John Piper And Friends Tripping on the ‘Masculine Feel’ of Christianity

"Golden living dreams of visions; Mystic crystal revelation And the mind's true liberation." Hair link

http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=153204&picture=rainbow
Rainbow


  Peace

Brothers and sisters, put on your bell bottom jeans, leather peace necklace, Birkenstocks and let's travel back to those heavy days of hippies, Woodstock, Nehru collars and LSD fueled trips. I promise it will be groovy. Here is some music just to get you in the mood. 

Piper's unusual thoughts on all sorts of things, just to get you warmed up.

Are you feeling it yet? You need to be in the mood to deal with what we are going to lay on you! We all know that John Piper does not dig: 

 Whoa, this is getting to be a bummer. Time to chill.

I'm back in the groove again

Piper in the sky with diamonds and feminine feels

Now, our dear bro from England, home of the Beatles, DaveAA turned us onto Piper tripping on the whole dude/chick thing. Darrin Patrick, Doug Wilson, Crawford Loritts groove along with his mystic crystal revelations. DaveAA, man, cool. We all need to prepare ourselves to get into this far out groove. From More on thed Masculine Feel of Christianity (2012 Desiring God)

If it is done right, this masculine feel creates a space. It is big, it's roomy, it's beautiful, it's peaceful. It's just full and radiates with all the good things of life and in it women, flourishing, will give it that feel. So that as you walk in on Sunday morning and strong singing, led primarily by men, and then a voice from God is heard, and women are loving this, they're radiant, they're intelligent, they're understanding, they're processing, they're interacting. Then all the gifts that were just articulated will flourish in that space. And as you navigate that community there will be feminine feels all over the place.

Thoughts:

  • What are these feminine feels going on all over the place? We may be hip but we are not into orgies. There are safe feels and unsafe feels. I hope these are the safe kind.
  • The masculine feel creates a space: beautiful, roomy, peaceful. Didn't Timothy Leary get down with this vision decades ago?
  • So, dudes are the ones who are primarily in charge of the singing? What would Joni Mitchell, Mama Cass, and Linda Ronstadt think? Do dudes sing the Magnificat as well, just like in the Bible? Bummer, it was a female who sang that one.
  • When the dudes are leading the singing, the chicks can flourish process, interact and become radiant. This is quite a trip. Is it legal?

Men can be feminine and women can be masculine.

Piper continues the revelation by saying that men can be feminine. Whoa, this is getting interesting. Do any of you have any idea what he's seeing?

 One of the things I would have said is that in a community where there is a secure, strong, humble, masculine feel, men are free to be appropriately feminine. And women are free to be appropriately masculine. In other words, when you look at any given human being, the most attractive, interesting, winsome human beings are not all masculine or all feminine. 

Watch to the end where John Piper talks about playing football when he was growing up 😉 Pay particular attention to Crawford Loritts' expression! 

Thoughts from the Twitterverse

Here are some responses to the tweet I sent out with a quote from Piper in this post.











 

I leave you with two videos. One is a final, deeply theological assessment of Piper's comments. The other is Piper's entire video.

Oh yeah-Peace Out!

Entire video – John Piper's remarks come at the 5-1/2 minute mark


Comments

John Piper And Friends Tripping on the ‘Masculine Feel’ of Christianity — 685 Comments

  1. What the heck??? What space? Masculine is feminine? Men are free to be appropriatly feminine???? Whaaaaat??? No confusion on our part but piper must be smoking something because I don’t believe he even understands his own answer!!!

  2. Shauna wrote:

    What the heck??? What space? Masculine is feminine? Men are free to be appropriatly feminine???? Whaaaaat??? No confusion on our part but piper must be smoking something because I don’t believe he even understands his own answer!!!

    My 15 month old granddaughter speaks clearer than what he tried to say.

  3. There’s something particularly ridiculous about this panel of men discussing what women think and feel. I’m also struck by the narrow definitions of what masculine and feminine are in their small world.

  4. Shauna wrote:

    I don’t believe he even understands his own answer!!!

    But the guy next to him sure seemed to. He kept nodding away.

  5. one of the little people wrote:

    There’s something particularly ridiculous about this panel of men discussing what women think and feel. I’m also struck by the narrow definitions of what masculine and feminine are in their small world.

    Oh, but those men must be singing louder than the women for it to have a masculine feel–shaking head.

  6. The masculine feel creates a space: beautiful, roomy, peaceful. Didn’t Timothy Leary get down with this vision decades ago?

    With the help of large quantities of Lysergic Acid.

    I wish I was posting this from my home system instead of a PonyCon hotel’s business center; there I could cross-index YouTubes and fan content of Tree Hugger (i.e. My Little Stoner Pony) balancing her chakras and warbling to soothe the savage Smooze.

  7. one of the little people wrote:

    Shauna wrote:

    I don’t believe he even understands his own answer!!!

    But the guy next to him sure seemed to. He kept nodding away.

    A Yes-man’s head is incapable of moving from side to side, only Up and Down.

  8. mot wrote:

    Shauna wrote:

    What the heck??? What space? Masculine is feminine? Men are free to be appropriatly feminine???? Whaaaaat??? No confusion on our part but piper must be smoking something because I don’t believe he even understands his own answer!!!

    My 15 month old granddaughter speaks clearer than what he tried to say.

    So did that speaker at the N.I.C.E banquet after Merlin cast Curse of Babel.

  9. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    mot wrote:

    Shauna wrote:

    What the heck??? What space? Masculine is feminine? Men are free to be appropriatly feminine???? Whaaaaat??? No confusion on our part but piper must be smoking something because I don’t believe he even understands his own answer!!!

    My 15 month old granddaughter speaks clearer than what he tried to say.

    So did that speaker at the N.I.C.E banquet after Merlin cast Curse of Babel.

    I guess it is all like the Emperor not wearing any clothes. None of these guys on the stage with Piper are going to admit how idiotic and nonsensical he sounds.

  10. Many people claim Piper doesn’t write his own tweets and posts, but the crazy convoluted opinions he puts out publicly would never be tolerated if written by a mere employee.

    Only Piper himself could get away with it. I’m sure his staff cringes — or at least rolls their eyes.

  11. I needed a trigger warning that I was going to encounter Doug Wilson's face at the end of this post… But this was fabulously funny!!

  12. Shauna wrote:

    What the heck??? What space? Masculine is feminine? Men are free to be appropriatly feminine???? Whaaaaat???

    “Girls will be boys
    And boys will be girls
    It’s a mixed-up muddled-up shook-up world
    ‘Cept for Lola —
    Lo lo lo lo Lola
    Lo lo lo lo Lola!”
    — The Kinks, “Lola”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsWS6fuVw1o

  13. Piper continues the revelation by saying that men can be feminine. Whoa, this is getting interesting. Do any of you have any idea what he’s seeing?

    One of the things I would have said is that in a community where there is a secure, strong, humble, masculine feel, men are free to be appropriately feminine. And women are free to be appropriately masculine. In other words, when you look at any given human being, the most attractive, interesting, winsome human beings are not all masculine or all feminine.

    He said HUMBLE — everybody take a drink!

    And WINSOME — everybody take another drink!

    Anyone know an ER (other than Gettysburg) specializing in alcohol poisoning?

  14. Does anybody have the Piperorean definition of “flourishing”?
    I don’t think that word means what he thinks it means.
    Little Johnny Piper has been frolicking in the autumn mist for far too long.

  15. Far Out! This trip is all just so, like, yesterday, man. I really thought most folks were already aware of it. Maybe Piper or some of the other guys have changed their minds in the subsequent years, or have come to some understanding about what it meant and can enlighten us.

  16. Now, our dear bro from England, home of the Beatles, DaveAA turned us onto Piper tripping on the whole dude/chick thing. Darrin Patrick, Doug Wilson, Crawford Loritts groove along with his mystic crystal revelations.

    “Mystic Crystal Revelation
    And the Mind’s True Liberation —
    TESTOSTEROOOONE!
    TESTOSTERONE!”

    “Doug Wilson” as in “PENETRATE! COLONISE! CONQUER! PLANT!” Wilson?
    (Commonwealth spelling of “colonize” to sound Veddy Veddy British. Bowler hat and Brolly.)

  17. Dave A A wrote:

    Farm Out! This trip is all just so, like, yesterday, man. I really thought most folks were already aware of it. Maybe Piper or some of the other guys have changed their minds in the subsequent years, or have come to some understanding about what it meant and can enlighten us.

    You ARE Channeling Tree Hugger!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZdX1kldYdCg
    (warbling horse sounds…)

  18. siteseer wrote:

    It sounds like… Electric Ladyland! Ha ha

    “THERE IS ELECTRIC KOOL-AID BEING SOLD AT THE PANEL TRUCK. IF YOU DON’T WANT TO TRIP, DON’T TRY IT.”
    — PA announcement at Woodstock

  19. Shauna wrote:

    What the heck??? What space? Masculine is feminine? Men are free to be appropriatly feminine???? Whaaaaat??? No confusion on our part but piper must be smoking something because I don’t believe he even understands his own answer!!!

    I wonder if he ‘trips’? seriously …. he is so full of it …. and people are hanging on HIS every word?????

  20. @ one of the little people:

    Their type of Christianity is very two dimensional and formulaic. People can’t have real personalities, complex motivations, and deep spirituality.

    Gender roles are shallow and superficial.

    I’m glad to be out of that world of Christian seduction and manipulation and pretending to be something you’re not. To that crowd, God can only love you if you fit these guys’ description of your gender. They are control freaks and don’t speak for God on who is in and who is out.

    To quote St. Augustine:

    God has many the Church does not have.
    The Church has many God does not have.

  21. M. Joy wrote:

    What the ?????? Piper rambled for almost 4 minutes and made absolutely-no-sense-whatsoever.

    Must be practicing to be a trial lawyer.

    4 Goebbels on the meter.

    “But do you know what a Goebbels is? A Goebbels is the amount of nonsense a man can spout in one minute.”
    — A.Hitler making a joke, as recorded in the 1943 OSS psych profile

  22. Janey wrote:

    Many people claim Piper doesn’t write his own tweets and posts, but the crazy convoluted opinions he puts out publicly would never be tolerated if written by a mere employee.

    Yet one dude tried to convince us today that Piper had *real* elders. I think stoned elders might be more descriptive.

  23. Found this interesting quote by Zack Hunt:

    “As you are probably already aware, during the recent Desiring God Conference John Piper declared his belief that God intended Christianity to have a masculine feel to it. Several others have already written great responses to this absolutely absurd claim. So, I won’t add to what is already out there, except to point out that without women who were brave enough to visit the empty tomb on Easter Sunday and then return to preach the gospel to a bunch of cowardly men, there would be no church for Piper to exclude them from.”

  24. Will be thinking of everyone in the path of the storm tonight. Praying for warmth and safety.

  25. Janey wrote:

    To quote St. Augustine:

    God has many the Church does not have.
    The Church has many God does not have.

    Reminds me of a line from the film ‘The Hiding Place’ where Papa ten Boom says ‘just because a mouse is in the cookie jar doesn’t make him a cookie’

  26. refugee wrote:

    Will be thinking of everyone in the path of the storm tonight. Praying for warmth and safety.

    Yes.
    But I just have to say: All of you ladies in the path of the snowstorm, make sure you have a man around to shovel the snow! If you shovel snow, you might get (gasp) muscular!

  27. I STILL don’t understand the flag football/tackle football joke. Darren Patrick and Loritts sure seemed to get it — Must have been contextual. Maybe Wilson had said something about flag football being for sissies?

    I don’t care for any sports, and I’m from Kentucky.

    I love the 60s theme, by the way. Trippy.

  28. i am so confused now, if its ok for a man to have feminine characteristics does that mean he can now dress as a woman and go to Target?

  29. Appropriately Feminine?

    Appropriately Masculine?

    Now we have more phrases to try to figure out and understand.

    I like what other people are doing instead, just tripping out and staying groovy.

    Here’s my trip out video contributions. Not from the Sixties. Still, don’t view if you’ve had one too many adult beverages.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQLlR4pvhyg

  30. Piper was all over the place in his commentary. Complementarians cannot even stay on the same page in their own framework.

    Other complementarians would totally disavow his remarks about men being appropriately feminine or women being appropriately masculine.

    Sorry to beat a dead horse, but complementarianism, like in secular culture, encourages girls and women to be passive doormats. But here Piper is in this video praising women for “having spines,” for speaking up, etc.

    This even somewhat contradicts his previous views that women should not speak directly or authoritatively, because doing so may cause a man in her ear shot to feel bad.

    Astute observation by the person above that we have an ALL MALE panel explaining what WOMEN think and feel. Why don’t they get actual honest to goodness women on their panel to ASK women what actually women think and feel?

    And what is this weird obsession with whether Christianity feels masculine or not?

    It must really annoy or disturb some of these male complementarians that some of the core tenets of Christianity are in direct opposition to secular cultural, manly-man stereotypes of masculininity

    (e.g., some of those Christian beliefs involving things such as showing tenderness, compasssion, putting one’s self last at times, etc, traits which Jesus showed,

    which Mark Driscoll pretty much said made him feel ill at ease, because he cannot worship as hippie, touchy feely savior. He’d prefer a behind – kicking Jesus who beats people up and so forth).

  31. Janey wrote:

    Many people claim Piper doesn’t write his own tweets and posts, but the crazy convoluted opinions he puts out publicly would never be tolerated if written by a mere employee.

    Maybe one of those spambots that periodically comment jibberish here have gained access to Piper’s data stream and he can’t tell the difference.

  32. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    I wish I was posting this from my home system instead of a PonyCon hotel’s business center

    I think you may be this blog’s most dedicated participant! Deb and Dee should maybe send you some kind of ribbon or something 🙂

  33. @ Mara:

    Mara,

    that was said in jest, this is so much gobbledeegook why any credence is given to these guys is mind blowing to me.

  34. dee wrote:

    Yet one dude tried to convince us today that Piper had *real* elders. I think stoned elders might be more descriptive.

    A cult of personality… facilitating delusion.

    “Personality cults were first described in relation to Totalitarianism regimes that sought to transform society according to radical ideas. Often, a single leader became associated with this revolutionary transformation, and came to be treated as a benevolent “guide” for the nation without whom the transformation to a better future could not occur.” – wikipedia

  35. dee wrote:

    Groovy!

    Yes, groovy, that a woman has “intelligently processed” this so-called teaching and “with backbone” posted it for review.

    Acts 17: “Bereans, more noble than those in Thessalonica, received the word with all readiness of mind and searched the scriptures daily whether those things were so.”

  36. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Piper continues the revelation by saying that men can be feminine. Whoa, this is getting interesting. Do any of you have any idea what he’s seeing?

    One of the things I would have said is that in a community where there is a secure, strong, humble, masculine feel, men are free to be appropriately feminine. And women are free to be appropriately masculine. In other words, when you look at any given human being, the most attractive, interesting, winsome human beings are not all masculine or all feminine.

    He said HUMBLE — everybody take a drink!

    And WINSOME — everybody take another drink!

    Anyone know an ER (other than Gettysburg) specializing in alcohol poisoning?

    LoL!

    Off topic…I and a mate once sat through a high school biology lecture by a teacher who loved the word “therefore”. We counted 234 instances in 60 minutes. Being cricket lovers we gleefully reported to others at the end that said teacher was 234 not out at the end of the innings!

  37. More seriously though…looks to me like these have fallen seriously in love with the sound of their own and each others voices and the ability of their own brains.

    They appear to live in cloud cuckoo land and spout confusing nonsense but its somehow good “theology”.

    Who was it who said you can know a theologian by how well he confuses everyone including himself?
    Oh wait….that might have been me

  38. If Christianity has a masculine feel to it, then why did the uncircumscribable God choose to be circumscribed within the womb of the Virgin Mary? Of all the ways our Lord could have revealed Himself as the Messiah, He chose to be born of Woman, breast-fed and nurtured by his mother – a woman. Now that is humility. Something the Neo-Cals have yet to understand.

  39. He sounds like he’s off his rocker, that’s what. There I’ve said it. He seems like he’s a confused person traipsing off on the path toward senility.

  40. When I read that paragraph, I couldn’t help but think how Piper sounds as though he might have smoked just a bit too much reefer. Thanks for the laughs!

  41. Oh my, the second paragraph sounds like he is tripping. Men are free to be appropriately feminine and women are free to be appropriately masculine. What in the world? This reminds me of some dudes I knew in my teen years who deemed themselves enlightened hippies and endeavored to teach deep, profound truths….while being stoned out of their gourd, of course. And those sitting at their feet would exclaim, “Wow man, that is HEAVY.”

  42. I’m having such fun watching this video. The first question – posed to none other than Doug Wilson himself: “What is biblical femininity and what are the feminine virtues that you refer to?” This is laughable. Let’s see, how about this: “A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts.”

  43. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    one of the little people wrote:
    Shauna wrote:
    I don’t believe he even understands his own answer!!!
    But the guy next to him sure seemed to. He kept nodding away.
    A Yes-man’s head is incapable of moving from side to side, only Up and Down.

    If I’m not mistaken, I think at first he was really trying to wrap his head around what Piper was saying. “Okay, I think I get it. Yeah, alright. Uh-huh. Okay dude, I’m really trying to like this. Yeah…right…yeah, bro…I think I get it now. Yeah…cool, groovy, hip, deep, far out!”

  44. M. Joy wrote:

    What the ?????? Piper rambled for almost 4 minutes and made absolutely-no-sense-whatsoever.

    Isn’t that usually par for the course?

  45. What Piper is saying in the video seems to be consistent with what he’s maintained all along: masculinity is to be defined primarily as “being in charge” and femininity is to be defined primarily as “being submissive.” Other things, like being nurturing or liking art or music, are considered “feminine,” but a man can display them without censure as long as he remains in charge of the women in his life. Similarly, a woman can “show backbone,” stand up for herself, enjoy sports, and not be censured as long as she does it as part of an overall attitude of submission to male authority.

    By “masculine feel” in Christianity, Piper really means, “Men should be in charge of women in Christianity.” As long as that is in place, he can allow all kinds of supposed latitude in these other areas. And of course he qualifies that male authority should be humble and so on. But what it all comes down to is that men rule, women obey. That’s what male and female mean to him. Period.

  46. Ron Oommen wrote:

    @ Ron Oommen:
    PS. Two fingers down the throat might work too

    Oops sorry that was meant to be a reply to HUG. Flippin’ phones and their touch screen buttons…

  47. Daisy wrote:

    Astute observation by the person above that we have an ALL MALE panel explaining what WOMEN think and feel. Why don’t they get actual honest to goodness women on their panel to ASK women what actually women think and feel?

    Don’t cha know, women are susceptible to being deceived? They need men to tell them how women should think, feel and act. Besides, they can’t have a woman up there teaching men about women. The ceiling might cave in. Which makes me wonder just exactly how they even know how women feel and think since they only seem to be interested in hearing what other men think about women. What a strange world they live in.

  48. It always drives me nuts when “mystical” Christians and non-Christians spout off nonsense and string together words that sound “spiritual”, but taken together at face value don’t mean anything.

    To hear self-proclaimed Calvinists talking like this, though… there’s so much irony here, these videos need rustproofing.

  49. Kristen Rosser wrote:

    By “masculine feel” in Christianity, Piper really means, “Men should be in charge of women in Christianity.” As long as that is in place, he can allow all kinds of supposed latitude in these other areas. And of course he qualifies that male authority should be humble and so on. But what it all comes down to is that men rule, women obey. That’s what male and female mean to him. Period.

    I think you’re right that’s what he’s saying here, but it contradicts what he’s said at other times, such as with the “muscular women” comments. He’s implied at other times that women should fit his image of what women should be, even though that might not be what other men prefer.

    But the way these guys talk in this, let’s just be honest–they sound like they are on drugs.

    I will point out one other issue this gathering implies. He associates with pastors who should clearly be disqualified from ministry. One reason I believe hyper-Calvinism is not Christianity is that they have set up a hierarchy where the leaders can excommunicate anyone who doesn’t toe the lines they have set up, but they do not hold those same principles for their leadership.

    If this religion they had set up was really about God, they’d be consist with their rules. But they are not. They want to rule women, and use complementarianism to argue it, even though it has very poor support in the Bible, and really only in the English translations. But I believe they want to rule other men as well. They’d throw out a regular Joe who dares to ask questions about their leadership, but they keep people like Doug Wilson and CJ Mahaney around, despite enormous evidence that they are corrupt and abusive.

    The Calvinistas are an abusive cult that has minimized the triune God and ignored Christ’s incarnation. This means they are not Christians.

  50. Is Doug Wilson deliberately trying to look like Spurgeon in that image/video? He fancies himself as such.

  51. Great post–I would hope the more of these videos that are made public, the less influence this stream of teaching would have. I have friends that rave regarding Piper’s books–he lost me with the thought of Christian hedonism–seemed much different the enjoyment of God as posited by the Westminster Catechism.

    Many of Piper’s tweets, awkward at best, totally insensitive, sometimes twisted, at worst, and strange spontaneous comments, has convinced me he must have a great book editor who keeps his weirdness hidden. I hope those who love him best can perhaps convince him to close his social media accounts.

  52. mot wrote:

    My 15 month old granddaughter speaks clearer than what he tried to say.

    Video Bear, our Forever Friends bear, does too. And he can’t actually talk.

    (Though, if you squeeze him in just the right way, he can wave his paw or nod in agreement.)

  53. This is what happens when someone has lived within a world of heavily described gender roles their whole lives. He’s never seen what actually happens when males & females just act out their humanness within a freeing environment, he doesn’t know what people actually are in terms of their talents, capabilities, qualities & so on because he’s never seen these actually just be allowed to unfold & be used. He lives in a world where you limit or stretch what you are according to your chromosomes. I feel sorry for him, coming later in the game to the church means that all his rantings look ridiculous when you’ve seen what humans are, without the boxes.

  54. Sadly enough, it does sound like he’s on some type of narcotic concoction. As for the bit about the “feels”, it sounds like he was using that term to cover up the fact he meant “vibes”. Seriously, replace “feels” with “vibes” and see what you get. All in all, this has less to do with Jesus and more with reading “energies” -how very New Age of him. Now, let’s head over to the drum circle and commence with some male-led chant to bring about a New Patriarchal Age of the Triple God (ala Wayne Grudem) who is eternally separate…

  55. ishy wrote:

    I will point out one other issue this gathering implies. He associates with pastors who should clearly be disqualified from ministry.

    Yes. I haven’t forgotten about John Piper’s promotion of Mark Driscoll. So how did that work out? Weren’t he and C.J. Mahaney Driscoll’s mentors?

    Then we have Darrin Patrick, whom Driscoll (and Piper) heavily influenced, sitting on this panel advising pastors at a Desiring God conference.

    How did things work out for Patrick?

    http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2016/april/darrin-patrick-removed-acts-29-megachurch-journey.html

    He was removed from the Journey Church for violating his duties as a pastor. The CT article states:

    “The Journey cited a range of ongoing sinful behaviors over the past few years including manipulation, domineering, lack of biblical community, and ‘a history of building his identity through ministry and media platforms.'”

    Don’t even get me started about Doug Wilson. 🙁

  56. Daisy wrote:

    It must really annoy or disturb some of these male complementarians that some of the core tenets of Christianity are in direct opposition to secular cultural, manly-man stereotypes of masculininity

    Except I don’t think “secular culture” teaches this at all. It may sometimes be a useful modern marketing trope, but humans have rejected and feared this imbalance for millennia. In fact, the Iliad is essentially a morality tale about the dangers of unrestrained thumos.

  57. waking up wrote:

    He sounds like he’s off his rocker, that’s what. There I’ve said it. He seems like he’s a confused person traipsing off on the path toward senility.

    You know, you may be right. I should probably show more compassion. I will say this – anyone who is actually in control of their faculty and spouts nonsense like that in a public forum has nothing but my scorn. Perhaps Piper is simply suffering from senility onset. If so, I hope it debilitates him quickly enough to stop him doing further harm.

  58. This is pitiful. Listening to him explain himself I get the ‘feel’ that I am listening to someone who has little if any real experience in the worlds of men or women either one. He seems to live is his own fantasies. Like thinking what it might be like to actually be a grown man if one were that. Really non-realistic.

    In my med school class we graduated 80+ of whom only four were women. I practically lived in an environment dominated by men for several years. I have experienced being a woman in a male environment. There are no ‘feels’ like what he seems to be describing. And there is no aura of safety in which women thrive. In my experience when you get a bunch of men together what you have is a bunch of men together; there is no creation of a special outer ring of heaven for anybody male or female.

    Somebody has suggested drugs? Let me add to the list. Perversion? Illness? Dementia? Arrested growth and development at an early age? Some poor soul who never really played the game but tries to carry water for the team? I don’t feel anger; I feel pity. Bless him. And yes, somebody who loves him needs to get him off social media and out from in front of the camera.

  59. Is Crawford the black guy next to piper? Because his expressions are not too far from what mine would be in the beginning of that clip. Also I don’t think piper really answered the question.

  60. I’m sorry I haven’t gotten to comments yet but are they really all laughing at ‘they broke a guys neck playing football’??? Is that a real comment or joke? Is that a funny joke? No! Good night.

    Half the problem with these guys is that they feel the need to label everything masculine or feminine and yet they recognize that these are qualities that are really NOT masculine or feminine solely, they are shared qualities. It’s like they are halfway to truth but they can’t get there because they are so wedded to gender theology. If they would just stop this stupid idea that ‘backbone’ is masculine and ‘kindness’ is feminine and so on and so forth they would stop being quite so stupid.

  61. okrapod wrote:

    Tell me about it. I have seen a lot of male-dominated environments -both secular and “Christian”- where there is no peace for women but rather petty competition and self-hate. It’s sad that we as humans beings are so wrapped up in an eternal game of forced domination and submission based on gender, that we don’t see the devil laughing in a far-off corner at the fact that he’s managed to get both halves (of what was originally one being) to constantly shame and attack each other. The more we give into the hatred of the other, the more we allow him to halt the work of the Body of Christ.

  62. A community protected by a masculine ‘feel’, I think that is a quote. He wants his nice safe little church house community to be protected by a masculine ‘feel’ while he and they fantasize about how being a man means putting your foot in some woman’s face.

    You are not a man, sir. All you do is sling words around. In your nice safe little religious world. Men do more than that. Young son just told us a few days ago that he is being deployed-again-to the middle east-again. He hates to go, they all do, but this time he says he feels better because the mission is clear. We have to stop this threat.

    So, you wimps in your ‘masculine’ churches will be a little safer we hope because my son and a lot of other mothers’ sons think there is more to being a man than sitting around fantasizing and whining.

  63. @ Sam:

    I would like to apologize to everyone. I was trying to reply to what okrapod said above about medschool. Unfortunately, I have royally messed the entire forum up. Once again, I apologize for the confusion. 🙁

  64. ishy wrote:

    I think you’re right that’s what he’s saying here, but it contradicts what he’s said at other times, such as with the “muscular women” comments. He’s implied at other times that women should fit his image of what women should be, even though that might not be what other men prefer.

    That thing about sex rather than hand holding was so strange! I think he was saying you can list after someone with muscles but not want to talk to them? Which just tells you something deeply disturbing about how he thinks of women.

  65. Darlene wrote:

    Which makes me wonder just exactly how they even know how women feel and think

    Well,duh! They TELL women how to feel and think!

  66. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    @ Darlene:
    This is a family friendly blog, so I’ll just say, Doug must have incredibly boring conjugal experiences.

    Right? I think this a lot when they start talking specifics. I feel for sorry for their wives because they are probably missing some things.

  67. okrapod wrote:

    A community protected by a masculine ‘feel’, I think that is a quote. He wants his nice safe little church house community to be protected by a masculine ‘feel’ while he and they fantasize about how being a man means putting your foot in some woman’s face.

    You are not a man, sir. All you do is sling words around. In your nice safe little religious world. Men do more than that. Young son just told us a few days ago that he is being deployed-again-to the middle east-again. He hates to go, they all do, but this time he says he feels better because the mission is clear. We have to stop this threat.

    So, you wimps in your ‘masculine’ churches will be a little safer we hope because my son and a lot of other mothers’ sons think there is more to being a man than sitting around fantasizing and whining.

    Best to your son.

    I don’t like to divide all into masculine feminine but I think in life you have people who talk and people who act. Actions tell you who they really are. These men do nothing but talk endlessly.

  68. okrapod wrote:

    Young son just told us a few days ago that he is being deployed-again-to the middle east-again

    May God keep him safe.
    My husband did 3 deployments to Iraq, and many little two or three week trips in between deployments to undisclosed locations. I know things that DH doesn’t know that I know, but he came through every situation without so much as a scratch. May the Lord keep your young son that safe!

  69. I still want to know what Piper means when he talks about women “flourishing” under the control of men. Is it like rescue animals flourishing in a zoo, or an animal shelter?

  70. “Pay particular attention to Crawford Loritts’ expression!” (Dee)

    The video shot posted above speaks to me. “Why did I agree to get on stage with this guy?!” (Loritts) … “Hey dude, what are you smokin’?” (Patrick)

  71. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    On a more serious note, how in the blue blazes does someone spout this kind of nonsense word salad and people actually take him seriously? I mean seriously.

    Good point. It reminds me of the portion of Scripture 1 Corinthians 14:33King James Version (KJV)

    33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

  72. Nancy2 wrote:

    I still want to know what Piper means when he talks about women “flourishing” under the control of men. Is it like rescue animals flourishing in a zoo, or an animal shelter?

    I don’t know. Maybe flourishing=not complaining?

  73. @ Nancy2:

    I have given the wrong impression with the use of the term ‘young son’. He is not young, he is a relatively senior officer with a permanent assignment to combined services headquarters and this assignment did not automatically fall to him. But the JAG who was scheduled to be deployed with one of the aviation units resigned rather than go one more time, so ‘young son’ said he would be the one to go. This particular assignment is for someone below his rank but there is some leeway in the regs about that. So he is going. To me, this is the sort of thing that constitutes how leadership ought to work. If you aren’t willing to do it yourself, don’t ask somebody else to do it.

    Which is part of why this infamous gang of religious bullies is so obnoxious in my opinion. I want to say show me your scars, show me your dirty hands, show me where you ever risked anything for anybody or any cause. Then maybe I will listen to you, you sorry excuses for humanity.

  74. Warning… Several comments have come close to infringing the trademark of Barry McGuire, which is “Trippin the Sixties” TM.
    “We got million dollar churches, but nobody’s on their knees” from “Don’t Blame God”

  75. okrapod wrote:

    I have given the wrong impression with the use of the term ‘young son’.

    Nah, he’ll always be young to you. Age and rank doesn’t change anything.

  76. I saw Timothy Leary give a talk at UC Santa Barbara back in 1981. Entertaining, but not too comprehensible. One audience member yelled out about half way through, “Man, you’re burnt!” Leary responded, “Ain’t it the truth?!”

  77. okrapod wrote:

    Young son just told us a few days ago that he is being deployed-again-to the middle east-again. He hates to go, they all do, but this time he says he feels better because the mission is clear. We have to stop this threat.

    I stopped to. pray for him.

    I just has an idea. Once he is deployed, maybe we could send him a TWW care package. If you think this would be OK, could you let me know and help me to figure it out?

  78. Piper: “So that as you walk in on Sunday morning and strong singing, led primarily by men, and then a voice from God is heard, and women are loving this, they’re radiant, they’re intelligent, they’re understanding, they’re processing, they’re interacting.”
    ++++++++++++++++
    Some thoughts:

    1) Piper has a perverse understanding of worship. “Christian Hedonism” defines the purpose of worship as “God serving me” instead of “Me serving God.” This colors his whole notion of what goes on during the service.

    2) “A voice from God is heard.” As a result of lustful worship, God speaks audibly? His voice is heard? Tell that to Aaron when he lost his two sons, Nadab and Abihu.

    3) “They’re interacting” Unlike the Christian gathering spoken by Paul in 1 Corinthians 14 where there in fact IS interaction among the saints, Piper pontificates for half and hour and then dismisses everyone. There is no interaction.

  79. okrapod wrote:

    He wants his nice safe little church house community to be protected by a masculine ‘feel’ while he and they fantasize about how being a man means putting your foot in some woman’s face.

    I always chuckle when Piper waxes eloquent about men providing safety for women. Can you imagine him in a battle with a thing?

  80. Lea wrote:

    re they really all laughing at ‘they broke a guys neck playing football’??? Is that a real comment or joke? Is that a funny joke? No! Good night.

    Listen, these guys are weird. And remember, God willed for them to do so…

  81. Lea wrote:

    Is Crawford the black guy next to piper? Because his expressions are not too far from what mine would be in the beginning of that clip.

    Yep!

  82. While Piper certainly has his weird views regarding the “masculine feels” of christianity (little “c”), I credit Mark Driscoll for first stepping a toe in this water which subsequently precipitated a flurry of masculinity mischief by the New Calvinist who’s who.

    Christianity Today summarized one of Driscoll’s sermons like this “‘Real men’ avoid the church because it projects a “Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ” that “is no one to live for [and] is no one to die for.” Driscoll explains, “Jesus was not a long-haired … effeminate-looking dude”; rather, he had “callused hands and big biceps.” This is the sort of Christ men are drawn to – what Driscoll calls “Ultimate Fighting Jesus.” Of course, we all know that his un-Biblical views on several fronts and potty-mouth preaching eventually cost Driscoll his Mars Hill and Acts 29 ministries.

    Darrin Patrick, the obvious “dude” in the linked video, is famous for his Bible studies in bars with a round of beer, being right-hand man to Driscoll at Acts 29, his book “The Dude’s Guide to Manhood”, and for inappropriate conduct with women which cost him his ministry. Patrick, while he still had a microphone, echoed Driscoll’s cry to the emerging young reformers to be “real men”: “I believe males should really be men. We don’t need more boys, we need real men.”

    Driscoll has re-invented himself and returned to ministry. I’m not sure where Patrick is these days.

    While Piper and others have picked up on this sort of “preaching to men” (as Matt Chandler, new Acts 29 president, refers to it), the Acts 29 boys are directly responsible for releasing macho beasts on the church. This ‘masculine Christianity’ teaching has certainly attracted young men back to church, but unfortunately at the expense of women who are being subordinated into New Calvinist bondage. If you listen closely, you can hear the real cries of “feminine feels” about this mess. TWW and other watchblogs have stepped into the gap to represent them as the reformed boys attempt to mature into men without a proper view of Christ and His Church.

  83. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    how in the blue blazes does someone spout this kind of nonsense word salad and people actually take him seriously? I mean seriously.

    I am with you on this. I don't get it but that is because I always question everything except chocolate. It reminds me of the movie, Being There. People assume an individual is *profound* so if they think he sounds odd, they must be missing something. John Piper is Truly Chance the Gardener.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Being_There

  84. On the average, women live longer than men. Piper, Grudem, Chandler, Wilson, etc ………. What are these men going to do if they fall into the average, as far as aging goes? ……… When they become completely dependent on their wives to care for and protect them? (We already know that Grudem is going in that direction at warp speed.)

  85. dee wrote:

    I also wondered what Patrick had been smoking!

    … or drinking. He was famous in SBC ranks for his St. Louis tavern Bible studies “Theology at the Bottleworks” … reading the Word while guzzling beer with the boys. He had an extreme case of WWJD at the time.

  86. HUG – You’ve gone and brought in Lola with John Piper. You have far exceeded my level of admiration for you!

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Shauna wrote:
    What the heck??? What space? Masculine is feminine? Men are free to be appropriatly feminine???? Whaaaaat???
    “Girls will be boys
    And boys will be girls
    It’s a mixed-up muddled-up shook-up world
    ‘Cept for Lola —
    Lo lo lo lo Lola
    Lo lo lo lo Lola!”
    — The Kinks, “Lola”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsWS6fuVw1o

  87. Beakerj wrote:

    . He’s never seen what actually happens when males & females just act out their humanness within a freeing environment, he doesn’t know what people actually are in terms of their talents, capabilities, qualities & so on because he’s never seen these actually just be allowed to unfold & be used.

    I would love to observe Piper if he had to depend on a female officer in a serious situation. I wonder if he would feel uncomfortable?

  88. Deb wrote:

    I suspect it was Neo-Cal congregations that paid for their pastors to attend this Desiring God Pastors Conference.

    No doubt about it! When you are a 20-30 something “lead pastor”, with a team of hand-picked elders in their 20s-30s, and operate an authoritarian elder-ruled church with no congregational voice, you can use the tithes and offerings at your discretion.

  89. Dale wrote:

    and then a voice from God is heard

    Of course, in the 9Marks model, the lead pastor stands in the place of God. When you hear the lead pastor, you hear Christ. Combine this with the legalism of mandatory statements of faith, unlawful oaths to church covenants, and unquestioned submission to church authority, and you have yourself a worship service where you do indeed hear from “god.”

  90. Max wrote:

    While Piper and others have picked up on this sort of “preaching to men” (as Matt Chandler, new Acts 29 president, refers to it), the Acts 29 boys are directly responsible for releasing macho beasts on the church. This ‘masculine Christianity’ teaching has certainly attracted young men back to church, but unfortunately at the expense of women who are being subordinated into New Calvinist bondage.

    It’d be less weird if they had gone the route of something like (unrealistic) knights, with codes of honor, chivalry, and a desire for truth. Go on a quest to save the damsels. Not saying there’s still not huge problems with that, but the wild beast thing doesn’t make them seem smart, or at least that’s my perspective. Maybe being dumb oafs appeals more to young men now.

    And Driscoll was just nuts. Yes, Jesus was a carpenter, and he was probably pretty sturdy, but nothing in the way He acted even vaguely resembled the things Driscoll called for.

  91. Max wrote:

    Driscoll explains, “Jesus was not a long-haired … effeminate-looking dude”; rather, he had “callused hands and big biceps.”

    The problem is often with the extremes. The most common portrayals of Jesus make him look like a bearded woman from a bad make-up commercial: soft pink cheeks, long flowing locks, soft focus, pouty eyes, and in dress. Isn’t that an insult to both men and women? I can understand a reaction against that portrayal, but too far in the other extreme is no better. Wouldn’t it be great if Jesus could be portrayed as a more normal person?

  92. @ Max:
    I really like your comment. Perhaps God wants men to wake up to the fact that women do dominate church attendance. Maybe He wants them to see that church must rely on women and their *feminine feels* in order force church advance beyond a 1950s view of the perfect women who did housework in her pearls and heels while the men brought home the bacon.

    Women have so much to give to the church and it makes me sad that they are relegated to flourishing after the men do the leading. I am so grateful for Pete Briscoe’s input into my life. He used me to demonstrate to myself that women would be teaching both men and women.

  93. ishy wrote:

    And Driscoll was just nuts. Yes, Jesus was a carpenter, and he was probably pretty sturdy, but nothing in the way He acted even vaguely resembled the things Driscoll called for.

    Though, I don’t think Driscoll actually wrote his books. I think he plagarized, used ghost writers, and had the sermon services doing “his” writing for him.

  94. Dale wrote:

    2) “A voice from God is heard.” As a result of lustful worship, God speaks audibly? His voice is heard?

    It is truly bizarre. And they fuss about Anne Voskamp.

    So, how did you guys survive the storm? It is still snowing here but there is an underlying coating of ice on the ground. Apparently they are concerned that power outages will occur tonight and tomorrow night due to the drop in temps. I have never seen 2 degrees ever predicted for a night time low in this area.

    I am kind of enjoying a quiet day. After making taco soup, I may even take a midwinter’s nap!!!

  95. Tim wrote:

    I did, and later reposted it at my place under the title The Bride of Christ Isn’t Masculine Enough?

    I wish I had know this. I would have linked it. Maybe I will add into the next post on Piper. Surely there will be more on this subject.

  96. Apparently the church has it’s own way of defining what is masculine and what is feminine. (I am not surprised).

    In regard to his examples, how is being tender, caring, writing, and artistic a feminine quality? Think of all of the doctors, architects, fashion designers, and authors who are men and live in the real world. Would Piper consider these men feminine because of their chosen profession? How is being thoughtful a masculine quality? Think of all of the women philosophers, researchers, and teachers in the real world? Outside of the church, does Piper consider women who use their brains to think masculine?

    Only men can create a space in church where the genders flourish? And when those men create that space the women will be in awe? John Piper is ridiculous. He focuses so much on sex and and gender rightness that I think he really has a problem.

  97. Last night I was at my son’s JV basketball game between two Christian schools. One of the players started dribbling down the court for a fast break. He lost the ball out of bounds and immediately crouched down, probably in shame. His coach yelled at him to take off his skirt and put his basketball shorts on.

    Nice “masculine feel” there. Way to go! Way to honor women too.

    Seems to me the fruit of the Spirit are qualities that are traditionally associated with women…gentleness, goodness, peace.

    These traits need to be considered gender-neutral.

    Put off your cruelty, Coach, and clothe yourself with kindness.

  98. dee wrote:

    So, how did you guys survive the storm? It is still snowing here but there is an underlying coating of ice on the ground. Apparently they are concerned that power outages will occur tonight and tomorrow night due to the drop in temps. I have never seen 2 degrees ever predicted for a night time low in this area.

    We got a snowflake in here in Athens, GA. Pretty much just one.

    The cars are speeding by the house, so I assume it’s safe to go out.

  99. dee wrote:

    I wonder if he would feel uncomfortable?

    I’d love to be a fly on the wall for that. And almost anything really where Piper has to deal with a competent woman doing her job, totally unaware of his views on femininity. I think his head would explode if a woman changed his car tyre. I’d volunteer for this myself 🙂

  100. dee wrote:

    So, how did you guys survive the storm?

    We were right on the rain/snow dividing line in Charlotte. It did not start snowing where I live until 8 this morning. I’d say we now have about a half an inch of snow.

  101. Kathi wrote:

    Only men can create a space in church where the genders flourish? And when those men create that space the women will be in awe? John Piper is ridiculous. He focuses so much on sex and and gender rightness that I think he really has a problem.

    Makes me wonder if Piper has some misgivings/doubts/insecurities about his own sexual identity.

  102. okrapod wrote:

    You are not a man, sir. All you do is sling words around. In your nice safe little religious world. Men do more than that. Young son just told us a few days ago that he is being deployed-again-to the middle east-again. He hates to go, they all do, but this time he says he feels better because the mission is clear. We have to stop this threat.
    So, you wimps in your ‘masculine’ churches will be a little safer we hope because my son and a lot of other mothers’ sons think there is more to being a man than sitting around fantasizing and whining.

    Well said, Okrapod. And I will be praying for your son and his family.

  103. dee wrote:

    Women have so much to give to the church

    AMEN! It’s clear from Scripture that there are to be no distinctions of race, class, or gender in the Body of Christ:

    “All of you who were baptized ‘into’ Christ have put on the family likeness of Christ. Gone is the distinction between Jew and Greek, slave and free man, male and female — you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28 Phillips)

    I realize that complementarians claim that we are overworking this verse … but, it’s because it is Truth!

  104. Bethlehem Baptist is a 9Marks church in the mold of The Village Church in Dallas. Members must agree to abide by a set of “Relational Commitments.” Here is a link to them:

    http://www.hopeingod.org/document/relational-commitments

    “Just as church leaders are involved in beginning a marriage, they should be involved when it is threatened with seeming dissolution. Therefore, when a member of Bethlehem is considering divorce, he or she is expected to bring the situation to our elders and cooperate with them as they determine whether biblical grounds exist for the separation, and as they endeavor to promote repentance and reconciliation”

  105. A comment from my wife as I discussed this blog piece with her “New Calvinists are taking spiritual things and turning them into carnal things.”

  106. Max wrote:

    dee wrote:

    Women have so much to give to the church

    AMEN! It’s clear from Scripture that there are to be no distinctions of race, class, or gender in the Body of Christ:

    “All of you who were baptized ‘into’ Christ have put on the family likeness of Christ. Gone is the distinction between Jew and Greek, slave and free man, male and female — you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28 Phillips)

    I realize that complementarians claim that we are overworking this verse … but, it’s because it is Truth!

    Complementarians hate that verse. But I believe every word of it. God uses whomever he wishes too.

  107. What?? Being articulate and thoughtful are masculine traits????? I have an adult son. When he was a small child, his female cousins were much more competent in these areas. My sweet little boy was clueless!!! Now they all catch up (he is now getting his PhD), but Piper must have missed out on " articulate" in his development. He makes no sense!

  108. Kathy C wrote:

    His coach yelled at him to take off his skirt and put his basketball shorts on.

    With a little research, you might find the coach is a member in good standing at a local New Calvinist church. Of course, a lot of athletic coaches are macho-idiots regardless of church affiliation.

  109. Would you seek counseling at Bethlehem given their one-sided definition of confidentiality?

    “Confidentiality is an important factor in establishing a relationship to receive spiritual counsel. The leader providing spiritual counsel will keep confidentiality except in the following situations:

    2) when a person refuses to repent of sin and it becomes necessary to promote repentance through accountability and redemptive church discipline (Matt. 18:15-20);”

  110. Dale wrote:

    Therefore, when a member of Bethlehem is considering divorce, he or she is expected to bring the situation to our elders and cooperate with them as they determine whether biblical grounds exist for the separation, and as they endeavor to promote repentance and reconciliation”

    The elders determine . . . makes me ill.

  111. Ken F wrote:

    The problem is often with the extremes.

    Someone once said that heresy can be an overemphasis of a long-neglected truth.

  112. ishy wrote:

    Maybe being dumb oafs appeals more to young men now.

    New Calvinist small group meetings are the only “Christian” gatherings on the planet where its OK for macho-boys to drink, burp, pass gas, and make utterly stupid comments about Scripture … even in the presence of women!

  113. dee wrote:

    People assume an individual is *profound* so if they think he sounds odd, they must be missing something.

    You know, when I first started reading this post, I thought you were kookoo-kaboo. But afterwards I realized you hit on the matter exactly. The feeling of unsettled confusion that I sometimes get after reading Piper is identical to the feeling I got when I used to speak to an old burnt-out hippy. If he has a point at all, it requires far too much processing of word salad to get at it.

    There are times Piper says things that are clear, even profound. There are times he makes a fair point but is far too dramatic. And there are times he sounds like this. I never found his good statements to be regular enough to justify sifting through all the confusion. It didn’t take me long after moving to the Ville to realize all his young followers were getting off on thinking they’d found a profound guru with special, arcane knowledge.

    It’s not unlike the hippy movement at all. And on that note:

    “We are all wired into a survival trip now. No more of the speed that fueled that 60’s. That was the fatal flaw in Tim Leary’s trip. He crashed around America selling “consciousness expansion” without ever giving a thought to the grim meat-hook realities that were lying in wait for all the people who took him seriously… All those pathetically eager acid freaks who thought they could buy Peace and Understanding for three bucks a hit. But their loss and failure is ours too. What Leary took down with him was the central illusion of a whole life-style that he helped create… a generation of permanent cripples, failed seekers, who never understood the essential old-mystic fallacy of the Acid Culture: the desperate assumption that somebody… or at least some force – is tending the light at the end of the tunnel.”

    – Hunter s. Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

  114. dee wrote:

    That may explain his hung over appearance.

    I realize that Christians have various views about alcohol consumption. However, in Patrick’s case, he took Southern Baptist church planting money to launch a ministry which included Bible studies at St. Louis taverns, drinking with the folks there while discussing Scripture. It was a slap in SBC’s face, which has resolved to have a “total opposition to the manufacturing, advertising, distributing, and consuming of alcoholic beverages” (from one of several SBC resolutions in this regard). Right or wrong, this is SBC’s stance and for a young whippersnapper New Calvinist to preach otherwise as an SBC pastor runs contrary to the majority position on this … while enjoying $200,000 of SBC money to plant his church!

  115. Todd Wilhelm wrote:

    So, when Piper had his 8-month vacation, what exactly was he cultivating in that garden of his?

    And why did it take 8 months? Also, for a guy who lives simply, he sure has enough money to do as he pleases. This does not mean that he is a high roller. It means he uses his resources a way that pleases him. It is not different more Biblical than someone who uses her money to take a luxurious vacation. We all have our particular wants. His are not necessarily sacrificial when it is used to bless him.

  116. dee wrote:

    how did you guys survive the storm?

    It just missed us up here in the Northwest mountains. Currently a balmy 12 below and a week of blinding snowshine is a thing of the past as the first clouds of storm Iras work their way up from California. I’m resting up expecting a few feet to shovel or blow from the deck and walk.

  117. Max wrote:

    I realize that Christians have various views about alcohol consumption.

    I was joking. he does look a bit out of it. I have no trouble with people consuming alcohol. I love a glass of wine and plan to open a bottle to go with the taco soup tonight.

    You might enjoy the post I wrote about Christmas a couple of years ago. It involves a Christmas eve I spent in an old mountain bar in Ouray, Colorado.

    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2013/12/23/in-an-old-mountain-bar-on-christmas-eve/

  118. R2 wrote:

    I thought you were kookoo-kaboo.

    Do not disabuse yourself of this notion. I sometimes fit that description quite well!

  119. Max wrote:

    dee wrote:

    That may explain his hung over appearance.

    I realize that Christians have various views about alcohol consumption. However, in Patrick’s case, he took Southern Baptist church planting money to launch a ministry which included Bible studies at St. Louis taverns, drinking with the folks there while discussing Scripture. It was a slap in SBC’s face, which has resolved to have a “total opposition to the manufacturing, advertising, distributing, and consuming of alcoholic beverages” (from one of several SBC resolutions in this regard). Right or wrong, this is SBC’s stance and for a young whippersnapper New Calvinist to preach otherwise as an SBC pastor runs contrary to the majority position on this … while enjoying $200,000 of SBC money to plant his church!

    My question is how was he and other Neo-Cal pastors allowed to use alcoholic beverages, but if you are a SBC pastor and believe that women should be allowed to preach in the SBC, you will more than likely lose your pastoral position in the SBC. So many contradictions and blatant hypocrisy by the SBC elite.

  120. Dale wrote:

    Bethlehem Baptist is a 9Marks church in the mold of The Village Church in Dallas. Members must agree to abide by a set of “Relational Commitments.” Here is a link to them:
    Dale – Reading this is very disturbing. How, exactly, are the church leaders “involved” in the beginning of a marriage? Are we talking Doug Wilson level of involvement? Then the expectation that people will go to the elders when there is a marriage problem and then they are expected to follow the elders determination. This is cult talk and is highly problematic when there is abuse in a marriage.

    “Just as church leaders are involved in beginning a marriage, they should be involved when it is threatened with seeming dissolution. Therefore, when a member of Bethlehem is considering divorce, he or she is expected to bring the situation to our elders and cooperate with them as they determine whether biblical grounds exist for the separation, and as they endeavor to promote repentance and reconciliation”

  121. Max wrote:

    Christianity Today summarized one of Driscoll’s sermons like this “‘Real men’ avoid the church because it projects a “Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ” that “is no one to live for [and] is no one to die for.” Driscoll explains, “Jesus was not a long-haired … effeminate-looking dude”; rather, he had “callused hands and big biceps.” This is the sort of Christ men are drawn to – what Driscoll calls “Ultimate Fighting Jesus.” Of course, we all know that his un-Biblical views on several fronts and potty-mouth preaching eventually cost Driscoll his Mars Hill and Acts 29 ministries.

    you mean this guy? http://s3.crackedcdn.com/phpimages/article/2/0/8/137208_v1.jpg

  122. Oopps – I didn’t format my comment very well….

    Dale – Reading this is very disturbing. How, exactly, are the church leaders “involved” in the beginning of a marriage? Are we talking Doug Wilson level of involvement? Then the expectation that people will go to the elders when there is a marriage problem and then they are expected to follow the elders determination. This is cult talk and is highly problematic when there is abuse in a marriage.

  123. dee wrote:

    I love a glass of wine and plan to open a bottle to go with the taco soup tonight.

    Please do so to the glory of God!

  124. R2 wrote:

    There are times Piper says things that are clear, even profound. There are times he makes a fair point but is far too dramatic. And there are times he sounds like this. I never found his good statements to be regular enough to justify sifting through all the confusion.

    There are also times when he flat out contradicts himself.

  125. Nancy2 wrote:

    My husband did 3 deployments to Iraq, and many little two or three week trips in between deployments to undisclosed locations.

    Please tell your husband that I said ‘thank you and the nation thanks you’.

  126. Bill M wrote:

    Maybe one of those spambots that periodically comment jibberish here have gained access to Piper’s data stream and he can’t tell the difference.

    How big a loser do you have to be to fail a Turing Test?

  127. Daisy wrote:

    And what is this weird obsession with whether Christianity feels masculine or not?

    Well, when you’re five-foot-four, muscled like a wet noodle, and with histrionic drama-queen mannerisms on a hair trigger, how else can you PROVE you’re a REAL MAN?

  128. Ron Oommen wrote:

    More seriously though…looks to me like these have fallen seriously in love with the sound of their own and each others voices and the ability of their own brains.

    We had a high-profile fanboy like that in local Eighties-Nineties SF & Furry Fandom.

    A Legend in his own mind, a running bad joke in everyone else’s.

  129. Kathi wrote:

    Then the expectation that people will go to the elders when there is a marriage problem and then they are expected to follow the elders determination. This is cult talk and is highly problematic when there is abuse in a marriage.

    Combine that with their lack of confidentiality in counseling sessions and their penchant toward excommunication…

    When you go in for counseling they should read you your Miranda rights.

  130. Darlene wrote:

    This reminds me of some dudes I knew in my teen years who deemed themselves enlightened hippies and endeavored to teach deep, profound truths…

    “Grass doesn’t make you deep and profound. It makes you THINK you’re Deep and Profound.”
    A Child’s Garden of Grass (from memory)

  131. Eeyore wrote:

    To hear self-proclaimed Calvinists talking like this, though…

    Not surprising, though.

    “I KNOW I’M RIGHT —
    I’M PREDESTINED ELECT!”

  132. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    Perhaps Piper is simply suffering from senility onset. If so, I hope it debilitates him quickly enough to stop him doing further harm.

    I have heard the same speculation about Pat Robertson and his open-mouth-insert-both-feet talent. The first time I heard it was in a commenter who claimed he saw the same symptoms & behavior in his boss during early-stage Alzheimers.

    But remember this: NOBODY dares tell a CELEBRITY anything other than what the CELEBRITY Wants to Hear.

  133. mot wrote:

    My question is how was he and other Neo-Cal pastors allowed to use alcoholic beverages, but if you are a SBC pastor and believe that women should be allowed to preach in the SBC, you will more than likely lose your pastoral position in the SBC. So many contradictions and blatant hypocrisy by the SBC elite.

    There was an extensive discussion about beverage alcohol among SBCers in the not too distant past. They had some of their big names discussing it. It was evident to me that based on scripture no good argument for forbidding moderate use of beverage alcohol was made by any of them. Drunkenness is forbidden, but complete abstention is not taught in scripture.

    The also discussed tithing and whether that is a NT teaching. The arguments were more balanced on that one, so…

    But the issue of specifically women elders/ actual pastors is not specifically addressed in the NT. Where it does discuss women in a teaching function, specifically using that word, well…there is that snake pit. To even have a discussion it has to include inference from other scriptures, and inference is in the eye of the beholder. The mention of the women/wives (same word in Greek) in regard to deacons has been debated to death of course.

    But i don’t see hypocrisy since all of the debating is based on scripture. I think that the absolute literalists would have to say yes to alcohol, maybe to tithing, and no to women teaching in the position of elder to a gender mixed group. I also think that we have the option to do what is best in our culture in these regards, scripture or no.

  134. okrapod wrote:

    This is pitiful. Listening to him explain himself I get the ‘feel’ that I am listening to someone who has little if any real experience in the worlds of men or women either one. He seems to live is his own fantasies. Like thinking what it might be like to actually be a grown man if one were that. Really non-realistic.

    Slacktivist has said exactly the same thing about the Author Self-Inserts in Left Behind (all volumes) — that the ASI Airline Pilot and Greatest Investigative Journalist Of All Time are NOT shown (or even hinted at) doing anything their RL counterparts in their position would; instead, they do what a five-year-old would IMAGINE Important Grown-ups would do.

  135. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    I will say this – anyone who is actually in control of their faculty and spouts nonsense like that in a public forum has nothing but my scorn. Perhaps Piper is simply suffering from senility onset.

    I often wonder this myself. I’ve come to expect loopy word salad from John the Pied Piper, but the stuff in this video is… special. It might be valid to consider whether age is causing him to lose his grip.

  136. Lea wrote:

    That thing about sex rather than hand holding was so strange!

    Channeling Josh Duggar?

    I think he was saying you can list after someone with muscles but not want to talk to them? Which just tells you something deeply disturbing about how he thinks of women.

    “Masculine Musculature on a Woman can beget Unnatural Arousal in a Man…”
    — Piper regarding “Muscular Women”

    To which my initial (and unchanged to this day) reaction has been:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=457N1m4oUZw

  137. Nancy2 wrote:

    I still want to know what Piper means when he talks about women “flourishing” under the control of men. Is it like rescue animals flourishing in a zoo, or an animal shelter?

    With Benefits (nudge nudge wink wink know what I mean know what I mean…)

  138. Dale wrote:

    R2 wrote:

    There are times Piper says things that are clear, even profound. There are times he makes a fair point but is far too dramatic. And there are times he sounds like this. I never found his good statements to be regular enough to justify sifting through all the confusion.

    There are also times when he flat out contradicts himself.

    Even within the same sentence?

  139. I’m no fan of Piper, by a long shot, and he can sure manage to mess up even a good idea.

    But yep, there is such a thing as overly feminized church services, and it can hurt a church. We were once part of a UMC congregation. Pastor was a woman–no problem. Worship leader was a man. Again, no problem.

    Except the services had gone from church services or preaching services or whatever to “worship services” as part of a carefully laid out growth plan. No singing of hymns or even most ccm. All was of the “Jesus is my boyfriend” variety, including the one about the sloppy wet kiss. Sermons went from Christ centered to part of the package to help you have an emotional moment with Jesus. Actually as a woman I was very uncomfortable. It felt like a sexual encounter, or at least the attempt to get you to close your eyes, sway, and have a physical good time with Jesus.

    Most of the men detested it, and so did a lot of the women. Most went “elsewhere.” When the church went back to regular services they got the growth they sought. Admittedly, a few women, mostly single, missed their weekly emotional high and went elsewhere.

    Many of the men did state they did not like church when it was all “girly” and “touchy feely.”

    I’m a woman, but I do like some emotion in a service but ALSO some logic and rock solid preaching and theology. IF those things are masculine then I like a “masculine” service.

    But really the difference is some prefer a Christ centered service of proclamation and thinking, others a service more seeker oriented and feeling based.

    Piper just messed up the labels. Again.

  140. The prize for the most ridiculous comment on this subject, imho, still goes to Mark Driscoll, who said that he couldn’t respect Jesus if he could beat Him up. I would be concerned if a ten-year-old said that.

  141. Nancy2 wrote:

    TULIPs!!!!!

    Ah yes, what else would be in their garden?!

    John Piper’s interview with Matt Chandler is a tip-toe through the TULIPs:

    “When you say ‘I’m a Calvinist’, what does that mean?” (Piper)

    “Well, I mean the 5-Points. I don’t know how else to define it.” (Chandler)

    A revealing exchange on “Calvinism and Sexual Complementarity” if you haven’t viewed it. Warning: Chandler refers to the female members of his church as “our girls.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKEpVzHnUw0

  142. Deb wrote:

    The Journey cited a range of ongoing sinful behaviors over the past few years including manipulation, domineering, lack of biblical community, and ‘a history of building his identity through ministry and media platforms.’”

    Any church board could charge any pastor with the same things, if they want to get rid of him/her. Even the possible sexual harassment (mentioned almost in passing) MIGHT (likely not) have an innocent explanation.
    To me this is the most bizzare of all the celeb pastor firings of the last couple years– including the fact that it’s been almost a year and AFAIK Patrick has made no attempt at a comeback.

  143. Christiane wrote:

    ” … without women who were brave enough to visit the empty tomb on Easter Sunday and then return to preach the gospel to a bunch of cowardly men, there would be no church for Piper to exclude them from” (Zack Hunt)

    Print it and stick it on the refrigerator, folks!

  144. Max wrote:

    dee wrote:

    I love a glass of wine and plan to open a bottle to go with the taco soup tonight.

    Please do so to the glory of God!

    Just don’t “Spill The Wine” like Eric Burdon! 🙂

  145. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Slacktivist has said exactly the same thing about the Author Self-Inserts in Left Behind (all volumes) — that the ASI Airline Pilot and Greatest Investigative Journalist Of All Time are NOT shown (or even hinted at) doing anything their RL counterparts in their position would; instead, they do what a five-year-old would IMAGINE Important Grown-ups would do.

    I remember thumbing through a couple of the “Left Behind” books while browsing in a bookstore. What bad writing to go along with the bad theology. I happened upon a passage where the heroes were flying about in a jet plane, supernaturally shielded from enemy missiles. I think they were flying over Israel as it got nuked by someone. Now that you mention it, it does seem like something that would appeal to fundamentalist ten year old boys. Horribly unreadable.

  146. I’m sorry but I couldn’t watch the full hour presentation at the end. Just seeing Piper’s part was enough.

    The sad thing is he thinks he makes sense. I have no doubt that Piper and his merry band are 100% invested in what they believe, they are nuts, but they are honest nuts.

    It’s funny but it’s not. It’s an insult to women (and those that love and support them) who work their butts off making the world a better place.

    For example, here’s the folks in charge of the air defence of Canada and the United States.

    http://www.norad.mil/Leadership

    Notice anything?

    Dee had a great response to one of my comments in the last post and it’s something that I’ve mentioned in other comments.

    The world in which the bible was written was not “biblical”. It was patriarchal, slavery was acceptable, women and children had few if any rights, everything was hierarchical, kings and emperors ruled people, masters ruled slaves, men ruled women, even the concept of childhood was different.

    The people of that world would not recognize this world. In fact the people of the reformation in the 1500s would not recognize this world. Martin Luther would probably be horrified that the “people” actually select their leaders by election.

    What the men and women of this Neo Calvinist belief confuse is that somehow the society of the bible, the culture in which the bible was written (and the attitudes of those chronicled within) is the point of the bible. That the bronze/iron age culture of the bible is what is godly about the bible.

    And in so doing miss the point, causing great misery in the process.

  147. linda wrote:

    Except the services had gone from church services or preaching services or whatever to “worship services” as part of a carefully laid out growth plan. No singing of hymns or even most ccm. All was of the “Jesus is my boyfriend” variety, including the one about the sloppy wet kiss. Sermons went from Christ centered to part of the package to help you have an emotional moment with Jesus. Actually as a woman I was very uncomfortable. It felt like a sexual encounter, or at least the attempt to get you to close your eyes, sway, and have a physical good time with Jesus.

    This is strange all right, but it sounds like emotional manipulation. In the pentecostal church I used to attend, there were some aspects of this variety in their service, and yes, I hated it.

    That being said, I’m not sure I’d define it a “feminine” per se. These were male worship leaders doing the same thing. You don’t worship unless you “feel” the presence intimately. Not my style.

  148. linda wrote:

    Except the services had gone from church services or preaching services or whatever to “worship services” as part of a carefully laid out growth plan. No singing of hymns or even most ccm. All was of the “Jesus is my boyfriend” variety, including the one about the sloppy wet kiss. Sermons went from Christ centered to part of the package to help you have an emotional moment with Jesus.

    Why does this have anything to do with a person being female?

    linda wrote:

    Most of the men detested it, and so did a lot of the women.

    Perhaps they weren’t detesting a *feminization* (whatever that means) of the service. Maybe they detested poor theology that is not gender based merely silly based

    Perhaps I need you to define what you mean by *feminine.* I am a female but I don’t get this characterization.

  149. Dave A A wrote:

    To me this is the most bizzare of all the celeb pastor firings of the last couple years– including the fact that it’s been almost a year and AFAIK Patrick has made no attempt at a comeback.

    I think they hid some really serious stuff and masked it with Christians.

  150. Jack wrote:

    What the men and women of this Neo Calvinist belief confuse is that somehow the society of the bible, the culture in which the bible was written (and the attitudes of those chronicled within) is the point of the bible. That the bronze/iron age culture of the bible is what is godly about the bible.

    And in so doing miss the point, causing great misery in the process.

    My thoughts too, but it’s not just the Neo-Cals, there are Arminian leaning outfits a-plenty who also believe in and long for those good old days. And now for thee favorite clobber verse which is commonly used to shut down this kind of talk from ‘the enemy’: (drum roll please…)

    “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.”

  151. Tim wrote:

    I saw Timothy Leary give a talk at UC Santa Barbara back in 1981. Entertaining, but not too comprehensible. One audience member yelled out about half way through, “Man, you’re burnt!” Leary responded, “Ain’t it the truth?!”

    I have a friend who was absolutely *distraught* that Timothy Leary got cremated and some of his remains were shot into space. Why? Because *he* wanted to freeze Leary’s head! (Yes, some of my friends are incredibly strange.)

  152. linda wrote:

    But yep, there is such a thing as overly feminized church services, and it can hurt a church.

    What you’re describing is bad theology, not feminization of a church.

  153. R2 wrote:

    – Hunter s. Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

    This is absolutely the best thread ever on TWW. I’ve gotten Aquarius, Lola, Good Vibrations, Spill That Wine and now HST. All in a thread about John Piper. I love it!

  154. Nancy2 wrote:

    Todd Wilhelm wrote:
    So, when Piper had his 8-month vacation, what exactly was he cultivating in that garden of his?
    TULIPs!!!!!

    Ding, ding, ding. Folks, we have a winner.

    Nancy2, please step up to claim your prize.

  155. linda wrote:

    Except the services had gone from church services or preaching services or whatever to “worship services” as part of a carefully laid out growth plan. No singing of hymns or even most ccm. All was of the “Jesus is my boyfriend” variety, including the one about the sloppy wet kiss. Sermons went from Christ centered to part of the package to help you have an emotional moment with Jesus. Actually as a woman I was very uncomfortable. It felt like a sexual encounter, or at least the attempt to get you to close your eyes, sway, and have a physical good time with Jesus.

    Most of the men detested it, and so did a lot of the women. Most went “elsewhere.” When the church went back to regular services they got the growth they sought. Admittedly, a few women, mostly single, missed their weekly emotional high and went elsewhere.

    We went through a progression like this when our pastor took the church we were involved with in the NAR direction. The pastor was male and all leadership was male. I never characterized it as a feminine change, just that it was extremely manipulative and controlling. I am a woman and I hated it. I didn’t notice a divide between men and women as far as who accepted it and who didn’t, the divide was between the gullible and those with a more analytical bent.

    Looking back on it, I can see how some would call this a more “feminine” service but maybe that is based on sort of a stereotyped view of gender that isn’t really accurate?

  156. Word salad… bah. The envy on this thread fairly reeks to high heaven.

    I know more about churches in my little finger than all of you do put together in a month of Sundays. And I know for a fact that jealousy is the only reason anyone ever criticises anybody I agree with.

    John Pipeband is a great writer. The years of selfless dedication to writing sheeps of height that none of you can approach is testimony to what hard work can achieve: if any of you whiners could be bothered, maybe you could sustain 50,000 words without saying anything too. But you can’t, so you never will.

    You’re all rubbish.

    Up Yours,
    Roger Bumblast

  157. @ R2:

    “I never found his good statements to be regular enough to justify sifting through all the confusion.”
    +++++++++++++++++++

    well, statistically, everyone ends up being profound with at least every 2,034th utterance.

    (probably should run this by Ken F, though)

  158. @ R2:

    “It didn’t take me long after moving to the Ville to realize all his young followers were getting off on thinking they’d found a profound guru with special, arcane knowledge.”
    ++++++++++++

    we can laugh that them, can’t we? at the very least, roll our eyes? emote an ironic facial expression?

    gah dang, it’s great to have exited such environments. feel like running hard through the whole town for hours, i feel so festive about it.

  159. Mara wrote:

    Appropriately Feminine?

    Appropriately Masculine?

    All this diversion away from the greatest lessons ever given on this Earth to our kind when Our Lord Himself modeled for us all the Way to be an ‘appropriate’ HUMAN

  160. Todd Wilhelm wrote:

    So, when Piper had his 8-month vacation, what exactly was he cultivating in that garden of his?

    Seeds from the coastal highlands of Oaxaca?

  161. dee wrote:

    People assume an individual is *profound* so if they think he sounds odd, they must be missing something. John Piper is Truly Chance the Gardener.

    So true. Piper talks in Platitudes with flowery words that seem meaningful and sincere.

    It doesn’t help when many around you are in raptures over him. Including adults. It makes sense that someone would at least try to understand what they might be missing. But it is a black hole unless you accept the faux sincerity.

    Thankfully, this was not my initial Piper experience. My peers were not in raptures over him 17 years ago. It was a few Wheaton students home for a visit. They drank the Kool aid at college. My brother was concerned he was paid for a “Christian” cult experience. We were like: Who is this guy, Piper? Everyone thought they would grow out of it. It’s not that easy to come out of it. It becomes a way of life for some.

  162. So, in the intro to the article, before it gets to Piper’s quote, it says:

    In his 2012 biographical address on “The Frank and Manly Mr. Ryle,” John Piper highlighted the value of a masculine ministry — and with it, the importance of Christianity having a masculine feel. It’s a provocative thing to say when, not only in our day, but throughout history, true masculinity has seemed too often like an endangered species, under assault from both the left and the right.

    The “Frank and Manly Mr. Ryle”??

    Throughout history, masculinity has been an endangered species?? Under assault?? I have no words. Do these guys have any idea what it’s been like to live as a female through the vast majority of history?

  163. siteseer wrote:

    So, in the intro to the article, before it gets to Piper’s quote, it says:

    In his 2012 biographical address on “The Frank and Manly Mr. Ryle,” John Piper highlighted the value of a masculine ministry — and with it, the importance of Christianity having a masculine feel. It’s a provocative thing to say when, not only in our day, but throughout history, true masculinity has seemed too often like an endangered species, under assault from both the left and the right.

    The “Frank and Manly Mr. Ryle”??

    Throughout history, masculinity has been an endangered species?? Under assault?? I have no words. Do these guys have any idea what it’s been like to live as a female through the vast majority of history?

    I’m amused by Piper’s phrase ‘Masculinity has been an endangered species’. Has he no idea that the definition of a species is one in which the members can have sex and reproduce their kind?

    Someone should very gently explain it to him. Yes.

  164. siteseer wrote:

    been an endangered species?? Under assault?? I have no words. Do these guys have any idea what it’s been like to live as a female through the vast majority of history?

    And what is “true masculinity”? It seems like they just want to act like jerks and call it masculine.

  165. ishy wrote:

    siteseer wrote:

    been an endangered species?? Under assault?? I have no words. Do these guys have any idea what it’s been like to live as a female through the vast majority of history?

    And what is “true masculinity”?

    Hypermasculinity — defining “masculine” entirely in terms of Power Struggle and Sexual Aggression, burning out everything else with a white-hot iron, and firewalling what’s left to the max.

    For what it’s worth, I first came across the term in a reprint of a 1943 OSS psych profile of one Adolf Hitler, describing his “Fuehrer” persona that ended up taking him over.

  166. Christiane wrote:

    I’m amused by Piper’s phrase ‘Masculinity has been an endangered species’. Has he no idea that the definition of a species is one in which the members can have sex and reproduce their kind?

    But that’s EVIL-UTION!

  167. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    In fact, the Iliad is essentially a morality tale about the dangers of unrestrained thumos.

    Since you brought it up, I found the character of Thersites in the Iliad to be memorable, one of the few things I can distinctly recall from a history class 40 years ago. The Iliad affirms the supremacy of the aristocrats and Thersites, the lone person who spoke against the prerogatives of the king, was silenced by the butt end of Odysseus spear. Even though Thersites made a great deal of sense when he pointed out that the kings wishes were contrary to the best interests of all present, no one joined his protest. Just to drive home the point that we should all know our place, Homer described Thersites as ugly.

    3,000 years later we don’t call people such as Piper aristocrats but many others still want to be part of elevating other men. We also still have thugs such as Odysseus that go around silencing anyone who dares speak against the great man, although in this day of the internet their job is more difficult. I don’t recall the specifics but at the time my professor mentioned if we never found ourselves in the place of Thersites and spoke up as he did, then we have not lived to our potential.

    I’ve heard it expounded better but the link below gives a good perspective.
    http://www.waggish.org/2011/thersites-the-iliad-and-not-knowing-your-place/

  168. “The first thing He (God) says is not good is a solitary bachelor.”

    Doug Wilson’s comment. These Neo-Cal fellas like to take their playbook solely from Genesis. While they love Paul on so many things, they donb’t point to his singleness as a virtue, nor what he says about the benefits of remaining single. Further, they seem to brush aside the fact that our Lord Jesus was never married. No doubt, had the Neo-Cals been around in Jesus’ day, they would have been hounding him to get married, and telling Him that is the most godly way for a man to live. It’s been said many times here but bears repeating. Neo-Calvinists idolize marriage. Marriage is the ideal for everyone. They don’t even consider that being single is a viable choice. Further, should persons in their congregations be struggling with sexual temptation, the remedy is to go out and find someone to marry as QUICKLY as possible, just so those sexual urges can be satisfied. Remember the inteview with Doug Wilson’s father? “Ask her name and marry her!” Because self-control is out of the question, I suppose. Imagine if we treated other areas of temptation in the same way? For those who were formerly thieves, or drug addicts, or greedy CEO’s, what would the *Quick Fix* be? If the main reason to marry is to have sex, I think that marriage is based on a shaky foundation. When you consider that, just about anyone will do. But I think we here at TWW recognize that marriage is based upon more than fulfilling one’s sexual desires. And it’s about more than just not wanting to be alone. Neo-Cals have a very narrow, boxed-in view of marriage that lays the foundation for serious problems that will arise later on. Anyway, here is the link for that interview with Jim Wilson, Doug Wilson’s father, “Ask her name and marry her!”:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKprMev1W8Q

  169. R2 wrote:

    It didn’t take me long after moving to the Ville to realize all his young followers were getting off on thinking they’d found a profound guru with special, arcane knowledge.

    “Special Arcane Knowledge” as in “Occult Gnosis”?
    (Occult = Hidden, Secret; Gnosis = Knowledge; put them together and you have Speshul Sekrit Knowledge known only to the Inner Ring of initiated Illuminati. Or Gnostics. Gnostic = He Who KNOWS Things.)

  170. and now i’ve just watched the Desiring God conference video clip.

    my toes are curling backwards.

    as were crawford loritts’. you weren’t buying into it, were you, crawford. it was the weirdest thing you ever heard, right? why did you give in and start nodding your head?

  171. Christiane wrote:

    I’m amused by Piper’s phrase ‘Masculinity has been an endangered species’

    The entries on Wikipedia for masculinity and femininity are informative. This is a topic that can tend to get people spun up because of differing views on what masculinity and femininity are or should be. The one thing that does seem somewhat constant is that all societies seem to have ideas on what things are masculine and what things are feminine (in Western culture the idea is strong enough that we have separate words). But there does not seem to be a set standard. These terms seem describe how things are rather than how they should be.

  172. Max wrote:

    Ken F wrote:

    The problem is often with the extremes.

    Someone once said that heresy can be an overemphasis of a long-neglected truth.

    Especially when pushed in isolation. Chesterton wrote that Christianity is a dynamic balance of opposing doctrines, “any one of which in isolation could lay waste to a world.” Examples:
    Calvinism — God’s Omnipotence and Sovereignity.
    Communism — Woe to the Rich and standing up for/elevating the Poor.

  173. If you read carefully, you will note I said many of the MEN felt the more emotional service was “feminine” or “girly.” Did not say I did. Did say as a female I did not like the service.

    Did say Piper mischaracterizes wanting a more thinking factual service as masculine. I disagree with his characterization even while supporting the idea of avoiding those touchy feely Jesus is my boyfriend services.

    Those that wanted the boyfriend styled services were all female, as it happened, except the music minister. Those that left were all single females. Don’t read more than that into that statement: that is who left. Do understand MOST of the single females abhorred the new service and returned only after we reverted service styles.

    So I agree with Piper re the type of service. And disagree with him on calling it masculine or feminine. But apparently he is not nearly the only male who finds the touchy feely services “feminine.” For good or ill, that is how many men describe it.

  174. elastigirl wrote:

    “I never found his good statements to be regular enough to justify sifting through all the confusion.”
    +++++++++++++++++++

    well, statistically, everyone ends up being profound with at least every 2,034th utterance.

    (probably should run this by Ken F, though)

    I like the phrase “Even a broken clock is right twice a day.” But that phrase has less meaning these days with digital clocks. Maybe Piper is digital?

  175. More from Piper,

    And there are things about this guy that are remarkably tender, kind, warm, nurturing (the kinds of things we would associate with a woman).

    So when the Bible says (Ephesians 4:32) “Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you,” what it really means is to be feminine?

    And when you look at a woman who is dominantly and prominently feminine, she will have a backbone, she will be articulate, she will be thoughtful (things we tend to think are male).

    So then I guess passages like Ephesians 6:13, “Therefore, take up the full armor of God, so that you will be able to resist in the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm” are just saying to be masculine?

    I’m curious how people get to this mindset where they view everything in life through a lens of sex? Qualities are not qualities in and of themselves but are expressions of sex. Everything is some kind of expression of sex.

  176. Max wrote:

    Deb wrote:

    I suspect it was Neo-Cal congregations that paid for their pastors to attend this Desiring God Pastors Conference.

    No doubt about it! When you are a 20-30 something “lead pastor”, with a team of hand-picked elders in their 20s-30s, and operate an authoritarian elder-ruled church with no congregational voice, you can use the tithes and offerings at your discretion.

    Gotta keep up with the Furticks.

  177. Has anyone else pointed out that Piper himself is inherently NOT masculine. His sermons read like they were torn from the pages of a weepy 12-year-old girl’s diary.

    He needs to chop some wood or spend some time in a bar full of marines to understand the alpha male directive.

  178. dee wrote:

    I always chuckle when Piper waxes eloquent about men providing safety for women. Can you imagine him in a battle with a thing?

    Five-foot-four (160cm), muscled like an overcooked noodle, with the histrionic mannerisms of a society matron with The Vapors? Wadda you think?

  179. Darlene wrote:

    But I think we here at TWW recognize that marriage is based upon more than fulfilling one’s sexual desires. And it’s about more than just not wanting to be alone. Neo-Cals have a very narrow, boxed-in view of marriage that lays the foundation for serious problems that will arise later on. Anyway, here is the link for that interview with Jim Wilson, Doug Wilson’s father, “Ask her name and marry her!”:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKprMev1W8Q

    I think that’s definitely a reason, but I think there’s a bigger one. It’s easier to control a whole lot of people if you have a large group of them suppressed by the others. The Calvinistas aren’t just in the business of promoting marriage. They are in the business of organizing people underneath them to promote themselves and their churches. They get husbands to “keep control” of the women, which effectively puts half the population into slavery of a sort.

    It’s not just women they want to control, but they give husbands the “prize” of being slaveowner of their wives and families, and promising them that one day they might move up to elder, and gain standing in the community and money from the congregation’s allegiance to their businesses. The promise of elder will not happen for most men. It’s a prize for those that kiss up the most. The rest will be expected to pay their money to the ministry (probably more than they can afford), support the pastors, elders, and theologians by buying their books and using their businesses, and they will probably be just as likely to be excommunicated for a small slight or for having any thought of their own.

    Remember the people above them are given passes for having affairs with younger, prettier women, amassing large amounts of wealth, plagarizing, etc. They are not good examples of people. But if any of the peons attempted those things, thinking they’d get a pass, too, they’d be kicked out.

  180. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    Has anyone else pointed out that Piper himself is inherently NOT masculine. His sermons read like they were torn from the pages of a weepy 12-year-old girl’s diary.

    Maybe that’s why he’s so heavily into “Me Man!” and “Woman, Submit!”

    Hanging out with the Real Tough Guys (like the Jerk with the Kirk in Moscow) for some Hypermaculinity-by-Proxy.

  181. siteseer wrote:

    I’m curious how people get to this mindset where they view everything in life through a lens of sex? Qualities are not qualities in and of themselves but are expressions of sex. Everything is some kind of expression of sex.

    Late-period Dr Freud cross-bred with male nymphomania?

  182. Ken F wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Chesterton wrote that Christianity is a dynamic balance of opposing doctrines

    Chesterton is a good remedy for Calvinism.

    Yes! Chesterton ‘gets it’. In his poem ‘The Convert’, he celebrates how man-made circular logic is so prfoundly lacking in ability to convey an experience of the great mystery of God

    “AFTER one moment when I bowed my head
    And the whole world turned over and came upright,
    And I came out where the old road shone white,
    I walked the ways and heard what all men said,
    Forests of tongues, like autumn leaves unshed,
    Being not unlovable but strange and light;
    Old riddles and new creeds, not in despite
    But softly, as men smile about the dead.

    The sages have a hundred maps to give
    That trace their crawling cosmos like a tree,
    They rattle reason out through many a sieve
    That stores the sand and lets the gold go free:
    And all these things are less than dust to me
    Because my name is Lazarus and I live.

    (G.K. Chesterton)

  183. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    He needs to chop some wood or spend some time in a bar full of marines to understand the alpha male directive.

    Yes. He reminds me of our pup who as a baby puppy was raised and nurtured by the cats and adopted some their mannerisms. I wonder about Piper’s father, if he was in the picture when P was growing up. From whence came that ‘fluttering hands’ mannerism??? Marine/bar therapy might help, yes.

  184. the opportunity to be an idol and doing what they tell you as you take your place on the pedestal in the spotlight in front of crowds and being paid handsomely for it does funny things to people. which i would think they end up regretting.

    and then it’s burned into the internet for eternal public consumption.

    not worth it.

  185. elastigirl wrote:

    and then it’s burned into the internet for eternal public consumption.
    not worth it.

    You’d think after awhile they’d learn, but they don’t ever seem to!

  186. Deb wrote:

    I am so grateful that there is video evidence of this nonsense.

    It might be his subconscious cry for help.

  187. elastigirl wrote:

    and now i’ve just watched the Desiring God conference video clip.
    my toes are curling backwards.
    as were crawford loritts’. you weren’t buying into it, were you, crawford. it was the weirdest thing you ever heard, right? why did you give in and start nodding your head?

    Exactly, Elastigirl. He was desperately trying to be sold on it. The looks on his face make that quite evident. Then I think he just gave in and bought it.

  188. Darlene wrote:

    Neo-Calvinists idolize marriage. Marriage is the ideal for everyone.

    How true. From Bethlehem’s “Relational Commitments”:

    “Because our church recognizes both the divine origin of marriage and the devastating effects of divorce, we are deeply committed to preserving marriages and preventing divorce. Toward this end, we will devote a significant portion of our preaching and teaching ministry to strengthening marriages and families.”

    But doesn’t 9Marks emphasize expositional preaching to prevent such unbalanced idolatry?

  189. Dale wrote:

    But doesn’t 9Marks emphasize expositional preaching to prevent such unbalanced idolatry?

    I think it depends on how you define expositional preaching. In SEBTS, it was the topical, popular style that often involved very little Scripture.

    It certainly didn’t seem expositional to me.

  190. dee wrote:

    I think they hid some really serious stuff and masked it with Christians.

    Must have. Won’t know for sure unless someone comes to someone like you with some slanderous gossip. Until then I’ll hope for the best that Patrick is just quietly moving on.

  191. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    He needs to chop some wood or spend some time in a bar full of marines to understand the alpha male directive.

    Piper would never make it through a wives of 5th Group SF “while the boyz are deployed” party!

  192. Ken F wrote:

    Christiane wrote:
    I’m amused by Piper’s phrase ‘Masculinity has been an endangered species’
    The entries on Wikipedia for masculinity and femininity are informative. This is a topic that can tend to get people spun up because of differing views on what masculinity and femininity are or should be.

    I think various circumstances in life challenge these Neo-Cals ideas of gender roles. For example, at one point in my marriage my husband was hospitalized. He was on steroids and very emotional due to the effects of the steroids. I had to be the strong one at that time. I had to take on more responsibilities because my husband was in no condition to do so. In a word, I was the one who had to lead at that point. Physiologically, mentally, emotionally, he was unable to operate in the function of what Neo-Cals call *Headship.* Right now, I have a friend who has been the caretaker of her husband for quite a few years. She has the responsibility of taking care of the household, managing all of their financial affairs, basically the one who is the leader – because his medical condition prevents him from being able to lead. What do Neo-Cals do in this situation?

    Then I am hearkened back to the pioneer days when settlers were moving westward in our country. Women had to be tough and brave the elements just like the men. Both men and women had to depend upon their physical exertion in order to survive in the wild West. I think one of the reasons that women in the West were granted the right to vote prior to the 19th Amendment in 1920, is because women had to be regarded as equals in that society. Women had to be just as tough as men to survive in that brutal environment. Pampered, weak women would not last very long in the Wild West.

    There are so many situations in which the Neo-Cal take on gender roles betrays the reality of life and the situations we humans find ourselves in. Should any of these women in complementarian marriages find themselves in a situation in which they must assume responsibilities and take the reins in order for their marriages and households to function and survive, I hope they are able to rise to the occasion.

  193. Dale wrote:

    How true. From Bethlehem’s “Relational Commitments”:

    “Because our church recognizes both the divine origin of marriage and the devastating effects of divorce, we are deeply committed to preserving marriages and preventing divorce. Toward this end, we will devote a significant portion of our preaching and teaching ministry to strengthening marriages and families.”

    Way to make the 51 percent of adult American women who are not married at this point in time feel welcomed in your church, Bethlehem Baptist! I am not saying marriage is wrong or bad, but when it’s emphasized to the point of being an object of cultic worship, then yeah, it’s a real problem.

    And yes, since 2009 the majority of American woman have been in various states of singleness–divorced, widowed, never married, with children, without children, empty-nester, etc. And Bethlehem is making for darn sure that they are not welcoming.

  194. Dale wrote:

    Toward this end, we will devote a significant portion of our preaching and teaching ministry to strengthening marriages and families.

    Interesting that with all the focus on marriage at Bethlehem that Piper would have marital issues. Could it be that when the focus is not on Christ that problems ensue?

    1 Cor. 2:2: “For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.”

  195. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    Has anyone else pointed out that Piper himself is inherently NOT masculine. His sermons read like they were torn from the pages of a weepy 12-year-old girl’s diary.
    He needs to chop some wood or spend some time in a bar full of marines to understand the alpha male directive.

    +100!

    Thanks for the laugh. Spot on.

  196. Darlene wrote:

    I think one of the reasons that women in the West were granted the right to vote prior to the 19th Amendment in 1920, is because women had to be regarded as equals in that society.

    And there was a shortage of women so the states that wanted more women to come to marry their men said, “We’ll give you the vote too!”

  197. Darlene wrote:

    There are so many situations in which the Neo-Cal take on gender roles betrays the reality of life and the situations we humans find ourselves in.

    I think a huge part of this is due to the fact that their leadership have never been in a position where they were were supervised by women. Think about it this way–take your average YRR pastor. At the very least, since he started seminary, he has been treated as always being over all women and over a good chunk of the men, since he is studying to be in ministry. He’s probably never worked a job where he had a woman as a supervisor. Now he’s the young lead pastor of a big church and he’s bringing in his buddies to properly educate these people in the pews.

    Now let’s switch to the pewpeons. I can guarantee you there have been employees of my too big to fail financial institution who attended Bethlehem Baptist. I can also guarantee you that bringing Piper’s nonsense about what women should and should not do would not go over well at my employer. I suspect this is pretty much the case for most non-church jobs in the USA today. BBC members probably ignore Piper’s witterings on the subject or compartmentalize them in one way or another. However, I’m sure Piper’s fanbois just follow along after everything the Great Man says.

  198. my point in speaking about Piper’s ‘masculinity is an endangered species’ comment is this:

    in science, a ‘species’ exists only when the males and females in it can mate and reproduce young

    so when Piper resorts to men as a ‘species’, he is in need of a science lesson, about sixth-grade level, I’d say

    He seems fragile for someone who has caused so much grief in the Christian world. Frail and pitiful now. But he has been a great force in service to some very vile teachings and I cannot understand him or how he came to have so much contempt for women as human persons.

  199. Velour wrote:

    And there was a shortage of women so the states that wanted more women to come to marry their men said, “We’ll give you the vote too!”

    Maybe the State of Alaska should let women’s vote count double. It has gotten better – I think it is up to 48%.

    For women living in Alaska and seeking a spouse, the odds are good, but the goods are odd.

  200. Dale wrote:

    For women living in Alaska and seeking a spouse, the odds are good, but the goods are odd.

    I’ve heard that funny saying before about Alaska. Thanks for the reminder.

  201. Nancy2 wrote:

    SureWhyNot? wrote:

    He needs to chop some wood or spend some time in a bar full of marines to understand the alpha male directive.

    Piper would never make it through a wives of 5th Group SF “while the boyz are deployed” party!

    Too funny!!!

  202. Christiane wrote:

    I’m amused by Piper’s phrase ‘Masculinity has been an endangered species’.

    I hope to live long enough to see New Calvinism on the rare and endangered species list.

  203. Muslin, fka Dee Holmes & mirele wrote:

    Now let’s switch to the pewpeons. I can guarantee you there have been employees of my too big to fail financial institution who attended Bethlehem Baptist. I can also guarantee you that bringing Piper’s nonsense about what women should and should not do would not go over well at my employer. I suspect this is pretty much the case for most non-church jobs in the USA today.

    And the NeoCalvinists seem to be, like many evangelicals, relentless in their attacks on gays. And then there’s the people like me who work jobs in the real world, with a gay supervisor, gay colleagues, and strict anti-discrimination laws (California) that violating could get a person fired from their job and the employer sued.

    My gay colleagues are far nicer and more professional than the entire leadership at my former 9 Marxist/John MacArthur-ite/NeoCalvinist/Complmentarian-Patriarchy promoting church (Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley). The people in these NeoCal churches don’t live and work in the real world but in their own special little bubbles where they never have to get along with anyone who is different.

  204. @ Dale:

    “Could it be that when the focus is not on Christ that problems ensue?”
    +++++++++++++

    i’d say to be human is for problems to ensue, with or without God/Jesus/Holy Spirit and bible and prayer and any number of good and positive things.

    we do our best, though.

  205. Max wrote:

    Christiane wrote:

    I’m amused by Piper’s phrase ‘Masculinity has been an endangered species’.

    I hope to live long enough to see New Calvinism on the rare and endangered species list.

    I’m thinking that the neo-Cal version of a ‘real man’ is part coward, part jerk, all self-absorbed, obsessed with sex, self-serving, and boldly going into greater and greater heights of misogyny than ever before …. in short, you may get your wish 🙂

  206. siteseer wrote:

    More from Piper,

    And there are things about this guy that are remarkably tender, kind, warm, nurturing (the kinds of things we would associate with a woman).

    This guy creeps me out!

  207. Darlene wrote:

    When I read that paragraph, I couldn’t help but think how Piper sounds as though he might have smoked just a bit too much reefer. Thanks for the laughs!

    Piper would’ve been right at home among these teens and adult hippies who were stoned on weed:

    That 70’s Show (American TV sit com, getting high in the basement scene):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SolmwnWnWW4

  208. Ken G wrote:

    @ Darlene:
    Piper doesn’t share that view. Here is what he recently told a young women regarding marriage,
    http://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/will-i-be-single-for-the-rest-of-my-life

    Okay, I read the article and Piper’s advice is far better than what I’ve read/heard from the Neo-Cal Camp insofar as he isn’t pushing marriage as the main means of fulfillment. However, this conference posted with the video here at TWW with Piper, Wilson, Darrin Patrick, etc. begins with the premise that marriage is the Ideal. Just listen to Doug Wilson’s views that Genesis teaches man should not be alone, that bachelorhood is not a normal course of affairs. So that’s all well and good what Piper instructs to this troubled young woman named Ashley. However, what they actually practice and teach – the Neo-Cals as a group – is that marriage is the preferred status of Christians. Just look at what Dale quoted up thread from Bethlehem Baptist’s Church website, the church Piper pastored for decades:

    “Toward this end, we will devote a significant portion of our preaching and teaching ministry to strengthening marriages and families.”

    Think about that. If this young woman, Ashley, was attending a church that does this, no wonder she feels discouraged. Which causes me to consider just how often the sermons at Bethlehem Baptist made singles feel excluded. Not only that, but in reading Ashley’s words, it is evident that she doesn’t think she has much of a place in the local church. I would say that she feels that her role as a woman in the church is stifled. That the opportunities for her to be involved in ministry are minuscule. When Ashley speaks of being “serving material”, I wonder if she wasn’t asked to babysit for the married couples on a regular basis and that somehow she was supposed to find fulfillment in that. Certainly, she doesn’t speak of serving in a positive light and I’m curious as to why. In other words, I really wonder if she didn’t think as though there were no meaningful ways that she could minister in her local congregation. If she is attending a Neo-Cal church, that would certainly be the case. So, the main thing left for her to have a fulfilling life is marriage and bearing children. And let’s face it, this is really the message the Complementarian Neo-Cals are sending to single women.

  209. Max wrote:

    Christiane wrote:

    I’m amused by Piper’s phrase ‘Masculinity has been an endangered species’.

    I hope to live long enough to see New Calvinism on the rare and endangered species list.

    So do I and the sooner the better.

  210. mot wrote:

    Max wrote:
    Christiane wrote:
    I’m amused by Piper’s phrase ‘Masculinity has been an endangered species’.
    I hope to live long enough to see New Calvinism on the rare and endangered species list.
    So do I and the sooner the better.

    Ditto! Just think of a world with no more Neo-Cal Conferences where their leaders are propped up on the stage as Wise Gurus dispensing deep theological truths. 😉

  211. Lea wrote:

    Half the problem with these guys is that they feel the need to label everything masculine or feminine and yet they recognize that these are qualities that are really NOT masculine or feminine solely, they are shared qualities. It’s like they are halfway to truth but they can’t get there because they are so wedded to gender theology. If they would just stop this stupid idea that ‘backbone’ is masculine and ‘kindness’ is feminine and so on and so forth they would stop being quite so stupid.

    ^This is spot on.

  212. Dale wrote:

    Dale wrote:

    Toward this end, we will devote a significant portion of our preaching and teaching ministry to strengthening marriages and families.

    Interesting that with all the focus on marriage at Bethlehem that Piper would have marital issues. Could it be that when the focus is not on Christ that problems ensue?

    1 Cor. 2:2: “For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.”

    This why when people insist that speculating on his marriage and public pronouncements on such is gossip or slander, they are dead wrong.

    Since the 80’s, Piper has put himself out there as an expert on biblical male/female relationships. His writings and speaking on the subject are prolific. He has marketed himself as an expert interpreting for God on these relationships.

    People would be fools not to question his words and deeds.

  213. JeffB wrote:

    The prize for the most ridiculous comment on this subject, imho, still goes to Mark Driscoll, who said that he couldn’t respect Jesus if he could beat Him up. I would be concerned if a ten-year-old said that.

    I hadn’t heard that one but I agree with you that sounds like a man who never got past a certain level of emotional development and should probably not be teaching anyone anything.

  214. Dave A A wrote:

    To me this is the most bizzare of all the celeb pastor firings of the last couple years– including the fact that it’s been almost a year and AFAIK Patrick has made no attempt at a comeback.

    They definitely kept a better lid on the details than most of the other scandals. This one made me curious because of the odd way they phrased the whole thing…something about sexual sin but not full on cheating? Another example from the ‘make sure they know of the fifteen things I did wrong I didn’t actually commit adultery!’ file.

  215. Darlene wrote:

    Okay, I read the article and Piper’s advice is far better than what I’ve read/heard from the Neo-Cal Camp insofar as he isn’t pushing marriage as the main means of fulfillment.

    Except for the fact that Piper’s Bethlehem Baptist Church routinely publicly disciplines and excommunicates godly Christian women who leave abusive husbands/marriages. A woman named Natalie has been lied about by BBC pastors/elders before hundreds of church members at BBC for leaving an abusive husband of several decades to protect herself and her children.

  216. siteseer wrote:

    Throughout history, masculinity has been an endangered species?? Under assault?? I have no words. Do these guys have any idea what it’s been like to live as a female through the vast majority of history?

    I really don’t know what they think. It makes no sense at all to say that sort of thing.

  217. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    He said HUMBLE — everybody take a drink!
    And WINSOME — everybody take another drink!

    Reminds me of “Tubthumping” by Chumbawamba, although it’s post-groovy era:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2H5uWRjFsGc

    He drinks a whisky drink
    He drinks a vodka drink
    He drinks a lager drink
    He drinks a cider drink
    He sings the songs that
    Remind him of the good times
    He sings the songs that
    Remind him of the better times:
    Oh Danny boy, Danny boy, Danny boy…

  218. ishy wrote:

    seems like they just want to act like jerks and call it masculine.

    Bingo.

    They also get really upset if someone complains that they have acted like jerks.

  219. Darlene wrote:

    mot wrote:

    Max wrote:
    Christiane wrote:
    I’m amused by Piper’s phrase ‘Masculinity has been an endangered species’.
    I hope to live long enough to see New Calvinism on the rare and endangered species list.
    So do I and the sooner the better.

    Ditto! Just think of a world with no more Neo-Cal Conferences where their leaders are propped up on the stage as Wise Gurus dispensing deep theological truths.

    The seminaries producing these fellas need to die also

  220. elastigirl wrote:

    as were crawford loritts’. you weren’t buying into it, were you, crawford. it was the weirdest thing you ever heard, right? why did you give in and start nodding your head?

    I think it was a wary head shake, like when you start shaking your head at someone hoping they’ll stop talking about something.

  221. Nancy2 wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    Which makes me wonder just exactly how they even know how women feel and think
    Well,duh! They TELL women how to feel and think!

    And yet, women – even in Complementarian churches – have their own feelings and thoughts, although I doubt these Neo-Cal men put much stock in them. I honestly believe that many of their women in the Comp. Camp are sold on gender roles against their inward convictions and beliefs. But it would seem the only way to survive in that environment is to go along with the status quo. It takes a certain kind of courage to be willing to be ostracized for one’s convictions in a Neo-Cal, Comp church. One would have to be determined not to care what their peers think of them. They would have to be willing to risk being reprimanded publicly, ignored/shunned, disciplined, and excommunicated. Now that would be a woman with backbone. I don’t think Piper would actually appreciate a woman with backbone if it meant that she would stand up to the Neo-Cal status quo.

  222. okrapod wrote:

    So, you wimps in your ‘masculine’ churches will be a little safer we hope because my son and a lot of other mothers’ sons think there is more to being a man than sitting around fantasizing and whining.

    I really do wonder about the John Pipers out there.

    Piper wants things “just so” in order for him to feel safe, secure, or to feel that all is right with the genders.

    How does Piper, and complementarian guys like him, expect his fans to function in the real world, when they do things such as hold a secular job, where they may be working with or for very blunt, out-spoken, direct or bold women?

    Not all women out there are Christians, are complementarian, or give a fig what Piper says.

    Piper seems to think his masculinity or security is at least partially dependent on how women dress or behave around him.

    Well, Piper, women are not all the same, none (not even Christian ones), are beholden to you and your whims and preferences and your weird views of how you “think” women should be.

    If your gender theology leaves you this weak (at the mercy of how other women dress, talk, behave, or if they work out at the gym or not), there is something amiss with your gender theology.

  223. Lea wrote:

    JeffB wrote:
    The prize for the most ridiculous comment on this subject, imho, still goes to Mark Driscoll, who said that he couldn’t respect Jesus if he could beat Him up. I would be concerned if a ten-year-old said that.
    I hadn’t heard that one but I agree with you that sounds like a man who never got past a certain level of emotional development and should probably not be teaching anyone anything.

    Not to mention that our Lord was flogged and severely beat up just before He ascended Calvary. Driscoll was/is clueless.

  224. Darlene wrote:

    I don’t think Piper would actually appreciate a woman with backbone if it meant that she would stand up to the Neo-Cal status quo.

    Women with a backbone in these churches tend to get excommunicated if it comes time to show it.

  225. Lea wrote:

    Actions tell you who they really are. These men do nothing but talk endlessly.

    There is a term used on some sites by ex-Christians, or by folks who are flirting with becoming ex-Christian, and it’s a little on the crude side – but I feel it aptly describes what you’re saying of Piper and crew.

    That word is “theojizzling.” (A riff off “theologizing”. I hope I spelled both correctly.)

    It sort of denotes the self-absorbed, blinder-wearing, navel-gazing tendencies of Professional (or arrogant) Christians who are living in the Evangelical Bubble, who like to pontificate or debate endlessly about Bible passages or church doctrines.

    They don’t really DO anything or accomplish anything, or make anyone’s life easier or better, but they like to listen to the sound of their own voices.

    If Piper had to live life as a woman, his views and teachings on women would change about 180 degrees.

    It’s very easy for him to spout off his gender drivel as he doesn’t have to live with most of the patronizing or negative ramifications of it.

  226. dee wrote:

    Beakerj wrote:
    . He’s never seen what actually happens when males & females just act out their humanness within a freeing environment, he doesn’t know what people actually are in terms of their talents, capabilities, qualities & so on because he’s never seen these actually just be allowed to unfold & be used.
    I would love to observe Piper if he had to depend on a female officer in a serious situation. I wonder if he would feel uncomfortable?

    Or what about a female physician in the E.R. able to save his life? I seriously doubt whether he would be concerned about gender roles at that point.

  227. MidwesternEasterner wrote:

    The spoof news site Newslo did a satire article about John Piper a while back.
    http://www.newslo.com/pastor-john-piper-women-who-wax-their-private-parts-are-hurting-gods-work/

    That article was hilarious. I had no idea that Piper preached against women waxing their private parts. If one would go along with his thinking, then men shouldn’t ever shave because God gave them whiskers. Piper: I call bluff on you! Stop shaving and look like a man!!

  228. Ken F wrote:

    Max wrote:
    Driscoll explains, “Jesus was not a long-haired … effeminate-looking dude”; rather, he had “callused hands and big biceps.”
    The problem is often with the extremes. The most common portrayals of Jesus make him look like a bearded woman from a bad make-up commercial: soft pink cheeks, long flowing locks, soft focus, pouty eyes, and in dress. Isn’t that an insult to both men and women? I can understand a reaction against that portrayal, but too far in the other extreme is no better. Wouldn’t it be great if Jesus could be portrayed as a more normal person?

    As an Orthodox Christian, I don’t see these kind of portrayals of Christ in the icons in our church. I do, however, know that quite a bit of Jesus art portrays him as a white, leaning toward effeminate, male. Back in the hippie days, there was a popular poster portraying Jesus as a Revolutionary, and in it He looked quite manly and masculine.
    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/22/68/36/226836698a863b513a6300f2b7294738.jpg

  229. Darlene wrote:

    MidwesternEasterner wrote:
    The spoof news site Newslo did a satire article about John Piper a while back.
    http://www.newslo.com/pastor-john-piper-women-who-wax-their-private-parts-are-hurting-gods-work/
    /
    That article was hilarious. I had no idea that Piper preached against women waxing their private parts. If one would go along with his thinking, then men shouldn’t ever shave because God gave them whiskers. Piper: I call bluff on you! Stop shaving and look like a man!!

    He didn’t. It’s a parody site. You can click the “Show facts” button and see the parts that are true. But… what he did say, taken to its logical end, pretty much ends up in the same place.

  230. Lea wrote:

    Darlene wrote:

    I don’t think Piper would actually appreciate a woman with backbone if it meant that she would stand up to the Neo-Cal status quo.

    Women with a backbone in these churches tend to get excommunicated if it comes time to show it.

    You are telling the truth. Only women who just blindly go along are wanted in these “churches.”

  231. ishy wrote:

    He didn’t. It’s a parody site. You can click the “Show facts” button and see the parts that are true. But… what he did say, taken to its logical end, pretty much ends up in the same place.

    That guy is very strange. You really can’t tell the difference between the real McPiper stuff and the Piper/Parodies

  232. Darlene wrote:

    As an Orthodox Christian, I don’t see these kind of portrayals of Christ in the icons in our church.

    The Orthodox icons are MUCH better – no comparison.

  233. Beakerj wrote:

    This is what happens when someone has lived within a world of heavily described gender roles their whole lives. He’s never seen what actually happens when males & females just act out their humanness within a freeing environment, he doesn’t know what people actually are in terms of their talents, capabilities, qualities & so on because he’s never seen these actually just be allowed to unfold & be used. He lives in a world where you limit or stretch what you are according to your chromosomes. I feel sorry for him, coming later in the game to the church means that all his rantings look ridiculous when you’ve seen what humans are, without the boxes.

    While I went Christmas shopping, my 6’2″ retired Light Weapons Specialist Green Beret husband make sugar cookies! I had to tell him a few things about making the cookies before I left (yes, I assume authority and teach the man, bite me!) but he made the cookies from scratch all by himself – 2 batches! ………. He used the measuring spoons and cups, rolling pin, pastry mat, cookie cutters, baking sheets, cooling racks……. The cookies came out great!
    I wonder what Piper and his groupies would say about that!

  234. mot wrote:

    You are telling the truth. Only women who just blindly go along are wanted in these “churches.”

    Yep. I’ve been a Baptsit most of my life, but I’m not a “good fit” anymore……… even in the non-Neo-Cal SBC churches around here!

  235. DEE & DEB … Hold on! Temps are predicted to be in the 60s by middle of next week in the Raleigh area.

  236. I was going to write that Piper is a total creep on so many levels, but I’ve written that before, so I won’t. Whoops! I just did! Oh well. Bummer, man!

  237. Nancy2 wrote:

    mot wrote:

    You are telling the truth. Only women who just blindly go along are wanted in these “churches.”

    Yep. I’ve been a Baptsit most of my life, but I’m not a “good fit” anymore……… even in the non-Neo-Cal SBC churches around here!

    I have been Southern Baptist for soon to be 43 years and I am not wanted because I believe God uses men and women for whatever purposes he desires.

  238. Velour wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    Okay, I read the article and Piper’s advice is far better than what I’ve read/heard from the Neo-Cal Camp insofar as he isn’t pushing marriage as the main means of fulfillment.
    Except for the fact that Piper’s Bethlehem Baptist Church routinely publicly disciplines and excommunicates godly Christian women who leave abusive husbands/marriages. A woman named Natalie has been lied about by BBC pastors/elders before hundreds of church members at BBC for leaving an abusive husband of several decades to protect herself and her children.

    Velour: Well yeah, I explained further on in my comment that the advice Piper gives to Ashley at the Desiring God site is different from how Neo-Cals operate generally and how Bethlehem Baptist Church operates specifically. Two conflicting messages and the one that gets preached and taught consistently is that women are most happy, fulfilled and most glorifying to God when they are married and raising children.

  239. Darlene wrote:

    Velour: Well yeah, I explained further on in my comment that the advice Piper gives to Ashley at the Desiring God site is different from how Neo-Cals operate generally and how Bethlehem Baptist Church operates specifically. Two conflicting messages and the one that gets preached and taught consistently is that women are most happy, fulfilled and most glorifying to God when they are married and raising children.

    Which leads me to ask what does Piper believe makes men happy, fulfilled and most glorifying to God?
    Whi

  240. roebuck wrote:

    I was going to write that Piper is a total creep on so many levels, but I’ve written that before, so I won’t. Whoops! I just did! Oh well. Bummer, man!

    You saved me having to write it. Thanks.

  241. Ken F wrote:

    The entries on Wikipedia for masculinity and femininity are informative. This is a topic that can tend to get people spun up because of differing views on what masculinity and femininity are or should be.

    Indeed, it is treading on thin ice to speak of the subject within the confines of a church, so much depends on the meaning of words. I have seen a number of lists that compare “feminine” and “masculine” characteristics. Setting aside their validity relative to the sexes, I observed years ago that in the church I left behind that the supposed feminine virtues were lauded but the masculine were suppressed.

    I wonder if that isn’t what so many men have rebelled against. The idea that their only role in the church is that of a submissive little woman. I don’t think any woman should be a submissive little woman and have lived long enough to see a the supposed gender characteristics broadly distributed between men and women.

    That said, due to cultural conditioning, I think more women than men are willing to put up with being relegated to the role of “the little woman”. I think what many should resent is the authoritarian system that degrades the value of all but the leaders, that the only gift we can exercise is to sit down, shut up, and listen. So for those men who are put off by the “feminization of the church”, don’t begrudge women, instead recognize the problem is an institution that infantalizes all adults, both men and women, and blocks them from achieving their potential.

  242. Darlene wrote:

    Two conflicting messages and the one that gets preached and taught consistently is that women are most happy, fulfilled and most glorifying to God when they are married and raising children.

    Thanks Darlene.

    I did read your entire comment and I understood what you meant. What is lived out at Piper’s (now former) church Bethlehem Baptist is pure evil in what is done to wives who are forced to leave abusive marriages.

  243. @ Max:
    Can’t wait! It’s been fun, but now I’m ready to get back to normal. 
    😉

    That's one of the benefits of living in the South.

  244. dee wrote:

    I have never seen 2 degrees ever predicted for a night time low in this area.

    I grew up in the Great Lakes region and regularly experienced below zero temps. Now I live in the Poconos and we get cold temps at night in the teens and lower. But this region is still not as cold and blustery as the Great Lakes region. Cold weather has just become a part of the cycle of nature for me because I’ve always lived in a climate that has several months of winter weather.

  245. Darlene wrote:

    Which leads me to ask what does Piper believe makes men happy, fulfilled and most glorifying to God?

    I didn’t want all that other text with this question. But I’d really like to know what Piper has taught men in this regard. I’m sure there are some TWW’s that have the answer.

  246. IMO, I think Crawford is horrified by what he is hearing in much the same way that any of us might be horrified and embarrassed in his situation. Think of an embarrassing in-law who just cannot stop talking nonsense, usually after too much alcohol. IIRC from decades ago, Crawford was a chaplain for a pro football/basketball team, so he probably knows that it is unlikely for someone to break their neck playing flag football in the backyard. That is also why Doug Wilson and Darrin Patrick were so quick to jump on that detail when given the chance.

    The imp in me wants to say that Crawford is thinking that Karen Loritts could metaphorically break Piper’s neck with an “appropriately masculine” look from her lovely and intelligent eye. She is intelligent and funny and articulate. Piper could learn a lot from her. However, like it or not, Loritts is experiencing the un-fun part of being in a coalition. You get to share equal billing with an adolescent who looks like he has not groomed himself in a couple of weeks, an aging theologian who is speaking nonsense, and Doug Wilson who defies categories except that he is reliably pro-Doug.

    I am not a psy*, but IMO there is something seriously wrong with Piper’s schema(s) of human relationships such that they are reduced primarily to rank. It would be extremely helpful if he could come to understand how he has wandered so far off course and why and the impact that has had on his own marriage and children. Think of the good that could come of that for all of his disciples and their families and congregations!

  247. Christiane wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    As an Orthodox Christian, I don’t see these kind of portrayals of Christ in the icons in our church.
    LOVE the very reverent icon of Christ shown in this orthodox Church:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHi-1taeqeo

    And you’ll notice in this hymn, which is call the Trisagion, that the beauty of it is both Female and Male voices joined together in harmony, praising the Lord. So much for Piper’s views on male dominating the singing in church.

  248. Darlene wrote:

    That article was hilarious. I had no idea that Piper preached against women waxing their private parts.

    Jesus wept. What will that sad old man come up with next?

  249. As if I did not already write enough in the previous comment, I think that Piper’s rationale for Recovering Biblical Mahood and Womanhood reveals a lot about Piper’s thoughts about one’s identity as a man or a woman. He says that a parent should be able to answer the question of a child “What does it mean to be a man?” and “What does it mean to be a woman?” I thought that was extremely odd because I have never heard a child ask that question. Maybe the kids I knew/know are weird. Or maybe Piper asked that question of himself because it was not apparent from his close adults.pr

    Before Bob criticizes me for speculating about Piper, I want to say that Piper condemns me and every other woman as prone to rebellion. Without knowing me and without a shred of textual evidence. I regret what Piper has written and said and the damage he has done to so many. I sincerely hope that he and his disciples will repent of their false teaching and correct it in the way that the Apostle Paul did when he he was confronted by the risen Christ and the Apostle Peter did when he was confronted by the Apostle Paul.

  250. Dale wrote:

    Bethlehem Baptist is a 9Marks church in the mold of The Village Church in Dallas. Members must agree to abide by a set of “Relational Commitments.” Here is a link to them:
    http://www.hopeingod.org/document/relational-commitments
    “Just as church leaders are involved in beginning a marriage, they should be involved when it is threatened with seeming dissolution. Therefore, when a member of Bethlehem is considering divorce, he or she is expected to bring the situation to our elders and cooperate with them as they determine whether biblical grounds exist for the separation, and as they endeavor to promote repentance and reconciliation”

    The best thing to do in this case, if one attends The Village Church, go to a J.P. to get married. Oh, and by the way, those Village Church leaders haven’t been involved in the beginning of all the marriages of their members. What about the members who married before they ever started attending TVC? I’d wager that there might even be some members who married when Chandler and the Village Church elders were in diapers. 🙂

  251. Darlene wrote:

    That article was hilarious. I had no idea that Piper preached against women waxing their private parts.

    Maybe (like Muscular Women) that also provoked Unnatural Arousal in a Man…

    Or we may be getting another involuntary peek into a ManaGAWD’s sexual fantasies…

  252. Velour wrote:

    And the NeoCalvinists seem to be, like many evangelicals, relentless in their attacks on gays.

    Because it means that another, bigger, tougher Man somewhere might treat and use them the way they do a woman.

  253. elastigirl wrote:

    the opportunity to be an idol and doing what they tell you as you take your place on the pedestal in the spotlight in front of crowds and being paid handsomely for it does funny things to people. which i would think they end up regretting.

    Referencing a foolish thing to confound the Predestined Wise…

    “But such is the lure of the limelight, how sweetly
    It takes hold of the mind of its host…”
    — Ponyphonic, “Lullaby for a Princess”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7PQ9IO-7fU

  254. ishy wrote:

    I think that’s definitely a reason, but I think there’s a bigger one. It’s easier to control a whole lot of people if you have a large group of them suppressed by the others. The Calvinistas aren’t just in the business of promoting marriage. They are in the business of organizing people underneath them to promote themselves and their churches. They get husbands to “keep control” of the women, which effectively puts half the population into slavery of a sort.

    How can you have the thrill of Holding the Whip when there is nobody beneath you to Feel the Whip?

  255. @ Nancy2:
    I baked raisin brown bread for my neighbors for Christmas. In between batches, I shot targets with my pistol in the backyard, placing shots in quarter-size groups at 10 meters. Then went back in the house to fight New Calvinists in the blogosphere. Piper would have trouble putting a fix on me.

  256. Dale wrote:

    Would you seek counseling at Bethlehem given their one-sided definition of confidentiality?
    “Confidentiality is an important factor in establishing a relationship to receive spiritual counsel. The leader providing spiritual counsel will keep confidentiality except in the following situations:
    2) when a person refuses to repent of sin and it becomes necessary to promote repentance through accountability and redemptive church discipline (Matt. 18:15-20);”

    I’d have to be kooky to agree to their terms of confidentiality. Sin is whatever they determine it to be. If you disagree with the pastor = sin. If you question a particular teaching = sin. If you don’t submit to your husband as they think you should = sin. Heck, Neo-Cals are proficient at finding sin behind every rock, crevice and corner. Further, this shows that they are clueless when it comes to counseling in the first place. People seeking counseling do so because they have….you guessed it….PROBLEMS. So now these inept counselors can turn your problems into sin, thereby releasing them from confidentiality. The client has absolutely no right to privacy whatsoever. Anything they say to the counselor is information that can be exposed to the elders. Oh, and by the way, the same kind of Non-Confidentiality exists at The Bible Church of Little Rock, where Frank Turk of Pyromaniacs blog teaches. Here’s there Non-Confidentiality Consent to Counseling form:
    http://www.bclr.org/wp-content/uploads/Counseling-Forms-Combined.pdf

  257. Ken F wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
    Even within the same sentence?
    Not necessarily in the same sentence, but certainly in two adjacent sentences, like this: http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/how-shall-we-fight-for-joy
    1. Realize that authentic joy in God is a gift.
    2. Realize that joy must be fought for relentlessly.

    4. Learn the secret of gutsy guilt – how to fight like a justified sinner.

    What does #4 even mean? Please, can somebody here translate Piper for me?

  258. @ Muff Potter:

    Let’s face it. These guys (Piper, Chandler, and crew) are terrified of women. Their flesh, their mystique, and their primal power, all converge to a spear point these kinds of men fear greatly. Rather than embracing them as powerful allies (which is what the Hebrew word ezer amounts to), they pursue a course of idiocy cloaked in religion.

  259. There’s an aspect to this I haven’t seen anyone bring up yet.

    Many of the NeoCal guys I’ve known have some pretty serious emotional problems that they try to control through sheer force of reason. They’re afraid to face the demons inside of them. That’s why they hate psychology so much.

    Generally speaking, I find women to be emotionally stronger than men because they’re better at experiencing and processing their emotions. In NeoCalvinism the male tendency to suppress emotions is seen as a virtue rather than a weakness.

    These guys don’t know how to experience their own emotions and outsource that job to women. But only the feelings that men think are safe are permitted. Emotion has to be bounded by their own “masculine rationality.” If the “feminine feels” aren’t kept under control, the men might have to face their own demons. And they can’t have that.

  260. dee wrote:

    Women have so much to give to the church and it makes me sad that they are relegated to flourishing after the men do the leading. …

    If all men mysteriously vanished off the earth tomorrow, or from some sort of disease that only affects males (like in some kind of “Twilight Zone” television episode), what does Piper think would happen to Christianity and/or the church then?

    I think the faith would continue on just fine in such a scenario. Women don’t need men to “be in charge of them,” or be a “covering,” or for teaching, biblical comprehension, etc.

    (Before anyone jumps all over me for that, if there were any Christians advocating a ‘Matriarchal’ version of the faith, I’d just switch it around: if all women disappeared tomorrow, the faith would continue on as-is, just fine, if only men were in existence).

    I guess one of the points I’m trying to make is that complementarian guys like Piper (unlike the Bible) make Christianity, or the church, far, far too dependent in some fashion on gender/sex (in his case, upon the male sex).

  261. dee wrote:

    After making taco soup

    Taco soup? I like tacos, and I like soup, but you may have to reassure me that Taco Soup is indeed not only edible but very yummy. I am skeptical. 🙂

  262. Darlene wrote:

    dee

    You might enjoy the post I wrote about Christmas a couple of years ago. It involves a Christmas eve I spent in an old mountain bar in Ouray, Colorado.
    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2013/12/23/in-an-old-mountain-bar-on-christmas-eve/

    Dee: That is at the top of the list as one of the best Christmas Eve stories I’ve ever read. I was able to visualize all of it in my mind’s eye.

    wow, like finding and opening a gift that got lost behind a chair when all the others were opened … a beautiful bit of golden warmth in the middle of a snow storm …. thank you so much for sharing this here and now 🙂

    I urge everyone to read it. It’s like being hugged by angels. 🙂

  263. R2 wrote:

    There’s an aspect to this I haven’t seen anyone bring up yet.

    Many of the NeoCal guys I’ve known have some pretty serious emotional problems that they try to control through sheer force of reason. They’re afraid to face the demons inside of them. That’s why they hate psychology so much.

    Generally speaking, I find women to be emotionally stronger than men because they’re better at experiencing and processing their emotions. In NeoCalvinism the male tendency to suppress emotions is seen as a virtue rather than a weakness.

    These guys don’t know how to experience their own emotions and outsource that job to women. But only the feelings that men think are safe are permitted. Emotion has to be bounded by their own “masculine rationality.” If the “feminine feels” aren’t kept under control, the men might have to face their own demons. And they can’t have that.

    I’m not a Mormon, but this is one area where they definitely do have a leg up on the NeoCals. Mormons generally don’t see anything unmasculine about expressing emotion.

  264. rsiteseer wrote:

    Throughout history, masculinity has been an endangered species?? Under assault?? I have no words. Do these guys have any idea what it’s been like to live as a female through the vast majority of history?

    They are in denial. Anyone who even has just a rudimentary understanding of human history knows that men have not been an endangered species. They would know that it is women who have struggled to be emancipated and recognized as human beings deserving the same rights and freedoms as men.

  265. Ken F wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Even within the same sentence?

    Not necessarily in the same sentence, but certainly in two adjacent sentences, like this: http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/how-shall-we-fight-for-joy

    1. Realize that authentic joy in God is a gift.
    2. Realize that joy must be fought for relentlessly.

    It’s a new technique being employed by those who are attempting to create an ‘alternate’ reality: make statements that not just ‘saddle the fence’ but appear on BOTH SIDES of the fence, so you are always in the clear as far as calling the shots. The ‘alternate’ reality thing requires a way of thinking that does not allow for questioning or even pointing out that the double-talk exists. Question it, or point out ‘the obvious’, and your credibility will be disparaged. It’s a strange new world.

  266. R2 wrote:

    Many of the NeoCal guys I’ve known have some pretty serious emotional problems that they try to control through sheer force of reason. They’re afraid to face the demons inside of them. That’s why they hate psychology so much.

    Bingo.

    That was my experience at my ex-church Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley.
    Pastor/elders from abusive backgrounds taking it out on others, unwilling to face their own demons and what abusive people they had become.

  267. ishy wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    MidwesternEasterner wrote:
    The spoof news site Newslo did a satire article about John Piper a while back.
    http://www.newslo.com/pastor-john-piper-women-who-wax-their-private-parts-are-hurting-gods-work/
    /
    That article was hilarious. I had no idea that Piper preached against women waxing their private parts. If one would go along with his thinking, then men shouldn’t ever shave because God gave them whiskers. Piper: I call bluff on you! Stop shaving and look like a man!!
    He didn’t. It’s a parody site. You can click the “Show facts” button and see the parts that are true. But… what he did say, taken to its logical end, pretty much ends up in the same place.

    Oh my…this reminds me of the first time I read an article from The Onion. My son was the one who first showed me the article. I took it seriously, not knowing that it was parody. Boy did I feel like a clueless, naive pushover.

  268. Darlene wrote:

    Heck, Neo-Cals are proficient at finding sin behind every rock, crevice and corner.

    Interesting, in a NYT article comment section recently, a writer suggested that some folks reduce our national conversation to: Neo-Cals vs. Secular Humanists.

    Comments: Michael Tide of Bothell, WA
    “A nice article, but an incomplete argument. Rep v. Dem cant be reduced to a Neo-Calvinist v. Secular Humanist formula. We have to examine what we mean by ‘good’ and ‘bad.'”

    and the NYT article was: The Opinion Pages | OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
    “Why Rural America Voted for Trump”, by ROBERT LEONARD JAN. 5, 2017.

    Apparently Neo-Cal really is a thing, all over the map, and in the secular news.

    Neo-Calvinist v. Secular Humanist was the formula of a 2009 documentary film with debates of Doug Wilson and the late Christopher Hitchens: “Collision”, http://bit.ly/2i5LreG.

    Bothell, WA is West, near Seattle, distant from Moscow, ID and Pullman, WA where Wilson resides.

  269. ishy wrote:

    He didn’t. It’s a parody site.

    But these Predestined Elect are so wack to start with, how can you tell?

  270. Darlene wrote:

    When I read that paragraph, I couldn’t help but think how Piper sounds as though he might have smoked just a bit too much reefer. Thanks for the laughs!

    More like acid or shrooms.
    (Or bath salts if you’re Driscoll or Wilson?)
    “Weed don’t make you do that!”

  271. mot wrote:

    Sad, to see someone like Piper leading so many people astray.

    Showed this post to a friend who assessed that Piper portrays the church as a brothel.

  272. Nancy2 wrote:

    Yep. I’ve been a Baptsit most of my life, but I’m not a “good fit” anymore……… even in the non-Neo-Cal SBC churches around here!

    what other denoms are present in your area, NANCY TWO?

  273. @ siteseer:

    “I’m curious how people get to this mindset where they view everything in life through a lens of sex? Qualities are not qualities in and of themselves but are expressions of sex. Everything is some kind of expression of sex.”
    ++++++++++++++

    they grew up in a subculture where sex is the unforgivable sin.

    “No, you can’t even think about it.”

    but then the sexual revolution hits christian culture (40 years late, of course). repression-on-penalty-of-something-too-horrible-for-words meets pseudo-liberation. Shame if you do overnight becomes shame if you don’t (but agree to the terms and conditions).

    i’m sure there’s a psychological term for what this does to people.

  274. elastigirl wrote:

    i’m sure there’s a psychological term for what this does to people.

    I look at these men: patriarchal yet apparently able to walk away from marriages towards younger women without guilt;
    and yet it’s the women that they condemn to lives of submissive, subordinate behaviors and the shame of being treated with ‘less’ dignity than any man within the faith community

    There are all kinds of ‘names’ for these behaviors in psychology, but maybe, for the sake of their souls, these men might begin to ask God to show them the truth about what the hell they are doing to the women and to themselves and to the children who are watching…..

    The latest I’m picking up on is that they can sin but it’s not counted against them, as Our Lord covers their deeds.

    I may be Catholic, but that is not even close to evangelical faith. And even I know that.

  275. linda wrote:

    Admittedly, a few women, mostly single, missed their weekly emotional high and went elsewhere.

    As a never married woman (hence single here) what on earth does their singleness have to do with anything?

    I’m not particularly a fan of emotional services and just prefer a calm, level- headed person giving a sermon.

  276. Daisy wrote:

    linda wrote:
    Admittedly, a few women, mostly single, missed their weekly emotional high and went elsewhere.
    As a never married woman (hence single here) what on earth does their singleness have to do with anything?
    I’m not particularly a fan of emotional services and just prefer a calm, level- headed person giving a sermon.

    Exactly, Daisy.

  277. @ Darlene:

    pastor-john-piper-women-who-wax-their-private-parts-are-hurting-gods-work/

    “Oh my…this reminds me of the first time I read an article from The Onion. My son was the one who first showed me the article. I took it seriously, not knowing that it was parody. Boy did I feel like a clueless, naive pushover.”
    +++++++++

    not clueless nor naive at all — why wouldn’t he say something like this? i’d put nothing ludicrous past him. by now we expect these kinds of things from him. it’s a weird new kind of entertainment.

  278. elastigirl wrote:

    @ Darlene:

    pastor-john-piper-women-who-wax-their-private-parts-are-hurting-gods-work/

    “Oh my…this reminds me of the first time I read an article from The Onion. My son was the one who first showed me the article. I took it seriously, not knowing that it was parody. Boy did I feel like a clueless, naive pushover.”
    +++++++++

    not clueless nor naive at all — why wouldn’t he say something like this? i’d put nothing ludicrous past him. by now we expect these kinds of things from him. it’s a weird new kind of entertainment.

    Poe’s law doesn’t just apply to fundamentalists, it apparently works on neocals, too.

    A personal anecdote: the first time I saw Mermaids: The Body Found on Animal Planet, I didn’t know it was a hoax. I thought it was a serious documentary and spent the next 24 hours believing in mermaids, until I went online to look up the mermaid researcher “Dr. Paul Robertson” and found out he was just an actor.

  279. Darlene wrote:

    And let’s face it, this is really the message the Complementarian Neo-Cals are sending to single women.

    It’s not just Neo Cal churches that do this.

    Even Non-Neo Cal Christian groups exclude adult single women, make them feel they are missing the mark if they are not married with children.

    I have seen the same emphasis on wifehood and motherhood for women from Non-Neo Cal Southern Baptist churches and from IFBs and other conservative Christian groups.

  280. Daisy wrote:

    I’m not particularly a fan of emotional services and just prefer a calm, level- headed person giving a sermon.

    I feel the same way. Two things I don’t appreciate in church: overly emotional or being yelled at. I don’t get up early and go to all the trouble to be there to get screamed at. I appreciate calm, balanced teaching and I expect to learn something.

  281. Daisy wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    And let’s face it, this is really the message the Complementarian Neo-Cals are sending to single women.
    It’s not just Neo Cal churches that do this.
    Even Non-Neo Cal Christian groups exclude adult single women, make them feel they are missing the mark if they are not married with children.
    I have seen the same emphasis on wifehood and motherhood for women from Non-Neo Cal Southern Baptist churches and from IFBs and other conservative Christian groups.

    I think a lot of churches have a bias against older singles in general. There must be something wrong with you, you must be this terrible sinner, you don’t fit in anywhere but maybe we will tolerate you.

  282. @ MidwesternEasterner:

    “…the first time I saw Mermaids: The Body Found on Animal Planet,”
    ++++++++

    oh this is funny. we love Shark Week on Discovery. Anyone remember the ‘documentary’ in South Africa, documenting the impossibly huge shark nicknamed Submarine?

    totally thought it was real. and those poor people trapped in the overturned boat with a few inches of air left over their heads, and Submarine zooming around below their legs… and that brave, brave man who swam through the dark waters dodging Submarine and rescued them one by one.

    “What a hero!!” i exclaimed, in choked-up amazement.

    (loved the mermaid ‘documentary’. if only it was true. still holding out for Bigfoot and extraterrestrials)

  283. Friend wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    He said HUMBLE — everybody take a drink!
    And WINSOME — everybody take another drink!

    Reminds me of “Tubthumping” by Chumbawamba, although it’s post-groovy era:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2H5uWRjFsGc

    He drinks a whisky drink
    He drinks a vodka drink
    He drinks a lager drink
    He drinks a cider drink
    He sings the songs that
    Remind him of the good times
    He sings the songs that
    Remind him of the better times:
    Oh Danny boy, Danny boy, Danny boy…

    Ah! I remember that tune! Was kinda like the theme song on TV during the cricket world cup in 1996 or 1999 ( can’t remember which).
    Hmm….that was 20 years ago…wow.

  284. I am single myself, I have never been married and I have no children. I did raise a nephew who said I was like a father to him and often tells me what an influence I was in his life. Of course, my evangelical side will not listen to such emotionalistic pablum all I need to hear is what a piece of trash I am and how I disgust God. After many years I am actually able to hear that from him now and it means a lot. My reasons for not being married are actually quite simple and most likely selfish at least that is what I was told when I was in real world faith communities. I was the primary/secondary care provider for about 31 years for family and the “ministry” I was in required so much time I did not want to drag a mate down that rabbit hole. Another reason, far more important, I did not earn a lot of money and I did not have a nice car, big muscles, etc.

    I did try a few times with women in the faith but it just never fully worked out. I can tell you this if you are older and single in many evangelical faith communities you are seen as a total failure and outside the will of God, in sin, pathetic etc. You are actually much more accepted if you have been married a few times, have a few kids, not paying any support in some circles and are messing around on the side.

    It is far better now in some faith communities in my area and I am seeing a change in that area.

  285. @ brian:

    i think you’re an excellent human being, brian.

    evangelical inept morons incapable of original thought are not in your league.

  286. Christiane wrote:

    The ‘alternate’ reality thing requires a way of thinking that does not allow for questioning or even pointing out that the double-talk exists… It’s a strange new world.

    Your observation is spot on, except the part about it being new. In one of the earlier threads was a discussion about the Westminster Confession of Faith. It has the same double-speak. It actually states that God ordains everything that comes to pass, and not in just a way that he foreknew. And yet it also says that God does not ordain evil, which means some things came to pass that God did not ordain. It makes God responsible for everything except the things that could make him look bad. The WCF was the basis for most of the other Calvinist Confessions, such as the Second London Confession. These confessions enable people to argue from both sides of their mouth. If this is how they have been taught to think, it’s no surprise to find so many contradictory aspects to New-Calvinist teaching.

  287. @ Daisy:
    The History Channel had a documentary a few years ago showing a reconstruction based on the Shroud of Turin. The 3D reconstruction of the face looked like like a normal person. Here’s the documentary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMCOyFjeycg. The face reveal starts at about 2:06:00, and one good sample is at 2:14:19. But anything on the History Channel has to be taken with a big grain of salt.

  288. R2 wrote:

    These guys don’t know how to experience their own emotions and outsource that job to women. But only the feelings that men think are safe are permitted. Emotion has to be bounded by their own “masculine rationality.” If the “feminine feels” aren’t kept under control, the men might have to face their own demons. And they can’t have that.

    Spot on! This is what I was taught growing up, and it was reinforced by my earlier “Christian” training. My wife is helping me to unpack all of this. But by now the trenches where I buried all that stuff is pretty deep. I might not be able to validate what you wrote through my feelings (yet), but I can validate it through what I was taught. It’s not a matter of men getting in touch with their feminine side. Rather, the challenge is to learn to identify and process emotions as real and important.

  289. Bill M wrote:

    instead recognize the problem is an institution that infantalizes all adults, both men and women, and blocks them from achieving their potential.

    Very good analysis. It sounds like it’s less of an issue of masculine/feminine, and more of an issue of infantilizing people from both genders by enforcing stereotypes.

  290. R2 wrote:

    These guys don’t know how to experience their own emotions and outsource that job to women. But only the feelings that men think are safe are permitted. Emotion has to be bounded by their own “masculine rationality.” If the “feminine feels” aren’t kept under control, the men might have to face their own demons.

    The thing is, pride is an emotion. So is anger. All this talk about hitting people is not unemotional rational talk! Stop pretending men aren’t emotional, because they are.

  291. Lea wrote:

    Stop pretending men aren’t emotional, because they are.

    Piper is one of the most emotional people I’ve ever seen. In fact, Desiring God seems to be a treatise on using one’s emotions to measure one’s spirituality. Surely this crowd isn’t claiming that men aren’t emotional?

  292. Velour wrote:

    Daisy wrote:
    dee wrote:
    After making taco soup
    Taco soup? I like tacos, and I like soup, but you may have to reassure me that Taco Soup is indeed not only edible but very yummy. I am skeptical.
    Taco soup rocks, Daisy.
    http://thepioneerwoman.com/cooking/chicken-tortilla-soup/

    I don’t think Chicken Tortilla soup is the same as taco soup. Look on pinterest, there are a bunch of recipes though. (although I love chicken tortilla soup too).

  293. Lea wrote:

    Velour wrote:
    Daisy wrote:
    dee wrote:
    After making taco soup
    Taco soup? I like tacos, and I like soup, but you may have to reassure me that Taco Soup is indeed not only edible but very yummy. I am skeptical.
    Taco soup rocks, Daisy.
    http://thepioneerwoman.com/cooking/chicken-tortilla-soup/
    I don’t think Chicken Tortilla soup is the same as taco soup. Look on pinterest, there are a bunch of recipes though. (although I love chicken tortilla soup too).

    Thanks, Lea, for that tip.

    Where I live (California) the two names are used interchangeably. But I do see that there is a difference in some of the ingredients: http://www.food.com/search/taco+soup

  294. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    Piper is one of the most emotional people I’ve ever seen.

    All the guys laughed at him for saying flag football and he went straight from that to ‘we broke a guys neck’. Fascinating.

    Women are always accused of being emotional and not rational but just watch this stuff.

  295. Gram3 wrote:

    I am not a psy*, but IMO there is something seriously wrong with Piper’s schema(s) of human relationships

    The bigger picture is that Piper and some other Christian leaders are quite comfortable completely making things up about *what it means to be human*, without the kind of ethical standards and rigorous analysis to which professionals are required to adhere. As the picture narrows, we begin to see that Piper’s schema is at odds with the findings and education developed over decades (centuries, really) of study. Then he tacks “god” on the end of it, and that makes teaching falsehood ok. Ken Ham does the same thing, propagating his blarney about the age of the earth, but that is relatively harmless. This gender garbage is actually harmful. Piper’s fruits will come after him.

  296. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    Ken Ham does the same thing, propagating his blarney about the age of the earth, but that is relatively harmless.

    The Young Earthers are no longer harmless, in my opinion. They will proclaim that anyone who doesn’t agree with them isn’t a Christian and isn’t saved. They have made a secondary issue a primary issue. They are a hateful group and they lack love.

  297. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    Desiring God seems to be a treatise on using one’s emotions to measure one’s spirituality.

    Great observation. Piper looks inward to how he feels. Is he experiencing satisfaction? The Christian’s calling is to look outward, to love others. He focuses on self, instead of denying self. This is fatal to true spiritual growth.

  298. Muff Potter wrote:

    it’s not just the Neo-Cals, there are Arminian leaning outfits a-plenty who also believe in and long for those good old days.

    True. It’s fair to say that “fundamentalists” of all stripes long for a golden age that never was.

  299. Nancy2 wrote:

    mot wrote:
    You are telling the truth. Only women who just blindly go along are wanted in these “churches.”
    Yep. I’ve been a Baptsit most of my life, but I’m not a “good fit” anymore……… even in the non-Neo-Cal SBC churches around here!

    I have not found any SBC Church that I ” fit into ” for several years now. I thought it was because I was stuck in East Texas….but in truth, it is this way with many people who formerly and still call themselves ” Southern Baptists.”

  300. K.D. wrote:

    it is this way with many people who formerly and still call themselves ” Southern Baptists.”

    Yes, many Southern Baptists are joining the “Done” ranks … done with church in its current state, but not done with Jesus.

  301. Daisy wrote:

    Taco soup? I

    It is awesome and a staple in the South. I learned of it while I was in Texas. Here is one quick recipe.
    1 lb hamburger and 1 onion. Brown and drain.

    Add one can each of the following-Do not Drain them first.
    Black beans
    Pinto bean or chili beans depending how much heat you like.
    Creamed corn or regular corn (I like the creamed for consistency
    Rotel tomatoes: Mild regular or fire roasted
    Tomato sauce or Diced tomatoes
    Then
    1 pk of Ranch Dressing (dry)
    1 pk Taco seasons-mild or regular
    1 -2 tsp cilantro optional if you hate cilantro)

    Then cook on low all day or high for a few hours.

    Serve with a dollop or sour cream, shredded cheese (I like Colby Jack or Mexican without seasons) and a few cracked tortilla chips.

  302. ishy wrote:

    It’s a parody site.

    Yep the world is having fun with Piper. A macho challenge to men coming from a non-macho preacher is fascinating stuff. The “fake” John Piper tweets:

    “You can download my upcoming book on extra-masculine dudeness at a discount using our special “bro-mocode.” https://twitter.com/fakejohnpiper?lang=en

  303. Lea wrote:

    R2 wrote:
    These guys don’t know how to experience their own emotions and outsource that job to women. But only the feelings that men think are safe are permitted. Emotion has to be bounded by their own “masculine rationality.” If the “feminine feels” aren’t kept under control, the men might have to face their own demons.
    The thing is, pride is an emotion. So is anger. All this talk about hitting people is not unemotional rational talk! Stop pretending men aren’t emotional, because they are.

    Yes! So is cruelty, arrogance, sarcasm, humor, etc. People are really disagreeing over what are appropriate cultural displays of emotion or are politically correct emotions within their group/tribe. I tend to prefer the more subdued emotions that are not outwardly when it comes to groups but that does not mean there are no emotions going on. But then my parents raised us that way, too.

    Frankly, the emotionalism of the YRR is one thing that really turned me off trying to have discourse with them. They reminded me of middle school boys who cannot handle even basic disagreement and parroting points they had heard but did not really understand. They tend to view disagreement as personal disrespect. They literally become either angry or arrogant over the most trivial things. In their world that is an accepted display of emotion. And they are quick to project their own emotional response onto others who dare disagree with them.

  304. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    You mean that the top commander (the four-star general) is female?

    And the Major General who is the Chief of Staff.

    But I’ve noticed that even in the pentecostal church that I used to attend, everyone had their slot. “men’s ministry”, “women’s ministry”, “young adults” (the under 30 crowd), “ethnic fellowship” (which apparently is exclusively made up of folks who immigrated from Africa, “French fellowship” – which also appears to be made up of those who recently immigrated from African countries.

    I’m not really surprised at the gender obsession. Women are moving into “non-traditional” roles – pilots, mechanics, engineers, welders, railway workers. In our area, all of these programs have seen a dramatic increase in female enrolment.

    When I went to university in the late eighties, early nineties almost all engineering students were men, a couple of years back, the enrolment is almost 30% women.

    This scares men like Piper as women are not staying within their proper bucket.

    Interesting to note, the “men’s ministry” at the church I used to attend was held at 7pm on Wednesdays, “men’s bible study” was at 7pm Wednesday and 7am Monday.

    “Women’s ministry” and “bible study” was held at 10am on a Tuesday.

    Pretty obvious that working women were not considered in the scheduling of these groups so I’m guessing that many working women do not attend. My wife never did – she works full time.

  305. @ Max:

    Apparently Jared C. Wilson is the author of the Fake John Piper Twitter account. Thus it seems the account is less a satire and more an homage.

  306. R2 wrote:

    There’s an aspect to this I haven’t seen anyone bring up yet.
    Many of the NeoCal guys I’ve known have some pretty serious emotional problems that they try to control through sheer force of reason.

    Since there is no individual aspect to reason within determinism, this is a disaster. But I know what you are talking about. They are constantly forcing round pegs into square holes and dont even know it. It is pure cognitive dissonance. And I think they were attracted to determinism because they see it as “reason”. Yet, These are not young people who are champions of individual rights except their own.

    And it becomes pure Gnosticism where these boys view themselves as the specially anointed philosopher kings that God appointed to lead the ignorant toward their version of the Gospel. So they need to use forms of force like censoring, shame, guilt, membership covenants, love bombing, deception, obeying elders, etc to make it work.

  307. Lea wrote:

    Stop pretending men aren’t emotional, because they are.

    the Gospels also relate that Jesus at times gave way to these emotions and expressed his feelings physically – he wept (John 11:35),he even wailed (Luke 19:41), he sighed (Mark 7:34), he groaned (Mark 8:12), he flashed angry glares at people (Mark 3:5), he spoke with annoyance in his voice (Mark 10:14), or with chiding words (Mark 3:12). On occasion Jesus broke out in a rage (John 11:33, 38 as the Greek makes clear), or openly exulted (Luke 10:21), or cried aloud in utter desolation (Matt. 27:46).
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/robertcrosby/2012/06/the-emotional-jesus-his-ups-downs/

  308. It’s also sad that Piper had to prove his “manly” creds by mentioning that a man’s neck was broken in football and double sad that he was “called out” as somehow “unmanly” for bringing up flag football.

    If that story is even true.

  309. Jack wrote:

    Muff Potter wrote:

    it’s not just the Neo-Cals, there are Arminian leaning outfits a-plenty who also believe in and long for those good old days.

    True. It’s fair to say that “fundamentalists” of all stripes long for a golden age that never was.

    “As it was in the Days of The Prophet (pbuh)…”

  310. Lydia wrote:

    And it becomes pure Gnosticism where these boys view themselves as the specially anointed philosopher kings that God appointed to lead the ignorant toward their version of the Gospel

    Gnostic = “He Who KNOWS Things (and YOU DON’T!)”

  311. Lea wrote:

    Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    Piper is one of the most emotional people I’ve ever seen.

    All the guys laughed at him for saying flag football and he went straight from that to ‘we broke a guys neck’. Fascinating.

    Nothing says “MASCULINE” as the ability to hurt, maim, or kill those weaker than you.

    “We broke a guy’s neck” = ME TOUGH! SEE? SEE? SEE?

    In the Seventies pop-psychology Transactional Analysis (which originated the term “mind games”), one of the mind games cataloged is “Tough Guy” — bragging about being in on violence and power-tripping and hanging around with genuine mean/tough guys to Prove How Tough *I* Am. Whether said experience with “breaking a guy’s neck” is real, imagined, or deliberately fictional. “ME TOUGH! SEE? SEE? SEE?”

  312. Roger Bombast wrote:

    The years of selfless dedication to writing sheeps of height that none of you can approach is testimony to what hard work can achieve: if any of you whiners could be bothered, maybe you could sustain 50,000 words without saying anything too. But you can’t, so you never will

    Roger is absolutely right!

    When my wife gets off work today, I’m going to tell her exactly what her place is in this house!

    This will be followed by a move to the garden shed. Which is unheated. We have a cold wave and today is a balmy -20C (-4 F).

    MG is neither winsome nor enduring. I pull a Piper and it will be far warmer in the garden shed.

  313. brian wrote:

    I have never been married and I have no children. I did raise a nephew who said I was like a father to him

    So many of these evangelical “leaders” (Kevin DeYoung. Mark Driscoll) are so committed to producing a multitude of offspring with their subservient women that they don’t have time to worry about other peoples’ children who need homes and/or adult guidance and supervision.
    You are a better man than they are! Actually, you are a better person than most —- quite a challenge and a deep commitment to raise someone else’s child, especially for a single person.

  314. Ken F wrote:

    The face reveal starts at about 2:06:00, and one good sample is at 2:14:19. But anything on the History Channel has to be taken with a big grain of salt.

    These days, you’re liable to get more accurate hard information on Coast to Coast open lines.
    “WEST OF THE ROCKIES! YOU’RE ON THE AIR!”

  315. Christiane wrote:

    The latest I’m picking up on is that they can sin but it’s not counted against them, as Our Lord covers their deeds.

    “Uh, it’s all Under The Blood.”
    — Mike Warnke, when he was exposed as a fraud

  316. I think I see a similarity between the neo-cal obsession with gender roles and the current idea that people are whatever gender they believe themselves to be. Both seem to be saying that (a) you have to behave in specific ways and if you do/do not then that says something about your gender/gender conformity, and (b) you have to delve into your own inner thoughts/feelings to validate your conception of maleness or femaleness because you may not be a ‘real’ man/woman.

    This puts very small radius for whatever circle you may have thought you belonged to. So, you guys better be driving an F150 and you women better be wearing heels, because if not…If not what? Well at the church they might be telling you that you are defying God’s plan for humanity, and in the world of options and alternatives they might be telling you that you need to go ahead and come out.

  317. Lea wrote:

    All the guys laughed at him for saying flag football and he went straight from that to ‘we broke a guys neck’.

    From wimp to monster (in football). Normally, playing tackle football with skills will not permanently injure players.

  318. Max wrote:

    Yes, many Southern Baptists are joining the “Done” ranks … done with church in its current state, but not done with Jesus.

    You don’t have to walk into a building with a sign that says Blah Blah Bapist Church to know be close to Jesus. He is not confined to man made structures.

  319. Daisy–right there with ya! And please note most of our UMC single females were also! Seems there is a minority subset of women AND men involved in the touchy feely thing!

    And please, ya’ll, don’t equate evangelicalism with worm theology. Please please please go to Grace Evangelical Society’s website, get some of their apologetic books, and find out why we evangelical Christians should be the downright happiest people on earth!

  320. Lea wrote:

    The thing is, pride is an emotion.

    Pride demands that something be sacrificed to it. So you can understand why pride is called the mother of all sins.

  321. okrapod wrote:

    So, you guys better be driving an F150 and you women better be wearing heels, because if not…If not what?

    oh no …. my husband drives an F-150. He had a little truck for a while and was run off the road by a Mercedes (car) and his small very practical truck was demolished (he was to all appearances ‘OK”) But then he buys the F-150 and comes home and says, ‘With THIS truck, nobody is gonna run me off the road’

    (sigh)

    Women are supposed to wear heels? What are ‘heels’????
    🙂

  322. Christiane wrote:

    Women are supposed to wear heels? What are ‘heels’????

    Those blasted things than hang in the carpet when you clutch to shift gears!

  323. Nancy2 wrote:

    Christiane wrote:

    Women are supposed to wear heels? What are ‘heels’????

    Those blasted things than hang in the carpet when you clutch to shift gears!

    oh, now I remember …. blasted things, used to wear them to work …. torture ….. I’ll keep to my Birkenstocks these daze, with socks in the winter time …. Birks are the only fitting footwear for real feet

  324. brian wrote:

    I am single myself, I have never been married and I have no children. I did raise a nephew who said I was like a father to him and often tells me what an influence I was in his life. Of course, my evangelical side will not listen to such emotionalistic pablum all I need to hear is what a piece of trash I am and how I disgust God. After many years I am actually able to hear that from him now and it means a lot. My reasons for not being married are actually quite simple and most likely selfish at least that is what I was told when I was in real world faith communities. I was the primary/secondary care provider for about 31 years for family and the “ministry” I was in required so much time I did not want to drag a mate down that rabbit hole. Another reason, far more important, I did not earn a lot of money and I did not have a nice car, big muscles, etc.
    I did try a few times with women in the faith but it just never fully worked out. I can tell you this if you are older and single in many evangelical faith communities you are seen as a total failure and outside the will of God, in sin, pathetic etc. You are actually much more accepted if you have been married a few times, have a few kids, not paying any support in some circles and are messing around on the side.
    It is far better now in some faith communities in my area and I am seeing a change in that area.

    I have experienced some of the same things. A guy who is irresponsible and has made a mess of his life is probably more accepted than a responsible man who is inexplicably single. Bubba is a good ole boy who likes his fun – he is a good, regular guy, while Bob over there is kind of quiet and seems to be always working – must be something wrong with him. What if your life does not follow a nice, neat script like everyone says you should have? I had a few career changes and did not get to be what some would call moderately successful until I was 40. I have had to struggle with both bitterness and pride. What if culturally you don’t quite fit in?

  325. Jacob wrote:

    You are actually much more accepted if you have been married a few times, have a few kids, not paying any support in some circles and are messing around on the side.

    then these organizations are very far from ‘faith’ communities, I’m afraid ….. best to leave and find a place where people follow Christ in earnest

  326. From cultwatch.com:
    1. Single charismatic leader.
    2. People always seeming happy and enthusiastic. Image of perfect American family. (Reality – Piper problem kids & marriage issues.)
    3. Instant friends.
    4. Told who you can associate with.
    5. They hide what they teach.
    6. They are the only true group, or the best. Elite.
    7. Hyped meetings. (He depicts masculine/feminine worship feeling.)
    8. Experiential rather than logical.

    These 8 encapsulate the Piper phenom. One leader prominent at Bethlehem Baptist. Go deep to get to the core (#5). His comments in the video emit experience, lack logic. Cult of the personality is established; the group is grounded in that single leader, forever.

    Impact. The Pipers lived in a 3-story inner city turn-of-the-century manse, so the Core followed & moved in from the suburbs. The Caucasian Pipers adopted an African American daughter, the Core followed with adoptions (cross-cultural). Etc.

    A culture – a cult. Piper rules from his retirement, no less, at Bethlehem and nationally with Pipettes lockstep via his pastor conferences at his base, Bethlehem.

    Thank you, TWW, comment people, Dee and Deb, for bringing into the light the phenom. “Walk in the light as He is in the light.” 1 John.

    Jesus was all about light, and the established cult of His contemporary religious leaders did not like this, even to the point of crucifixion.

    Oh dear, tread lightly speaking truth to power.

  327. All,
    As i reflect more on this specific post, many of the comments, and WW in general, I realize how “out of touch” this “panel” in the video, is with my world, and the real world. We had a messy death in my department this past week, and it is VERY complicated, with no clear cut right/wrong paths of action… IMHO, this is real life, and very complex…. in fact, our ” professionals” say it is very complex for them..
    Based on stuff that comes out of Pastor Pipers mouth, he is one of the last people i would go to for advise in this type of situtation….. is it not pathetic that i would not trust him, or any YRR/neo-Cal “preacher” to give me advise/council/ear to listen, for arguably, some of the more important issues we humans have to deal with?,

  328. For me, this all boils down to a couple of simple questions:

    Are complementarian marriages happier than egalitarian marriages?

    And…

    Is the complementarian view of men and women [and marriage] biblical?

    I don’t take any pleasure in the Pipers’ reported marital issues. I had a sibling who unknowingly married a nutcase, and experienced years of difficulties. Marriage can be messy. It usually is, to varying degrees.

    But since Piper is such a vocal and public advocate of this extreme view of “roles,” in the church and out, it’s worth asking, “How’s what working for you?” Has JP’s view of women caused him to treat his wife differently? Does she harbor any animosity over her role as his sidekick, with no concern for her interests and calling?

  329. @ Daisy:

    I like to believe that the last Adam (Jesus) was the most beautiful specimen of man ever. Supernaturally knit from Mary’s genome with no human male DNA involved in his conception at all, and certainly not a vast file of zeros and ones in some computer simulation.

  330. Nancy2 wrote:

    Christiane wrote:

    Women are supposed to wear heels? What are ‘heels’????

    Those blasted things than hang in the carpet when you clutch to shift gears!

    Ha! I had to get new car mats because I wore a hole in the old one shifting in heels!

  331. GSD wrote:

    Does she harbor any animosity over her role as his sidekick, with no concern for her interests and calling?

    Does the wife lockstep with the Followers, thus idolatry?

  332. Lea wrote:

    They definitely kept a better lid on the details than most of the other scandals. This one made me curious because of the odd way they phrased the whole thing…

    (referring to The Journey elders in the sacking of Darrin Patrick)
    Whole thing was curious. I’m curious whether any of his buddies from the stage or from Acts 29 came along side to help him man up and deal with whatever the mistakes or weaknesses were?

  333. Lydia wrote:

    People are really disagreeing over what are appropriate cultural displays of emotion or are politically correct emotions within their group/tribe.

    That’s a good point. It just so often gets drilled down as ‘women emotional/men rational’ which is not the case at all.

  334. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    Piper is one of the most emotional people I’ve ever seen. In fact, Desiring God seems to be a treatise on using one’s emotions to measure one’s spirituality. Surely this crowd isn’t claiming that men aren’t emotional?

    It’s interesting that research has not found any appreciable differences between the male and female brain.

    http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/brains-men-and-women-aren-t-really-different-study-finds

  335. @ Jeffrey Chalmers:

    Churches that teach a theology of glory will ignore or downplay the tragic, messy things. In their world, everything should be reduced to a checklist or a script. That some situations don’t have a good answer (much less, don’t have the one perfect answer), is not so much a tragedy to them as it is an affront. If you are smart enough and spiritual enough you should be able to fit it all into a nice, neat formula. I think pastors from such a churches would be like Job’s comforters – they might be able to recite verses or things from their mental checklist but they would miss the whole point. Their focus would be on themselves and on how well they could fit some tragedy into their script.

  336. Muff Potter wrote:

    I like to believe that the last Adam (Jesus) was the most beautiful specimen of man ever.

    Oh yeah, almost forgot, there’s a clobber verse for that one too, it’s in Isaiah I think…

  337. GSD wrote:

    For me, this all boils down to a couple of simple questions:

    Are complementarian marriages happier than egalitarian marriages?

    And, when they are unhappy, what options are open for those involved?

  338. Ya, just as real drugs mess you up, so does Calvinism…for good. And you can’t even prevent or help it. What a bummer. Who cares? One of the biggest deceivers out there, next to his equally glib bud Big Mac from Californ. I.A.

  339. @ Muff Potter:

    Here is food for thought. The scientists think they have traced the human genome to the probably first man, and this is done through the Y chromosome. Every male/son of man shares that lineage. Meantime, there is the issue of ‘son of David’ which would be through the Y chromosome. Which leaves the issue of Son of God which would be understood in a non-biological way, which of course is what some people believe. I heard a rabbi on you tube which illustrated this; he said that God has many sons, why do you (christians) only regard one?

    Now we can come along and say that son of man means something else entirely, like the name of a coming apocalyptic figure, and that it really has nothing to do with being human per se but rather is Jesus identifying himself with the predicted person. Some folks say this. And we can say that son of David does not mean son of David but is rather a metaphorical statement representing a prophesied ruler who will sit on David’s throne, that being David’s kingdom in a metaphorical way. And Son of God not meaning anything biological but rather meaning the perfect image of God as in ‘like father like son’.

    But Al Mohler says that unless you believe in the virgin birth you cannot be a christian. So there you go, right from the prophet’s mouth. For me, I find it disconcerting the different amounts of time, if any, on this topic when one compares the gospels with each other and also when one looks at the epistles.

    I will stop here lest I be the cause of somebody or other having to go to the ER for acute chest pain.

  340. brian wrote:

    I was the primary/secondary care provider for about 31 years for family

    I question if the "real men" have done anything in the sight of God that stacks up to being a primary or secondary care provider for 31 years. If they have, they would not be casting judgments.

  341. Jeffrey Chalmers wrote:

    As i reflect more on this specific post, many of the comments, and WW in general, I realize how “out of touch” this “panel” in the video, is with my world, and the real world. We had a messy death in my department this past week, and it is VERY complicated, with no clear cut right/wrong paths of action… IMHO, this is real life, and very complex…. in fact, our ” professionals” say it is very complex for them..
    Based on stuff that comes out of Pastor Pipers mouth, he is one of the last people i would go to for advise in this type of situtation….. is it not pathetic that i would not trust him, or any YRR/neo-Cal “preacher” to give me advise/council/ear to listen, for arguably, some of the more important issues we humans have to deal with?,

    IMO, great comment and good analysis.
    Nice to read this in contrast to those commenters who scream “slander” at the DEEBS.

  342. siteseer wrote:

    And, when they are unhappy, what options are open for those involved?

    Piper and crew would say just suck it up. It’s all for God’s glory!

  343. GSD wrote:

    it’s worth asking, “How’s what working for you?” Has JP’s view of women caused him to treat his wife differently? Does she harbor any animosity over her role as his sidekick, with no concern for her interests and calling?

    He’d never let her speak, so not sure how we’ll ever know.

  344. Bill M wrote:

    brian wrote:
    I was the primary/secondary care provider for about 31 years for family
    /
    I question if the “real men” have done anything in the sight of God that stacks up to being a primary or secondary care provider for 31 years. If they have, they would not be casting judgements.

    I’m also a care provider, though not close to that many years yet. And I’m single, and in my 40s.

    In my experience, the churches I’ve found who’ve appreciated me for who I was were/are tiny. Bigger churches don’t want singles, as they mess up their country club atmospheres. In my two year search for churches where I used to live, where most of the churches were fairly large, I collected what they said to me about singles:
    “We’ve never had a longterm leader, but singles are not really interested in going to church.”
    “Singles are not our target demographic, so we don’t have anything for them here. You should try somewhere else.”
    “You can be in the women’s class, but we don’t want singles mixing with married couples.”

    Tiny churches:
    “We’re so happy you came? Are you new in the area? Come to dinner Wednesday!”
    “DO YOU SING? CHOIR? CHOIR IS ON WEDNESDAY!?” (Usually more than one person!)
    “You were a missionary? Come talk to our Sunday School class about it! We all have class together here!”

    I’m sure it’s not true for all small churches, but I think they appreciate each person much more than bigger churches who just view you as a number or someone who messes up their demographics.

    And yes, all of those were actually said to me.

  345. okrapod wrote:

    I think I see a similarity between the neo-cal obsession with gender roles and the current idea that people are whatever gender they believe themselves to be. Both seem to be saying that (a) you have to behave in specific ways and if you do/do not then that says something about your gender/gender conformity, and (b) you have to delve into your own inner thoughts/feelings to validate your conception of maleness or femaleness because you may not be a ‘real’ man/woman.

    This is a really interesting thought. 2 sides of the same coin? Human identity through gender roles. Shouldn’t the gospel run deeper? To what is our essential humanity rather than societally constructed “roles”?

  346. Lea wrote:

    The thing is, pride is an emotion. So is anger. All this talk about hitting people is not unemotional rational talk! Stop pretending men aren’t emotional, because they are.

    Case in point: Frank Turk.

  347. siteseer wrote:

    okrapod wrote:
    (a) you have to behave in specific ways and if you do/do not then that says something about your gender/gender conformity, and (b) you have to delve into your own inner thoughts/feelings to validate your conception of maleness or femaleness because you may not be a ‘real’ man/woman.
    /
    This is a really interesting thought. 2 sides of the same coin? Human identity through gender roles. Shouldn’t the gospel run deeper? To what is our essential humanity rather than societally constructed “roles”?

    Can they handle that? It seems like people choose hyper-Calvinism because they want easy answers, even if they make God out to be as terrible as humanity.

    I think the other side does it, too. “It’s too hard to find out who I am, so I’m just going to decide.” I have a lot of friends (even Christians) who have said and done the same thing. Maybe there are chemical absolutes, but it feels like to me a lot of people put on absolutes to keep from really searching their souls.

  348. Ken F wrote:

    Your observation is spot on, except the part about it being new. In one of the earlier threads was a discussion about the Westminster Confession of Faith. It has the same double-speak. It actually states that God ordains everything that comes to pass, and not in just a way that he foreknew. And yet it also says that God does not ordain evil, which means some things came to pass that God did not ordain. It makes God responsible for everything except the things that could make him look bad.

    Mind-bending cognitive dissonance. Maybe it comes of trying to define God in minute detail that makes sense to the mind of a human?

  349. siteseer wrote:

    Mind-bending cognitive dissonance.

    I’ve been trying to boil down Calvinism to a one-liner. This is as close as I can get: “God is responsible for everything but evil, man is responsible for nothing but evil.” Everything else in the theology flows from that.

  350. siteseer wrote:

    Shouldn’t the gospel run deeper? To what is our essential humanity rather than societally constructed “roles”?

    like ‘yes’

  351. siteseer wrote:

    Shouldn’t the gospel run deeper? To what is our essential humanity rather than societally constructed “roles”?

    when you consider that it was our HUMANITY that Christ took to Himself (assumed) at the Incarnation, you then understand when the Church says ‘what was not assumed could not be saved’

  352. ishy wrote:

    And yes, all of those were actually said to me.

    Yeesh, the bad communication betrays an inability to relate to people as individuals. Why the need to categorize and drop you into a slot? Back when I worked a stint in a canary sorting beets, anything that I couldn’t sort into a bin went into the re-peeler. Those were beets, not people and none of us fit into bins especially the re-peeler. It is not a good testimony when a church resembles a factory.

    I erred in my response to brian as I should not elevate one by diminishing another. There is nothing like being devalued because you don’t want to be a sprocket in someone’s institution to make you see things anew. I am trying to alter my perceptions of others’ value based on who they are and not what they do. After encountering the stories of a number of otherwise unremarkable people it led to a new appreciation of them. Many serve in humble positions, some maintaining their dignity in the face of long term hardships, and they are overlooked yet are truly remarkable.

  353. Can someone who knows the original languages better than what I can find on the internet comment on Doug’s comment in his first few minutes that the first person created was male? I thought the first person was simply human containing both male and female.

  354. I can’t believe I missed it the first time I read it.

    Piper gives himself the typical “out”. Can you see it?

    If it is done right, this masculine feel creates a space. It is big, it’s roomy, it’s beautiful, it’s peaceful. It’s just full and radiates with all the good things of life and in it women, flourishing, will give it that feel… etc.

    No? I admit, I missed it as well, but this morning it jumped out at me. It is a part of the hook that kept me enslaved for so long. Here, let me point it out.

    If it is done right, this masculine feel creates a space. It is big, it’s roomy, it’s beautiful, it’s peaceful. It’s just full and radiates with all the good things of life and in it women, flourishing, will give it that feel.

    You see, anyone doing comp in their marriage and having trouble is doing it wrong. Even Piper can get it wrong, sometimes (he admits to being human; it’s supposed to make us feel warmer toward him, closer to him–we can identify with the humble Big Man). But then God jumps in and sets him on the right track again, and with a little work (okay, eight months’ worth), All’s Well With The World Once More. Because gospel.

  355. Bill M wrote:

    Yeesh, the bad communication betrays an inability to relate to people as individuals.

    You’re not kidding.

    Last month we attended a Christmas program from a larger church.

    To make a long story short, while the band was pretty good, but there was a play put on that left a lot to be desired.

    The gist was crooks were holding up a train to steal the Christmas presents destined for an orphanage.

    The crooks weren’t Christian of course and the passengers were a mix.

    The Christian passengers prayed and lo and behold the thieves were taken down by the other passengers. The message was that faith overcomes all (or something like that….I think)

    I’ll leave aside whether depicting a hijacking with (fake) guns is appropriate or not but the acting was as wooden as the sets, however the audience clapped and amened like nobody’s business.

    The pastor came out and stated that they would love it if this became your church or if you felt the play brought you closer to Jesus (or perhaps you had never heard of Jesus (?)).

    There was “musical guest star” brought out on stage with much fanfare. It was the music ministers daughter playing violin (ironically the kid was a highlight in the proceedings – she was pretty good).

    At the end, the players came out to resounding applause. Flowers were handed out to the director and she did a speech thanking the “hundreds” who helped make it happen. It was like the Oscars.

    I’m pretty sure I was the only non-christian in the house that night and it didn’t inspire me to go to church. This presentation was for true believers, not me.

    Even my wife who is a devout Christian apologized to me and the kids for going out to that. She didn’t need to, it was a fail on the part of the church, not her. I told her that and we all had a good laugh, then went out for dinner.

    There seems to be a huge disconnect between that church and the real world. The way the pastor spoke was like any non-christians in the house must be stupid not to be moved toward Jesus. If only you would read the bible. Yikes! I did, and I wouldn’t recommend any non-christian reading it with a literal fundamentalist interpretation. Sure fire way to shut down engagement.

  356. Piper:

    If it is done right, this masculine feel creates a space. It is big, it’s roomy, it’s beautiful, it’s peaceful. It’s just full and radiates with all the good things of life and in it women, flourishing, will give it that feel… etc.

    I’m being honest, but church services have never felt very natural to me.

    I’ve been to maybe hundreds of churches, in most denominations from Baptist, to contemporary nondenom, to charismatic, to high Lutheran, to even Catholic. I tried to “feel the feels” at charismatic churches when I first got saved. I tried to endure 45 minute sermons that were mostly about the pastor’s personal life. I’ve been to Mass, and while I thought it was pretty and beautiful, that also did not feel natural.

    We all know the stuff Piper said here was nuts. Even people on the stage with him looked like they thought it was nuts.

    But, the church I see in the New Testament doesn’t look anything like church worship services now. Some churches try to be more cultural, but most of those are really just celebrity platforms for their pastors.

    Piper didn’t get it. But what is the closest to what Jesus had in mind for the church?

  357. @ Patti:

    I hope you did not think that I was saying that scientists think that the first human was a male. Not at all. It was merely that the Y chromosome was what they could trace. And they were talking about when the species made the leap to ‘modern man’ not when man sprang from dirt or so. I was talking about identifiable inheritance based on the Y chromosome.

  358. refugee wrote:

    You see, anyone doing comp in their marriage and having trouble is doing it wrong.

    See also nine Marxists. It’s just that it’s not being done properly you know!

    They never have a fix. They can’t even really define what these things look like practically in comp because they know the second they lay it down on paper everyone with sense will recoil or think of fifteen alternate examples eventually so they just say a bunch of stuff about roles and ‘lovingly leading’ and handwave the rest away. ‘Oh, your husband is being dictatorial and abusive? That’s not right but maybe just submit some more and it will be fine. That didn’t work? You didn’t submit hard enough!’ And so on.

  359. I used to attend John MacArthur’s church, Grace Community Church, for several years before moving. Now, I can’t remember whether this question was asked somewhere in the previous article’s comments or this article’s, but regardless, there is this general vein of wonder as to, “Why do women put up with this stuff?” Complementarianism, patriarchy, etc.

    I can only speak in reference to Grace Church–a church that is often mentioned on this website. In all my time at GCC, I never heard any of the women wish that things were different, complain about inequality, or that they had more leadership opportunities. And this is a church attended by thousands of women.

    Why?

    1) Because if you weren’t a fan of Complementarianism, you didn’t go to GCC. Why bother? This is Los Angeles, there’s a church for everything.
    2) Because women were given leadership opportunities to have authority over other women in Bible studies, core groups, women’s ministries–and that was enough for them. They had plenty of opportunity to edify, sympathize with, or torture their own gender.
    3) Behind the scenes, these women had a great amount of sway in their marriages. Most were not heavily submissive, and their dissatisfaction in marriage could tarnish their husband’s reputation as a Christian, so the men did care what their wives thought of them.
    4) Grace Church had zero problems with single women holding professional careers in the world. Even married women. Women would typically stop working when their first child was born, as motherhood is seen as the most important job.
    5) The vast majority of women at Grace saw motherhood as the highest office, as well as gateway to advancing them in women’s ministries. If you had a passion for leadership, being a wife and mother gave you more credibility and leadership potential.
    6) Women fight wholeheartedly for complementarianism because it protects the role of the stay-at-home mother. In fact, it promotes this role heavily. And a lot of us just want to raise our children without worrying about filing joint tax returns.

    Complementarianism alongside GCC’s staunch divorce policy only seemed to break down in the face of bad marriages. Where abuse could thrive on either end, and the marriages became prisons. And this was seen on both sides, where either the female or the male were misbehaving.

  360. Lydia wrote:

    People are really disagreeing over what are appropriate cultural displays of emotion or are politically correct emotions within their group/tribe.

    In your average traditional Southern Baptist church, raising your hand to praise the Lord is generally frowned upon. They think it’s something that only the Pentecostals should do and they don’t want it to get on them. Even occasional shouts of “Amen!” to a good sermon point will result in frowning faces turned in your direction. Church folks can be a strange bunch.

  361. @ okrapod:

    No, I just don’t understand how some people like Doug Philips can so dogmatically claim that the first Adam was a male bachelor and that wasn’t good so he needed a subordinate to use for his domination.

  362. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    Complementarianism alongside GCC’s staunch divorce policy only seemed to break down in the face of bad marriages

    comp plus no divorce has no answer for a bad marriage or bad actor. That’s a huge problem. What good is a theory that doesn’t have answers for foreseeable pro elms?

  363. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    Complementarianism alongside GCC’s staunch divorce policy only seemed to break down in the face of bad marriages. Where abuse could thrive on either end, and the marriages became prisons. And this was seen on both sides, where either the female or the male were misbehaving.

    I don’t classify Grace with Calvinista churches. They seem to be their own brand of Calvinist, though MacArthur has supported Calvinista pastors, which I have some trouble with. And in these things, Grace is much more like fundamentalist churches than Calvinista churches, I think, as women are not treated as lower than pet dogs.

    I agree with Lea that Calvinism overall tries to claim that God ordains everything, then tries to force people into obeying earthly rules, with no answers for people who are not godly or nice. If God ordained everything, you’d think they’d just let things happen, but the more dogmatic Calvinists can’t seem to do that.

    I wonder, what’s the ratio of single men to single women? And are singles allowed to be in leadership positions?

  364. Nancy2 wrote:

    You don’t have to walk into a building with a sign that says Blah Blah Bapist Church to know be close to Jesus. He is not confined to man made structures.

    “Sir,” said the woman, “I can see that you are a prophet! Now our ancestors worshipped on this hill-side, but you Jews say that Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.” “Believe me,” returned Jesus, “the time is coming when worshipping the Father will not be a matter of ‘on this hill-side’ or ‘in Jerusalem’ … the time is coming, yes, and has already come, when true worshippers will worship in spirit and in truth. Indeed, the Father looks for such people who will worship him like that. God is spirit, and those who worship him can only worship in spirit and in truth.” (John 4 Phillips)

  365. ishy wrote:

    SureWhyNot? wrote:
    Complementarianism alongside GCC’s staunch divorce policy only seemed to break down in the face of bad marriages. Where abuse could thrive on either end, and the marriages became prisons. And this was seen on both sides, where either the female or the male were misbehaving.

    I don’t classify Grace with Calvinista churches. They seem to be their own brand of Calvinist, though MacArthur has supported Calvinista pastors, which I have some trouble with. And in these things, Grace is much more like fundamentalist churches than Calvinista churches, I think, as women are not treated as lower than pet dogs.
    I agree with Lea that Calvinism overall tries to claim that God ordains everything, then tries to force people into obeying earthly rules, with no answers for people who are not godly or nice. If God ordained everything, you’d think they’d just let things happen, but the more dogmatic Calvinists can’t seem to do that.
    I wonder, what’s the ratio of single men to single women? And are singles allowed to be in leadership positions?

    The ratio was fairly evenly split in the single’s group, which was called The Foundry when I attended, but has now been changed to Foundation, I believe.

    Yes, to singles in leadership. In fact, the leader of Foundation was a single male who later married and became a church elder.

    I think LA would be a very difficult environment to set up a Hyper-Calvinist-patriarchal regime, as the constituents of this city are pretty educated. In the singles group, there were several young people with graduate degrees and a large percentage of professionals. But Grace often had CJ Mahaney around for its Shepherd’s Conferences, and I watched him from my perch in the choir once during worship, and his constant head-bobbing, foot-stomping, clapping, “GLORY BE!!!” seemed distinctly out of place. Like he needed to be weighed down by some heavy reading.

    Piper’s books were promoted. “Have you read Desiring God? Oh you must–you MUST! I never knew what it meant to be passionate about my saviour until reading Desiring God!I feel like a schoolboy!”

    Elizabeth George was widely read in our circles too. Good practical advice on how to prevent your husband from cheating by being photo-shoot ready at all times!

  366. ishy wrote:

    nd in it women, flourishing

    By “women flourishing”. Does he mean we shut up, submit, and wear the plastic a$$ smiley face at all times?

  367. Patti wrote:

    No, I just don’t understand how some people like Doug Philips can so dogmatically claim that the first Adam was a male bachelor and that wasn’t good so he needed a subordinate to use for his domination.

    I understood it as a means to show Adam how much he needed a soulmate and live-saving ally. If Eve was formed at the same time as Adam perhaps he would be more likely to mistreat her. Proposing that Adam was at first androgynous seems to be reading more into the text than needs to be there. It’s possible, but it creates some other unexplained problems. In any case, there is certainly nothing in the text to support Adam ruling over Eve.

  368. okrapod wrote:

    Which is part of why this infamous gang of religious bullies is so obnoxious in my opinion. I want to say show me your scars, show me your dirty hands, show me where you ever risked anything for anybody or any cause. Then maybe I will listen to you, you sorry excuses for humanity.

    Exactly!

  369. Nancy2 wrote:

    ishy wrote:

    nd in it women, flourishing

    By “women flourishing”. Does he mean we shut up, submit, and wear the plastic a$$ smiley face at all times?

    Yep.

  370. Patti wrote:

    Can someone who knows the original languages better than what I can find on the internet comment on Doug’s comment in his first few minutes that the first person created was male? I thought the first person was simply human containing both male and female.

    “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”

    ‘human’ is from ‘HUMUS’ …. physically, we are formed from the same elements as is the soil, but our life comes from and is sustained by the Hand of God …. we are EACH individually gifted by God with an eternal soul

    so our bodies are ‘of the Earth’ and our life is from God

    from the author Marjorie Kinnon Rawlings, these insights about how we are ‘of’ the soil:
    “It seems to me that the Earth may be borrowed, but not bought. It may be used, but not owned. It gives itself in response to love and tending, offers its sesonal flowering and fruiting. But we are tenants and not possessors, lovers, and not masters. Cross Creek belongs to the wind and the rain, to the sun and the seasons, to the cosmic secrecy of seed, and beyond all, to time…”

    and

    “Who owns Cross Creek? ………It seems to me that the Earth may be borrowed, but not bought. It may be used, but not owned. It gives itself in response to love and tending, offers its sesonal flowering and fruiting. But we are tenants and not possessors, lovers, and not masters. Cross Creek belongs to the wind and the rain, to the sun and the seasons, to the cosmic secrecy of seed, and beyond all, to time…”

    and

    “We were bred of earth before we were bred of our mothers. Once born, we can live without mother or father, or any other kin, or any friend, or any human love. We cannot live without the Earth or apart from it, and something is shrivelled in a man’s heart when he turns away from it and concerns himself only with the affairs of men.”
    ― Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings, Cross Creek

    a woman wrote these words, yes 🙂 That makes me smile.

  371. @ Ken F:
    and yet, when a fetus forms, does it not, before the sex organs develop, house BOTH the makings of a male and a female? rudimentary sex organs of both? And do not still people show evidence of this? Men with nipples?

  372. Nancy2 wrote:

    ishy wrote:

    nd in it women, flourishing

    By “women flourishing”. Does he mean we shut up, submit, and wear the plastic a$$ smiley face at all times?

    And bring Hubby his tea when he rings from his third floor study.

  373. Lea wrote:

    comp plus no divorce has no answer for a bad marriage or bad actor. That’s a huge problem.

    If you’re the domineering abusive husband, that’s a Feature, not a Bug.

  374. Patti wrote:

    @ okrapod:

    No, I just don’t understand how some people like Doug Philips can so dogmatically claim that the first Adam was a male bachelor and that wasn’t good so he needed a subordinate to use for his domination.

    Wishful thinking plus Sacred Sexual Fantasy.

    Remember Douggie ESQUIRE’s preferred (not really adultery) act on his Handmaid. If that act isn’t an ANIMAL forcing Dominance on a Subordinate, you tell me what is.

  375. Lea wrote:

    refugee wrote:

    You see, anyone doing comp in their marriage and having trouble is doing it wrong.

    See also nine Marxists. It’s just that it’s not being done properly you know!

    “This time We WILL Achieve True Communism!”

  376. Muff Potter wrote:

    Supernaturally knit from Mary’s genome with no human male DNA involved in his conception at all,

    And yet he could not have developed male physical traits without a Y- chromosome.

  377. ishy wrote:

    what is the closest to what Jesus had in mind for the church?

    Well, that question is easier to answer in regard to individuals rather than institutions. I know faithful believers who look like Christians described in the early church, but I have yet to walk into a church that looks like the gathering of the Body of Christ in the New Testament. There is a big disconnect on what the 21st century church looks like and what it looked like in the first century. And it’s not a matter of culture and form, but of substance. Over the centuries, we have allowed men to control religious institutions, rather than the Holy Spirit … we are the form of godliness described in Scripture which has denied the spiritual power available to us. So we move forward in church in our own power and continue to manufacture ways of doing church … but doing church without God in most places. Unless the church, whether it be local or national, has a real 2 Chronicles 7:14 experience, we won’t see genuine church this side of Heaven. So, we (individual believers) should endeavor to get our own house in order … the church house may never get there. Dig your own spiritual well, read the Word, pray, and seek God’s face for His will in your life … it may not have anything to do with going to a local church.

  378. ishy wrote:

    SureWhyNot? wrote:
    Complementarianism alongside GCC’s staunch divorce policy only seemed to break down in the face of bad marriages. Where abuse could thrive on either end, and the marriages became prisons. And this was seen on both sides, where either the female or the male were misbehaving.
    I don’t classify Grace with Calvinista churches. They seem to be their own brand of Calvinist, though MacArthur has supported Calvinista pastors, which I have some trouble with. And in these things, Grace is much more like fundamentalist churches than Calvinista churches, I think, as women are not treated as lower than pet dogs.
    I agree with Lea that Calvinism overall tries to claim that God ordains everything, then tries to force people into obeying earthly rules, with no answers for people who are not godly or nice. If God ordained everything, you’d think they’d just let things happen, but the more dogmatic Calvinists can’t seem to do that.
    I wonder, what’s the ratio of single men to single women? And are singles allowed to be in leadership positions?

    I classify Grace Community Church and its franchises, from its Masters’ Seminary graduates like my ex-pastor at Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley, as Calvinistas. That’s all it’s about. The Elect. 9 Marxists. Etc.

  379. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    The vast majority of women at Grace saw motherhood as the highest office, as well as gateway to advancing them in women’s ministries. If you had a passion for leadership, being a wife and mother gave you more credibility and leadership potential.

    So single and childless women are less credible?

  380. I was just thinking – Complementarians base everything off of a wealthy first-century family structure isolated from it’s extended relatives and minus the servant staff; the boss is “father” the second-in-command is “mother”, “brothers” and “sisters” are technically equal as they’re youth and immature, but since sons are future fathers, they rank slightly higher than girls who are future mothers. Since singles aren’t future “husbands” or “wives”, “fathers” or “mothers” they’re not really part of the family they have in mind – they have little room for extended relatives in their framework. They might be men and women; but they aren’t Men and Women in the fullest sense. If they’re not part of the family, then they have no future or stake in it; let alone any say about what’s going on.

  381. SureWhyNot? wrote:

    Women fight wholeheartedly for complementarianism because it protects the role of the stay-at-home mother. In fact, it promotes this role heavily. And a lot of us just want to raise our children without worrying about filing joint tax returns.

    What a shame that women have to subject themselves to a doctrine of inferiority just to get respect and support for making this choice, but I know what you mean.

  382. Ken F wrote:

    And yet he could not have developed male physical traits without a Y- chromosome.

    I’m a big fan of the Almighty’s supernatural power. For a God who created Cartesian space itself where there was none, and all the spaces and folds in between the spaces, I doubt very seriously he’d have trouble finagling a Y-chromosome where there wasn’t one present in Mary’s double-helix, or one from a human male donor.

    “In the Universe, there are things that are known, and things that are unknown, and in between, there are doors.”
    — William Blake —

  383. Ken F wrote:

    I understood it as a means to show Adam how much he needed a soulmate and live-saving ally. If Eve was formed at the same time as Adam perhaps he would be more likely to mistreat her. Proposing that Adam was at first androgynous seems to be reading more into the text than needs to be there. …

    I would just like to mention that marriage is not necessary to have companionship and friendship and allies (if Christians are carrying out Christianity correctly, that is).

    This is one reason I believe Christ de-emphasized the nuclear family as he did, and said anyone who loves his mother or son more than him is not worthy to be his follower, or anyone who obeys God in Heaven is also his mother, sister, brother, etc.

    You have folks like me who never marry (and haven’t had kids), and most of my family is either abusive and/or dying off – I don’t have a nuclear family of my own to turn to.

    You have Muslims who convert to Christianity who get ostracized by their Muslim family or orgin, and they could use a new “spiritual” family to fill that void (eg, other Christians).

    God did not intend for marriage to be the end-all, be-all or only method of a person obtaining friendship, help, or companionship, as that would leave some of us hopeless (the divorced, never married, widowers, the Muslim converts to Jesus Christ, etc).

    But I see so much of the Christian faith today reading the Genesis account of “not good for man to be alone” as being some kind of reference to marriage only, and I am not sure that is what the text was getting at.

    (I’m not saying that is what YOU were arguing for in your post – just something in your post triggered these thoughts in my mind.)

  384. brian wrote:

    I am single myself, I have never been married and I have no children. I did raise a nephew who said I was like a father to him and often tells me what an influence I was in his life. Of course, my evangelical side will not listen to such emotionalistic pablum all I need to hear is what a piece of trash I am and how I disgust God. After many years I am actually able to hear that from him now and it means a lot. My reasons for not being married are actually quite simple and most likely selfish at least that is what I was told when I was in real world faith communities. I was the primary/secondary care provider for about 31 years for family and the “ministry” I was in required so much time I did not want to drag a mate down that rabbit hole. Another reason, far more important, I did not earn a lot of money and I did not have a nice car, big muscles, etc.

    I did try a few times with women in the faith but it just never fully worked out. I can tell you this if you are older and single in many evangelical faith communities you are seen as a total failure and outside the will of God, in sin, pathetic etc. You are actually much more accepted if you have been married a few times, have a few kids, not paying any support in some circles and are messing around on the side.

    It is far better now in some faith communities in my area and I am seeing a change in that area.

    Spot on. Plenty of respect fm me. And too much disrespect for people who choose to remain single and unattached in societies everywhere. I am of Indian origin. Not getting married is akin to a pact with he devil in my cultural circles. Of course, I am married….but that’s because I had no desire to resist the charms of the young lady who eventually agreed to become my wife 😉

  385. Daisy wrote:

    But I see so much of the Christian faith today reading the Genesis account of “not good for man to be alone” as being some kind of reference to marriage only

    I have a hard time figuring out how so many reconcile themselves to a mandate for marriage position when Paul, who so many of them highly regard, recommends they remain single. Are these the same folks who accuse others of picking and choosing Bible verses?

  386. Muff Potter wrote:

    For a God who created Cartesian space itself where there was none

    Can ten or eleven dimensions be described in Cartesian coordinates?

  387. Ken F wrote:

    Muff Potter wrote:

    Supernaturally knit from Mary’s genome with no human male DNA involved in his conception at all,

    And yet he could not have developed male physical traits without a Y- chromosome.

    Goodness …. there was something much greater going on at the event of the Incarnation:
    Jesus Christ took (assumed) OUR HUMANITY to Himself in the Incarnation. The Incarnation is a great mystery and a miracle beyond our understanding. We just know that by being ‘assumed’ by Christ, it is possible that we can now be saved by Him.

    As for the Second Person of the Holy Trinity …. by Him, ALL things were made …. I wouldn’t worry about the miracle of the ‘Y’ chromosome, no. I wouldn’t be concerned at all. 🙂

  388. Christiane wrote:

    okrapod wrote:
    So, you guys better be driving an F150 and you women better be wearing heels, because if not…If not what?
    oh no …. my husband drives an F-150. He had a little truck for a while and was run off the road by a Mercedes (car) and his small very practical truck was demolished (he was to all appearances ‘OK”) But then he buys the F-150 and comes home and says, ‘With THIS truck, nobody is gonna run me off the road’
    (sigh)
    Women are supposed to wear heels? What are ‘heels’????

    I had no idea what an F-150 is. So then I Googled it. Oh yeah, I’ve seen those monster trucks in the store parking lot and can’t even imaging trying to step up to get into one.
    http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/2015-Ford-F-150-PLACEMENT-626×382.jpg

  389. Nancy2 wrote:

    Christiane wrote:
    Women are supposed to wear heels? What are ‘heels’????
    Those blasted things than hang in the carpet when you clutch to shift gears!

    Or that get stuck in the cracks of the sidewalks.

  390. Ken F wrote:

    siteseer wrote:
    Mind-bending cognitive dissonance.
    I’ve been trying to boil down Calvinism to a one-liner. This is as close as I can get: “God is responsible for everything but evil, man is responsible for nothing but evil.” Everything else in the theology flows from that.

    You’re either saved or damned before you ever took breath and there’s not a thing you can do about it.

  391. @ Darlene:
    IMHO this is why neo-Cals blow alot of smoke…. the boiled down, logical conclusion contradicts the boiled down message of the gospel..

  392. Muff Potter wrote:

    For a God who created Cartesian space itself where there was none, and all the spaces and folds in between the spaces

    Love this!!

  393. Darlene wrote:

    I had no idea what an F-150 is. So then I Googled it. Oh yeah, I’ve seen those monster trucks in the store parking lot and can’t even imaging trying to step up to get into one.

    Goodness, if you think the 150 is a monster truck, wait till you see the 350!!!

  394. @ Bill M:
    Darlene wrote:

    I had no idea what an F-150 is. So then I Googled it. Oh yeah, I’ve seen those monster trucks in the store parking lot and can’t even imaging trying to step up to get into one.

    An F-150 isn’t a monster truck, unless it’s really been tinkered with. An F-159 is just the most common Ford pick-up truck – a half-ton.
    High heels ……. yeah, I gotta heel stuck in a floor heat and air vent at church a couple years ago. Had to take my shoe off to get the heel out of the vent!

  395. Lea wrote:

    Goodness, if you think the 150 is a monster truck, wait till you see the 350!!!

    My daughter drives an F-250.

  396. Nancy2 wrote:

    Lea wrote:

    Goodness, if you think the 150 is a monster truck, wait till you see the 350!!!

    My daughter drives an F-250.

    My nephew flies an F-18

  397. Darlene wrote:

    You’re either saved or damned before you ever took breath and there’s not a thing you can do about it.

    And the Predestined Elect are always ready to rub that FACT in your face.

  398. I used to want an F150-bad bad- but now I can’t even afford a new bicycle, and what with the aluminum I will take a pass. But I actually have a very small 2000 Nissan Frontier. Absolutely everything on the road would demolish it on impact. I do have a plan though, not original to me. I am parking it on the street right now, and I am thinking about putting some garden plants in large containers in the bed come spring and hanging a sign that says ‘truck garden’. A little mirth goes a long way.

  399. Max wrote:

    There is a big disconnect on what the 21st century church looks like and what it looked like in the first century.

    As I think more about this, it’s apparent to me (at least where I live) that the Church within the church is being marginalized. In many places, the Body of Christ is being pushed to the margins, excluded and silenced by those who desire to do church without them. While this is most visible in authoritarian patriarchies (like hyper-Calvinism) which shun and excommunicate dissenting believers, error in belief and practice can appear anywhere that the teachings of men supersede the commandments of God (and Jesus warned us not to do that!). When young folks pursue “Christian” celebrities, they may never get to know Christ. Piper’s ministry is but one example of this … he is over-emphasizing desiring God at the expense of genuinely knowing Him.

  400. okrapod wrote:

    But I actually have a very small 2000 Nissan Frontier. Absolutely everything on the road would demolish it on impact.

    you’re right ….. THAT’s the very model small truck my husband was driving when he was run off the road by the Mercedes …… he hit a stone wall by a house, the wall gave way, the truck was demolished, the air bag failed to deploy, and yet my spouse walked away without a scratch …..

    except he went out and bought a stupid F-150 so I know the accident must have affected his mind 🙂

  401. Max wrote:

    There is a big disconnect on what the 21st century church looks like and what it looked like in the first century.

    you are not kidding

    picture the Crucifixion ….. the women were present and stood the heart-breaking vigil (with St. John, the only male among them) …. the male disciples (?) … they had all run away and hid or denied knowing Our Lord for fear of persecution

    yes, today the men are still cowardly: afraid to let women take their honored place in the Church and instead persecuting women as a ‘lesser’ class of beings

    you know, maybe it hasn’t changed so much after all, come to think of it

  402. Max wrote:

    Max wrote:

    There is a big disconnect on what the 21st century church looks like and what it looked like in the first century.

    As I think more about this, it’s apparent to me (at least where I live) that the Church within the church is being marginalized. In many places, the Body of Christ is being pushed to the margins, excluded and silenced by those who desire to do church without them. While this is most visible in authoritarian patriarchies (like hyper-Calvinism) which shun and excommunicate dissenting believers, error in belief and practice can appear anywhere that the teachings of men supersede the commandments of God (and Jesus warned us not to do that!). When young folks pursue “Christian” celebrities, they may never get to know Christ. Piper’s ministry is but one example of this … he is over-emphasizing desiring God at the expense of genuinely knowing Him.

    Max: These churches do not believe the Holy Spirit operates in the daily lives of the believers in that church. These men want to be the Holy Spirit for other people IMO.

  403. Christiane wrote:

    okrapod wrote:
    But I actually have a very small 2000 Nissan Frontier. Absolutely everything on the road would demolish it on impact.

    you’re right ….. THAT’s the very model small truck my husband was driving when he was run off the road by the Mercedes …… he hit a stone wall by a house, the wall gave way, the truck was demolished, the air bag failed to deploy, and yet my spouse walked away without a scratch …..

    except he went out and bought a stupid F-150 so I know the accident must have affected his mind

    No, if he went out and bought a HUMMER, you’d know it affected his mind.

  404. Daisy wrote:

    This is one reason I believe Christ de-emphasized the nuclear family as he did, and said anyone who loves his mother or son more than him is not worthy to be his follower, or anyone who obeys God in Heaven is also his mother, sister, brother, etc.

    You have folks like me who never marry (and haven’t had kids), and most of my family is either abusive and/or dying off – I don’t have a nuclear family of my own to turn to.

    At the time of Christ, Family and Lineage meant EVERYTHING. Like the Great Houses in Game of Thrones, the individual (except for titled Paterfamilias, of course) had only the importance of his Lineage. And the more descendants you had, the more powerful your Lineage. (Marry and outbreed the other Lineages — “You Win or You Die.” If you weren’t of a Lineage, you were nothing — no support structure, not even a decent burial at death (just tossed on the garbage dump).

    One of the Church’s major appeals was it provided a Lineage and support structure for those who had slipped through the cracks on the way to the garbage dump. Those of no Lineage now could claim the Lineage of Christ, a Lineage whose growth and power didn’t depend on marry-and-breed.

    These Salvation by Marriage Alone/Quiverfull types have just regressed to Pre-Christian Lineage structure.

  405. I went and listened to Piper again. Yes, he’s off his rocker and panels like this make me think guys like Piper love to hear themselves speak and sound like what they believe is “waxing eloquent.” The only problem, he’s babbling and uttering gibberish. He’s making up stuff about how HE interprets the FEELING of Christianity. I mean, I’m not super smart, but why does he believe he can trust his feelings?

    On a separate note, I was happy to read a SBC minister respond to the question “What is the biggest threat facing the baptist church in America?” His response “Hypercalvinism.”

    But perhaps it is deeper than that…Piper, Macarthur, Keller, and many Lifeway materials and their leaders are all leading the charge in mass evangelical consumer market and thousands of pastors who have deep problems with hypercalivinism simply fail to realize it is coming from celebrity evangelical pastors and big publishers and the main SBC store of Lifeway.

  406. waking up wrote:

    On a separate note, I was happy to read a SBC minister respond to the question “What is the biggest threat facing the baptist church in America?” His response “Hypercalvinism.”

    But perhaps it is deeper than that…Piper, Macarthur, Keller, and many Lifeway materials and their leaders are all leading the charge in mass evangelical consumer market and thousands of pastors who have deep problems with hypercalivinism simply fail to realize it is coming from celebrity evangelical pastors and big publishers and the main SBC store of Lifeway.

    There are some pastors in the SBC that are vocal against hypercalvinism, but they are not one of the big names and what I have seen is the others will belittle them. The SBC has waited to long to stop this cancer.

  407. waking up wrote:

    On a separate note, I was happy to read a SBC minister respond to the question “What is the biggest threat facing the baptist church in America?” His response “Hypercalvinism.”

    Hyper-Calvinism is a threat to the American Church period, not only in Baptist ranks. It’s cousin New Calvinism is perhaps more dangerous, in that it has targeted the most impressionable in our society – our youth. Young minds just don’t have the critical thinking skills to discern the errors of reformed theology – that’s why Generations Xers and Millenials are targeted by the new reformers. SBC seminaries and church planting programs across America are swarming with them.

  408. mot wrote:

    The SBC has waited to long to stop this cancer.

    Yes, too little too late. The SBC has effectively been Calvinized for the next generation and the pew still doesn’t have a clue that they have unknowing financed this rebellion in their seminaries, mission agencies, and publishing house.

  409. mot wrote:

    There are some pastors in the SBC that are vocal against hypercalvinism, but they are not one of the big names and what I have seen is the others will belittle them. The SBC has waited to long to stop this cancer.

    *This. I don’t know of any “big names” in SBC that are challenging the theology of the Calvinists. I do know there are pastors out there who strongly disagree with it, but they’re not the big names.

    And I also agree that they target successfully the millennials. They’ve got a majority of the seminaries and Lifeway. What else would you need if you’re a Calvinist in need of a power grab?

    I think it is also why we see the multi-sites stem from a Calvinist center and then branch into areas where there are small and medium churches. Those are the churches who have been completely unaware or unable to do anything about the takeover at the SBC. If they can move membership to a “campus” from a small church up the road, then they’ve sown that up to. This is just pure speculation on my part, but I’m looking at all of the changes over the past 7 or 8 years and in my area, this seems to be part of the process.

  410. mot wrote:

    These churches do not believe the Holy Spirit operates in the daily lives of the believers in that church.

    Calvinists have always mistrusted personal Christian experience. In their version of Christianity, they have substituted doctrinal propositions about grace for a direct experience of Grace. They prefer law, not the Spirit. They look at believers who share their testimonies of an encounter with the living Christ with the same glare as raccoons caught in the headlights of a car. They just don’t get it.

  411. mot wrote:

    There are some pastors in the SBC that are vocal against hypercalvinism, but they are not one of the big names and what I have seen is the others will belittle them.

    All the non-Calvinist “big names” in SBC are at the age that they don’t want to affect their retirement annuities by upsetting the apple cart. So the belittle guys and grassroots pew are carrying the heat of the battle. The only way to prevent New Calvinist belief and practice out of a traditional church is to trust in your smarts to see it coming, send it packing if/when it arrives through stealth and deception, and hold onto congregational governance through the protection of local church autonomy.

  412. Max wrote:

    All the non-Calvinist “big names” in SBC are at the age that they don’t want to affect their retirement annuities by upsetting the apple cart.

    “The more people a country gets into the middle class (i.e. in student/mortgage debt and retirement annuities), the more we have Peace.”
    — National Security Agency

  413. Max wrote:

    Calvinists have always mistrusted personal Christian experience. In their version of Christianity, they have substituted doctrinal propositions about grace for a direct experience of Grace.

    Their Ideology is Pure and Perfectly-parsed, and Reality must bow to Ideology.

  414. waking up wrote:

    And I also agree that they target successfully the millennials. They’ve got a majority of the seminaries and Lifeway. What else would you need if you’re a Calvinist in need of a power grab?

    And post-election surveys and studies of Millenials show their favored form of government is “Strong Leader”.

    Millenials are the Boomers’ “Keeper Kid” Mini-Mes (after the rejection of the first pre-production run of Gen Xers); they have been trained to sit dewy-eyed at the feet of the Boomers, lapping up their Elders; Wisdom with trembling lips and sighs.

  415. Max wrote:

    Hyper-Calvinism is a threat to the American Church period, not only in Baptist ranks. It’s cousin New Calvinism is perhaps more dangerous, in that it has targeted the most impressionable in our society – our youth. Young minds just don’t have the critical thinking skills to discern the errors of reformed theology – that’s why Generations Xers and Millenials are targeted by the new reformers. SBC seminaries and church planting programs across America are swarming with them.

    “Give me your children for five years and I will make them Mine. You will pass away, but they will remain Mine.”
    — Adolf Hitler, cult leader

  416. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Their Ideology is Pure and Perfectly-parsed, and Reality must bow to Ideology.

    Yep, that pretty well describes the New Calvinists I have talked to in my area. More philosophical than spiritual.

  417. R2 wrote:

    Many of the NeoCal guys I’ve known have some pretty serious emotional problems that they try to control through sheer force of reason. They’re afraid to face the demons inside of them.

    Thanks for bringing this up, R2. Whenever the topic of “gender roles” comes up, I find myself thinking back on Dr. Terry Real’s book on covert depression and the way that society exacerbates it, especially among men. Part of his thesis is that, in many Western societies, men are culturally conditioned to deny that they have problems or require any kind of care, because males are supposed to be strong and seeking care is equated with admitting weakness. So Dr. Real suggests that far too many men turn to various kinds of self-medication (including, but not limited to, substance abuse) in order to avoid dealing with their problems. “Force of reason”, as you call it, might very well be one drug of choice among NeoCal men.

    Generally speaking, I find women to be emotionally stronger than men because they’re better at experiencing and processing their emotions.

    Dr. Real addresses that, too. According to him, that’s partly due to the social rewards women receive for being emotionally connected and sensitive. Women are often better at experiencing their emotions because they’re encouraged to do so (and, conversely, often discouraged from being assertive, or taking initiative).

    In NeoCalvinism the male tendency to suppress emotions is seen as a virtue rather than a weakness… But only the feelings that men think are safe are permitted. Emotion has to be bounded by their own “masculine rationality.”

    Yep. Further below, Lea mentioned that such men seem to have no problem expressing anger or pride. As you say, those are the “safe” feelings, because the outward expression of them gives an appearance of strength and confidence — at least, so they hope. This allows them to feel something without admitting weakness. In fact, Dr. Real posits that displays of anger and aggression are often another form of self-medication… a desperate attempt to stave off depression and self-loathing by acting in grandiose, “hypermasculine” fashion.

    It boggles my mind whenever gender comp gurus and advocates claim that they’re being “counter-cultural”. If Terry Real is right, all they’re doing is taking the most divisive and backwards aspects of our culture, and slapping an “Approved By God” label on them.

  418. I wonder what Piper would think of the time when I was pregnant with child number two. Child number one spotted a rattlesnake climbing the window by the front door. I finished loading the canner with green beans, set the stove for bring up the pressure, grabbed my own personal shot gun and a hoe, raked the snake to the ground and shot it. Saved the rattles for the kiddo.

    Where does that fit his gender roles?