Naghmeh Panahi link
“God cares about the one who’s being oppressed.” “He didn’t come to save the institution of marriage.” Naghmeh Panahi.
(Naghmeh changed her name from Abedini back to Panahi after her divorce from Saeed Abedini.)
I have long followed Naghmeh’s story. In 2021, I wrote #IStandwithNaghmeh Franklin Graham Didn’t and Added More Pain to Naghmeh Panahi’s Abuse by Saeed Abedini #ChurchToo
In this post, I wrote the story of Saeed Abedini, imprisoned in Iran, and his then wife, Naghmeh, who led a campaign to free her husband. However, she was hiding much pain in her life. Saeed abused her for many years.
According to Wikipedia:
In 2002, Abedini met and married his wife Naghmeh, an American citizen. In the early 2000s, the Abedinis became prominent in the house-church movement in Iran, at a time when the Iranian government tolerated the movement.[7][8] During this period, Abedini is credited with establishing about 100 house churches in 30 Iranian cities with more than 2,000 members.[6] With the election of Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in 2005, however, the house-church movement was subjected to a crackdown by Iranian authorities, and the Abedinis moved back to the United States.[7]
In 2008, Abedini became an ordained minister in the U.S., and in 2010, he was granted American citizenship, thus becoming a dual Iranian-American citizen.[9] Abedini lived with his family in Boise, Idaho, where his wife grew up.[10]
n mid-January 2013, it was reported that Abedini would go on trial on 21 January and could face the death penalty.[4][12] He was charged with compromising national security, though the specific allegations were not made public. His supporters said his arrest was due to his conversion and attending peaceful Christianity gatherings in Iran.[7] On 21 January 2013, Iranian state media reported that Abedini would be released after posting a $116,000 bond. His wife, however, stated that the government “has no intention of freeing him and that the announcement is a game to silence’ international media reports.”[3]
On 27 January 2013, following a trial,[13] Judge Pir-Abbasi sentenced Abedini to eight years in prison. According to Fox News, Abedini was sentenced for having “undermined the Iranian government by creating a network of Christian house churches and … attempting to sway Iranian youth away from Islam.”[8] The evidence against Abedini was based primarily on his activities in the early 2000s. Abedini was meant to serve his time in Evin Prison.[8]
In early November 2013, Abedini was transferred from Tehran to the Rajai Shahr prison in the town of Karaj, which was populated with heavy criminals and was known for placing prisoners in harsh (and sometimes life-threatening) conditions.[14]
Saeed’s imprisonment was loudly condemned by the US Senate, which passed a resolution demanding his release. Franklin Graham and Jay Sekulow jumped on the advocacy bandwagon, utilizing Saeed’s wife as a voice calling for his release, while emphasizing his Christian work. But as Wikipedia says so succinctly:
In November 2015, Naghmeh Abedini began to back away from speaking out publicly for her husband’s release, telling supporters by e-mail that he had been abusive to her and she could “no longer live a lie.”[21]
Fearing God should promote a healthy view of abuse victims in the church.
I spoke about this in my initial post. Recently, Christianity Today profile Nagmeh in ‘Domestic Abuse Was Worse than Death Row.’ and wrote about her and Stopping Abuse Is Sexual Ethics 101.
In the article on sexual ethics, Andrea Palpant Dilley explains her thoughts on the fear of God.
Fearing God means respecting his precepts and dreading his judgment when we don’t follow those precepts. As a church, then, our breach of sexual ethics goes right to the heart of our disposition toward him.
The abusers, enablers, and fixers lurking in our pulpits and pews have no healthy fear. As a result, they take their sins to the closet instead of the altar and lose the ability to discern good from evil. A simple request to help abuse survivors ends up looking like “a satanic scheme to completely distract us from evangelism,” according to a lawyer for the Southern Baptist Executive Committee.
She accurately portrays the views of many Christians-liberal and otherwise, in the following. Let’s be afraid of the gays who will destroy the church while the church is overlooking abuse.
Among the various cries, some progressives are calling out Christian conservatives for policing the issue of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) while simultaneously dismissing abused women in their own midst.
“If the SBC hated abusers as much as they do gay people … we literally wouldn’t be having this conversation today,” tweeted Matthew Manchester in response to the recent Southern Baptist Convention report revealing widespread abuse and coverup. Others have voiced similar concerns about “a perverse double standard.”
Question: Do we fear God when we disrespect or even act against his edicts? In other words, do we believe our actions will have eternal consequences? Did the SBC leaders and pastors, who covered up sexual abuse in their friends’ churches, honestly believe in a God who will one day express holy rage at the mistreatment of the abused? Do they think that it doesn’t matter because God will forgive everything? Dilley says it well.
Fearing and respecting God requires fearing and respecting those who bear his image—and seeing violations of their bodies as violations of him and his created order. There’s no way to get around that direct corollary.
Naghmeh Panahi and Meriam Ibrahim: shared stories of domestic abuse and Christians who told them to stay with their husbands.
Look at what Naghmeh has to say about how she was treated.
“I needed someone who could have told me this is what abuse was and this was not the heart of God,” said Naghmeh Panahi in a recent CT profile about her domestic violence case.
Christianity Today profiled Naghmeh in 2022 in ‘Domestic Abuse Was Worse than Death Row.’ The article describes the supportive friendship between Naghmeh Panahi and Mariam Ibraheem.You may remember Ibraheem when she was being held on death row in Sudan.
Sudanese religious freedom activist and public speaker. Meriam Ibrahim was arrested during her second pregnancy for apostasy and gave birth to a girl in prison on 27 May 2014.[2] Mariam Ibrahim’s case is part of a wider problem of persecution of Christians in Sudan.[3]
Eventually, after the birth of her child in prison, she was released.
Ibrahim, the center of publicity, much like Naghmeh, was also hiding a dark secret. She was abused at home as well.
Even more so when your family is in the public eye, with happy photos and triumphant headlines hiding the distress at home.
Ibraheem said her home became “worse than death row.” The abuse by her ex-husband even echoed what she endured during her time behind bars in Sudan. “I didn’t teach my children Arabic because I didn’t want my children to know the names I was being called” during their fights at home, she recounted. It’s the same thought she had as guards insulted her while imprisoned with her newborn.
…Instead, the place she expected to be safe became dangerous; the person she expected to care for her was hurting her, and the faith she leaned on was telling her to stay.
Panahi recognized how Ibraheem had exhausted her patience trying to make an abusive marriage work, and she’s seen that pattern with other Christian women she’s helped over the years. Even when abuse persisted, they believed that marriage is for life, kids should grow up with both parents, and God could redeem the brokenness in their relationships.
Panahi began to understand that God did not want women to stay in abusive situations.
She began to see that God cared about her well-being more than preserving a marriage at any cost, and that institutions like marriage existed for the good of people and not the other way around. “The life of the person is more important than the institution,” she said. “One sheep is more important than the whole institution.”
That understanding was the key to Panahi’s escape. The God who saved her life when she was arrested at gunpoint in Iran made a way for her to find freedom from an abusive marriage in America.
Panahi helped Ibrahim to leave her abusive situation.
Panahi ended up helping Ibraheem find safe housing, legal representation, and counseling, leading to another testimony of rescue.
“God answers my prayers though people,” Ibraheem said. “God really worked miracles. When I prayed, God sent someone to help me.”
Many churches, pastors, and Christian leaders still counsel women to stay in abusive marriages.
They say the teachings that led them to justify remaining in abusive marriages as “biblical” remain widespread. When believers abroad are suffering religious persecution, Christians want to help them escape; when they’re suffering in a violent home, the message from the church too often is to stay.
…“I needed someone who could have told me this is what abuse was and this was not the heart of God,” said Panahi.
…While more leaders are speaking up to address domestic violence from the pulpit and to condemn abuse in marriage, Panahi notes they often stop short of assisting a woman with legal fees to get a divorce.
Together they have formed Tahrir Alisa Foundation, advocating for women who have suffered abuse due to religious oppression.
The website says this foundation is “Helping women escape and recover from domestic abuse and religious persecution_
Persecution brings the church together for a cause, but abuse, Panahi worries, is a bigger issue that’s doing more damage within the church. “Persecution is close to the heart of God, but what Jesus was most outspoken about was where religion is used to oppress,” she said.
Russell Moore weighed in with Divorcing an Abusive Spouse Is Not a Sin.
Sometimes the one being abused will believe that there is no other option but to stay, feeling trapped in the marriage. In the case of domestic violence, the church has a responsibility not only to alert the relevant civil authorities but also to bear the abuse sufferer’s burdens by arranging a safe place of refuge and meeting other needs.
The very least that one can expect from one’s church is not to be condemned as a sinner for escaping danger.
Recognize that abusers often weaponize spiritual language to cover the abuse. They might suggest that the abused spouses are “unforgiving” if they leave or that they would be sinning against Jesus if they were to pursue divorce—quoting out-of-context Bible verses all the while. As the steward of the oracles of God, the church has a mandate to call such misuse of the Scriptures what it is: a taking of the Lord’s name in vain, in one of the worst ways imaginable.
Divorce for domestic violence is not a sin. It’s about sin all right—but it’s the sin of the abuser, not the sin of the abused who decides to divorce.
Sadly, Franklin Graham is the poster boy for how to abuse a victim if domestic violence.
The Washington Post wrote about How Franklin Graham pushed a domestic abuse victim to return to her husband. Here are some of his actions and words that I believe were despicable in light of Naghmeh’s situation. It is essential to understand that Saeed had a history of violence before and after his divorce. In other words, Graham knew it, and, as you will see, he didn’t care. Naghmeh was part of his dog and pony show, and reputation appears more important than truth.
Abedini pleaded guilty to domestic battery, court records show, and was ordered to complete anger management sessions as part of his sentence. But two years later, as a judge would hear, Abedini vandalized his mother-in-law’s car; in 2010, he allegedly broke his father-in-law’s nose.
Here are some of Graham’s actions as listed in the Washington Post. However, the first one, in my opinion, is truly the product of a sick mind.
“Naghmeh, are you cheating on him?” he asked. Panahi replied strongly that she was not.” “It was a good question to ask,” Graham said, “and I would have asked it again.”
- I’m not saying that Saeed is not guilty of abuse,” Graham wrote to Panahi on Jan. 23, 2016, the week after Abedini’s release. “I am sure he is guilty of much more. The problem is you exposed him publicly to the whole world and embarrassed him.
- Within a week of the failed reunion, Panahi said, Graham flew Abedini to Boise on a private jet, a trip she learned about only that day when a reporter called her. She rushed to a courthouse and was granted a protection order. When Abedini arrived, she and her mother met him with the couple’s two children, who had not seen their father in three years.Then she handed over a copy of the order. Abedini left without speaking to her.
- Graham told The Post his goal was to “reconcile the differences in their marriage” and that he didn’t pressure her. He called Panahi “a dishonest woman” and “disappointing.”
- After a protection order had expired, Panahi said, during a visit with the children, Abedini grabbed their 8-year-old son by the neck when the boy didn’t clean up a water spill; Panahi took her son to a hospital, where he was put in a neck brace.
- Panahi said, she met with Graham and her husband in a hotel conference room in downtown Boise, to show she was trying to make the marriage work, even though Abedini had not met with an abuse counselor as she had requested.
Graham, who told The Post in 2020 that he knew Panahi was recording their meeting, began by noting the “tens of thousands” of dollars his ministries Samaritan’s Purse and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association had given Panahi while Abedini was in prison. (She said Graham gave her about $30,000 in honorariums for speaking engagements.)- Graham said the marriage could “be fixed easily,” and he seemed to dismiss the severity of her abuse. “I’m not here to defend him calling you bad names, yelling at you, whatever,” he said.
“Beating me,” Panahi interjected.
Graham told her that abuse is a “gray area,”- he dismissed the idea of abuse counselors. “You could get some godless psychiatrist,” he said.
In my original post, I listed other incidents with Franklin Graham.
- Naghmeh refused to meet with Abedini for counseling. Franklin Graham responded by sending counselors and others to her. Those who contribute to Samaritan’s Purse should see how your funds are used.”Panahi says Graham urged her to fly to Germany to meet Abedini in route to the United States. Initially, she agreed, but then said she didn’t feel safe and decided against it….on January 26, 2016, Graham flies Abedini, Abedini’s parents and sister, two counselors, and a bodyguard on a private jet owned by Samaritan’s Purse to Panahi’s home in Boise, Idaho….Who does that when I’ve told Franklin, ‘I’m afraid. Saeed has threatened to take the kids’?” Panahi said. “Who does a surprise with a bodyguard and Saeed and his parents and his sister and the marriage counselors? They show up unannounced on a private jet—like that is traumatic.”
- Graham wouldn’t quit. Looks like he needed a bodyguard when he went to these meetings.”Panahi said Graham continued to pressure her to submit to in-person marriage counseling with Abedini.In February, Panahi said Graham’s marriage counselors, Dan and Linda Stephens, who work with Samaritan’s Purse, flew to Boise to meet with Panahi’s pastor, Bob Caldwell. Panahi said the Stephenses also spoke with Panahi’s abuse counselor, Robert Needham.In August 2016, Graham called Panahi, and requested an in-person meeting between her, Abedini, and himself. Panahi said she agreed to meet, fearing that if she refused, Graham would paint her in the media as the reason the marriage failed.So, on August 9, 2016, Graham, Abedini, and Panahi had a meeting at a hotel conference room in Boise, which Panahi recorded. Also at the meeting were Panahi’s pastor, Bob Caldwell, Panahi’s lawyer, and Graham’s bodyguard.”
- …(Franklin Graham in a statement to Roys) “While I am not a licensed counselor, I did offer limited counsel—to both Naghmeh and Saeed—as a minister. . . . I do not believe it would be appropriate for me to publicly disclose advice or counsel I may have offered to this couple—other than to say it was always my sincere desire to see Naghmeh and Saeed experience Biblical reconciliation and a God-given restoration to their marriage.”
Even Anne Graham Lotz told Naghmeh that Franklin was in error. This is from my original post.
Ann Graham Lotz was contacted by Naghmeh. She supported her. Good for her.
“Franklin does not understand the deep evil that Saeed is dealing with and Saeed’s pretend humility. I spoke with Franklin today, and it seems like he believes if the woman loves enough and submits enough things will be fixed. I have learned otherwise. The more I gave in, the more abusive he became.”
Lotz responds the same day: “I totally confirm that you are to stay in Boise, where you have your network of support. You are right, Franklin does not understand. And I can also tell you, Franklin is not a good listener. Just never mind him, if that’s possible.”
My original assessment of Graham stands.
They had a cash cow on their hands. Imagine the conferences? Imagine the proceeds rolling in due to hauling these two around the world, giving talks on unjust imprisonment, especially the unjust imprisonment of a pastor due to his faith. These would include the heart-wrenching tales of a wife and children separated from Saeed. The dollar sign seemed to be front and center. I also wonder if promises were made to some potential donors a priori.
I believe that Franklin Graham’s actions are highly questionable and would encourage folks to read this account before giving money to his ministry.
Naghmeh said it best in The Washington Post article.
“God cares about the one who’s being oppressed,” she said. “He didn’t come to save the institution of marriage.”
Recent video of Naghmeh
Julie Roys has done a great job o highlighting Naghmen’s abuse. Here is Naghmeh’s talk at Restore 2022. “Overcoming the Idol of Marriage.”
This makes me believe in women ministers, what a wise godly woman
“My original assessment of Graham stands:
“They had a cash cow on their hands. Imagine the conferences? Imagine the proceeds rolling in due to hauling these two around the world,”
Brings to mind the whole Ravi Zacharias debacle, which was a travesty.
Xians (some) love to throw their treasure at exotic fabulist “gospel” stories that play like Hollywood. It’s not truth stranger than fiction. It’s lying and fraud posing as truth. With a money collection pot grift for the rubes to fill with their hard earned dollars.
The grift is in the category of “Three Cups of Tea”, the nonprofit that was leveraged to become Greg Mortenson’s personal ATM for Mortenson living large.
From the main article up-top:
— Graham told her that abuse is a “gray area,”
he dismissed the idea of abuse counselors. “You could get some godless psychiatrist,” he said.—
Well, at least the godless psychiatrist wouldn’t have beaten the poo-poo out of her.
It is my fervent hope that people will pay less and less heed to Graham in future.
Authority is measured in power over women, and in a ‘marriage’ where authority is an issue, power over a woman. This is where homophobia rears its other equally ugly head – ministry figures who derive their authority from this power (rather than from from the humility of the Word of God) have no control over a gay man.
It would be wise for Christians to begin to understand that the material presented to them, which forms a Rube Goldberg belief structure, isn’t theology at all, but a ramshackle assemblage of teleologies. Stripping these out of your mind gets you so much closer to faith, not acquiescent belief.
There’s a Word for this.
Any male-supremacist society will have a love/hate relationship towards (male) homosexuality. (Female homoseuxlaity doesn’t count.)
Because it’s no longer Man and Woman, it’s Penetrator and Penetrated, with the Penetrator forcing submission on the Penetrated in an animal forced-dominance display. WOMAN, SUBMIT! GAWD SAITH!
And with that comes the fear that a Bigger, Stronger, More Biblically Manly Man can force upon you what you can force upon a mere woman. The ultimate Forcing Submission on an Inferior, “Making a woman out of him”. And that Cannot Be Allowed To Be. GAWD H8S FAGS!
Yet since a woman is nothing more than domestic livestock with benefits (nudge nudge wink wink know what I mean know what I mean) , the only way to have REAL sex with another Person is with another man. Paging Ted Haggard…
This ties into the Itching Ears for JUICY Testimonies.
And as “William Wallace II” needs constant reminding, “like Hollywood” is FICTION.
True Fiction, NOT False Fact.
And Christians confuse the two more than I’ve ever seen in Gaming, Comics, Anime, or Furry fandoms.
Very much agreed.
I’ve done this, and it is very emancipating.
It really quite surprising how strong “celebrity” and”patriarchal” so much of “Christianity” is, given the fundamental premise of Christ message…. But, I guess that is the point…. So many of these “leaders” , and peons, are not really following Christ…
Heck, Falwell Jr, basically admitted it
Back in the 1930’s one of my aunts was a victim of domestic abuse. She had a houseful of kids on top of that. She was member of a group I personally consider a cult. And they were honorable and really the body of Christ to her. When it became apparent to the community her husband was beating her and the kids, the pastor of her group and his wife went to her. Despite grave risk to their family, they told her she could move into their house at any time she needed to do so. A short time later she had to block an interior door and she and the kids escaped out a window. Went to the parsonage, where they lived safely for several weeks. In time they got a rent house, and that church gave her a decent living stipend until she died, I think. Helped her kids get jobs. Helped her get a job. Helped with food, with whatever she needed.
THAT is how you handle abuse in the church.
> Question: Do we fear God when we disrespect or even act against his edicts? In other words, do we believe our actions will have eternal consequences?
I think that in much Evangelical thinking, if one reckons that one really is saved, and one also embraces the common “once saved, always saved” view, then “fear of God” is no longer about “eternal consequences” (at least the most dire eternal consequences).
The story of David, Uriah and Bathsheba (so prominently featured at TWW recently) suggests that a casual attitude toward YHWH’s commands can have dire temporal consequences.
It might be that Evangelical pre-occupation with post-mortem consequences, and possible complacency that can arise once one reckons that one is safely and permanently beyond the reach of those (due to professed faith or a conversion experience) can also lead to complacency about the risk of present-day “under the sun” consequences of disregard of YHWH’s precepts.
The wrath of God that Paul wrote about in Romans 1, that was revealed from heaven against those who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, seems to have been (at least as far as is explicitly described there) temporal.
I have never heard this text used to criticize the hiding of unrighteous conduct in the churches; in Paul’s argument, he is criticizing the conduct of pagans, but perhaps there are wider applications.
Having finished the post, the thought occurs that Evangelicals need to embrace the idea that there are ways of violating a marriage covenant (so profoundly violating it that it effectively ceases to exist) beyond sexual infidelity.
Paul sees “abandonment” as grounds to dissolve a marriage covenant. Surely emotional, verbal and physical violence also qualify.
“Husbands, love your wives as Christ loves the Church.”
Perhaps there’s a connection between toleration of pastoral abuse of flock and toleration of spousal abuse in Christian marriages.
Or, as I have sometimes thought of people I preferred to avoid, “that person’s ‘love’ was not easily distinguished from ‘hatred’. “
“Rule by Vice” –
Pastor’s abusive behavior makes MY abusive behavior legitimate and respectable, if not Biblical.
“He does it, So Can I.”
I am so grateful to read your words. Women’s ordination has been around a long time. I first met a woman pastor in the 1960s. The churches I’ve belonged to for about 30 years have had women pastors.
The strongest argument against ordaining women is tradition. I don’t object to that argument in isolation, particularly in denominations that have been around for over a thousand years. But newer denominations and independent churches are not content to lean on ancient practice alone. They have to say in ever more creative ways that women are unworthy and subhuman. Men who approve of spousal abuse clearly think the victims—and their ilk—should be silenced, ignored, and punished on a whim. In this morally bankrupt framework, letting women talk authoritatively to men is profoundly upsetting to men.
Men with a bit of power worked very hard to create this problem, so naturally they will resist any solutions.
I have gotten to the point that this particular verse makes me cringe. Not because there is anything wrong with it, but because it is used as the get out of jail free card when discussing complementarianism. “But if the husband loves the wife like Ephesians says he should, then complementarian theology doesn’t harm women.” This completely ignores the fact that the vast majority of those teaching this do not ever hold the husband responsible for his behavior. They always look for fault in the wife. That is why Franklin Graham thinks accusing the wife of adultery is a good question. That is why he doesn’t see his own sin in leveling false accusations without any evidence to suspect that other than his own “if my wife were cheating on me, I’d probably get angry at her too!” Instead of dealing with the sin he has been told about, he feels the need to find a sin to be the root cause, and he is convinced it must be the woman’s sin. The Bible says that making false accusations is itself a sin.
I think this goes back to our Genesis curse theology. If you believe that a man lording it over the woman is the way things are supposed to be because of the fall, rather than the sinful state of things because of the fall, it effects how you interpret all other verses about women and marriage. Either, a man lording it over his wife is his Biblically Demanded Role, or it is a direct indication of the fallen sinful state of this world. Those are opposites. We are not supposed to be idolizing the results of the fall.
I think where this really needs to be thought through is the first part of the curse. God did say that the man will Lord it over his wife and she will be dependent on him. God also said that procuring food was going to become back-breaking work. In order to be consistent with our management of the curse, if women are to be kept subservient, then men are not allowed to use any tools to procure food. Not even a hoe, or a shovel. None. The reality is that the vast majority of technological development has ultimately been created with one purpose in mind: to reduce the impact of the curse. If that is not sinful, then why is a woman trying to shed the implications of the curse sinful?
My journey to egalitarianism involved a whole lot of: “Why is it not sinful for a man to be afraid that he won’t get his way in marriage, but it is sinful for a woman?” The Bible doesn’t actually say that… Come to think of it, the Bible doesn’t really differentiate between male and female sins. Maybe there isn’t a difference.”
1. Marriage never belonged to any religion, in God’s eyes. It belonged to the couple plus an officiating bard / chieftain and the regulation witnesses. Parsons only kept a register because no-one else was in such a position.
2. Bad religion and bad ideology don’t allow you agency over your private parts.
3. As early settlers’ village elders and church elders were much the same people, the US government that inherited the role of the former has “inserted itself” here also, spiritually entrenched by dominionism and the deliberately bodged “expediency” favoured by William James.
4. The world’s institutions jettison what superficial religious trappings they please but at bottom they will never break free from the bad spiritual power of the fundamentalists and resurgents e.g in moralistic hate crime against boys that prefer pink (which we all wore) or have got emotions (which I am proud of).
ES,
I apologize for triggering you. Within my reflection, I mentioned that text as a kind of ironic preamble to what followed, which was basically (what HUG replied) that there is a kind of pastor who uses his sense of authority to lord it over the flock (IIRC, Paul explicitly forbids this), and husbands sometimes do the same over the people they regarded to be biblically under their authority.
—
If we grant that it is an unattainable ideal that a real flesh-and-blood husband actually would love his family the way Christ loved the church, then we ought to be prepared to also excuse wives from the duties that are customarily assigned to them. (I think there is biblical warrant for this; David, for example, could not hold Amnon to a higher standard than David had lived up to).
I’d like to rephrase:
Either a husband lording over his wife is his Biblically Ordained Role, OR it is evidence of his fallen sinful state.
I personally believe that when Ephesians 5 gives it’s directive to husbands, it is rather clearly subverting the curse. Which indicates to me that a husband who wields power over his wife in any way, is sinning against her. This is not preached this way. Instead it is preached as if it is nice thing Christian husbands should do. And he should do it, not because if he doesn’t he is sinning against her and going to be held accountable before God, but rather so he can win more souls to Christ. But if the woman dares to ask a question with the wrong inflection – SHE IS SINNING!
Samuel Conner,
No need to apologize. I understood exactly what you meant and where you are coming from. The verse itself should be one that brings hope to women – but sadly, it has been very badly twisted.
I’m also a little blunt sometimes. Usually more blunt than triggered. 🙂
ES,
The fall is metaphor. Human beings which I am thrilled to be an equally wonderful one, have this capacity to disadvantage another. Loss of ground leading to frictions around intense food production and the trend to harder metal weapons represent successive falls, these are in Genesis also.
God created us male and female together. Not subtractively, not zero sum. We are still together when we are single and alone. Let no fundamentalist, resurgent or their Roman lookalikes put us, the sexes in general, asunder. Because their bad spiritual grip has infected those other boys and girls who now unthinkingly terrorise their fellows and themselves.
The so called curse is a reverse engineered just so rationalisation to pagans, and describes devil’s work for believers. Those who wish there was no free will for us (and only them), namely the resurgents, want to turn us into Stepford Wives and Midwich Cuckoos.
Holy Spirit sent at Ascension gives those of us who near the Kingdom of heaven, the power to trade our gifts with those of our fellow orphans so to gain treasure in heaven, a doctrine unheard of by almost all religious authorities and certainly the dominating ones.
The Old Testament also rails against the crushing behaviour of those devils against us. Sirs, you oppress any woman, you oppress me. You teach secular authority to oppress any boy, you oppress me.
Sad that both Ravi and Franklin were Billy lookalikes – the Billy that had no concept of church.
One hasn’t been saved. One has hope of providential salvation on condition one avails of heart currency to buy into God’s pyramid scheme of paying forward – the only one Christians should trust and the only one they don’t trust.
Only our God is worthy to trade in souls but the many bad religious leaders (largely toned down and “respectable”) have cornered that themselves.
Dominionists pin the world’s problems on the free will of you and me and not on their own occult power of dominionism.
ES,
Taking Ephesians together with when Jesus tells disciples not to lord it (the reverse of any William James-like taking of Bible pieces to be irrelevant to each other) Paul is showing his audience how to transform the typical Roman offhand competitive marriage. The same Bible told Long Senior not to incite his children but look what Long junior aged 20 (Aaron) did, yet his parents’ philosophy doesn’t get queried.
Graham needs shut up about that, at least until he has suffered from some physical abuse himself.
(I thought about sayin’ something’ else, but I was afraid Graham might take it as a threat, and suffer the embarrassment of letting his weak, feminine side show through.)
On a different note:
The photos I’ve seen of Naghmeh… …. She is a strikingly beautiful lady, physically. I get the feeling that she’s at least as beautiful on the inside as she is on the outside.
I suspect this is one reason why most complementarians ignore un-married women.
Never married, widowed, or divorced women don’t fit their world view or interests, since unmarried women are not quite as beholden to most of their sexist theology of male headship.
Complementarians (when not focused on men and male rule) are laser focused on “married mothers.”
Women who are single (for whatever reason) or childless don’t get much thought in complementarian thinking.
But even that is not enough. I’m a married mother, and believe me, I don’t fit their nutty criteria.
Today on Baptist News Global about Franklin Graham:
https://baptistnews.com/article/do-franklin-grahams-accusations-against-progressive-christianity-hold-up-against-truth/#.YwgmdHbMJPY
And as for daddy Billy . . . I used to have so much respect for Billy Graham. Two things changed that reality.
1. https://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/03/us/billy-graham-apologizes-to-jews-for-his-remarks-on-nixon-tapes.html\
2. https://www.upi.com/Archives/1985/07/12/Religion-in-AmericaNEWLNBaptist-battle-still-boiling/1197489988800/
Read it and weep . . .
Franklin news today from Baptist News Global:
https://baptistnews.com/article/do-franklin-grahams-accusations-against-progressive-christianity-hold-up-against-truth/#.YwgvFnbMJPY
I submitted a comment about Franklin Graham from Baptist News Global that has been disallowed. I offer an apology for however it was considered offensive.
Wow. I’ve seen a side of TWW I’ve never seen before tonight.
Go ahead and remove this post as well.
It will be my last. Won’t be back here again.
Grace and peace to all . . .
Unless they are targeted with manipulative tactics to try and match make them to a one year (typical time length) widowed male. With tactics never including the respect of directly asking if the target is interested. While during the one year time frame direct requests from the target for help along other lines seems to perplex them (they just don’t want to do it, mentor youth, and maybe that’s a good thing…) Telling questions and statements. “Do you expect me to do that?” Or “They won’t even do that for their own children.” I guess they (complementarian men) only expect to speak, direct, be heard and responded to. Although, on occasion they may not like or know what to do with the response, whether it’s direct or indirect.
You will have to pardon me, I have no idea what you are referencing…
ES,
I think this might be what is referenced
https://www.christianpost.com/news/robert-aaron-long-struggled-with-sins-he-committed-at-spas.html
ES,
I believe it’s the latter example: a man ‘lording it’ over his wife has broken with the Church’s terms for a marriage being a devotion of ‘either to other’ so that the couple are mutually caring for one another . . . .
Of course, heavy-duty ‘patriarchy’ is sinful: just look at the scene that bred the scion of the Duggar family with all of his cheating on his wife and his consumption of child pornography, even the rape of infants!
And look what the ‘lifestyle’ did the that poor woman with mental-health problems who lived isolated with five little children including an infant, home-schooling them, and when she ‘lost it’ and didn’t get the care she needed for her psychosis, she drowned her five children . . . . the way the state handled it: as if her mental illness and psychosis was not the cause of her ‘crime’
So she is locked up. Very soon, her ‘husband’ (the creep) divorces her and marries another woman. . . .
sin
it leads to suffering and death
patriarchy is the worship of the male sex, at the cost of the human dignity of women who are ALSO made ‘in the image of God’
strange patriarchal cults are everywhere these days – and the red states are finding out that some of their Republican voters are SICKENED by the new ‘laws’ that require women to stay pregnant with a toxic pregnancy once the fetus has died, and doctors are ‘warned’ (threatened) with charges IF they do a proper D and C to end the toxic pregnancy that will likely result in sterility OR, at worst, the death of the mother whose womb is infected and who needs medical care. . . .
Yep, I agree with the latter suggestion: a husband’s ‘lording it’ over his wife IS a sign of the results of the Fall in Eden.
A proper Christian marriage is ‘either to other’ with respect and dignity shown to both partners because ALL humans regardless of sex deserve respect because they are made in the image of God and have received a soul from God. . . .
To an extent Mr Graham is right when he talks about “grey areas” but only because he hasn’t taken the time to think things through, unlike ministers of a bygone age.
Richard Baxter, a Puritan, offers these thoughts
– “ It is a relation of love that you have entered. God hath made it your duty for your mutual help and comfort; that you may be as willing and ready to succour one another, as the hand is to help the eye or other fellow-member, and that your converse may be sweet, and your burdens easy, and your lives may be comfortable. If love be removed but for an hour between husband and wife, they are so long as a bone out of joint; there is no ease, no order, no work well done, till they are restored and set in joint again. Therefore be sure that conjugal love be constantly maintained.”
But he also says this
-“ As the difference between my house and my prison is that I willingly and with delight dwell in the one, but am unwillingly confined to the other, such will be the difference between a quiet and an unquiet life, in your married state; it turneth your dwelling and delight into a prison, where you are chained to those calamities, which in a free condition you might overrun”.
As for separation, he is quite clear
-“ Quest. XVII. If there be but a fixed hatred of each other, is it inconsistent with the ends of marriage? And is parting lawful in such a case? Answ. The injuring party is bound to love, and not to separate; and can have no liberty by his or her sin. And to say, I cannot love, or my wife or husband is not amiable, is no sufficient excuse; because every person hath somewhat that is amiable, if it be but human nature; and that should have been foreseen before your choice. And as it is no excuse to a drunkard to say, I cannot leave my drink; so it is none to an adulterer, or hater of another, to say, I cannot love them: for that is but to say, I am so wicked that my heart or will is against my duty. But the innocent party’s case is harder (though commonly both parties are faulty, and therefore both are obliged to return to love, and not to separate). But if hatred proceed not to adultery, or murder, or intolerable injuries, you must remember that marriage is not a contract for years, but for life, and that it is possible that hatred may be cured (how unlikely soever it may be). And therefore you must do your duty, and wait, and pray, and strive by love and goodness to recover love, and then stay to see what God will do; for mistakes in your choice will not warrant a separation. duty). But in plain danger, which is not otherwise like to be avoided, I doubt not, but it may be done, and ought. For it is a duty to preserve our own lives as well as our neighbours’. And when marriage is contracted for mutual help, it is naturally implied, that they shall have no power to deprive one another of life (however some barbarous nations have given men power of the lives of their wives). And killing is the grossest kind of desertion, and a greater injury and violation of the marriage covenant than adultery; and may be prevented by avoiding the murderer’s presence, if that way be necessary. None of the ends of marriage can be attained, where the hatred is so great.“
(A Christian Directory)
When I was struggling with being in an abusive marriage, where I stayed for far too long, I found Gretchen Baskerville’s book The Life Saving Divorce & the ministry & fb page that grew out of that incredibly helpful.
You would not believe what Christian wives (mostly it’s women) are expected to put up with in an effort to ‘save’ their husbands, up to & including frequent violent rape, paedophilic husbands sexually abusing & filming the children, plus wives & children being kept literally in rags & starving when money isn’t short. And decades of the above. Churches have refused to help people even in these circumstances & some of these husbands are pretty well known in various church circles.
I got off very very light in comparison to these women. And we really have to ask ourselves if marriage was made for humanity, or humanity made for marriage because it is actually receiving what amounts to human sacrifice daily.
If anyone needs more details of ministries such as this, & how to find support to break free of abuse, you can get in touch with Gretchen via her website, or even me through Dee if needed.
Luckyforward,
I don’t know what was removed, but I see two comments in a row from you. Your second comment is right below your comment that contains two links. Maybe the pugs needed to check the links, just in case. That has happened to some of my comments with links or Certain Words; they emerge after a while.
Thank you for your interesting comment. One of the problems in abuse is that the abuser knows how to abuse”just enough” so that the victim lives but is in constant pain and peril. This is also true of abusers who use psychological methods that demean and cause the victim to question their sanity. In both of these situations, the person lives but lives barely.
I believe John Piper said that a woman should bear abuse for a short time. He may have backtracked. The problem with abuse is that one never knows when it will be the one that lands someone in the ICU. Even he, who believes that one should never divorce, clapped and celebrated his son’s second marriage. My understanding is that the first wife left him. His son chose not to stay single just in case the wife came back which is what Piper has intimated in his writings. (Believe it or not, I actually read his stuff.)
Naghmeh, whom I have long admired said it well. “God cares about the one who’s being oppressed,” she said. “He didn’t come to save the institution of marriage.”
BeakerN,
I am so very sorry for the pain you endured in your marriage. It sounds like you have learned a great deal about marriage and divorce. Would you be interested in telling your story?
Friend,
When I approve a post, the links should work immediately. If they do not, please let me know. The blog is functioning as it should as we seek someone to update and help.
When I am out, I do not approve the comments being held, often for one of “those words.” Sometimes, that can be a few hours. I try to approve comments first thing in the morning, noon, mid-afternoon, early evening, and just before lights out.
I have not disallowed any of your comments. In fact, I try to post a note that a comment is disallowed when I do so. I would say that I disallow about one comment every two weeks. If I posted those comments, you would understand why. They are truly offensive and disgusting.
I try to approve comments a few times each day. Recently, my mother has made a decision to refuse medications that treat her heart condition. That has been difficult for me and her caregivers. I was emotionally not myself for about two weeks. During that time, I was slower in approving comments and I am sorry if that was one of yours.
Thanks for asking Dee, but I think because it’s too easy to find who I am in real life, as well as the fact that most of the abuse I got was due to my ex-husband’s very significant childhood trauma at the hands of his Mum being triggered by getting married (not uncommon), which he refused to face & treat, my answer will be no. Or at least for the next few years.
Lowlandseer,
Thank you for the link. I think I heard about that situation, but nothing more than a man had attacked massage parlors and several had died.
My brother, who left the faith a long time ago, insists that purity culture causes sexual deviance in men. Not that every man will be deviant, but rather that men will become deviant who would not have been deviant if they hadn’t been shamed and blamed for their originally normal sex drive.
A story in this same vein: https://julieroys.com/insular-quiverfull-churhc-new-york-north-country-faces-reckoning/
dee,
Thanks for both of your comments about this. I didn’t mean to speak out of turn, but I also thought that this was probably about needing time for approval.
I’m very sorry your mother is faring so poorly. Stopped and prayed for all of you just now. <3
I haven’t heard patriarchy described like this before but it is very true.
My wife calls it “Bow to the Penis!”
(I am pretty sure the pugs will want to spend extra time inspecting this comment)
Humph-This blog allows HUG to comment. This is nothing!
She also demonstrably genuflects when she says it. It’s quite an something to see it in its full glory.
Dee,
thank you for allowing both HEADLESS (HUG) and KEN F (Tweed) to post here. Different styles, but both ‘gifts’ of expression ‘a cut above’ the usual 🙂
permitting ‘satire’ helps us all to get through some of the worst of what our humankind is capable of . . . to see the worst for what it really is, that is a part of the genius of this form of expression
BeakerN,
I’m so grateful for the truly helpful Christian resources for those of us who have experienced abusive marriages. I’ve heard so many women’s (and some men’s) stories that are awful. The church environment made the situation worse for me.
The cognitive dissonance between what some church leaders said and what the professionals and my body/mind knew as the truth was huge. Some of those leaders are still smearing me to others, including my friends.
I recently commented that spiritual abuse in the churches has a lot in common with abusive marriages. My reading about dv prepared me to see the dynamics in the churches.
Since these clowns are so fond of covenants and contracts then that’s what marriage is.
My wife and I agreed together to love, respect and support one another in a monogamous relationship.
If one of us breaks the contract then the other reserves the right to leave.
This isn’t a Christian thing, heck the patriarchs had slave girls & concubines & multiple wives, it’s an “us” thing.
No woman needs to stay in an abusive relationship or with someone who disrespects them.
It bears repeating: men and women are equal. Full and complete stop.
Pastor Sam Powell has a blog entry in which he makes a very strong case that STAYING in an abusive marriage could be a sin. The title of the post is “Divorce and tempting God” and is easily found via Google. It’s a real eye-opener.