ill educated and that most educated men know better. Well, here is my attempt to refute that notion.

There is probably a good F.A.Q. somewhere online about domestic violence you could point this kid to, or maybe send him a copy of “Why Does He Do That” book by Lundy Bancroft.

One of the things you learn about abuse (physical or verbal) is that it is never, ever the target’s fault or responsibility.

The abuser is entirely to blame and is entirely responsible for his/her abusive behavior, regardless of what the target is doing or not doing.

I kind of grasped that in regards to physical abuse quite some time ago, but it wasn’t until after I read a book and articles on verbal abuse I realized it applies to verbal abuse as well.

I used to think if only I could walk on egg shells around my sister, and not trigger her temper, she’d remain civil to me, but that’s not the case.

No matter how nice and pleasant I was to my sister, she’d sometimes go into a rage and chew me out pretty fierce anyhow.

Abusers act out with hostility due to wanting to control others, refusal to deal with their own issues, and/or entitlement. Their abusive behavior has nothing to do with what the target is doing or not doing.

Abusers choose to act with malice, hostility, or violence. They choose to act in that manner; it has nothing to do with how or what the victim is doing.

By the way, even if a woman were to make a man angry, that is still zero excuse for the man to physically or verbally abuse her.

Other than self-defense (say, you’re a married guy and your wife is chasing you with an ax with an intent to chop off an arm), I can’t think of any scenario where it’s okay for a guy to use force against his wife.

@ numo:
Oh and – giving away guns????!!!!

Our church has a hunting event, but they have to have it open to men and women. Everyone goes out in the woods in Central Wisconsin (except me!). We have our sexism hold-outs but lots of our girls can shoot and field dress a deer with the best of them.

Sadly, we also have lots of domestic abuse around here. I saw a lot when I was working as a family doctor, but you can’t get help for a woman unless she agrees to it. And it’s even tougher when the church isn’t supportive of the woman.

The prizes: Lots and lots of guns, including one signed by Ted Cruz!

“FOR ZARDOZ YOUR GOD GAVE YOU THE GIFT OF THE GUN!
THE GUN IS GOOD!”

The prizes: Lots and lots of guns, including one signed by Ted Cruz!

Penis Extension signed by God’s Anointed Next President Himself?

I’m all for conceal and carry. I get that meat is a necessity of life, however hunting big game I don’t get it! Men who participate in big game hunting I have serious reservations about. Now, onto sending women back to abusers is this man out of his mind? This is setting women back by 40 + years in domestic violence and sexual abuse! I’m so tired of these men using the word if God to justify physical abuse of any kind. I seriously pray that women from all over see this and start picketing the churches where pastors give abusers a pass to continue to abuse women. Seriously more Christians need to make it a priority to expose this teaching because what I see is Satan gaining a foothold within the church. We need to stop being passive to abuse and start being proactive as a body of believers.

Dee – did you have your dog with you when having the pedicure? If so, I think there may have been a misunderstanding when your little charismatic friend gave the command “Heel”! …

This is disgusting. Are they having manly tiger Tatar on the menu for all takers? And all to prove they aren’t “girly men.”

No “real” men would ever need to prove their, manliness, by big game, safari hunting. In fact, it proves to me what wimps they are.

It’s aggravating to see these buffoons, mix up godliness, gender and guns. Thank God I live in New England,liberal as it is. Can’t stand the big, Baptist Texas view of gender, God, politics. Ugh.

Stan wrote:

Is the post where we can talk about John Piper trolling Christian Republicans only months removed from him tickling ears by echoing their views on abortion and gay marriage?
I eagerly await David Platt to point out that if you can afford trips to Africa to hunt big game, you’re not being “radical”.

Hee. Hee. Platt gave up Radical for a six figure gig with a plush office. Radical is for the over 50 missionaries he gave a godfather retirement deal.

@ marquis:

Good comment. You know, these guys make claims to being theologians but telling a woman she is responsible and must endure pain and suffering for the abusers salvation in that way negates the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. It is the opposite of what they claim to believe and ends up mocking Jesus Christ.

Ken wrote:

On a more serious note, isn’t the three witnesses requirement for charges against elders/vicars/ministers a protection against genuine misunderstandings or untrue rumour-mongering or accusations by church members who may have had a home truth or two told to them that they didn’t want to hear?

Yes. Paul was talking to Timothy who apparently had some authoritative position and to whom allegations within the church regarding some presbyter might be referred, and Paul was telling Timothy to not leap in and get involved without applying the OT instructions relative to the necessity of witnesses.

Paul was not addressing the issue of alleged crimes that some presbyter might be doing on his own time. That is to say that he was not saying let somebody get away with disobeying the law just because within the church he serves as a presbyter. Had he been saying that he would have been contradicting other scriptural admonitions regarding the christian duty to the governing authorities. Paul was not a nut case. He was not saying that.

Which is to say that I think I agree with you if I understand what you are saying.

Lydia wrote:

You know, these guys make claims to being theologians but telling a woman she is responsible and must endure pain and suffering for the abusers salvation in that way negates the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. It is the opposite of what they claim to believe and ends up mocking Jesus Christ.

BINGO! Make another person responsible for either your sin or your salvation is heresy. And yet so many of these neo-cal and sbc “churches” do both to women. I think deep down this stems from a desire to not be responsible for themselves, which is ironically opposite from the super macho image they try to project. The dudes doth protest too much.

okrapod wrote:

Kemi wrote:
It’s 2016, for heaven’s sake! Are we really losing ground? So discouraged.

Yes. I am going to write something about this but without referencing anybody else’s comment, but yes we are and thank you for bring this up.

Looking forward to it!

Somebody has asked if we are losing the battle. Yes. Yes we are. What the churches are experiencing is part of the greater battle that we are losing in this country. Segments of our nation are losing a cultural battle to the red neck ideologies. There are reasons for this. But I am convinced that if we see it only as an evangelical church battle then we will have failed to see the bigger picture and failed to deal with some of the causes which go beyond just the church to the society at large.

This is not a place to discuss politics, and indeed though economics and politics play into the picture and also race and gender there is a significantly more extensive problem. I think we are engaged in a clash of classes, a clash of strata in society, and the middle class of whatever race or gender or political bent are seeing their stratum with its values lose out as a predominant philosophy in this country.

This is not basically about guns, and Nancy2 is not red neck. This is not primarily about doctrine and Ken is not red neck. But there is such a thing as red neck and we see it in the south in various manifestations and TX seems to have its variety and it is infiltrating those of the residual middle class who have not morphed into the upper stratum as some have done. And it is spreading like a cancer. These bozos in the pulpit are playing to that, and it breaks my heart and scares me to the bone.

@ K.D.:

Pecan Manor? A few years back, Hyacinth….er I mean Dorothy produced a Christmas tour of Pecan Manor video. It is quite the place. It is a show place of their travels on the SBC dime.

I just read that Platt laid off another 20 people and will contract with an out side image firm. Word on the street is that it is the same firm fbcjaxwatchdog wrote so much about. Can’t remember the guy’s name but he did a video on how men should wear scarves. Platt is also sending minions to talk to the media and not answering questions…. even from denomination state publications. He has the playbook down well.

It is interesting to contrast. Patterson flaunts it while Platt plays the humble poor guy on a big salary with tons of speaking gigs that pay well. He even managed to convince his fans he was in danger for Christ at the Dubai Marriott.

The only thing to happen that would be worthy is for the money to dry up and they all go away.

@ okrapod:
Booker T Washington once wrote that the color of equality is green. :o)

A big problem is people have been conditioned over time to expect jobs and opportunity to come from big government. It is not sustainable.

Clothing and gear from Underarmor ???!!

Whatever could they need armoured underpants for?

Nick Bulbeck wrote:

Whatever could they need armoured underpants for?

Well, when they are handing out guns as prizes …

@ Lydia:
Lydia: What will these big shot boys in the SBC do when the money dries up?

In another instance, in which Patterson was accused of covering up the sexual misconduct by his protégé, Darrell Gilyard,. He attempted to obfuscate a number of accusations made by a number of women against Gilyard by saying that each complaint needed to be backed up by 2-3 witnesses!. Gilyard would eventually go to jail for his conduct.

I have a number of friends, both women and men, who suffer from deep wounds of having been violated sexually. Aspects of those experiences can bring devastation to their soul and despair to their spirit for decades.

Not only does Mr. Patterson’s response demonstrate an absurd lack of understanding about the damage such violations inflict on victims, and lack of compassion for them in having to carry the awful burden thereof, but it seems to me gives evidence of a seared conscience that he does not really care about what is truly right or wrong.

And, given the context of apparently protecting his protégé, that would mean Mr. Patterson is perfectly willing to sacrifice others on the alter of whatever lies within his own affections. Is that not what lies at the heart of cruelty?

Nick Bulbeck wrote:

Clothing and gear from Underarmor ???!!
Whatever could they need armoured underpants for?

Those Castrating Jezebels?

@ K.D.:
What! No rabbits or doves or quail! K.D., you don’t know what your missing. We do wild game dinners, too. Both sexes are welcome. They are more like fellowship meals.
Aside from pests, we don’t hunt what we won’t eat. numo wrote:

(Btw, do you do anything along the lines of humane trap and release? My dad was a big believer in that, and it seemed to work very well.)

No trap and release for us. Moving a raccoon, coyote, fox, possum, or bobcat to another location just means someone else’s livestock/pet/garden will be threatened. We have skunks, too – I have found a couple of those in the chicken house – wouldn’t even dream of trapping those! A few years ago, we had an over-population of skunks couple with a rabies outbreak.

K.D. wrote:

He helped pay for his new ” residence” by raising insurance rates on retired SWBTS professors. Already guys not making a ton of money in retirement…

Like the Furtick Mansion and Creflo Dollar’s Gulfstream 650 — “TITHE! TITHE! TITHE!”

I’m a gun owner and a hunter, but hunting of the sort Dr. Patterson is engaged in, using the large “weapons” he owns, approaches weird status. The money he uses for such adventures began with SBC member tithes and channeled to him by the decaying SBC empire. While he may now have other resources to tap for his African jaunts, he would not be where he is without SBC money putting him there. Those who criticize this “man of God” have a right to do so – it’s not macho, manly or godly … but juvenile behavior. I used to have a great respect for Paige Patterson and his ministry; however, it appears that he is done but hasn’t quit yet.

numo wrote:

(I am not anti-hunting per se, but i think his kind of hunting should be banned; large animals can be “shot” with cameras, not bullets.)

“Bwana” Clyde Batty thanks you, Numo. 😉

http://www.frightenstein.com/characters/bwana.html

Nancy2 wrote:

But, Paige probably thinks real men don’t tote cameras around, they just pose in front of them in camo.

BTW, does he know that “Paige” is a unisex name?

Good point, Nancy. Maybe that’s what he’s “compensating” for.

I couldn’t watch the video – this is shallow, but everything about PP’s voice and manner of speaking grated on me: the odd lisp, the mincey cadence. Smug, much? How does someone with that delivery attain the presidency of a major seminary?

Martha wrote:

How does someone with that delivery attain the presidency of a major seminary?

Politics.

Nancy2 wrote:

The CR in the SBC was nothing short of a dirty political takeover

It should be obvious to all by now that SBC’s “Conservative” Resurgence was really a “Calvinist” Resurgence. As one of the CR architects, Paige Patterson (a non-Calvinist) was apparently too occupied with his big game adventures to discern what was really taking place. When he finally took his camo off and put his weapons back in the gun case, it was too late … the SBC pendulum had done swung back 500 years and resurrected John Calvin.

It’s funny, but it’s not.
The problem with this attitude is it’s insidious.
Actually have been to church a few times this year. Went to my wife’s Assemblies of God church. They’re doing a series of sermons based on the movie “War Room”. Watched the movie so I’d know what they’re talking about. Didn’t finish it – I found it to be pretty complementarian in it’s outlook. Won’t bother going to the rest of the sermon series either.
The point is: Even the rank and file in Evangelical churches don’t see anything wrong with this outlook. It’s in the bible.
The way my wife looks at it- take what’s good and leave the rest. But I’m unable to pick and choose like that. I see nothing good in complementarianism.
I’ve read the comments and heard the argument “It’s about what God wants”.
Well, women are people, in every sense of the word. Young women are moving into trades, heavy equipment operation, pilots, mechanics and engineering. Do you think they’re going to sign on to this?
Like the pathological fixation on young earth creationism, the reality of the world scares these “men”. Christianity is one voice in a pluralistic society. Instead of seeing this as a challenge, they want to control, control, control. So they focus on snippets of Paul and the Bronze Age societies of the Old Testament.
I applaud women like Naghmeh, who are not afraid to stand up and protect themselves and their children. Christians (men and women both) need to reclaim their religion.

dee wrote:

I did not know that, HUG? Sounds like the beginning of a new baptist hymn. “When Jesus blows the trumpet, it’s be me and my Landrover rising up to meet him.”

I was thinking that PP might be swept by a Landrover into heaven, right after he and his successor part the Mississippi and his successor makes a Winchester float.

There is something ‘different’ about people who kill animals just be be killing. Food acquisition is a good reason, thinning the population when needed is a good reason, stamping out epidemics is good. Even the occasional hunt to maintain skills, provide the meat is actually eaten, can be a good reason. But killing for the sake of killing is not a good reason.

I have killed my share of chickens in the past and my share of lab rats also in the past, except only that I did not shoot any of them. Might have been easier if I had for some of the chickens. But there was always a reason to kill them. So I do not think that every kill of every animal is wrong. But killing for no reason and for the mere sake of killing is not okay.

dee wrote:

Sounds like the beginning of a new baptist hymn. “When Jesus blows the trumpet, it’s be me and my Landrover rising up to meet him.”

Or just repeat 8-10 times and you have a complete worship chorus.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

This is the “LEGALIZE RAPE” crowd, right?

Looks like it. I didn’t even know such a group existed! Kudos to the establishment owner for going to the police. Now, someone needs to hack this group’s website and replace all their info with a video of Helen Reddy singing “I am Woman.”

Patriciamc wrote:

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
This is the “LEGALIZE RAPE” crowd, right?
Looks like it. I didn’t even know such a group existed!

Well, “Rapist’s Rights” DOES sound like the Ultimate MRA/Manosphere Cause…

Nancy2 wrote:

I was thinking that PP might be swept by a Landrover into heaven, right after he and his successor part the Mississippi and his successor makes a Winchester float.

You’ve been watching the last scene of Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life one time too many. (Though not as many as Prosperity Gospel preachers…)

Max wrote:

I’m a gun owner and a hunter, but hunting of the sort Dr. Patterson is engaged in, using the large “weapons” he owns, approaches weird status.

Can you give examples of such large “weapons”?
(Though I suspect “*****(ed.) extensions” would be a better description — “ME MAN! SEE? SEE? SEE?”)
.600 Nitro Express Double?
.50 BMG Barett 82?
.577 T-Rex?
20mm Lahti?

Daisy wrote:

They think the church lacks men (all the while ignoring that lots of women have been quitting church, but who cares about women, right?)

Put out the bait to bring the men back and the women will SUBMIT!

Patriciamc wrote:

I didn’t even know such a group existed!

I only learned about it some 3-ish years ago when some Men’s Right Activist supporters showed up to comment on Spiritual Sounding Board. Yes, they exist.

Which reminds me, my family watched Suffragette last night. Even my 9-year-old daughter was moved by the struggles of women to obtain rights that many women in my generation take for granted today. Some of these groups, the SBC included, would love to take us back to the nineteenth century.

Nancy2 wrote:

Put out the bait to bring the men back and the women will SUBMIT!

With the implied threat of “at gunpoint, if necessary”.
ME MAN! RAWR!!!

okrapod wrote:

There is something ‘different’ about people who kill animals just be be killing. Food acquisition is a good reason, thinning the population when needed is a good reason, stamping out epidemics is good. Even the occasional hunt to maintain skills, provide the meat is actually eaten, can be a good reason. But killing for the sake of killing is not a good reason.

Even the Wolves of the Seeonee Pack know that:

“But kill not for pleasure of killing,
And seven times never kill Man.”
— Rudyard Kipling, “Law of the Jungle”, First Jungle Book

Daisy wrote:

I read some articles a couple years back that tele-evangelist Benny Hinn stopped his private jet at tropical places like ….. and he claimed he was stopping over at such places do to ministry work.
Sure he was. Sure he was. (If ministry = wearing flip flops and cut-offs and strolling casually down beaches in the evening watching the sun set.)

Or, watching the bikini-barely-clad babes.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Well, “Rapist’s Rights” DOES sound like the Ultimate MRA/Manosphere Cause…

Yeah. It boggles the mind. Oh, as a couple of people have mentioned, the MRAs are commenting over at Spiritual Sounding Board. Julie Ann will have to spray down her site with Lysol.

okrapod wrote:

This is not basically about guns, and Nancy2 is not red neck. This is not primarily about doctrine and Ken is not red neck. But there is such a thing as red neck and we see it in the south in various manifestations and TX seems to have its variety and it is infiltrating those of the residual middle class who have not morphed into the upper stratum as some have done.

It’s not just the South okrapod. The Pacific Northwest is a hornet’s nest of redneckism and fundagelical whackos.

dee wrote:

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

But these are preacher-boys. They would do a Landrover drive-by in Perfect Safety. (Did you know Landrover got a dedicated product placement scene in Left Behind?)

I did not know that, HUG? Sounds like the beginning of a new baptist hymn. “When Jesus blows the trumpet, it’s be me and my Landrover rising up to meet him.”

Oh, it gets better. According to Slacktivist, this is the outline of the scene, in Volume 2 of “History Written in Advance”/the 68th Book of the Bible:

* Author Self-Insert (self-described “Greatest Investigative Reporter of All Time”) is driving his SUV on a major street outside Chicago when the city takes one or two megaton-range nuclear detonations. (Ground Zeros presumably The Loop and O’Hare Airport.)
* Author Self-Insert is unaffected by flash blindness, thermal pulse, or the following blast shockwave. Author Self-Insert’s SUV is unaffected by the EMP.
* Author Self-Insert heroically cuts his SUV across and over the median in a Movie Car Chase maneuver — and pulls into a Landrover dealership.
* Author Self-Insert heroically strides into dealership and buys a Landrover on-the-spot with his credit card.
* Landrover Salesman in dealership has not fled; he makes the sale as if nothing out of the ordinary has happened. All the paperwork, all the credit checks. Dealership’s systems are unaffected by EMP; building and inventory intact, not even broken windows. Landrovers operational despite EMP.
* Author Self-Insert drives out of dealership in his new Landrover; breaking the fourth wall, he makes a Product Placement speech/Landrover ad copy Testimony.

FW Rez wrote:

Actually, any religious institution giving away guns anytime seems out of place to me.

Unless it’s the First Church of Zardoz:

“FOR ZARDOZ YOUR GOD GAVE YOU THE GIFT OF THE GUN!
THE GUN IS GOOD!”
(“The Gun is Good!”)

FW Rez wrote:

dee wrote:

Sounds like the beginning of a new baptist hymn. “When Jesus blows the trumpet, it’s be me and my Landrover rising up to meet him.”

Or just repeat 8-10 times and you have a complete worship chorus.

Isn’t there something in the Bible about “Vain Repetitions”?
Or does that only apply to The Rosary?

Ken – your comment about the healing of Dee’s arthritis was just about the same thing I wanted to say. I think you said it better than I would have. These “name it and claim it” people really get to me. If that was the case about all our illnesses, then we wouldn’t have any of them. But it’s not. PP and his group make me sick. They are trying to take women’s right back to the 1800’s or earlier. My son lives right by this seminary and goes to church with several the students from there. He has been talking about how when he ever gets married that he is the head of the household. I think we will have to talk to him about that. My husband is one of the few men in East Texas that don’t hunt. He fishes though. He is as manly of a man there is except he cleans my house for me (lol).

Muff Potter wrote:

It’s not just the South okrapod. The Pacific Northwest is a hornet’s nest of redneckism and fundagelical whackos.

Yikes.

Sick book:

http://azfamilychurches.com/David-Edgington-Bio.htm

The Abusive Wife: Ministering to the Contentious Woman
by “Dr.” David D. Edgington

Notice all the endorsers are male, including nouthetic counseling bigwig Jay Adams who summarizes the book’s message as: “Shrewish women and what the Bible says about them”.

Here is the author’s 2013 mugshot for a domestic violence (assault) arrest several years ago:

http://mugshots.mobi/arizona/maricopa-county/8434880

Nancy2 wrote:

@ K.D.:
What! No rabbits or doves or quail! K.D., you don’t know what your missing. We do wild game dinners, too. Both sexes are welcome. They are more like fellowship meals.
Aside from pests, we don’t hunt what we won’t eat. numo wrote:
(Btw, do you do anything along the lines of humane trap and release? My dad was a big believer in that, and it seemed to work very well.)
No trap and release for us. Moving a raccoon, coyote, fox, possum, or bobcat to another location just means someone else’s livestock/pet/garden will be threatened. We have skunks, too – I have found a couple of those in the chicken house – wouldn’t even dream of trapping those! A few years ago, we had an over-population of skunks couple with a rabies outbreak.

I agree, if we have trouble with a ‘ coon’ or ‘possum or fox…..it is not sent on for someone else to worry with…it is shot….sorry, but that’s just the way it is…
Rabbits here tend to be tough as leather swamp rabbits. There has never been quail in this part of the world, ducks, tons of geese, which nearly always winds up in a gumbo for the meal. And a duck and turnip casserole which, if done right, might be the best thing served at the meal.

Nancy2 wrote:

We have skunks, too – I have found a couple of those in the chicken house – wouldn’t even dream of trapping those!

A friend of mine trapped a live skunk, the trap looked like a large briefcase. He hauled the case up and set it along side the road and went back down do get the rest of his gear. As he returned to the road, someone had stolen the case and was driving off.

Not to fear, the thieves stopped a few hundred feet down the road and put the case back on the side of the road and continued on.

Jerome wrote:

The Abusive Wife: Ministering to the Contentious Woman
by “Dr.” David D. Edgington

Honorary Doctorate?

Notice all the endorsers are male, including nouthetic counseling bigwig Jay Adams who summarizes the book’s message as: “Shrewish women and what the Bible says about them”.

Here is the author’s 2013 mugshot for a domestic violence (assault) arrest several years ago:

Didn’t “domestic violence (assault)” used to be called “wife beating”?

“Lions and tigers and bears….OH MY!

LOL…another effort to help men on the path to becoming “Authentic Men.”

You might be a redneck if you think that any teaching of critical thinking in the schools is a gummint plot to destroy the nation.

You might be a redneck if you think that moral and ethical integrity is genetically passed down to the next generation, which is why Junior should not be in jail right now because his daddy and his granddaddy both were good men. And I don’t care what they say about that one incident with his daddy, he was a good man.

You might be a redneck if you think that the anatomic location of the human brain is in the underwear.

You might be a redneck if you see people mostly as groups and not as individuals, and make no allowance for any information to the contrary.

You definitely are a redneck if you think that God put you in charge but left it to you to achieve and maintain that position. And you are definitely a redneck if you cannot understand why other people don’t see this. Must be because they are (racial comment) or (gender comment) or (political comment) or possibly even people influenced by the gummint, but for sure it is all a plot to destroy the nation.

@ Catherine:

I was born on the Stockbridge Menominee Res and lived my childhood in Racine.

Jack wrote:

The way my wife looks at it- take what’s good and leave the rest. But I’m unable to pick and choose like that. I see nothing good in complementarianism.

I am like this now, too. Especially when it comes to filling your kids heads with the whole gender war thing. They sponge everything up by osmosis. The other problem is that teens questioning at church seems to be verboten in most evangelical venues. No Thanks. Learning comes from thinking and asking questions. Not indoctrination.

Nancy2 wrote:

Muff Potter wrote:

The Pacific Northwest is a hornet’s nest of redneckism and fundagelical whackos.

Mark Driscoll????

When it comes to Rednecks in the Pacific Northwest, I would think he was their king.

Lydia wrote:

You might enjoy Iron Jawed Angels.
http://iron-jawed-angels.com/

I loved this! Their courage was admirable.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Isn’t there something in the Bible about “Vain Repetitions”?
Or does that only apply to The Rosary?

One of Papa Chuck’s favorite verses back in the day. It was always a not so subtle diss of the Roman Catholic Church. Dave Hunt took up the war-hoop later on with his propaganda tome: A Woman Rides the Beast

I must have missed that passage in the Gospels where Jesus took his disciples to a quiet place where the local arms manufacturers donated door prizes for them to use to hunt lions, deer and conies.

Envisioning Jesus organizing a gun giveaway event at a seminary turns the gospel on its head. Yet perhaps this is exactly how Mr. Patterson envisions Jesus. If so, he needs to go back and read Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and keep reading them over and over until he stops envisioning Jesus that way.

Lydia wrote:

It is bizarre when you think they were arrested for protesting in front of the White House and force fed in prison during hunger strikes.

Thanks! I’ll look into that. Schools must have glossed over the violence when teaching this topic in school. I don’t remember suffragettes being beaten, arrested, and forced fed. And in Suffragette the main character’s husband gives their son away to another family, because the child is legally his property. She has no rights over her own child.

@ BeenThereDoneThat:

I know! Right?

okrapod wrote:

You might be a redneck if you think that any teaching of critical thinking in the schools is a gummint plot to destroy the nation.
You might be a redneck if you think that moral and ethical integrity is genetically passed down to the next generation, which is why Junior should not be in jail right now because his daddy and his granddaddy both were good men. And I don’t care what they say about that one incident with his daddy, he was a good man.
You might be a redneck if you think that the anatomic location of the human brain is in the underwear.
You might be a redneck if you see people mostly as groups and not as individuals, and make no allowance for any information to the contrary.
You definitely are a redneck if you think that God put you in charge but left it to you to achieve and maintain that position. And you are definitely a redneck if you cannot understand why other people don’t see this. Must be because they are (racial comment) or (gender comment) or (political comment) or possibly even people influenced by the gummint, but for sure it is all a plot to destroy the nation.

Are you living in East Texas too?

Tim wrote:

I must have missed that passage in the Gospels where Jesus took his disciples to a quiet place where the local arms manufacturers donated door prizes for them to use to hunt lions, deer and conies.

That would come around Matthew 15:40, and after Jesus extols the wonders of mixed martial arts, defeating other men at arm wrestling, and crushing beer cans with one hand. It’s called the “Sermon on Manliness.”

Melody wrote:

[sorry, this may sound political] One of many reasons Ted Cruz appalls me. [end political comment]

That’s okay, he appalls me too….at least he’s not your US Senator….

Daisy wrote:

As of late, Wilson is busy telling women they can expect to be raped if they don’t acquiesce or seek out male covering or male protection.(*)

So getting raped is God’s Punishment for Uppity Wimmen who are not Submissive enough?

Daisy wrote:

It’s called the “Sermon on Manliness.”

SNORT!

Ken wrote:

I’ve often wished it were possible to go back in time, and see the looks on the faces of the campaigners when told it was the Conservative party in the UK that produced Britain’s first women prime minister.

This is just a thought. I don’t know much about British politics, and I’m still learning about the system in my own country. In the US, the Democrats and Republicans have gradually reversed positions on many issues over the past generations. Democrats used to be the more conservative party. My very conservative, very devout Southern Baptist grandparents always voted Democrat. I wish they were alive today for me to ask them why. Nowadays, in some parts of the US, you’re practically not a Christian if you don’t vote Republican.

I wonder if there has been a similar reversal in British political parties?

@ BeenThereDoneThat:

If you look at the years leading up to Ratification, it is WW1. They were vilified for protesting over something so trite during that war to end all wars.

But I remind all that not for the male vote would it have been ratified. Go men!

@ okrapod:
Ask your doctors to start sending claims as registered mail. See how many hoops they have to jump through to get out of it that way!

Nancy2 wrote:

BeenThereDoneThat wrote:

you’re practically not a Christian if you don’t vote Republican.

Unless the Republican you vote for is named Donald.

“WHO IS LIKE UNTO THE TRUMP! WHO CAN STAND AGAINST HIM!”
Even Jerry Falwell Jr makes pilgrimage to Him to deliver the Anointing!

@ BeenThereDoneThat:

There are those in fundagelical land who’d love to return us to those good old days.

@ okrapod:
There was a certain surgeon here who became Lt Gov who was billing medicaid for operations he did not perform.

Muff Potter wrote:

There are those in fundagelical land who’d love to return us to those good old days.

That’s what scares me about people supporting Patterson and his shenanigans. Are they suffering from collective amnesia about how things used to be? Yes, there are social problems now. But there have always been social problems. A Stepford Wife society is not going to cure that.

Patterson’s advice to the abused woman in his story sounds like it was taken straight out of the nouthetic counseling playbook.

So he’s willing to put a woman back into a known abusive situation to be victimized again, but when it comes to himself, he’s all about having a huge weapon to kill with. That is cowardice, and the opposite of biblical love.

Here’s the thing. Of all the times I’ve met a person who is actually supremely good at something or has some wonderful quality in abundance, I can’t think of a single time when that person has boasted or played up their ability. Not once. The most skilled surgeons, the best warriors, and the most accomplished pilots have all had a calm confidence about them and usually understated their abilities if asked about them. And the people with the most real courage and love are the same.

In my experience, people who engage in the kind of macho theatrics that Patterson seems to love are usually covering for some truly deep deficiency, and they’re the first to cut and run when things get tough.

Also, the timing of his promotional video is terrible and indicative of his ignorance of the issues. The Superbowl is just a few days away and it’s well known to be a time when domestic violence/abuse spikes. Another testosterone-infused macho advert is just about the last thing this country needs.

MOD addemdum: I’m going to do something I try and avoid and stick a comment into the thread. As far as I know this is an Urban Legend. It got started by some counseling groups speculating this was so and it morphed into a story that got passed on so much that the legend became “fact”.[1] People who’ve analysed the stats on this say there is NO correlation to the Super Bowl and domestic violence.[2] There’s enough to deal with if we stick to facts without jumping to urban legends.

GBTC

[1] Riffing on the end of the movie “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance”

[2] My wife spend many years working with a local domestic shelter but parted ways with them eventually over things like this.

You know, it was not a perfect career, it was awful at times, but I am so glad I got a job teaching high school when I ” was released” from the seminary. I couldn’t do the pastor/church staff business today….heck, I couldn’t do it then…

@ Nancy2:
Nancy, i have a pet rabbit. I literally cannot talk about this.

Coyotes are one thing, but bobcats are a protected spevies in my state. (Might be true of foxes as well, would have to check.) My parents lived in the country, and my dad limited trap and release to raccoons and groundhogs. We get bear coming through very, very close to houses in late spring, when it’s mating season and males are covering up to 150 miles per day, looking for mates.

Back in the day,my brothers hunted small game, but i couldn’t. (Unless it was the only way i had of feeding myself.)

@ Serving Kids In Japan:
😉 i remember him.

@ dee:

For some reason, i literally LOLed at this. Good one!

@ okrapod:
Oof. Again. The late Oliver Sacks suffered from these (major visual aura) in childhood.

I used to get migraines a lot, and have had a couple of ocular migraines – no pain, but the visual aura was NOT fun. I now understand the term “fortification illusions,” however. Visual auras can be scary, and are annoying at the very least. I hope this gets resolved ok, for all of your sakes.

John wrote:

[1] Riffing on the end of the movie “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance”

“When legend and reality conflict, Print the Legend.”

Tim wrote:

On a side note, Paige Patterson’s wife has been called the “First Lady” of SWBTS. It’s an appalling title: https://timfall.wordpress.com/2014/05/07/first-lady-title-bad-for-church/

Not “First Lady”, Judge Tim.
QUEEN BEE.

Bookbolter wrote:

Patterson has also had stained glass windows with his own likeness installed at the seminary. While he is still living and still president of the seminary. Wish I were kidding.

Seeing the Chapel Tower from the south, it appears that they intentionally built it tall enough to replace the Rotunda Dome as the prominent landmark. No regard for the past.

BeenThereDoneThat wrote:

In the US, the Democrats and Republicans have gradually reversed positions on many issues over the past generations. Democrats used to be the more conservative party.

And until Nixon’s Southern Strategy in 1968 (capitalizing on the White South’s reaction to the Civil Rights Act), the Solid South was Solid DEMOCRAT. (Lincoln was Republican, so…)

* All those Klansmen below Mason-Dixon voted DEMOCRAT. Specifically, a subset of Democrat called “Dixiecrat”.
* Dixiecrat machines enforced Jim Crow.
* Democrat Woodrow Wilson was the most white supremacist president since Andrew Johnson, giving a Presidential endorsement to Birth of a Nation and making Federal Civil Service “Whites Only” by Executive Order. (Between Reconstuction and this, Federal Civil Service was one of the few ways blacks could rise above stoop labor into white-collar and service jobs such as the Post Office; Civil Service examinations were relatively color-blind for the time. Then cane the Executive Order.)

@ BeenThereDoneThat:
That mainly happened in England, and it really was hideous, what they fid to those women.

@ Ken:
??? You’re not conversant with the history of womens’ suffrage in the UK? Back in the 70s, there was even a TV miniseries about the Pankhursts, “Shoulder to Shoulder,” which was aired over here by PBS.

Really, I’m kind of … stunned.

@ Headless Unicorn Guy:

It’s a title Christianity Today chose to use for her. Not the best editorial decision

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Democrat Woodrow Wilson was the most white supremacist president since Andrew Johnson, giving a Presidential endorsement to Birth of a Nation and making Federal Civil Service “Whites Only” by Executive Order. (Between Reconstuction and this, Federal Civil Service was one of the few ways blacks could rise above stoop labor into white-collar and service jobs such as the Post Office; Civil Service examinations were relatively color-blind for the time. Then cane the Executive Order.)

Wasn’t he the one who also sent the flower of American youth to France in 1917 to fight and die for the interests of wealthy European blue-bloods?

Tim wrote:

It’s a title Christianity Today chose to use for her. Not the best editorial decision

Also used in the first line of her bio on SWBTS.edu “The First Lady Dorothy Kelley Patterson serves as professor of theology in women’s studies at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.”

Muff Potter wrote:

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Democrat Woodrow Wilson was the most white supremacist president since Andrew Johnson, giving a Presidential endorsement to Birth of a Nation and making Federal Civil Service “Whites Only” by Executive Order. (Between Reconstuction and this, Federal Civil Service was one of the few ways blacks could rise above stoop labor into white-collar and service jobs such as the Post Office; Civil Service examinations were relatively color-blind for the time. Then cane the Executive Order.)

Wasn’t he the one who also sent the flower of American youth to France in 1917 to fight and die for the interests of wealthy European blue-bloods?

And had an “independent” goon squad called the American Patriotic Association acting as a sanctioned press gang to make sure those flowers got drafted and sent to the trenches. And beat up on Germans in America. All exempt from the draft themselves because of their vital contribution to the war effort. With full Plausible Deniability.

But then, I know from experience that Intellectual Pacifist types can have one helluva Dark Side.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

And Cape Buffalo is considered one of the most dangerous game…

Indeed; I chose that example deliberately! Ten lions and a thousand antelope is a panicked stampede; ten lions and half a dozen cape buffalo is a tense stand-off.

One cape buffalo and a preacher with no firearm… is a race for the land rover.

Let me be clear, btw: as a human being and a follower of Jesus, I do not wish to see anyone – whatever colour their neck might be – pitted against a cape buffalo. Though I don’t like them shooting one for sport either.

Jerome wrote:

the chair was endowed by her late parents, Charles and Doris Kelley…

So Charles and Betty bought their baby girl a place in history, only I suppose because Paige insisted, like Dorothy said he insisted she continue her education when she did not want to. Well, thanks be it was not tithe money that did that.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
In the US, the Democrats and Republicans have gradually reversed positions on many issues over the past generations. Democrats used to be the more conservative party.
And until Nixon’s Southern Strategy in 1968 (capitalizing on the White South’s reaction to the Civil Rights Act), the Solid South was Solid DEMOCRAT. (Lincoln was Republican, so…)
* All those Klansmen below Mason-Dixon voted DEMOCRAT. Specifically, a subset of Democrat called “Dixiecrat”.
* Dixiecrat machines enforced Jim Crow.
* Democrat Woodrow Wilson was the most white supremacist president since Andrew Johnson, giving a Presidential endorsement to Birth of a Nation and making Federal Civil Service “Whites Only” by Executive Order. (Between Reconstuction and this, Federal Civil Service was one of the few ways blacks could rise above stoop labor into white-collar and service jobs such as the Post Office; Civil Service examinations were relatively color-blind for the time. Then cane the Executive Order.)

Until this election cycle,(2016) most local and still many elected county officials ( Sheriff, Constables, Tax Collector, County Clerk, County Commissioners) have run as Democrats here in East Texas.( many switched this past Fall, others remain Democrats.) They would be called the old ” Blue Dog” Democrats. I am pretty sure on a statewide and national level, these same ” Democrats” vote GOP.

@ okrapod:
Okrapod, you may want to make some calls and make sure no one has stolen your identity. I received a letter about a month ago about a huge gov.identity breach.

nmgirl wrote:

ironing and mopping?

The SWBTS offers a certificate in women’s ministry (that would be ministry to women) and they offer a concentration in homemaking for a bachelors in humanities, I think they called it. The homemaking concentration is like the old time home ec courses with enough hours for what might be called a minor elsewhere. Sewing, child care, nutrition and such as well as several courses which look like CBMW stuff.

numo wrote:

Nancy, i have a pet rabbit. I literally cannot talk about this.

Understood.
I have had pet pigs and pet chickens. My daughter has had pet rabbits.
Being a farm girl, I learned to compartmentalize at a very young age. I know that most people are not raised in an evironment that encourages the sort of disconnect that I have there.

okrapod wrote:

@ okrapod:
My point is, how is sewing or nutrition or how to witness to women actual theology? It is home ec and evangelism, not theology.

Well, doesn’t every good preacher man need a woman that can bring covered dishes to church, sew up the seat of his pants, and get the mustard stains out of his neckties? And the wives of the young whippersnappers need an older woman to teach them how it’s done. I guess they should call it manology.

The Pattersons are fans of Gothardism. In his 2014 addendum at the end of this posting of an article he originally wrote in 1976 ( http://www.recoveringgrace.org/media/Theology-of-BG-by-Patterson-1976rev5-15-14.pdf ), Paige Patterson says that the content of Bill Gothard’s seminars was “generally correct.” Dorothy Patterson has invited Michelle Duggar to speak at the seminary.

Here is a summary of Gothard’s teachings that tell us abused women and children are not victims: http://www.recoveringgrace.org/2014/04/there-is-no-victim-a-survey-of-iblp-literature-on-sexual-assault-and-abuse/ In fact, the “abuse” is usually their fault.

Welcome to the cult, Drs. Patterson. Gothard’s IBLP needs new board members, if you would like to make your support even more direct.

@ okrapod:
BRILLIANT!!!

Max wrote:

a younger reformed membership will lead to a generational shift in SBC belief and practice eventually. I’m not sure anything can be done about it at this point; intercession by millions in the pew could right the ship, but apathy (nearing apostasy) seems to have settled in.

I believe that such a large majority of the pew sitters are clueless as to what is happening.

@ Nancy2:
I hear you. I’m a town girl, but grew up in (and now live in) a farming area. But I can’t really compartmentalize, not the way farmers can.

I want some pet pygmy goats, too…

@ Nancy2:
Both of my bunnies (1 no longer on this planet) have lived indoors with me, used a litterbox faithfully (spayed/neutered) and were/are very intelligent and wonderful companions. But getting to know them is very different than becoming acquainted with a dog or cat. For one thing, you have to spend a lot of time on the floor, because they’re ground dwellers. Second, you have to learn to respect their innate prey animal instincts and just learn how to be around them. They will bond with humans, given love, time and patience. And they are very, very mischievous and cheeky! I think a sense of humor is a requirement on the part of the humans who have them, because if you’re lacking in that department, you’re not going to be able to relate to them.

Btw, I like the idea of pet pigs, sheep, chickens, etc. Am also very much a horse lover, and in many ways (biological and temperamental), rabbits are like tiny racehorses. Seriously. I’m much too “old” to go back to riding, but I get my fix with the buns. (Wish I could volunteer for the rescue where I adopted them, but it’s too far away to be practical…)

Nancy2 wrote:

Max wrote:
a younger reformed membership will lead to a generational shift in SBC belief and practice eventually. I’m not sure anything can be done about it at this point; intercession by millions in the pew could right the ship, but apathy (nearing apostasy) seems to have settled in.
I believe that such a large majority of the pew sitters are clueless as to what is happening.

And many…well, they no longer care. And their kids, grandkids, no longer even attend….the SBC will become just another of the ” also rans” in the denominational world…

@ Patriciamc:

“the MRAs are commenting over at Spiritual Sounding Board. Julie Ann will have to spray down her site with Lysol.”
++++++++++++++

sigh… claiming their territory, I see. (psssss “Mine.” psssss “Mine.”)

@ Daisy:

“…..Benny Hinn…… his private jet…… tropical places…..”
+++++++++++++++

can’t WAIT for the day when the ‘Christian’ fad is to live simply. giving surplus away.

even if it’s only a fad and not a matter of conscience.

Max wrote:

Uninformed/misinformed is one thing … being willingly ignorant is another! Most SBC churchgoers are, well, churchgoers. Easy pickins’ for New Calvinism. I actually had a New Calvinist leader in our State tell me that the SBC pew is theologically clueless.

I am far from being a theologian, but I have studied. The attitudes of certain men in our last 2 churches combined with the way my husband has behaved towards me is why I searched for and found TWW and Wade, etc.

@ Nancy2:
I wish there were more like you Nancy2 who would study, discern, and search for truth. The 21st century church is full of folks who don’t.

elastigirl wrote:

can’t WAIT for the day when the ‘Christian’ fad is to live simply. giving surplus away.

even if it’s only a fad and not a matter of conscience.

Makes me think of John Lennon’s song Imagine:

You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one…

Max wrote:

@ Nancy2:
I wish there were more like you Nancy2 who would study, discern, and search for truth. The 21st century church is full of folks who don’t.

Thanks, Max! I still have a long way to go. There are a lot of smart commenters (you are among them) on TWW who make me think and question. I’m so thankful Dee and Deb and for the folks on here, as well as the Burlesons. ….. Eagle, Nate ……

Mara wrote:

I have never, ever believed that this actually happened.

Ditto. The bullsh*t detector is going off.

Yup, that big game seminar/banquet/whatever is really Christ like!! If they like to go after animals, good for them, but why bring the seminary into it?…

Eagle wrote:

Since this church plant is in Mierel’s backyard of Phoenix. I am going to propose that The Wondering Eagle and Wartburg Watch provide ice cold bottled water that she can picket and protest! 🙂

Believe me, it’s on the agenda. With my luck, his first services will be on the hottest day of summer. But I’ll be ready.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Democrat Woodrow Wilson was the most white supremacist president since Andrew Johnson, giving a Presidential endorsement to Birth of a Nation and making Federal Civil Service “Whites Only” by Executive Order. (Between Reconstuction and this, Federal Civil Service was one of the few ways blacks could rise above stoop labor into white-collar and service jobs such as the Post Office; Civil Service examinations were relatively color-blind for the time. Then cane the Executive Order.)

You know, there was (and probably still is) a statue of Woodrow Wilson at my alma mater, the University of Texas at Austin. I’d walk by and I couldn’t figure out why on earth he was there, because yeah, he’d been president, but we didn’t have statues of any other president besides George Washington.

Fast forward three decades and I figured out from Wilson’s history as described (e.g., his executive order) and the placement of the statue (near Robert E. Lee) and I’m pretty sure this was a coded in your face white supremacist gesture on the part of the powers that be at UT. Unlike the Lee and Jeff Davis statues, Wilson’s statue wasn’t removed this past fall. I wish it had been.

Since this blog covers controlling preachers (among other things), I thought you might be interested in this (first letter on the video):

http://www1.cbn.com/video/bring-it-on-line-church

This lady wrote to a Christian show asking for advice (her letter appears in the video on the page linked to above).

She and her husband work as some kind of a preacher’s assistant, and the preacher expects them to carry stuff out to his car, heat up his car for him, buy stuff for him to stock his fridge (using their own money). This lady wants to know if this is okay, biblical, or right.

Pat Robertson was correct in his reply to her, IMO (he told her no way, this guy is using you, it sounds like a cult, get out now), though he also sounded pretty grouchy about it.

Anyway, how is that for an authoritarian, controlling preacher, demanding that a couple in his church act like maids or butlers and perform these little piddling duties for him?

mirele wrote:

okrapod wrote:
The SWBTS offers a certificate in women’s ministry (that would be ministry to women) and they offer a concentration in homemaking for a bachelors in humanities, I think they called it. The homemaking concentration is like the old time home ec courses with enough hours for what might be called a minor elsewhere. Sewing, child care, nutrition and such as well as several courses which look like CBMW stuff.
mirele wrote: As opposed to the bachelor degrees in nutrition and textiles which were taught at my alma mater and were quite science-based. I worked at a college bookstore and used to look at the books for those majors–they were not easy at all.

Snort! These SWBTS homemaking courses should be core curriculum requirements for all of the single male students!

When a crime has been committed, such as a husband beating his wife, you don’t have to go to the church first, you can call 911 and the police.
When the crime is that someone has been sexually molested you don’t have to go to the church first you can call the police or 911.

This is the way it is in the U.S. (Not sure about parts of Idaho) but no longer applies in Europe or Muslim countries, or parts of Michigan where Muslims are allowed to do what they do and are protected by the government. College campuses,the White House at times,the Catholic church,and now we learn the Protestant church has been practicing the sort of cover ups keeping sexual & crimes hidden.

I am not surprised when I learn that someone who has been covering up for the abuser is guilty of the same thing.

BC wrote:

When a crime has been committed, such as a husband beating his wife, you don’t have to go to the church first, you can call 911 and the police.

Yes! I can’t begin to understand the women who call the church first. I guess they think the minister can change the man, but it really is stupid. Go to the police, not the church! I remember reading where Mark Driscoll told some women that if the husband was abusive, a woman should threaten to call the pastors. Even now, I’m still shocked at how idiotic that comment is.

FW Rez wrote:

Bookbolter wrote:
Patterson has also had stained glass windows with his own likeness installed at the seminary. While he is still living and still president of the seminary. Wish I were kidding.
Seeing the Chapel Tower from the south, it appears that they intentionally built it tall enough to replace the Rotunda Dome as the prominent landmark. No regard for the past.

It’s high art to compete with the Sistine Chapel. You know some of Catholic Popes came from feuding families. Maybe is if a Bishop of the Mohler variety becomes Pope of Southwestern Baptist Seminary he will build, with the help of his helpmate, a tower of his biblical manhood to compete with the chapel comc strips.

NJ wrote:

Oh well, at least they don’t seem to have picked up the practice of honor killings.

Yet. ;-(

elastigirl wrote:

“the MRAs are commenting over at Spiritual Sounding Board. Julie Ann will have to spray down her site with Lysol.”

They are in the SSB dog house permanently. Someone sent me the link to where they are whining about it. dumb little yip yips.

Help me out here. Complementarianism is harmful, no doubt about it. Submission doctrines definitely attract abusers and sociopathic minded men and women are not safe in in these conservative, evangelical environments. That's why I left the church and Christianity a few years ago, but these comp men are only teaching what the bible teaches. Bible doctrine is degrading to women, so I don't really get the egalitarian view of bible.

Paige Patterson treated that battered woman poorly because 1 Peter treats battered women poorly. The bible stresses female submission to at least the husband, in EVERYTHING, so comp churches stress it. Everything means everything. It is a dangerous concept.

Leviticus puts a dollar value on males and females and guess what? Men are more valuable! (this scripture really destroyed by self-image) I just feel women are better off without religion in their lives and married to secular men.

BC wrote:

When a crime has been committed, such as a husband beating his wife, you don’t have to go to the church first, you can call 911 and the police.
When the crime is that someone has been sexually molested you don’t have to go to the church first you can call the police or 911.
This is the way it is in the U.S. (Not sure about parts of Idaho) but no longer applies in Europe or Muslim countries

Erm, are you sure this is what you want to put forward as fact, the ‘no longer applies’ bit? Are you Donald Trump? I can assure you, here in the UK you can absolutely ring the Police first & foremost if someone has been assaulted, sexually or otherwise. If your post contains – as I’m suspicious it does – a hint of Britain being islamified & ordinary rule of law not applying, then you are absolutely misinformed, as well as making yourself look like a fool. Source: me. I have frequently worked with the Police, after ringing them, in cases of threatening behaviour, sexual assault or child sexual exploitation, as part of my job. I have meetings with a local Area Commander about this stuff.
Can anyone tell this ridiculous assertion has vexed me greatly….

@ Daisy:
Regardless of whether he is good, bad or indifferent, RHE has just handed Douglas Wilson a propaganda coup. He has, of course, taken her comment apart. I don’t know what she was thinking – or rather not thinking.

Not only so, but he basically says that if criticism of him in this fashion is so inept, then how can you trust criticism of other gospel coalition types such as C.J. Mahaney.

Massive own goal from Evans’ point of view.

elastigirl wrote:

when did this idea start? this is a weird development. it’s not normal.

It has always been around I am thinking. The people who eventually staggered over to my-father-the-lawyer to get some mess cleaned up were not infrequently those who had been to the preacher first. And that was almost a century ago. I am thinking that the idea has just spread but is not new.

okrapod wrote:

But the seminaries and seminary colleges would see that women had job skills? Not so much, or maybe not at all.

But they are happy to take their tuition monies and give them (in reality) nothing in return

okrapod wrote:

mirele wrote:
As opposed to the bachelor degrees in nutrition and textiles which were taught at my alma mater and were quite science-based. I worked at a college bookstore and used to look at the books for those majors–they were not easy at all.
Precisely. And those majors qualified people for exams or licensure for actual jobs in the real world, at least I know that the nutritionists had a marketable job skill and the paper to prove it. And the home ec major plus the ed courses could get you certified as a public school teacher in home ec (consumer science I think they now call it). But the seminaries and seminary colleges would see that women had job skills? Not so much, or maybe not at all.

It was probably a propaganda tool to to certify what the seminary believes is the complementarian role of a woman. Women should stay at home and do women things and stay submissive. It also gave a visible platform for Dottie, as first First Lady of the seminary. It was intentionally controversial as is everything they do and say. They love to draw attention to themselves.

Ken wrote:

numo wrote:
So you’ve been exposed to more US-style evangelical/charismatic/Pentecostal practices than you’ve been willing to concede in the past.
That is actually an interesting comment. I would have to say that all – possibly without exception – of the dodgy over the top doctrines and practices I have encountered have come from the United States. The books and tapes/CD’s are imported, as well as the speakers. Specifically:

Perhaps since the USA has freedom of religion as a part of its founding principles, and has never had a state religion, nor the opposite – religion forbidden by the state, with all of this freedom comes a boatload of nonsense. If there should be serious persecution of Christians some day in the US, a lot of the nonsense would go away – fast. In Jesus ministry, when the going got rough, the crowds disappeared – again, fast. He was pretty much alone on the cross.

Ken wrote:

That is actually an interesting comment. I would have to say that all – possibly without exception – of the dodgy over the top doctrines and practices I have encountered have come from the United States.

Good golly, Ken. Do a refresher on Christian History. There is nothing new under the sun! The US is simply the new kid on the block.

Lydia wrote:

It vexes me you brought up Donald Trump. Was that necessary? I am not even a supporter but it is getting old. I happen to think he and Obama are from the same strain of narcissism. My British friends who are NOT Christians and not even right wing AT ALL are very concerned about the Islamization of Britian. And the legal sharia courts.
Is Islam good for women?

Sorry to have vexed you Lydia but I brought up Trump as an example of someone who told out & out lies about the influence of Islam here in the UK. He talked of what are non-existent no-go areas in London, & basically said the whole of Birmingham was a no-go area. My issue with these is that those things are not true. They are false, & he was stirring up a lot of fear & Islamophobia with his lies. Lies vex me, as does anything that demonises many British Muslims who are not extremists & aren’t striving for sharia law here.
I don’t think Islam is good for women & absolutely oppose sharia law being enforced here in any way. I’d be interested to know why your British friends are so alarmed. I’m 50 miles from London & it would take me a good while to track down a Muslim within a wide radius of where I am now.

@ okrapod:
Hi Okrapod,

Here’s some sources for you:
Sharia courts: https://fullfact.org/law/uks-sharia-courts/

Murder of Lee Rigby: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lee_Rigby

Wider persepectives on terror & safety: http://www.theguardian.com/uk/woolwich-attack

I think being American you have the huge privilege of rarely having attack son your own soil, which we, as a multiply invaded island, never have had. We are used to the fact that enemies, such as the IRA, can hit us where it hurts from time to time. I expect this factor alone makes it seem like any attack on persons here by Islamic extremists is a portent of doom.

Militant Islam is of concern here, of course it is, but I think agenda’d reporting is heavily influencing what you are able to see. I bet no-one there reported on all the Muslims who took aid to those flooded out in the Lake District recently?

Bridget wrote:

There is nothing new under the sun!

But I’m not as old as the sun! I can look back over the last 40 years or so. And in that time I’ve seen charismania and the Ft Lauderdale stuff, and more lately the church growth through modern business management and marketing techniques approach. Amongst other things. Almost as though the church needed the latest religious fashion, always seeking something new.

Now I know none of these things is actually new, but in my lifetime most of it has come across the Pond. I cringe when I hear of the likes of Hinn doing the rounds in eastern Europe. After decades of communism, that is the last thing they need. And I might add, they could also be wise not to look to the leadership of much of the church in western Europe, compromised as it is.

Repose should be response, although in the circumstances repose might be more accurate.

@ Beakerj:
I have an English friend who is in frequent contact with her brother (a businessman in England) who is not only horrified at the Islamisation of Britian/Sharia law no go areas) but also that he pays exteemly high taxes for the all the Muslims on the “Dole” (welfare) who have multiple wives with children. England talks about not paying for their multiple wives but then they are able to receive welfare for themselves. These women are genitally mutilated in England, little girls, and frightfully abused in many ways.
I haven’t heard D.Trumps opinion on this.

Daisy wrote:

Most preachers / churches act as stumbling blocks to victims anyway, so I’m not sure why anyone would want to approach a preacher/ church rather than authorities or some other means of help.

Threat of Eternal Hell/being Left Behind?

Beakerj wrote:

Lydia wrote:
It vexes me you brought up Donald Trump. Was that necessary? I am not even a supporter but it is getting old. I happen to think he and Obama are from the same strain of narcissism. My British friends who are NOT Christians and not even right wing AT ALL are very concerned about the Islamization of Britian. And the legal sharia courts.
Is Islam good for women?

Sorry to have vexed you Lydia but I brought up Trump as an example of someone who told out & out lies about the influence of Islam here in the UK. He talked of what are non-existent no-go areas in London, & basically said the whole of Birmingham was a no-go area. My issue with these is that those things are not true. They are false, & he was stirring up a lot of fear & Islamophobia with his lies. Lies vex me, as does anything that demonises many British Muslims who are not extremists & aren’t striving for sharia law here.
I don’t think Islam is good for women & absolutely oppose sharia law being enforced here in any way. I’d be interested to know why your British friends are so alarmed. I’m 50 miles from London & it would take me a good while to track down a Muslim within a wide radius of where I am now.

Beaker I have to ask: Are you a muslim? As to the Muslims helping during the flooding what I heard was they were a royal pain in a**, totally selfish, complaining about the food, wanting the housing that the flooded out Brits were getting etc. Muslim is not a charitable religion. The tithes they pay go for terrorist expenses.

Ken wrote:

In my opinion he also won the propaganda war on the Sitler issue in that far from just taking him to task on that particular issue, his critics were using this to bash every conceivable aspect of his theology and practice they didn’t agree with.

And DW sits back and smirks.
“I. WIN.”

Julie Anne Smith wrote:

elastigirl wrote:

“the MRAs are commenting over at Spiritual Sounding Board. Julie Ann will have to spray down her site with Lysol.”

They are in the SSB dog house permanently. Someone sent me the link to where they are whining about it. dumb little yip yips.

More YAP! YAP!s than yip yips.
(Ever seen a Chihuahua or Yorkie throwing his weight around? “ME BIG! ME MEAN!YAP! YAP! YAP! YAP! YAP! YAP!”)

Daisy wrote:

There is the Descriptive vs. Prescriptive aspect of it. Just because the Bible mentions that Billy Bob mugged his neighbor Joe in the book of Judges chapter 5, or whatever, does not mean God is groovy with people mugging each other.

I wanted to expand on that.

It’s kind of like reading your local newspaper.

I saw a story on my local TV news / printed paper (and the online version of the local paper) a few months ago about a teen-aged boy who murdered his parents and a few siblings in their home.

I do not infer from this reportage that the editors, journalists, or TV anchor man who reported it are accepting of people murdering their own families.

The police mentioned in the stories were said to have shown up to the crime scene to investigate it. I doubt that any of the cops interviewed approve of the young man’s actions, either.

That a local TV news show or paper reports on what happened – a crime having taken place – does not necessarily mean that the people reporting the story or everyone discussed in the story, approve of the crime themselves. I view the Old Testament in the same way.

I think the OT, with its reports of murder and other sins, is meant to show how utterly vile people can be to each other. I don’t think God approves of people being horrible to each or, likes it.

All or most of that nasty stuff you see in the OT is meant to show, I think, why the New Testament says humanity needed a savior.

Ken wrote:

That is actually an interesting comment. I would have to say that all – possibly without exception – of the dodgy over the top doctrines and practices I have encountered have come from the United States. The books and tapes/CD’s are imported, as well as the speakers.

I cringe about every time I see American based TBN (Christian network) do these TV spots saying they are expanding coverage.

In the last couple of years, they’ve done reports on how they have new TBN studios in Great Britain and other locations, and I’m pretty sure that these other nations are going to be fed the same swill we get in the United States on TBN.

Meaning, most of the programming overseas will probably be Word of Faith / Prosperity Gospel stuff that we get in the States, that teaches viewers things like if they “sow a seed” (send money to the TV preacher), they will be healed of ‘X’ or ‘Y.’ That sort of thing.

Ken wrote:

He has, of course, taken her comment apart.

This is Wilson’s SOP (standard operating procedure).

Any and every time he gets taken to task for whatever obnoxious views or comments he makes on his blog, Wilson always retorts by making the topic not his obnoxious views but the critic.

Wilson diverts the attention of people from him to whomever is pointing out how awful his opinions are.

Wilson will charge the critic (whether it’s RHE or whomever else) of being dumb, or of lacking reading comprehension. Wilson will say that his critic completely misunderstood the points he was trying to make.

Nancy2 wrote:

The above is a copy/paste from SWBTS women’s program. Will somebody please explain this nonsense to me?
Are women instructed by God to spread the Gospel through making pillowslip dresses, decorating cakes and setting tables for formal dinners?
Are those abilities crucial to salvation? Is the ability of Christian women to spread the Gospel centered on their homemaking skills?

On a related note:

On Being a Woman After God’s Own Heart – Biblical womanhood, or cultural womanhood?
http://www.cbeinternational.org/resources/article/being-woman-after-gods-own-heart

Daisy wrote:

Law enforcement officials had arrived to relocate a 10-year-old boy after reports of his repeated rape at the facility.

The “Appeal of the Beardless” — Islamic for Same-Sex Pedophilia.
Strong Penetrator, Weak Penetrated.

dee wrote:

Here is a link to that lovely stained gals window.

http://www.wadeburleson.org/2014/05/when-power-is-absolute-what-cant-he-do.html

And an excerpt from that link:

Before we Southern Baptists criticize our Roman Catholic friends again, we should remember we have a tendency to canonize saints faster than the they do. It’s never smart to make your heroes iconic and place them in stained glass before they are dead.

“Caesar Augustus wasn’t proclaimed a god until after he was dead. Caligula makes himself a god while he is still alive to enjoy it.”
— Alistair Cooke, introduction to an episode of the BBC’s I, Claudius on PBS Masterpiece Theatre

@ BC:

I read in an article that the usual custom is that Muslims only offer aid/ charity to other Muslims. I can’t remember what that page was, but there is this:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/articles/islamic-relief.aspx

@ Ken:

I think it goes deeper than that.

Gender comp at its root, no matter how well intentioned, no matter how nicely men who believe in it treats women, sends false messages to and about women.

You cannot tell 50% of the population that they are equal – but barred from X or Y, or that they are lacking in Z, and then expect anyone and everyone to really believe that they are “equal in worth.”

Gender comp sends conflicting messages to and about women and treats them as though they are little children.

It handicaps women, so if one is in an abusive marriage, she is conditioned to think she MUST stay, or that she is at fault in some capacity.

Further, her church will get into the mindset that the onus is on the woman to “save” the husband, the burden is on her to save the marriage.

That one woman in the article (if my understanding is correct) is still trying to cling to the gender comp understanding of marriage (which is probably what you view as being a ‘balanced’ view), minus its ramifications that do lead to, perpetuate, or excuse abuse.
She needs to chuck gender comp altogether, not try to ignore the parts she finds troubling.

Gender comp at its core is sexist and bad, not just that it may be implemented incorrectly by some men.

@ dee:
I suppose SWBTS will eventually need to add a stained-glass window for Al Mohler. I doubt that they have his depiction there now. But, since Mohler was also a hero of the Conservative Resurgence, the next SWBTS President (destined to be a New Calvinist) will surely include him in the CR hall of fame.

@ BC:
Wow.

Growing up heavily involved in SBC churches and with a father in ministry, I was pretty sure I had seen the full cast of characters that are typically on parade whenever humans gather anywhere.

But I’m very troubled by the absurd caricature of Christianity that’s being presented as normal, and even desirable, by the people who are running the seminaries and denominational entities. Big game hunting and taxidermy, ticky-tacky windows, college degree programs for “the little ladies”??? This is a cartoon, a sitcom where everybody laughs at the backwards buffoon!

The tragedy lies in the true believer, the young man or woman who gives up everything and lives in poverty or near poverty for years in order to attend seminary and learn how to make a difference for people, and invest their lives in the kingdom of God, only to be fed this mess. Many of them emerge corrupted and useless, or worse: dangerous.

Another tragedy is the poor soul who scrimps and saves to make an offering, and supports the whole process unwittingly. Ordinary folks are being played like a violin.

My husband attended SEBTS for a while, trying to get a music degree. He’s a professional in a tech industry, but very talented musically, and felt like he could do some good by using his gifts to serve God and help people in worship. He spent many hours in study and practice. He gave up evenings, weekends, and even took a year to go full-time. The process is exhausting and expensive, and wasn’t helped by frequent policy changes.

I worked in the library there, and could tell you some stories…anyway, the whole thing has left an awful taste in our mouths.

There are many wonderful people there, both students and professors, but they aren’t the ones running the theatrical. We were naive. We assumed the seminary was about learning everything you could and sending out the best and brightest to be a light to the world. They will tell you that, but what we found was mostly a sham. And it breaks my heart to say it.

dee wrote:

Here is a link to that lovely stained gals window.
http://www.wadeburleson.org/2014/05/when-power-is-absolute-what-cant-he-do.html

What’s next …….. Rosary beads? “Hail Paige ………”, “Hail Al …….”.

@ Law Prof:

Actually I never heard anybody object to stained glass windows, their own or anybody else’s. Statues, yes; windows, no. But I never heard anybody accuse the RCC of actual idolatry due to the statues, either, even though I heard an awful lot of anti-catholicism. Now, saying that hyperdoulia on the one hand and declaring Mary co-redemptrix on the other is was too over the line-that I have heard.

@ okrapod:
During the Reformation era, there were incidents in which mobs of people basically sacked churches, destroying stained glass window, defacing tombs, statues, wall paintings, etc., as well as looting – there were things that were made of precious metals that could be melted down, after all. There’s a German word that refers very specifically to these waves of mass destruction, but darned if i can remember it now – and i doubt i could spell it right if i did!

@ Libby:

LOVE your unvarnished communication. getting right to the point.

I feel the same as you. I thought Daisy’s and Dee’s responses were really good.

where the bible is concerned, I hold on loosely (but drink deeply from Psalms). and focus on kindness & generosity of heart, and the fabulously practical reality of my power + Holy Spirit’s power in me = exponential process & product.

Helps me to stay unentangled in wasteful emotion/energy drains that way.

Nancy2 wrote:

This is accomplished through instruction in homemaking skills and developing insights into home and family, while continuing to equip women to understand and engage the culture of today.

Sounds like they will emerge with a degree in Neighbor Shaming.

@ Friend:
From SWBTS (emphasis, mine):
“The Leadership Certificate in Women’s Ministry can be acquired by completing 12 hours of course credit. This is accomplished by completing four 3-hour courses taught by Southwestern faculty and other experts in the field of women’s ministry. Courses are available online and in a traditional schedule format at the Fort Worth campus. It is possible to complete the program in two years. Courses may also be taken for credit in Southwestern’s master’s or baccalaureate programs.”

People, this is one (3 hour) credit class per semester. In a normal college setting, this entire course load required for the certificate wouldn’t even qualify as “full time” for one 14-week semester! How serious can this really be?

Golly, I feel all alone and blushy after seeing I posted three comments in a row–as if I were standing in a crowded elevator talking to people, and I shut my eyes and they all got out, and I just kept talking… 🙂

Daisy wrote:

Police officers flee angry mob in Swedish refugee center through back door
https://www.rt.com/news/330180-police-violent-refugees-sweden/

Please check your news sources. This comes from RT, which is an organ of Vladimir Putin and the Russian government. It is not an unbiased news source.

Speaking of no-go zones, over the past month, we here in the Western US have had the takeover of the wildlife refuge in Oregon. During the takeover, federal employees (not just of the refuge, but of other federal agencies) were pretty much told not to go to work in Burns, Oregon, because of the fear that some alleged “patriots” might cause problems. And FBI agents were told to stay out of Kanab, Utah, today, because LaVoy Finicum’s funeral is going on.

Those of us who have kept an eye on sovereign citizens (of which *some* of the “patriots” are a particular subgroup) are well aware that these people are far more dangerous and more numerous than radical Muslims to the average citizen. If you Google the biggest threat to law enforcement in the USA 2015, you will get story after story pointing out that the biggest threat to our police forces comes not from Muslim extremists, but from sovereign citizens. (I’d put in links, but if you’re interested, you’ll use Google.)

Beakerj wrote:

I think being American you have the huge privilege of rarely having attack son your own soil, which we, as a multiply invaded island, never have had. We are used to the fact that enemies, such as the IRA, can hit us where it hurts from time to time. I expect this factor alone makes it seem like any attack on persons here by Islamic extremists is a portent of doom.

Well, I cannot determine who you refer to in the last sentence. Who is it that is reacting to ‘a portent of doom’ you or us. That said, and it does not particularly matter which you meant, I do think that you all have had two relatively recent, historically, differences from us. WW I and WW II were quite different experiences, though bad all around you had the brunt of it. And also you had empire, and dissolution of empire specifically, and I am wondering if your experiences with empire and its vastly different cultures may have given you a more tolerant? attitude toward some things that we might vigorously recoil against. I did not say that well, but I am thinking that this experience of dealing with ‘others’ would be vastly different if you (UK) went there as opposed to us who deal with ‘others’ mostly if they come here.

Because I do hear a difference not just in details but a difference in attitude between us in what you are saying.

okrapod wrote:

Because I do hear a difference not just in details but a difference in attitude between us in what you are saying

Yes I think there is definitely a difference in attitude Okrapod. Maybe some of it comes from the guilt of our Colonial past where we were often far more destructive & voracious than any ethnic or religious minority here. Brits generally have been known as tolerant & our Asian immigrants (esp those fleeing Idi Amin I think) have really benefitted the British economy. I was delivered by an Indian Doctor, in Birmingham, which is my hometown. Maybe my Mum, as an Irish immigrant, was particularly tolerant…maybe it’s because I have so many Chinese and Hispanic people married into my family, & lots of ethnically mixed children that I’m tolerant.

The portent of doom comment was about how things would be received Stateside. I remember the American friends in England reacting to 9/11 & it coming across quite clearly that they were shocked that such a thing could happen on American soil, the American mainland, whereas terrorist attacks on our soil were sadly familiar to us.

mirele wrote:

If you Google the biggest threat to law enforcement in the USA 2015, you will get story after story pointing out that the biggest threat to our police forces comes not from Muslim extremists, but from sovereign citizens. (I’d put in links, but if you’re interested, you’ll use Google.)

I beg to differ there mirele. The San Bernardino massacre was right in my backyard so to speak, and it sure as hell wasn’t white-anglo-saxon-gun-nuts who done it…

okrapod wrote:

But obviously there was no excuse for the catholic teens to be going to church dance parties on weekends, because dancing was a work of the devil and led to no good and that just goes to show you that all that other stuff which we objected to only leads to dancing and that ought to tell you something right there.

And of course, we strongly disapproved of the fact that Catholics drink (gasp) alcohol!

Beakerj wrote:

Birmingham, which is my hometown…

Really? Whereabouts * ? I grew up in Sutton Coldfield.

* Or “furryboots”, as they say in the north of Scotland.

@ Beakerj:
Sorry, but I am not making a meta-narrative. I mentioned only reported facts. I won’t respond to your further points because Dee asked us to drop the subject.

Recovering FROM Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Pt. 5
http://centrestreetbaptistchurch.com/2016/02/05/recovering-from-biblical-manhood-and-womanhood-pt-5/

@ mirele:

How many of the so-called “patriot” groups are going to decapitate me for being an infidel or kafir, though?

I’m more concerned over extremist Muslims.

Friend wrote:

Nancy2 wrote:

This is accomplished through instruction in homemaking skills and developing insights into home and family, while continuing to equip women to understand and engage the culture of today.

Sounds like they will emerge with a degree in Neighbor Shaming.

And Sin-Sniffing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Church_Lady

mirele wrote:

Speaking of no-go zones, over the past month, we here in the Western US have had the takeover of the wildlife refuge in Oregon. During the takeover, federal employees (not just of the refuge, but of other federal agencies) were pretty much told not to go to work in Burns, Oregon, because of the fear that some alleged “patriots” might cause problems. And FBI agents were told to stay out of Kanab, Utah, today, because LaVoy Finicum’s funeral is going on.

Take care, the situation is not black and white. Some heavy handed government officials operated outside of propriety, others bungled, and the over-ruling of a local judge to put a few people back into prison inflamed the situation. Don’t get the idea I approve of their reaction, I don’t, but also don’t immediately jump to the conclusion they don’t have a legitimate gripe.

@ Serving Kids In Japan:
Dalrock is toxic.

@ numo:

From what I’ve read of them and their comments, I have no doubts about that, Numo.

Serving Kids In Japan wrote:

You actually went to Dalrock, or whatever it’s called, and read there?

We took one for the team. 🙂 Incidentally, one of the vilest MRAs actually lives in his mother’s basement. No kidding.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3432531/Pictured-pick-artist-center-international-pro-rape-storm-t-shirt-shorts-door-mother-s-home-lives-basement.html

I don’t know if anyone said this in the comments because I haven’t read all of them. But Paige Patterson’s view sounds like the wife should be willing to suffer being beaten to the glory of God. What is astonishing is that no one was publicly outraged over his speech on wifely submission. I honestly believe that Calvinist churches would gladly opt for the days when men could hit their wives and it would be support by English Common Law.

Just yesterday I posted a scenario on a Calvinist Facebook site in which the husband and wife have differing political views on the issues and presidential candidates. I asked if that if the husband is requiring the wife to vote according to his wants and desires should she do it even if it would go against what she would vote. All of the males said the wife should submit to the husband and obey him and vote the way he wants her to. One man even stated his support of coverture and no one opposed him but me! Every time a marriage question is posted, the men show their true colors with regard to women. Their comments border on shocking, and the women who defend equality and oppose their rigid gender roles are called Feminists. Women need to be warned to stay away from Calvinist churches where they will be silenced and treated as African Americans were under Jim Crow.

Lydia wrote:

Bookbolter wrote:
Patterson has also had stained glass windows with his own likeness installed at the seminary. While he is still living and still president of the seminary. Wish I were kidding.
I could not believe my eyes when I saw they were commissioning stained glass windows with the likenesses of CR leaders. This is idolatry on steroids. But then as recent as the 1990’s, SBTS named a college after a pro chattel slavery SBC Founder.

Who was this pro chattel slavery SBC Founder? Honestly, I wouldn’t at all be surprised if many of these guys think that the Antebullum South was the Good Ole Days.

Daisy wrote:

Recovering FROM Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Pt. 5
http://centrestreetbaptistchurch.com/2016/02/05/recovering-from-biblical-manhood-and-womanhood-pt-5/

A most useful series of articles. Thank you for the link.

BeenThereDoneThat wrote:

Serving Kids In Japan wrote:
You actually went to Dalrock, or whatever it’s called, and read there?
We took one for the team. Incidentally, one of the vilest MRAs actually lives in his mother’s basement. No kidding.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3432531/Pictured-pick-artist-center-international-pro-rape-storm-t-shirt-shorts-door-mother-s-home-lives-basement.html

The article says, “He had advised followers that feminists may attack them or male opponents, but they were not to strike back but follow the ‘Gandhi principle of non violence’ record incidents on cell phones.”

I can’t even count the number of ways that’s ridiculous. Long live Gandhiji! Long live Gandhiji! And his iPhone 6! And his iPhone 6!

numo wrote:

@ Friend:
I’ve seen blog posts by a few women who think women’s suffrage should be repealed.

They want to go back to the early 19th century when women couldn’t own property, didn’t have the right to vote, and slavery existed? Some of them glorify the antebellum American South. It’s ok if they make the personal choice to not be able to vote or own property, but to impose this on others as a matter of public policy? Isn’t this Dominionism?

okrapod wrote:

because dancing was a work of the devil and led to no good and that just goes to show you that all that other stuff which we objected to only leads to dancing and that ought to tell you something right there.

Fortunately, there is now a 12 step program to enable evangelicals to be delivered from the evils of dancing.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

Mark wrote:
Maybe is if a Bishop of the Mohler variety becomes Pope of Southwestern Baptist Seminary he will build, with the help of his helpmate, a tower of his biblical manhood to compete with the chapel comc strips.
In the shape of a 300-foot (100-meter) erect phallus?

Hey, nothing surprises me. If someone had told me that comic strips with conservative resurgence leaders would emblazon a seminary chapel I would have been shocked years ago. I always thought stained glass windows should be teaching tools and have something to do with Bible stories and about Jesus. This has nothing to do with the Glory of God, but the glory of men. There is a term for this I don’t like to express. We will all meet our Maker someday. What will we tell Him or Her? And I think the same goes for the Pattersons. Catholic statuary and figurative art and Orthodox icons is all about teaching some lesson that has at least something connected to some Biblical truth. My parents best family friends were Roman Catholic. My “aunt” Katy had what I call a “Mary in the bath tub” in her yard. She liked Mary. Mary definitely has some connection to the Bible and Jesus. Don’t see Dottie and Paige, also a women’s name, incidentally, as have a connection to the Word of God, unless they believe they should be elevated to this station. Just my opinion. It wouldn’t astound me that if Paige has a neocalvinist successor, he might not try to outdo Mr Patterson to prove he is more of a stalwart complementarian and conservative Christian.

numo wrote:

take the vote away from men under a certain age, men who are not “white” (by their standards), etc.

Some would argue that the voter ID laws in certain states are meant to suppress the votes of the less popular members of society. Likewise the resistance to restoring voting rights to felons who have paid their debt to society. Thoreau compared the Concord jail (where he spent a night for refusing to pay taxes) to a village inn, perhaps because he found his fellow prisoners so ordinary.

It’s Saturday night and I just ate a really nice pink grapefruit while watching an NHL game. So I’m just feeling expansive, not trying to start a dispute. I treasure you all. 🙂

zooey111 wrote:

many women had been “required” by their husbamds to abstain from voting in the last 2 presidential elections.

Meanwhile, some other “good Christians,” including women I know, rearranged their lives to work at the polls, specifically because of rumors and fear mongering: hordes of undesirables were supposedly scheming to storm polling stations. Our election system has some problems, but I don’t believe that this particular fear materialized.

numo wrote:

@ Mark:
Of course it’s Dominionism. The next thing will be to take the vote away from men under a certain age, men who are not “white” (by their standards), etc.

Don’t forget men who do not own “property” (i.e. land).

Nancy2 wrote:

“Hunts include an African safari for two, including daily and trophy fees; Texas hunts for whitetail deer; and turkey hunts along the Rio Grande. Youngsters will walk away with Red Rider BB guns, all thanks to more than $20,000 put up by sponsors including the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention and GuideStone Financial Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention”.

“Keep on Tithing, PewPeons!”
— paraphrase of an incredibly arrogant professional welfare bum from the USENET days

My daughter knew some of her college girl friends, who married guys from the college they all went too. Then the guys went to PP’s “seminary”. She said these women turned into shadows of the vibrant women they used to in college. In her words, the seminary is a “cult”. I honestly feel sorry for these women. Maybe someday they will wise up and quit drinking that “koolaid”.

Nancy2 wrote:

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
“Keep on Tithing, PewPeons!”
— paraphrase of an incredibly arrogant professional welfare bum from the USENET days
Ticks me off royally. The SBC churches pass the plates, gladly taking money from hard working women. Then part of those tithes go to PP’s boys club. Which, now that I think about it, the SBC is a boys club!
We’re bringing home IMB missionaries, and I guess there aren’t any homeless people in Texas, or people who have lost their jobs and could use some help. Nope, nothing to use funding on that’s any more important than the PP he-man showcase.

Amen! I don’t think Lottie Moon could be a missionary in the present SBC. Now I could accept a stained glass of her in the back of a church. She is tried and true, and a great woman.

Lottie Moon

http://www.richmond.com/life/faith-values/article_6aa990ed-c16a-53c1-9e95-418634e0315d.html

dee wrote:

This was a culture that had a hard scrabble life. Men were not generically more valuable then women in terms of spiritually. However, men were more valuable for their strength and ability to take on the hard tasks of providing for food and protection. That is most likely the reason for boys bringing in a higher value than girls. In today’s culture, that doesn’t make sense any longer. I could go on a bit more but perhaps this is enough to get my drift. What do you think?

I get what you are saying, I hope you are right, but male babies at 2 months old are more valuable than female babies at 2 months old. A male baby at this age is not stronger than a female baby at this age. Yes, he may grow up to be stronger, but at this point he is not.

I do think most comps would say a woman did not have to submit to sin, but the submission doctrine does allow a man to almost completely control the life of his wife and deny her any real identity. I am glad for this blog or any organization that speaks out against this crap.

I don’t think comps believe in “equality with different roles.” I think they believe completely in female inferiority, so women are lured in by believing they are equal, then denied any real status or opportunity, and oftentimes, abuse.
That is why I find this paradigm highly dangerous.

I also think scripture gives this impression at times. I don’t like the way Eve was pranced in front of Adam, like an animal. It only mattered that he liked her, she was never asked how she felt about him. It makes you feel like she is his property and nothing more. I am not convinced that women are in the image of God, per Genesis. It says in my version: In his image God created HIM, male and female got created THEM. (emphasis mine here)

Thanks again. I do love the blog

Ken wrote:

In other words, the answer to husbands being faithless with regard to Christian marriage is not for wives to argue their half of the bargain is ‘not for today’ either.

Yeah, we get it, Ken. God made men to the masters and women to be the servants. If a husband is abusing the wife, it’s the wife’s Christian duty to just take it.
Why don’t you move over here and join the SBC? You’d probably get elected president of the SBC for your stance on gender roles alone.

Nancy2 wrote:

Yeah, we get it, Ken. God made men to the masters and women to be the servants. If a husband is abusing the wife, it’s the wife’s Christian duty to just take it.

I’ve never said God made men to be masters

I’ve never said women are to be servants.

I’ve never said an abused wife has to take it; on the contraray, she is not expected to ‘submit’ to such treatment.

I therefore conclude you don’t get it at all.

I’m not going to bet bogged down in the details of this again, it’s futile. I think it odds on that if Daisy replies to the above post, it will merely be to assert yet again without argument that ‘the bible teaches mutual submission’; and haven’t we already done Eph 5 to death with not an awful lot to show for it?!

Libby wrote:

I don’t like the way Eve was pranced in front of Adam, like an animal. It only mattered that he liked her, she was never asked how she felt about him. It makes you feel like she is his property and nothing more.

Hi Libby, there might be some who disagree with me, but I strongly believe that Eve was designed with the virtues and characteristics Adam was, not lacking, but ignoring. She therefore was a visual help he needed to stand in front of him.

‛êzer
ay’-zer
From H5826; aid: – help.

The root word H5826 means:

‛âzar
aw-zar’
A primitive root; to surround, that is, protect or aid: – help, succour.

neged
neh’-ghed
From H5046; a front, that is, part opposite; specifically a counterpart, or mate; usually (adverbially, especially with preposition) over against or before: –

BDB Definition:
1) what is conspicuous, what is in front of (substantive)
2) in front of, straight forward, before, in sight of (adverb)

The word translated “help” is found several times in the OT referencing God as our “help.”

Psalm 33:20 Our soul waits for the LORD; He is our help and our shield.

Psalm 70:5 But I am afflicted and needy; Hasten to me, O God! You are my help and my deliverer; O LORD, do not delay.

BC wrote:

@ Beakerj:
When you say you are of Asia and Irish descent are you saying that you are of Pakistani and there Muslim descent on your father’s side?

Why are you interrogating Beakerj like this? She has been commenting here for years. And what does it matter what her nationality is?

Bill M wrote:

On a related track, one of the problems I’ve seen with churches is they install young pastors as leaders and then try to get them to learn how to be a servant. This backwards approach attracts and creates oppressors. Better they first be servants and learn to lead by example.

In other words, rising through the ranks as an apprenticeship.

German/Israeli Army officer selection instead of British/American.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

they install young pastors as leaders and then try to get them to learn how to be a servant.

One thing that strikes me about the seminarians who serve at my church is what humble and attentive listeners they are. They always ask good questions and try to pick up life lessons as well as suggestions from the parishioners. I’m sure that some of this comes from seminary training.

dee wrote:

I have also heard from a few loons that women are not created in the image of God. They are created in the image of Males. There is a problem when one takes a Bible verse which is meant to convey a large idea-God created mankind- and then devolve it into “Therefore, women are a lesser creation.”
I, as well as others women, have been told that we have no business correcting John Piper or other pastors since we are not allowed to question so-called male teachers. By marginalizing over 50% of the church, the men are protecting their turf. I truly believe if women had been in leadership, issues like domestic violence would have been dealt with far more quickly.

Am I the only one getting really tired of all of the cr*p women have had heaped on them for thousands of years? What gives? We’re just people! No, not lesser than, not subordinate to anyone. So why have we been treated this way? One conclusion I can make is that Satan hates women and our influence. It seems to me that the authoritarian churches first isolate and push aside the women. Once their influence is gone, then the men are easy pickings. I do wish the comps would realize that by restricting women, they’re the ones, not the egalitarians, who are letting the sinful world affect their beliefs and practices.

Okay, I’m now getting off my fancy, French-milled, scented soap box.

Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

In other words, rising through the ranks as an apprenticeship.

German/Israeli Army officer selection instead of British/American.

That is part of it, the military equivalent of making a thirty year old a “head pastor” would be the old nobles being given a generalship by birthright. Good leadership was the exception.

Bill M wrote:

I don’t think I have ever heard Ken defend the nutcases that tell a woman to go back to their abuser.

I don’t agree with all of Ken’s conclusions, but I have never heard him say this either.

This was such a sad and silly video. Sad to say, but this video makes the man look like a dorky old wannabe big game hunter.

The gun he mentioned is an EXTREMELY powerful firearm. I am sure that he is not capable of firing it, without injuring himself.

Personally, I have to admit that I am a “gun lover”. I love plinking at cans with my .22s. I have a concealed carry permit, and regularly carry. I have rifles, shotguns, revolvers, and semi-auto pistols. Heck, I even have a semi-auto AK47 just in case the world devolves into a “Mad Max” dystopia.

I’m not a hunter, and while I respect real hunters, I don’t care much for dorky old rich guys going on African safari hunting trips. It just seems silly.

By the way, his comments about needing 2-3 witnesses for a sex crime makes no sense given the obvious nature of such offenses.

@ Bill M:
I am sorry you’ve had bad experiences with clergy. There are certainly some bad apples out there. .. I have encountered them too.

@ BC:
What is your problem, anyway???!!

Bridget wrote:

Bart wrote:
By the way, his comments about needing 2-3 witnesses for a sex crime makes no sense given the obvious nature of such offenses.
He does not seem to grasp the foolishness of his words which, in my book, makes him the most dangerous kind of leader.

Isn’t the 2 to 3 witnesses applicable to Matthew 18, which is the part of Scripture used as a citation for church discipline? I used to be a believer in church discipline. Now after witnessing spiritual abuse, I am not so sure.

Mark wrote:

Isn’t the 2 to 3 witnesses applicable to Matthew 18, which is the part of Scripture used as a citation for church discipline?

There is another scripture about 2-3 witnesses to bring a charge against an elder. But in the case domestic abuse, the victim should simply go to police not their elders and church leaders. Domestic abuse is breaking the law, not a church discipline issue, even if it does involve an elder.

Friend wrote:

At least the comps won’t snatch it away for their all-boys’ soap box derby!

Good. Their ickyness won’t defile my soapbox.

Bridget wrote:

Mark wrote:
Isn’t the 2 to 3 witnesses applicable to Matthew 18, which is the part of Scripture used as a citation for church discipline?
There is another scripture about 2-3 witnesses to bring a charge against an elder. But in the case domestic abuse, the victim should simply go to police not their elders and church leaders. Domestic abuse is breaking the law, not a church discipline issue, even if it does involve an elder.

They have a problem with civil society and secular laws and courts? Otherwise why would they be giving this advice? This advice is bearing bad fruit in a well publicized cases. I try to understand what the neo fundamentalists are thinking. It makes no sense. There is a biblical injunction to render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar’s which is the domain of a civil society with its secular laws and courts. They are overstepping their bounds is my thought is my opinion.

Bill M wrote:

From his formulation I believe he would say that an abuser is still guilty, I don’t think I have ever heard Ken defend the nutcases that tell a woman to go back to their abuser.

I think two things are being conflated here. One is the Normal Christian Marriage™, with the differentiated instructions to wives and husbands. I’m increasingly getting the impression that i>both egalitarians and complementarians are unable to get beyond Eph 5 21 on this issue! The intructions to husbands rule out absolutely any abusive behaviour, a point that seems to get lost in arguing what submission probably doesn’t mean.

An abusive marriage is where this is blatantly not being lived out. Usually – but not always – the husband has arrogated to himself the role of emperor, lording over his wife, treating her with contempt as the weaker vessel. Intimidation (him) or manipulation (her) have become the order of the day.

In these difficult circumstances you have the apostle Peter’s advice in 1 Pet 3 where wives have husbands who do not obey the word. He deals with how the wife should behave and conduct herself; ending the marriage is not the first port of call.

You then have the tension between Jesus’ instruction to his followers not to divorce, and the fact you cannot simply hand a woman over to be beaten up by her husband. You also have Paul’s instructions where an unbelieving spouse wishes to separate, relieving the believing partner of an obligation to continue the marriage at any cost. All these have to be factored in to the equation.

Any complementarian or patriarch who, when dealing with an abusive husband, can only focus on a wife submitting has totally lost the plot.

I wouldn’t pretend for one moment dealing with such issues is simple, that there is a one size fits all formula, and can only repeat I am glad I am not a pastor in this regard. They have to find the wisdom to confront and try to put right such situations.

Ken wrote:

ending the marriage is not the first port of call.

It most certainly might be in some cases!

Victorious wrote:

but there are over 50 “one-anothering” verses in the NT that confirm the mutual loving, kind, thoughtful treatment is not relegated to one specific gender to the exclusion of the other.

See Ken above: The apostles give a clear but very basic framework to Christian marriage. To this needs to be added all of the rest of what the NT teaches about how we should treat ‘one another’…

You have to determine from the context whether one another is universal in its scope, or means some to others. As far as mutual submission goes, you have to thank Gram3 for getting me to read this more carefully in context, as I used to be more sympathetic to the ‘everyone to everyone’ understanding of this verse (Eph 5 : 21) until I took it in context, where it is more qualified.

It’s a presupposition of mine that when a biblical writer addresses a person or group of persons or someone with a particular function, you cannot simply apply this to everyone else.

Ken wrote:

In these difficult circumstances you have the apostle Peter’s advice in 1 Pet 3 where wives have husbands who do not obey the word. He deals with how the wife should behave and conduct herself; ending the marriage is not the first port of call.

If the husband’s an abusive sack of monkey snot, why not?

Ken wrote:

I wouldn’t pretend for one moment dealing with such issues is simple, that there is a one size fits all formula, and can only repeat I am glad I am not a pastor in this regard. They have to find the wisdom to confront and try to put right such situations.

Or at least the wisdom to realize when such situations are too far beyond their ability to put right, and that they need to entrust that to law enforcement and people who have actually studied the human psyche.

@ Victorious:
This is about what the red-faced RSV translators call ‘conjugal rights’, and in this connection husband and wife ‘rule over’ each others bodies. They may temporarily refuse one another for prayer. There is obviously nothing cultural about this at all.

I’m afraid the thought occurred to me that out of all the multitudes who have read 1 Cor over the years, I wonder how many have ever said “Not tonight, Joséphine, I wish to – um, ‘ow you say – devote myself to prayer and intersession”!! To which she mutters something about having a headache.

Victorious wrote:

Ken, I find it unbelievable that you have defined/interpreted a husband’s “role” in a marriage by the only “instruction” provided and that is to love his wife. Surely you know that most gender-specific commands in the Bible are not exclusive to the other gender.
It may be getting old as some have made mention of this several times before, but there are over 50 “one-anothering” verses in the NT that confirm the mutual loving, kind, thoughtful treatment is not relegated to one specific gender to the exclusion of the other.

If we take scripture as it is “plainly written” and divide us by gender, all of that “one-anothering” stuff is directed at men. There are painfully few verses in the Bible that apply to women. The Ten Commandments were directed at men, not women. So, does that mean that the Ten Commandments do not apply to women?
In Eph., a husband is instructed to love his wife, while the wife is not instructed to love her husband. A wife is instructed to respect her husband, while the husband is not instructed to respect his wife. Submission is one way, love is one way, and respect is one way. So, I would assume that men who push this “one way” baloney based on Eph. 5 do not respect their wives and don’t really give a rip whether their wives love them or not.

Ken wrote:

This is about what the red-faced RSV translators call ‘conjugal rights’, and in this connection husband and wife ‘rule over’ each others bodies. They may temporarily refuse one another for prayer. There is obviously nothing cultural about this at all.

I think the obvious point is that each should respect the other’s physical boundaries.

Victorious wrote:

Then you would agree that the same Paul who addresses those in the church of Ephesus addresses those in the church of Corinth differently because of a specific need in those congregations?

I sometimes think of Paul’s writings as answer sheets for which we lack the questions. So what might people have been asking?

Question: There’s this horrible new fad in my church. For some reason all the women tape live ferrets to their heads on Sunday mornings! I’m an usher, and believe me, Mr. Paul, the view from the back of the church is quite distracting. What action would you recommend? I really want to hear your sermon next time you come through our area.

Please forgive the silly hypothetical; but I think it’s genuinely hard, and a serious task for serious believers, to sort out specific guidance from broader advice, rules, and beautiful statements of faith. Much menace happens when every single thing in the Bible is viewed as a command (directed at women and children more often than not). I think that regular study and prayer help, as well as a good-faith effort to see our fellow humans as precious in God’s sight.

Ken wrote:

This is about what the red-faced RSV translators call ‘conjugal rights’, and in this connection husband and wife ‘rule over’ each others bodies. They may temporarily refuse one another for prayer. There is obviously nothing cultural about this at all.

You do have a way of making things seem like they are simply black/white.

@ Friend:
makes sense! i used to live nearby.

Ken wrote:

understanding of this verse (Eph 5 : 21) until I took it in context, where it is more qualified.

No. 5.21 is still calling for husbands to submit to their wives; they are not excluded.

okrapod wrote:

You might be a redneck if you think that any teaching of critical thinking in the schools is a gummint plot to destroy the nation.
You might be a redneck if you think that moral and ethical integrity is genetically passed down to the next generation, which is why Junior should not be in jail right now because his daddy and his granddaddy both were good men. And I don’t care what they say about that one incident with his daddy, he was a good man.
Are Rednecks and people from the NW unprotected people groups on this blog?

You might be a redneck if you think that the anatomic location of the human brain is in the underwear.
You might be a redneck if you see people mostly as groups and not as individuals, and make no allowance for any information to the contrary.
You definitely are a redneck if you think that God put you in charge but left it to you to achieve and maintain that position. And you are definitely a redneck if you cannot understand why other people don’t see this. Must be because they are (racial comment) or (gender comment) or (political comment) or possibly even people influenced by the gummint, but for sure it is all a plot to destroy the nation.

Ken wrote:

The bit you quoted was completely tongue in cheek. I agree with pretty will everything you say here.

I was pretty much aware of that, Ken, but it did seem you were focusing on the prayer aspect of the chapter. That was why I tried to show Paul’s focus was more on the mutuality of the husband/wife relationship.

Paul has, in that one chapter, dispelled the notion that one person has more authority over the other and that decisions are best made by agreement of both parties. Regardless of what term we use (egalitarian or complementarian) the fact remains that throughout scripture, it’s not the outward appearance of an individual that determines how they must function. It’s the heart, talent, preparation, background, availability, etc. that God uses to accomplish His purposes.

Marriage is a team of two people who (hopefully) share the same goals and values and work together in their endeavors.

Bridget wrote:

@ BC:

I don’t understand why you liked this article to your comment to Beakerj. I am trying to think the best of you, but I am becoming completely repulsed by your comments.

I don’t understand it, either. And am well & truly sick & tired of the ad hominem attacks, as well.

BC wrote:

So glad that you’re avoiding any political comments

My apologies for unintentionally starting that. I was really just trying to explain to Ken how positions in the US have changed and asking if it might be the same for the UK. I didn’t mean to start anything, and I wasn’t endorsing any particular side.

dee wrote:

BC

Sometimes things slip past us. We truly want to avoid political comments. 

I think that this must be almost more than a full time job and then when you are having problems with arthritis of course things slip past you. I think you do marvelous. However it’s easy to jump to conclusions when everything isn’t read. There are some on this blog who are very supportive and are analytical. They go to such efforts to be reasonable and scriptural. Thank you! With such serious topics a little levity is understandable but I have noticed that there are a few who seem to get some joy out of leaping on someone like a pack of dogs.