@ESA’s Euclid mission released its first science images, including views of a large cluster of thousands of distant galaxies, close-ups of two nearby galaxies, a gravitationally bound group of stars called a globular cluster, and a nebula, or a cloud of gas and dust in space where stars form. -ESA Euclid
“I used to be Snow White, but I drifted.” ― Mae West link
Today I was frustrated. I heard Clay Travis (I listen to all sorts of talking heads, so don’t go nuts), a conservative talk show host, say that his wife took him to see the MJ the Musical. When he was questioned about Michael Jackson’s well-known history of child sex abuse, he said, “his wife didn’t believe it because he was never convicted.” His wife just graduated from law school, making the statement even more bizarre. O.J. Simpson was never convicted. Casey Anthony was never convicted. Yet in both cases, many reasonable folks believe they are guilty even though they are acquitted.
Michael Jackson was musically gifted, O.J. Simpson was a great football player, and Casey Anthony seemed to have no talent except for staring blankly into a camera. Michael Jackson was off-the-charts talented, but he was a troubled soul. If you can find the documentary Neverland 1, I suggest watching it.
I believe that Clay Travis and his wife are afflicted with cognitive dissonance, especially since they can afford the tickets to the cool music and really, really wanted to see it, abuse be damned. There is no question that the show is well produced, but seriously? The yuck factor is all over this. I have seen this type of dissonance occur when I discuss a beloved pastor who has a hidden abuse problem. His defenders fall all over themselves telling me that it is not possible. They “know” their pastor even though they have only seen him on stage, and they want to continue to see him put on his show of “piety.”
Eight years ago, I wrote the following post. The only changes I made to the original are using Grammarly, a product that has saved me, and making those corrections. The original post received 235 comments. I’ll be interested in seeing how it is received years later.
I am leaving on Friday for my annual family vacation on 30A in Florida. Todd will post on Friday, but I will still be posting. I will keep TWW updated when the “thing” hits the fan.
Start of the original post from 2017
Why I don’t like the term *purity* when it is applied to abstinence before marriage.
I have never cared for the term “purity” when it is applied to those who do not have sex before marriage. Do not get me wrong. I believe the Bible promotes sex only within a marital relationship. That is what we taught our children as they grew up. We taught them all sorts of other things that also pertain to purity. We taught them to understand the Scripture and why following the faith is good. We discussed how to live honestly and exhibit kindness and selflessness to others. Purity in relationships means treating others as they wish to be treated and never using others for selfish purposes.
As I watched my kids grow up, I would often see kids who did the purity ring thing but bullied other kids, acted snotty and arrogant, lied, cheated, etc. For me, purity was a big picture thing that should not be shrunken down to “don’t have sex before marriage.”
Here is one look at purity as it is defined in the New Testament.
The New Testament. In the New Testament, there is little emphasis on ritual purity. Rather, the focus is on moral purity or purification: chastity ( 2 Cor 11:2 ; Titus 2:5 ); innocence in one’s attitude toward members of the church ( 2 Cor 7:11 ); and moral purity or uprightness ( Php 4:8 ; 1 Tim 5:22 ; 1 Peter 3:2 ; 1 John 1:3 ). Purity is associated with understanding, patience and kindness ( 2 Cor 6:6 ); speech, life, love, and faith ( 1 Tim 4:12 ); and reverence ( 1 Peter 3:2 ).
I know of one teen who slipped up in the abstinence area. She got terribly punished by her parents and her church. She was made to confess her sin in front of her school. In the meantime, sitting in the audience of those listening were some of the meanest bullies one can imagine. Yes, they were *Christian* kids. These kids were constantly getting in trouble for being mean to others, but they never had to confess their sins to the school. They got a pass. The funny thing was that the girl who messed up in the abstinence department was one of the sweetest, kindest teens, always helping others. So the bullies were pure, and she wasn’t?
Why was she *not pure* and why did the bullies get a pass? Why did the mean kids get to go to the prom and she didn’t?
Slates goes to a purity ball
I was intrigued by this tweet from Stephanie Drury.
Slate posted Striking Portraits of Fathers and the Daughters Whose Virginity They’ve Pledged to Protect. The photographer decided to go to one such event and try to explain it through a series of pictures.
He began interviewing the people he photographed and said that also helped shape his ideas of the decisions the young girls had made along with their fathers.
“When you start listening to what separate individuals who are part of a group have to say, it suddenly becomes about people and not just about a group mentality. There are huge diversities within the group and reasons for why they choose these ceremonies.”
He learned that many of the young women were independent thinkers and their fathers were simply trying to protect their loved ones the best way they knew how. Magnusson sent portraits to everyone who participated in the project and said they were all very happy with the results.
(This link to this post no longer works.) Bruce Gerencser wrote Jodi Heckert Pledged to Protect His Daughter’s Virginity, Now in Prison For Child Molestation. Here is what he had to say.
As a photographer, I found Magnusson’s work to be stunning (and creepily disturbing), but I do wonder, based on several of his quotes in the article, if Magnusson really understands the American purity culture. For those of us who were once a part of the patriarchy movement, David Magnusson’s photographs are reminders of the many girls who are smothered by their God-fearing, hymen-worshiping “protective” fathers.
One of the dads featured in Magnusson’s work is now in prison for molesting one of his daughters.
Think about what is going on in that young girl’s home. Her dad is *protecting* her virginity while molesting her sister! I bet that there are plenty of Christians in Yuma who thought this guy was the perfect dad, given his penchant for sexual *purity* when it comes to his daughter. Instead, he is a monster, and that young woman will need all the help she can get to figure out this Christian thing.
Christians and cognitive dissonance.
I was a naive convert to the faith. I did not know many Christians and learned much about the Bible and faith through reading. I made some dumb assumptions early on. I assumed Christians following the Bible would intrinsically behave in a Christian manner. It seems I overlooked the whole “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” deal, especially in myself. I have been hurt many times along my faith journey by assuming that a person who goes to the right church and believes the right thing would also rightly live.
Somehow, I was also able to overlook my sins and shortcomings. There was a great deal of cognitive dissonance when it came to me. However, as time went on, I began to understand much more about man’s capacity to sin and to justify that sin. I learned that pedophiles, molesters, sociopaths, and narcissists can use the church to carry out their sick agenda. They get the culture, they know the lingo, and they know naive Christians. Even if they molest, they realize that many Christians will blow it off as a mistake.
Years ago, I would have assumed that any dad who took their daughter to a purity ball was a God-fearing, Christian man. I no longer make that assumption and hope to convince everyone else not to make such assumptions. I also think we need to take a good, hard look at what we mean by purity.
How sin leveling contributes to cognitive dissonance and the inability of Christians to understand evil in our midst.
Recently, The Gospel Coalition posted The Hypocrisy of Phariseephobia written by a college student who is struggling with his homosexuality. Here is what a clueless Christian said to him.
“People may say that sin is sin, but homosexuality—that’s different. Homosexuality is worse than all the others.”
He was deeply hurt as he should have been. However, he started getting down on himself because he judged this person!
This person seemed to have compassion on everyone she met—that is, everyone who wasn’t gay. This made me angry, but it gradually dawned on me: Because she thought of me as the worst person, I’d begun thinking of her as the worst person.
I was being a hypocrite.
He went on to say that he was judging the *judgy.*
This perspective is essentially a form of self-righteousness: “You’re not straight; therefore I am better than you are, and you are to be avoided.” In fact, this kind of attitude sounds much like a group of people Jesus often encountered: the Pharisees.
The Pharisees could have been labeled “sinner-phobic.” Blind to their own depravity,
It now appears that he believes that we are all the same when judging sin.
The Bible isn’t about “good guys” versus “bad guys.” There is only one good guy, and his name is Jesus Christ, the one who offered grace to both the sexually broken and the bigoted. So let’s drop our labeling and condemning, our anger and hypocrisy, and turn to Christ’s overwhelming grace. Let’s say with the guests at Simon’s house, “Who is this, who even forgives sins?”
In my opinion, the person going around spouting off about homosexuality being the worst sin is, in fact, misrepresenting the gospel, and that should bother The Gospel™ Coalition.
This is what contributes to churches and organizations that believe that child molesters, pedophiles, spouse abusers, etc., are no different than the guy who cusses in the car when he is cut off at an intersection. Yes, all of these have sinned, but what are the ramifications of those sins? Who has caused the most damage in this world?
The guy who cussed quietly in the car most likely has only hurt himself or those he is riding with. An apology and trying to control one’s outbursts is usually a solution. The man who has molested a child has probably molested many others. Such abuse can lead to serious ramifications for the child who has been harmed. The pain can last a lifetime and can lead to all sorts of difficult issues.
We speak strongly against allowing child sex abusers to have roles as leaders in churches. Norm Vigue at Steven Furtick’s Elevation Church is one of those. He served time in prison as a violent sex offender. He is now Furtick’s hero and leads all sorts of ministries. The Sins of Our Fathers: Elevation Church Needs to Know That Repentant Pedophiles Are Not Heroes.
We have heard from clueless Christians at Elevation Church who claim that they are no different than Norm Vigue. Sadly, they do not understand that they are different unless they are going around and raping children and ruining their lives. (I have taken to asking them if they have turned themselves in to the police yet.)Yes, we all sin, but some sins are much worse than others.
As Christians, we must carefully think about the lingo we are flinging around these days. Let’s discuss and debate a few questions.
- What do we mean by purity?
- Are all sins the same?
- Does God view all sins the same? (Hint: look at the OT)
I like James 1:27 for a definition of purity. I was reading an article about a famous person whose relative was murdered. This person said that they do forgive the accused but also believe the accused should pay. I think that is where the drift happens; some people can’t grasp the fact that forgiveness doesn’t mean no consequences. Who repents like Zacchaeus these days? I want to see that. Have we ever read about a pastor, once accused, who opens his own wallet to pay for therapy for his victims?
JJallday(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
“Does God view all sins the same? (Hint: look at the OT)”
There are also NT passages that refute sin leveling.
Max(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
” “his wife didn’t believe it because he was never convicted.””
And of course people who die before conviction… are never convicted and the case is dropped.
Jimmy Savile was never even prosecuted, let alone convicted.
Jon H(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Strange isn’t it … that some of the most impure people in Christendom have hung out in the purity movement?! (think Bill Gothard, Josh Duggar)
Max(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Max,
Agreed, although I do like the various punishments listed for various things in the OT
dee(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Christians are as obsessed with human sexuality as is the larger culture, just in the opposite direction.
Muff Potter(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I have never had the slightest discomfort talking about sex with my daughters. Maybe I am doing it wrong, but I just looked at it as a combination of complex human emotions and biological urges.
My goal was to prepare them for the good and bad of human relationships. Hopefully, when they chose to have sex, it would be in a manner that was emotionally and physically safe for them and their partner.
I still relish in their embarrassment when I flirt with their mom or their mom flirts with me, and one of the girls inevitably goes, “ewww, gross.”
davewis(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
It’s been so painful for me to hear pastors, whom I’ve known and respected, rave about seeing MJ the Musical.
Adell(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Get a maple old-fashioned at the Donut Hole for me!
Tom Rubino(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Sin leveling really gets my blood boiling. Years ago I sat through a sermon that compared my gluttony of eating a box of donuts to murder. It’s all sin, right? I was young and newer in my journey so I didn’t find the preacher afterwards and give him a piece of my mind, but I knew it was wrong. Oh how I’d love to have a re-do button to call out the garbage I’ve heard through the years.
I do believe sin leveling is a tactic used by manipulative, articulate pastors to keep us all under their thumbs. Who are we to think we’re better than anyone else? Sorry, but I do think I’m better than a pedophile because I don’t harm children, i cuss a little too much to emphasize a point but I protect children. Ironically, I think the sin leveling pastor thought he’d reached complete sanctification because while the rest of us pew sitters were sinners, he lived a perfect life. Perfect kids, perfect wife, perfect everything.
EW66(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I didn’t cuss until I started a journey through the American church … but I cuss only what needs to be cussed.
Max(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Jesus talked a lot about Hell in the NT
Max(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
We’ve been doing a deep dive into the Sermon on the Mount for the last few months. It’s been an amazing, rich, and incredibly challenging excursion. Challenging because I believe Jesus MEANT for His “talmidim” (disciples) to actually live out what He taught; to have a “work of new creation” transform them from the inside-out.
“Purity culture” teaching always seemed to have it INVERTED. Instead of a heart that has been transformed so it doesn’t WANT to lust, the emphasis is on outward appearances and actions.
And it’s ALWAYS the girls who bear the responsibility… boys are (even if it’s subtle) given the message that “you can’t help it, you’re just a captive to your eyes and hormones” which, as I told my two sons, is BS.
In Matthew 5:18, Jesus says, “How fortunate are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.”
Jesus is obviously riffing on Psalm 24:3-4: “Who may ascend the mountain of YHWH? Who may stand in His Holy place?
The one who has clean hands and a PURE (“tahor”) heart, who does not trust in an idol or swear by a false God”
Strong’s says this about the word “tahor”:
“Morally, (tahor) is used to describe individuals who are righteous and blameless… in Psalm 24:4, the psalmist speaks of those with ‘clean hands and a PURE heart’ as being worthy to stand in God’s holy place. This moral purity is NOT MERELY EXTERNAL BUT REFLECTS AN INNER INTEGRITY AND DEVOTION TO GOD.” (Emphasis mine)
“Inner integrity” is the operative phrase here when it comes to the obvious disconnect between words and walking with Christ… why a father can “protect” his daughter’s virginity while raping her sister and think nothing is wrong with that picture. As Dee mentioned, we have mastered the art of excusing our behavior while condemning others for the same things (I have a Ph.D in that!).
Inner integrity AND “devotion to God” are works that happen in the secret place of prayer, meditation on Scripture, listening for the “still small voice”, seeking for more of Him… and in the “public place” of living in community with people who are being transformed by Him, and conformed more and more into His image.
I really love the late, great Dallas Willard (philosophy prof at Southern Cal, author of “Divine Conspiracy” and other books). He spoke a lot about the Spiritual Disciplines. But he caught my attention when he wrote that Jesus’s “life students” (his term) should be the kind of people who DON’T WANT to cheat, steal, lie, take advantage of another … SIN, in other words, because they (continually) surrender their hearts to HIS transforming work, rather than human effort or ingenuity.
PapaB(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
But to the Christians in question, there is NO NT, only the (weaponized) OT.
“Son of Man (TM)” instead of “Son of God (TM)”.
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
And there are a lot of Christians who ONLY talk about Hell.
To the point where God is not God, Hell becomes God and we’re in Socratic Atheism country.
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
“AND GOD HATES [ALL] SIN WITH SUCH A PERFECT HATRED…”
— some tract (The Calvary Road?) that messed up my head back in the Seventies
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Aside:
In the Nineties, the second or third Christian Dating Service disaster was phone-based, listening to and leaving what’s now called Voicemail over the landlines. And several of the girls (at the time “woman” and “girl” were interchangeable in my native dialect) started their intros with the same question: “Are you Pure? Are you PURE? ARE YOU PURE?”
(I can only assume “Pure” was in relation to Pelvic Issues; i.e. I wasn’t the only one looking for a what’s now called a Body Count of Zero.)
And many years afterwards, there was this zinger of a comment over at Internet Monk:
“Evil seems to be the side most obsessed with Purity.”
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I think we can see how the country as a whole is responding to these trends in the 2024 PRRI Census of American Religion, which was released today at:
https://www.prri.org/spotlight/2024-prri-census-of-american-religion/
I hope there will be a breakdown by gender in the next couple of weeks. I was expecting the recent trend of young women leaving Christianity to be counteracted by an increase in young and middle-aged men joining. I guess I missed the boat with that prediction.
davewis(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Purity balls in my neck of the woods was more of a one-upmanship competition between the mothers than it was about purity in any form or fashion……. who’s daughter had the most beautiful, fancy gown…. the most elaborate hair-do; girls from age 4 and up with lipstick, blush, eyeliner, mascara, and tiaras.
When one of my nieces was 6 yo, her mother made her sit through a grueling 4 hours to get her hair styled. Undoing the mess and shampooing her hair afterwards was just as bad.
Many of the attendees didn’t even go to church, except on special occasions. And, an usual number of the young girls ended up to be the ones who wore the most revealing prom dresses.
Thank goodness my daughter and I were never interested in that nonsense. The photos and videos other families showed us were almost more than we could stand.
Nancy2(aka Kevlar)(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I think the obsession of these guys with purity is really just a carnal aversion to competition. And some are quite justified in their fears, if you know what I mean.
Andrea(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
To answer one of Dee’s question, my bet there will be significantly less comments to this post this time around…… Many of are really warn down by all the abuse and chaos going on…
Jeffrey Chalmers(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I have never heard of 30A (or paid any notice apparently) until my sister moved to Santa Rosa Beach a few months ago. I hope to make it out there in a couple of years.
Enjoy your trip Dee.
Afterburne(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Oh please, next you’re going to tell me that Jimmy Swaggart had sex with a prostitute. Right?
Proffy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Consensual sex with a legitimate prostitute is the least offensive sin I’ve seen reported on this site.
And I have seen plenty.
Sandy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
“Are all sins the same?”
We should all be concerned about church leaders who teach “Sin Leveling.” What BIG transgressions in their lives are they hiding while preaching that your LITTLE iniquities are just as bad?! When they are exposed and it’s stone-throwing time, they want to make sure you lay your rocks down. “So what if Pastor sinned real big while he was in our pulpit, he sure can preach! We’ve all sinned.”
Max(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Sandy,
Sad, but true….
Jeffrey J Chalmers(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I would use caution when saying someone is afflicted with cognitive dissonance. Instead, cognitive dissonance is something we experience when we learn something that challenges our preexisting set of beliefs.
Cognitive dissonance is not a bad thing. It is how we learn; as we gather new information and ideas, we build on or replace our existing ideas.
The challenge is when we need to hold two conflicting ideas (the technical term is cognitions) in our mind. This conflict can cause discomfort, even physical pain, until we figure out how to either accept or resolve the conflict.
For example, I am proud of my ancestors. They came to this country with almost nothing. They built a life for themselves and their children. Recently, when helping my mom with some genealogy, I learned that the men held Indian hunting parties.
Now, I have to figure out how to resolve this conflict. Were my ancestors good, hard-working farmers, or were they people who hunted other humans just because they didn’t want them around? Can they somehow be both good and bad?
I doubt Clay Travis is experiencing cognitive dissonance; he is a talk show host, just like Rush Limbaugh, Jon Stewart, and Stephen Colbert before him. They earn their money by engaging their audience with shocking stories and anecdotes that tend to share a cohesive thread or narrative. The shock builds a buzz…”Did you hear what Travis said yesterday?” The coherent thread builds a community that tunes in again to tomorrow.
Travis knows precisely what he is doing and why he is doing it.
Cognitive dissonance does describe what many people experience when their religious leader does something bad, such as child sexual abuse.
As members, we have learned and internalized that the church, especially our leaders, are good. We believe the right things and do the right things.
Others, outsiders, are bad. They believe the wrong things and, as a result, do the wrong things.
As we have seen on the blog and elsewhere, people take different approaches to resolve the conflict. Some ignore it, some justify it, some explain it away, and some leave.
davewis(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
“Evil seems to be the side most obsessed with Purity.”
— Comment in an Internet Monk thread a few years ago
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
> I made some dumb assumptions early on. I assumed Christians following the Bible would intrinsically behave in a Christian manner. It seems I overlooked the whole “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” deal, especially in myself.
I too came to faith through reading the ancient texts (in an outdated translation) and making (what I in retrospect regard to be) ignorant assumptions about the meaning and implications of the texts. I was very naive; decades later I concluded from observation that verbal expressions of faith are not a reliable predictor of the behaviors that the professor’s heart will produce in his visible life. Let the believer beware.
That’s a lesson that, IMO, ought to be front-and-center in new believer classes.
Samuel Conner(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
While the following might be uncomfortable for some, it has a valuable place in a discussion about cognitive dissonance and public displays of purity culture within the church.
A recent PRRI Poll found that 28% of White Evangelical Protestants feel that abortion should be legal in all or most cases.
However, 50% oppose laws that would make it illegal to access abortion pills by mail.
—
This implies that 75% of White Evangelical Protestants publicly toe the party line that they are against abortion, while internally, 50% are privately saying the option for abortion should still be available…. just in case….
—
This leaves 23% of this population struggling with the cognitive dissonance of being opposed to abortion while being supportive of shipping abortion pills.
https://www.prri.org/spotlight/opposed-to-abortion-but-supportive-of-shipping-abortion-pills/
davewis(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
In many circles of Christianity, unauthorized sex is the absolute worst thing there is.
Muff Potter(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
davewis,
“As members, we have learned and internalized that the church, especially our leaders, are good. We believe the right things and do the right things.
Others, outsiders, are bad. They believe the wrong things and, as a result, do the wrong things.
As we have seen on the blog and elsewhere, people take different approaches to resolve the conflict. Some ignore it, some justify it, some explain it away, and some leave.”
++++++++++++++++++++
so many thoughts….
so amazed at how christianity creates polygonized cognitive dissonance, and is in totally oblivious peace to the multiple contradictions.
-shamelessly creates in-groups and out-groups, always putting its adherents in the elite group
-looking down its nose at everyone else: all the goblins in the evil worldly world.
–but doing so with false modesty (“I’m the worst sinner”…”better than I deserve”)
-totally unaware that this entire exercise highlights that the inferior ‘goblins’ demonstrate kindness and integrity on a level of sincerity no christian can match
————————————–
elastigirl(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
davewis,
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
faith has moral/ethical limits.
in resolving cognitive dissonance with faith, what is the dividing line between right and wrong? reasonable/stupid? (etc)
for example, i’ve heard/read somewhere where John Piper is discussing the bible (perhaps cognitive dissonance regarding certain parts of it), and how at some point you simply have to accept it by faith.
i surmise this is how he is able to justify and promote gender roles, with a happy-go-lucky attitude that is blind to their inherent cruelty, built-in failure mechanism, and potential danger on many levels.
(in the end, all that matter is the donger; right/wrong, wise/foolish, skill & expertise/lack of knowledge & understanding matter not a whit)
and so many christians adopt that same ‘happy-go-luck’. (not unlike cartoon characters when under a spell have swirling swirls for eyes)
i suppose i can answer my own question with my reduced down theology: if it harms someone or something, destroying them by degrees, i nix it.
if it’s something i wouldn’t want done to me, i nix it.
seems to me, John Piper and so many of my fellow christians resolve cognitive dissonance with faith in faith itself.
where right and wrong are simply what is convenient, personally, politically, and theologically.
elastigirl(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
elastigirl,
Ever see the ultra-orthodox Jews at the wailing wall in Jerusalem bobbing their heads to Torah?
Well that’s the way some Christian sects (in a metaphorical sense) are with the apostle Paul.
Muff Potter(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Muff Potter,
Paul is everything, Jesus is more of a mascot than anything else.
Muff Potter(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Yes, there are no easy answers. The human desire for prestige, power, and money is powerful. In my experience, people with stronger-than-average desires for these things tend to rise within any organization. Thus, they set the rules (theology) of the organization to their own benefit.
In terms of this discussion, they resolve the dissonance in a manner that works well for them…. and then teach that their way is the ‘right’ way to do things. So it is propagated to the congregation and the next generation of leaders.
It is reasonable to consider that the current complementarian movement was a direct result of the purity movement that started in the 1990s and peaked in the 2000s. NOTE: I strongly disagree with the movements…. but I see how someone immersed in the church can get from purity to complementarian in a single (convoluted) logical (or theological) step.
It will be interesting to see where this goes in the next couple of decades. My guess is things will continue shifting rightwards while further consolidating their prestige, power, and money.
The giant thorn in their side is going to be young women. Currently, only between 52 and 54% of women in the U.S between the ages of 18 and 29 identify as Christian. Once that falls below 50%, the social(peer) pressure to follow without questioning gets weaker.
davewis(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
= the new SBC
Max(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
What does this mean? I haven’t heard anyone talking about Paul more than usual. Maybe I am hanging out in the wrong place.
davewis(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Visit your local New Calvinist church … you’ll hear Paul’s name dropped a LOT (most SBC churches are now “reformed”). The new reformers talk much about “God”, with only occasional mention of Jesus, and hardly a word about the Holy Spirit. Their sermons camp out primarily in Paul’s epistles; they have constructed their belief and practice around text taken out of context from Paul’s writings, torturing passages from his epistles to make them fit their theology (they particularly do this with verses from Romans and Ephesians). Much has been written on this over the years on TWW, regarding the aberrations of faith within the New Calvinist movement.
Max(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Thanks, I’ll pay more attention. As Lutherans, we tend to think of him as a prolific writer and traveler who tried to help work out some of the kninks in early Christianity 🙂
davewis(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
The New Calvinists think of Paul as the source of their theological inspiration, second to John Piper. They put words in Paul’s mouth – I’m sure he’s not too happy with the new reformers.
Max(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I hate to beat the same drum, but most traditional Reformed folks do not hold high opinion of John Piper. His statement to “glorify God by enjoying Him forever” injects an aspect of Law (aka, works) into the otherwise well-stated chief end of mankind as found in the WSC.
Burwell Stark(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I’ve encountered some Calvinists who don’t care much for Piper (they care even less for Keller), preferring MacArthur and Sproul instead, but he’s still very influential to a lot of people, Reformed or otherwise.
Arlo(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Good point. Every theological viewpoint has both its preferred and its rejected teachers. FWIW, I do not understand the theological attraction to MacArthur by many of the Reformed persuasion. While I have at various times in my life have been blessed by his teaching, especially his book “Safe in the Arms of God: Truth from Heaven About the Death of a Child” (assuming for the sake of the argument that he actually wrote it), overall, his appeal to the Reformed crowd is a mystery to me. And honestly, I think he appeals more to the Calvinist crowd than the Reformed crowd, which is surely splitting theological hairs. In brief, by “Calvinist crowd”, I am referring to those who are overly concerned with structure and authority under the guise of God’s sovereignty. This can include not only Presbyterians but also Baptists, non-affiliated Congregationalists, and others.
Burwell Stark(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
And a Celebrity Endorsement.
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
And The Reformed use the same workaround to the Paradox of Evil as Mohammed:
Put God beyond Good and Evil — God is All-Powerful, God Wills whatever God Wills (or has been Predestined to Will), and who are we to call it Evil?
“We are the creatures; HE IS THE CRE! A!! TOR!!!”
“Even though He slay me, Yea I shall Praise Him!”
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Yes, the “New” Calvinists have different idols than the “Old” Calvinists.
Max(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
There’s a guy somewhere on the internet going by the name “Modern Day Zorro”. He says that he used to be part of GCC and claims that MacArthur doesn’t write his own books. Has that actually been proven?
Arlo(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
MacArthur and Sproul seem to be very popular among the new breed as well
Arlo(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
I haven’t looked into it too deeply yet. From the outside, it seems like the goal of this theology is to use Paul’s status as the most prolific early clergy person to elevate him to a special class of people.
This elevation creates a hierarchy: God, clergy, Christians, and heathens. From there, they, as clergy, also enjoy an elevated position where they can demand respect and not be held accountable to the same rules as normal people.
The emphasis on the specialness of being ‘called ‘is a membership card for the privileged class. Plus, they can pull it out as a get-out-of-jail-free card.
If I remember my confirmation lessons correctly, Martin Luther was uncomfortable with the hierarchical separation of clergy and congregation in the Catholic Church.
His discomfort, or cognitive dissonance, spread to others, kicking off the Protestant Reformation. It will be interesting to consider what form the pushback will come in this time around.
davewis(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Yes, that has been a strange fit for the young reformers … neither MacArthur or Sproul are cool … but the “Father of New Calvinism” John Piper is certainly not cool either! The New Calvinists are a strange lot, indeed.
Max(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)
Very plausible.
The rules of CELEBRITY are in effect, and CELEBRITIS routinely ghost their books; they’re too busy being CELEBRITIES to concern themselves with such things. Working cuts into all the Praise and Adoration.
Headless Unicorn Guy(Reply & quote selected text) (Reply to this comment)