Slutting made her a better Christian.

Dianna Anderson at The Frisky explains how rejecting sexual morality makes her more moral in Girl Talk: What Losing My Virginity Taught Me About Faith

This also isn’t a conversion story of how losing my virginity made me realize how far away I’d fallen and now I’m chastened, back on the straight-and-narrow and celibate. I’m not celibate and I’m dating around. And I’m a Christian whose faith, at this point, is probably stronger than at any point in my younger years. And I know that this faith, this commitment, wouldn’t have been possible had I not actively made the decision to give up on purity.

Losing my virginity outside of a marriage relationship taught me how to be a better person and a better Christian. It challenged my presuppositions about what sexual health looks like, and brought into stark relief the gaps in my education about ethics and holiness. Sex, in this way, can be a sacrament, a movement toward understanding God, a form of holiness experienced in a deep, mystical way. Sex can be holy, whether or not you have a ring on your finger.

 

See Also:  

Slutwalk image modified from image licensed as creative commons by sahlgoode.

This entry was posted in Feral Females, New Morality, Rationalization Hamster, Slut. Bookmark the permalink.

230 Responses to Slutting made her a better Christian.

  1. donalgraeme says:

    You have outdone yourself in finding this one Dalrock.

    I mean…. wow….

    [D: Credit to the Dalrock research dept.]

  2. okrahead says:

    Now taking wagers as to how long it takes Mark Driscoll to blame this on Christian men.

  3. okrahead says:

    Wife it up! Wife it up! Waaaayyyy up! (Football chant style).

  4. earl says:

    This is the money quote as to why sluts shouldn’t be mothers.

    “Sex liberated me from my puritanical judgment and strict ideas about what’s right and wrong.”

    That attitude will make it easier for her sons to be locked up in jail and her daughters to grow up to be strippers.

  5. okrahead says:

    In her article she states she had her first kiss at 25. Any thoughts on how this plays into your “True Love Doesn’t Wait” post D?

  6. Neguy says:

    Wow, just wow.

  7. TLM says:

    A reasonable expectation when one considers the watered-down soft-sell Jesus and His Word that gets peddled by the churchians. No surprise at all.

  8. Neguy says:

    @okrahead, you may have seen the Mark Driscoll is actually on leave while under investigation of wrongdoing and that Mars Hill Church is basically collapsing.

  9. okrahead says:

    The fact Driscoll is under investigation is all the more reason he will want to smear his villain of choice. Distract by attacking the usual suspects.

  10. Puzzled Traveller says:

    I have now seen and heard it all.

    This is definitely in the top ten of rationalization hamster moments.

  11. Bluntobj says:

    So…Sex outside marriage to any guy she happens to choose is now a sacrament.

    It is instructive to see that the narcissism of a woman will lead to her dictating to God what God should consider to be a holy ‘sacrament’. This will become a regular stop on the Churchian path, just you wait!

  12. Dalrock says:

    @okrahead

    In her article she states she had her first kiss at 25. Any thoughts on how this plays into your “True Love Doesn’t Wait” post D?

    As Anon Reader pointed out with Pugsley, there is risk in taking these feminist women’s life stories too seriously. However, if I were to take her story at face value, I would say her case is more one of expecting purity to get her more courtship:

    I felt totally abandoned and misled by this God I’d been told to believe. I’d done everything right. I’d been told my virginity and modesty and purity would be attractive to Christian men. And yet, nothing was happening, nothing was moving, nothing was clear.

    The other post is relevant because this is all about the drive to sell Christian sexual morality as immoral, cruel, unloving/unChristian, etc. But in this case I think this post is more directly relevant, as is the Christian manosphere theme of many Christian young women having outsized expectations of their MMV.

  13. Joey says:

    Wow. The hamster gets a crick in his neck, when he gazes deep into his own navel.

  14. Mark says:

    @Dalrock

    I agree with donalgraeme…….you must have been saving this this one for us?…L*

    “”I’m not celibate and I’m dating around. And I’m a Christian whose faith, at this point, is probably stronger than at any point in my younger years. “”

    Interesting dichotomy.I believe this to mean ….”Once a slut,always a slut.Religious affiliation does not matter””.She is “average looking” at best.Which means that she is taking what she can get.By the time this chick hits 30,her N-Count will require a Cray supercomputer to calculate.Can’t wait to read all the comments from the regular posters……definitely going to require popcorn!

  15. Lovey says:

    Romans 3:8 And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.
    9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;

    10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

    11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

    12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

    13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:

    14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:

    15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:

    16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:

    17 And the way of peace have they not known:

    18 There is no fear of God before their eyes

    2 Timothy 3 King James Version (KJV)

    3 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

    2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

    3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

    4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

    5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

    6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,

    [“silly”-clueless and foolish easily lead away into deceptions, willingly ignorant of God’s Word]

    7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

    8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.

    9 But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as their’s also was.

    10 But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,

    11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me.

    12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

    13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

    Hos 4:6
    My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

    Jer 2:13 For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water.

    Heb 11:6
    But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

    Matt 7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

    8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

    If she would SEEK after the LORD she would find IN HIS WORD that her thoughts have led her astray and her life is in HIM …and HIS WORDS are SPIRIT and HIS words are LIFE !

    She will be ‘judged’ according to HIS WORDS …and nowhere in the WORD of GOD does this kind of conclusion speak of a BELIEVER ….SHE has been deceived by doctrines of demons that abound in the ‘church’ presently….sad…pray for her.

    1Ti 4:1
    Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

    Check our Lighthouse Trails Research on the many that are presently being taught and accepted by those who do not STUDY to show themselves approved of GOD and therefore KNOW NOT the difference between doctrinal truth of the scriptures and these various ways that people OPEN themselves up to demons !!! Popular culture and Pop theologies of new age isms and spirituality which is direct from the pit….it has been warning us …since the BEGINNING!

    20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

    21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

    May this young woman be brought to see the Truth rather than her present way to justify a false teaching .

    Mat 24:35
    Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

    Jhn 12:48
    He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

    Mat 12:50
    For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

    Mar 3:35
    For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

    Jhn 6:63
    It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

  16. Crowhill says:

    I’m sure her parents and pastor are so proud.

  17. the bandit says:

    “This is the way of an adulterous woman: She eats and wipes her mouth and says, ‘I’ve done nothing wrong.’ ”

    (Agur goes on to note that marrying such a woman causes the very earth to tremble with rage.)

  18. Mark says:

    “”Purity, for me and for many women, became a distraction from the Gospel””

    Huh????

    “”Sex liberated me from my puritanical judgment and strict ideas about what’s right and wrong. It taught me to meet people where they are – just as Jesus did””

    Wow!

    “”And I understand God’s love for God’s people on a deeper, more personal level than ever before.””

    ………..because she is getting her monkey punched?…….Wtf?

    “”Sex, in this way, can be a sacrament, a movement toward understanding God””

    This is what huffing glue will do a person’s mind!…….*shakes head*

  19. HawkandRock says:

    “Sex, in this way [unmarried], can be a sacrament, a movement toward understanding God, a form of holiness experienced in a deep, mystical way. Sex can be holy, whether or not you have a ring on your finger.”

    So now “holy” is whatever a woman determines it is for herself.

    Got it.

    Any act — no matter how objectively unhealthy or downright vile — can be a deep, mystical holy sacrament. If you FEEL that it is, it is. Period.

    Awesome….

  20. honordads says:

    Lipstick on a pig.

  21. Bike bubba says:

    It’s very interesting that she introduces her article about losing her virginity by discussing a boyfriend with whom she…..did not lose her virginity. Slut, or just hopeful? Just sayin’.

  22. Pingback: Proverbs 11:22 is still true  Like a gold… | Honor Dads

  23. Mark says:

    **waits for Deti and his Hamsterlator**

  24. zodak says:

    the frisky is such an awful cesspool. but i’m always impressed by the hamster.

  25. A Visitor says:

    “This also isn’t a conversion story of how losing my virginity made me realize how far away I’d fallen and now I’m chastened, back on the straight-and-narrow and celibate.”

    That’s a shame. Learning what you did wrong, having contrition, and changing your ways would have been a worthwhile story. Look at St. Augustine or Mary of Magdalene.

    “Losing my virginity outside of a marriage relationship taught me how to be a better person and a better Christian.”

    Ugh.

    I can’t even click on the article.

    Going off the quote Earl (I assume) gleaned from the article, it has made it much easier for Satan to tempt you with worse. You’re headed down a dark path, sweetie, and the end is not good.

    “By the time this chick hits 30,her N-Count will require a Cray supercomputer to calculate.” LOLed at that one, well said!

  26. earl says:

    Let’s try this with a different sin.

    “Robbing people made me a better Christian. It challenged my presuppositions about what ownership looks like, and brought into stark relief the gaps in my education about ethics and holiness. Thievery, in this way, can be a sacrament, a movement toward understanding God, a form of holiness experienced in a deep, mystical way. Thievery can be holy, whether or not you are a robber.”

  27. But Dal,…*sigh*, how do you expect these girls to become proper “Penis Homes” if they don’t slut it up before marriage?

    http://www.salon.com/2014/09/08/evangelical_megachurch_begins_closing_branches_after_pastor_calls_women_penis_homes/

  28. earl says:

    It’s stories like this about holy matters that remind me of this verse.

    “A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.”

    1 Timothy 2: 11-14

  29. I will not be satisfied until I see Jenny Erikson’s take on the subject.

  30. Neguy says:

    Maybe somebody should send these to her:

    “The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. And God raised the Lord and will also raise us up by his power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, ‘The two will become one flesh.’ But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.” – 1 Corinthians 6:13-20

    “For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God; that no one transgress and wrong his brother in this matter, because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as we told you beforehand and solemnly warned you. For God has not called us for impurity, but in holiness. Therefore whoever disregards this, disregards not man but God, who gives his Holy Spirit to you.” – 1 Thessalonians 4:3-8

    “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. On account of these the wrath of God is coming.” – Colossians 3:5

    “But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints…For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.” – Ephesians 5:3,5

    “We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day.” – 2 Corinthians 10:8

    “I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—not at all, meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one.” – 1 Corinthians 5:9-11

    “I have this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and seducing my servants to practice sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her sexual immorality. Behold, I will throw her onto a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her works, and I will strike her children dead.” – Revelation 2:20-23

  31. Random Angeleno says:

    Stunned into silence …

    Believe Rollo had a post about the openness with which women conduct their hypergamous instincts. Think Sandberg’s ideal younger woman.

  32. Michael Neal says:

    “A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.”

    1 Timothy 2: 11-14

    Christianity does not teach that anymore, even in my very traditional Catholic parish. Just a few months ago I recall hearing our priest say that it wasn’t Eve that was responsible for the deception; “Where was Adam?” he said. That basically boils down to women having no agency whatsoever for their actions.

  33. Missy says:

    What kind of crap is this? All this post is generating is hate and negative judgement. Sure, this girl may have a viewpoint other than yours but to be honest who do you think you are? Take a look in the mirror, sir. We are all sinners and we do not have the right or authority to meddle and probe into the lives of other people. This post is anything but uplifting or helpful. You set a bad example to Godly men. There is so much scrutiny on women regarding sexual status. I’ve yet to see anyone out a magnifying glass to the male population who are simply ” sowing their wild oats.” This is wrong.

  34. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock
    However, if I were to take her story at face value, I would say her case is more one of expecting purity to get her more courtship:

    I wonder, are there actually more stories / articles / fantasies pretending to be fact / etc. showing up now or are they just more easily noticed? Because when I view things like this as part of a larger picture, it seems to me to be a more sophisticated version of a slutwalk in the macro sense, or a gaggle of Uni suitemates all insisting to the lone virgin in their dorm unit that she just has to get rid of it as soon as possible, virginity is oppression by teh patriarchy and she should savor sweet freedom..next Saturday night, at the big frat mixer.

    In other words, pushback by 3rd stage sex-pozzy feminists to normalize sluttery in a different way – by sticking a Jesus fish on it. If my speculation is correct, quoting the Bible will have no effect (of course, since the article is at Teh Frisky this is, pardon the expression, “fish in a barrel”) at all and any attempt to suggest there’s some regret will be snarled at in various ways.

    So again I wonder, are there more of these articles showing up? Is it a trend? A pattern? Or are they just being noticed more?

  35. Anonymous Reader says:

    “”Sex, in this way, can be a sacrament, a movement toward understanding God””

    Mark
    This is what huffing glue will do a person’s mind!…….*shakes head*

    Actually it’s not a new idea, it is part of various Goddess cults.
    And this was published at Teh Frisky, not The Huffingglue Post, so more likely there’s oxy involved than glue…

  36. Anonymous Reader says:

    There’s quite a bit more to Driscoll’s fall from power, whether temporary or not, but one would not expect Salon’s writers to actually be capable of finding that out. After all, there’s only so much research one can do between rounds of Candy Crush…

  37. Well, were I not a Christian, and if I didn’t know the Scriptures, I would demand equal rights:

    Having sexual partners outside of my marriage relationship taught me how to be a better person and a better Christian. It challenged my presuppositions about what sexual health looks like, and brought into stark relief the gaps in my education about ethics and holiness. Sex, in this way, can be a sacrament, a movement toward understanding God, a form of holiness experienced in a deep, mystical way. Sex can be holy, whether or not you honor the ring on your finger.

  38. MarcusD says:

  39. MarcusD says:

    https://archive.today/oS4hU For those who want to read the article without giving them revenue.

  40. earl says:

    “Where was Adam?” he said. That basically boils down to women having no agency whatsoever for their actions.

    The victim mentality continues on.

    The flip side is when a woman reveals some sinful idea in her head to me now I tell a woman she is on the path of sinfulness. I will most likely get a 5 minute lecture of “you’re judging me”, but even still I’d rather tell her that than be like Adam standing there saying nothing.

    She may still sin anyway because grrl power and all…but at least I won’t be held responsible for it.

  41. CaptainObvious says:

    Can we just all agree that at this point all 501c churches with 100 more members or so should just rename their churches to something like Satan’s Fiery Temple?

    They could have catchy youth groups names like CatchFire! or some other crap. Get all the hunger games j-law loving sluts on board.

    Hey I’m just asking for a little honesty here!

  42. deti says:

    It’s not surprising to me, really, that it’s come to this. The argument set out here, that “premarital sex is not sinful” and “fornication makes you a better Christian” are pretty cutting edge feminist Christian thought.

    joyinthisjourney.com/2013/02/on-virginity-what-i-did-and-did-not-mean/

    This is affecting how a lot of Christian women view their faith and their sexuality. Again, a false theology is springing up to support this. You’re going to see a lot more women in and around Churches and Christian ministries saying these things. The thought processes and arguments are:

    1. We’re doing Christian women a disservice by pedestalizing chastity and purity. We’re idolizing and worshiping chastity and sexual abstinence before marriage by insisting on it as part of the unmarried Christian life. That’s wrong, because we’re never to worship anything but Christ.

    2. If we require abstinence, then we’re judging and condemning those who didn’t abstain. We’re driving away girls and women who aren’t virgins. We can’t do that, because we’re supposed to be Christians and we’re supposed to love sinners and bring them to healing and restoration, not punishment and ostracism. (This is really just “you’re making sluts feel bad”, but there it is.)

    3. Sex before marriage actually makes women better Christians. They have more “life experience”, which prepares them for the usual ups and downs, triumphs and tragedies of married life. They have been through the crucible of dating, falling in love, breaking up, pain, loss, heartbreak and recovery that accompanies the birth, life and death of a failed man-woman relationship. They have endured loving and loss, and come out stronger on the other side because they had to rely on God to get them through it.

    It’s really just a way for Christian women to justify their premarital sexual conduct.

    It’s really just “Romance and romantic feelings are the proper places for sex and marriage”.

    “If I am attracted to this man, and I love him, and he loves me, then sex is good and right and moral. “

    “Sex is good, and it makes me happy, and God wants me to be happy. So why, then, should I not have sex with someone I love and who loves me?”

  43. deti says:

    community.focusonthefamily.com/b/boundless/archive/2014/01/20/stop-worshiping-your-virginity.aspx

    Also this article. It’s written by a man at Boundless. Essentially the article is all about how virgin women need to stop lording their virginity over the nonvirgins, lest the nonvirgins feel judged, and lest the virgins believe they are “better Christians” than nonvirgins.

  44. Lyn87 says:

    /scratches head/

    Well… if a church is looking for a way to increase the number of young men in the pews, letting it become known that you have a lot of girls who think like in attendance might be a good way to do it.

    Seriously, though: I’ve known a lot churchian sluts, and I suspect most of the people here have as well, but they all knew they were rebelling against the clear teachings of Christianity and did it anyway. Declaring it to be holy is something I’ve never encountered before – at least not from anyone who wasn’t already a de facto pagan.

    This is one short step from Temple Prostitution.

  45. Lyn87 says:

    For the record… when I wrote “I have known a lot of churchian sluts” I meant “known” in the modern sense, not “known” as in, “… Adam knew his wife Eve and she conceived…”

    In case anyone was wondering.

    Also: “think like this in attendance…”, not “think like in attendance…”

  46. Anonymous Reader says:

    Hilarious, Deti – now merely by existing and not hiding her status, a virgin woman causes feelbad? So Boundless has joined the slutwalks, in essence.

    It appears we are seeing a transition in just a few years from “stop slut shaming!” to “virgin shaming” on a wide scale. As I’ve mentioned a time or two, shaming virgins has been common on many college campuses since the 80’s (and probably the 70’s and back to the 60’s…) but bringing it out into the bigger world? Well, well, well.

    Lyn87
    This is one short step from Temple Prostitution.

    Not that short a step. Read what she said about sex being holy. Years ago I did not understand how goddess worship really worked, but it fits in with matriarchy & thus the Female Imperative, AF-BB, etc. quite well.

    It should be no surprise that the mainstream quasi religious orgs are buying into this, because feelbad is the worst thing in the world for them.

  47. Dalrock says:

    @Anon Reader

    So again I wonder, are there more of these articles showing up? Is it a trend? A pattern? Or are they just being noticed more?

    This stuff is old hat, but there does seem to be a recent surge in the push to portray Christian sexual morality as cruel and immoral. For the author of the Frisky piece this topic won her the book deal she has wanted her whole life (emphasis mine).

    I am incredibly excited to start this next phase in my writing career. I may have even brandished the book contracts over my head while yelling “I’m going to be published!!!!!” at my cat.

    You can’t make this stuff up.

    Strangely, she is going on the promotion tour prematurely here, as the book won’t release until Feb of next year. It is like she has trouble containing herself.

  48. Oh shit, someone had better man up and marry that.. post whore/slut, ex-virgin, Churchian post haste. And I mean fast!

  49. Never. Listen. to. Women.
    http://redpillpushers.wordpress.com/2014/02/06/never-listen-to-women/

    And yes, Churchianity has now turned into Corinthian Style Worship:
    “Apart from savagery and shouting, ancient writers usually describe worshipers of Dionysus as engaging in dancing, drinking, sexual promiscuity, varying degrees of undress, and other forms of excessive behavior. It was only in frenzy that one could hold communion with the god, or – in ecstasy so great that the soul seemed to leave the body – to become one with him.”
    http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer_anunnaki/reptiles/reptiles11.htm

    Deep and mystical, even.

  50. Umm…NAWA…hahahahah, I can’t even say that with a straight face anymore. And there are STILL dudes out there wanting to put rings on fingers?! Sigh, I guess there really is a sucker born every minute. And you’ll still have some simpleton decrying “NAWALT”.

  51. Puzzled Traveller says:

    This chick should take these thoughts to their logical conclusion. Go all the way with them. Balls deep if you will.

    She should show up at church next Sunday and testify about these things. Perhaps there will be others at church who wish to learn of and participate in this miraculous holy sacrament that has been revealed to her by the thrust of a penis.

    Girls. So silly.

  52. This is the kind of stuff that would have me ex-communicated from a Church. I couldn’t just sit by and allow such a woman to enter and worship along side me..

  53. The Brass Cat says:

    The real question is why anyone would want to buy her book.

    “my Advanced English teacher met with each of us students and talked with us about our writing. She didn’t have much to say in terms of what I needed to do to improve, she said, because I was already miles ahead of the rest of the class in terms of clarity, and precision and economy of words.”
    “In graduate school, I needed an adviser for my thesis. I asked a professor with whom I’d had two classes – one formal and one independent study. He told me that he doesn’t usually direct Master’s students, but he’d make an exception for me because he enjoyed my writing so much.”

    Oh wow! Better get two copies. One to read and one to keep as a mint condition collectable.

  54. jzb says:

    I was an overly zealous evangelical christian and a virgin until 30 years of age. I’ve since had sex with a few women to find that:

    1.) Sex is no big deal
    2.) There are no emotional/psychological/massive issues I’m dealing with as a result of having sex with women who are not my wife.
    3.) Sex can be overrated.

    Anyway I think she’s onto something in the context that the black and white thinking is often responsible for a lot of emotional/psychological pain and struggle. Nobody is ruined because they are no longer a virgin or have had premarital sex. I think on some level we have to treat people as individuals, and we simply can’t imply that they’re all good or all bad based on some of the things they have done or do. I’m not defending sluttery, I’m just saying I think life/emotion/sex is more grey than Christians want to admit.

  55. Let all those who doubt the existence of the hamster fall silent.

  56. okrahead says:

    She’s a homeless shelter for Mark Driscoll’s church. Now it all makes sense. She is housing the homeless, all that she can find. Too bad that home s n such poor repair.

  57. @Random Angelino:
    http://therationalmale.com/2014/06/18/controlling-interests/

    “When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier.”

    ― Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead

    Slap the Jesus Fish® logo on this and you’ve got “Man Up and marry those sluts,…they’re better Christians for having dated the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys, but not marrying them.”

  58. Anonymous Reader says:

    Strangely, she is going on the promotion tour prematurely here, as the book won’t release until Feb of next year.

    Eh? That’s not strange, it’s normal. Heck, she should add a Kickstarter campaign to raise more money for her book, and then never bother to really write anything. It’s working in the gamer world…

  59. Pro-Truth says:

    Yep, This is what happens when you teach sexual morality wrong and combine it with Feminist churchian propaganda. (assuming she’s even telling the truth)

    Growing up in the purity movement as I did, you’re taught some very specific things about sex:
    Having sex outside of marriage will take away pleasure from sex within marriage.
    Having sex outside of marriage with make connection with your future spouse harder.
    Having sex outside of marriage means disappointing God, disappointing family, and causing unnecessary pain and heartache for yourself.
    Having sex outside of marriage will essentially destroy you, ruining your witness, your faith, your relationships.
    Having sex outside of marriage is the slippery slope to hedonistic atheism.

    Amazing how her slight deviation from these teachings, not long enough to fully realize the consequences completely invalidates them because sex feels good.

    Surprise! Sex can be considered a sacrament. Sex isn’t bad, it isn’t evil. In fact, it’s a good thing. It is, in fact one of the greatest ways one can become closer to God when it (and the children that naturally come from a sexual relationship) are kept within the bonds of marriage.

    Just imagine if a Man wrote this article.

  60. hoellenhund2 says:

    This is another reason I think the Bible is poorly written – more precisely, it’s apparently sufficiently ambiguous about many issues that people like this woman can basically spin its message to justify any sort of behavior.

  61. Kaehu says:

    This woman reminds me of my first girlfriend. Supposedly both Christians. It was supposedly ok, because we “loved” each other. We were together a year in an x-rated relationship. Then she dumped me and ripped my heart out, saying she was freeing me to find someone else. Unfortunately, I actually was in love with her. Sleeping with someone you have feelings for tends to do that. I never did figure what was really going on with her, but I suspect this comes close.

  62. Neguy says:

    A lot of this reminds me of Dalrock’s previous post that our real problem is the same is Adam’s: we don’t believe God’s laws are actually good for us.

    I can’t prove this scripturally but have a belief that in no case do we ever gain a net benefit from sinning. We will always be better off in the long term if we obey God’s commands. That doesn’t mean worldly gain necessarily, but Jesus himself promised that people would be rewarded many times over for the things they lost for his name’s sake.

    It’s tempting to look at how God redeemed some sin in our past and suggest that we actually profited from it, but this is in effect saying that we should continue in sin that grace may abound. Our sin hamster is always trying to get us to turn God’s grace and mercy into a license to sin. So this latest example really shouldn’t surprised. We all can easily get “hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.”

    Paul is our example here. He said that God allowed him to sin so severely in order to “demonstate his perfect patience.” Certainly it credentialized Paul’s ministry. But he never excused his behavior, never said it was some sort of ultimate good thing, and continue to profess his persecution of the church a gross sin and himself the chief of sinners.

  63. Anonymous age 72 says:

    Actually, bhe Bible does say the sin was Adam’s. And, his sin was listening to his wife, not eating the apple.

  64. okrahead says:

    HH,
    There s nothing n the Bible to justify what this slut is doing.

  65. dAVE says:

    Missy

    What kind of crap is this? All this post is generating is hate and negative judgement.

    The only crappy thing here is this woman’s deluded thinking, calling evil good and good evil. Sexual immorality is now being called holy, and purity deemed evil.

    Woe unto those who call evil good…

    Sure, this girl may have a viewpoint other than yours…

    It is God’s LAW, not a viewpoint. Get a clue.

    We are all sinners and we do not have the right or authority to meddle and probe into the lives of other people.

    Nobody probed into her life. She wrote all the details of her sin and published them.

    This post is anything but uplifting or helpful.

    Are you referring to the sin? Or her pride about the sin? Or the widespread disapproval that her sin has generated?

    You set a bad example to Godly men.

    Nooooooo! She set a bad example to godly men and women!

    There is so much scrutiny on women regarding sexual status.

    You mean, from Scripture? Yes. Scrutiny, not only on women, but on men as well. Sluttery is nothing to be proud of. The basest of human beings throughout history are those who engage in it. And women, because they are the gatekeepers of sex, deserve an even more scrutiny.

    I’ve yet to see anyone out a magnifying glass to the male population who are simply ” sowing their wild oats.” This is wrong.

    How relevant is this statement, really? We are talking about a specific person and her shameless sluttery; you introduced an irrelevant topic about some unknown men somewhere. Let’s learn to focus here.

  66. JDG says:

    Christianity does not teach that anymore, even in my very traditional Catholic parish.

    Not again. Christianity is the religion derived from the teachings and the practice of those teachings of Jesus Christ as recorded in the Holy Bible, and it is not the misleading representations of people following another teaching.

  67. Anonymous age 72 says:

    This is off topic, but I was remembering when I first began to suspect American women were totally out of control, and men were unable to mount any resistance. I had already concluded in 1974 that they were insane.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_Veterans_Memorial

    When the War Memorial was opened, the dearies began to rant that they should have a woman’s war memorial. The War Memorial was dedicated to all people in all branches of service who participated in the VN war, and listed every man and woman who died there. Yet, the dearies claimed they were being discriminated against by not having their own SPECIAL memorial. I am reminded of the grunting and squealing of the hogs I slopped on my father’s farm back in the 50’s.

    The only reason the War Memorial seemed to be only for men was because it accurately represented the relative contribution of each sex. Women didn’t do much so there weren’t many names on there.

    They got it. I wrote some strong op-eds against it. Why should the 8 women who died there get two memorials? One, the memorial for everyone. Then, their own SPECIAL memorial?

    Anyway, guess who the angriest people were at my criticism? Men. The men vets. They told me, “You have no idea what it meant to us to have those women there if we got injured or just to see an American woman far from home.”

    Sure, I did. American nookie!

    But, it doesn’t matter. They White Knighted to give the dearies whatever they asked for, no matter how piggish and stupid it was.

    I certainly hope everyone of those morons got his balls ripped off in the divorce courts they helped create, by supporting an environment which makes it impossible for men to resist anything stupid that women want.

  68. JDG says:

    Missy says:
    September 9, 2014 at 3:52 pm

    Take a look in the mirror, sir. We are all sinners and we do not have the right or authority to meddle and probe into the lives of other people.

    But weren’t you doing the same thing when you posted these words?

    And if what you say is correct, then why did the apostle Paul write the following:

    1Cor 5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?

  69. We are all sinners and we do not have the right or authority to meddle and probe into the lives of other people.

    It’s called “fraternal correction,” and no, we don’t have the right to do it, we have the responsibility. The technical term for what she’s doing here is “scandal”: encouraging Christians to sin and possibly to lose their faith. We have a responsibility to oppose that.

    Also, it’s funny how reading someone’s article about herself is now “probing” into her life.

  70. ballista74 says:

    @Dalrock:

    However, if I were to take her story at face value, I would say her case is more one of expecting purity to get her more courtship:

    I felt totally abandoned and misled by this God I’d been told to believe. I’d done everything right. I’d been told my virginity and modesty and purity would be attractive to Christian men. And yet, nothing was happening, nothing was moving, nothing was clear.

    It’s more an extreme case of pride and lack of a sense of cause and effect. She is probably like most Churchian women, who can’t see the forest for the trees relating to the effects of their own actions. As I’ve noted many times, most “Christian” women don’t look at themselves as the cause for anything. This one, just like 99.99% of the others only have themselves to blame in this environment for not finding a husband.

    @redpillsetmefree

    Never. Listen. to. Women.

    Indeed. This post is a perfect illustration of why women have no business being near any form of Christian church leadership.

  71. cynthia says:

    Not to take this off course, but I found this interesting:

    Thus, I graduated college with only one blind date under my belt. And then graduate school. And then I moved to Japan and started questioning my faith. Lots of little things that I thought were God’s blessing – my job in Japan, my success in academics – were leading me nowhere fast. It wasn’t so much that I was unhappy – it was that I felt totally abandoned and misled by this God I’d been told to believe. I’d done everything right. I’d been told my virginity and modesty and purity would be attractive to Christian men. And yet, nothing was happening, nothing was moving, nothing was clear.

    I was in this exact same position. Religious, virgin white girl in Japan. And let me tell you, that is a horrible, horrible environment for any young woman, much less one who’s discovering that men view her as a sexual creature. It’s a bottomless pit of depravity. White guys don’t have to court you – you’re meat to be picked up at a bar, fucked, and left at the love hotel. There are no “Christian boys” in Tokyo, and men there favor the slut.

    I would hazard a guess that the real problem was her environment.

  72. Yes, her environment probably had a great impact, but these statements:

    It wasn’t so much that I was unhappy – it was that I felt totally abandoned and misled by this God I’d been told to believe. I’d done everything right. I’d been told my virginity and modesty and purity would be attractive to Christian men. And yet, nothing was happening, nothing was moving, nothing was clear.

    reflect one of the biggest signs of religious abuse, Magical Thinking.
    The thinking that, if I “follow the rules,” then magically “my perfect husband will appear, because I earned him by being a good girl.”

    That is just simply not the case…life doesn’t work that way. And how many Christian men that have kept their purity only to discover that that will not get them the supermodel virginslut they were counting on?

    You have to SEEK if you want to FIND.

    Every person that I know that has someone that they claimed that God brought into their life was actively searching to get married.

  73. JDG says:

    hoellenhund2 says:
    September 9, 2014 at 6:00 pm
    This is another reason I think the Bible is poorly written – more precisely, it’s apparently sufficiently ambiguous about many issues that people like this woman can basically spin its message to justify any sort of behavior.

    You are giving way to much credit to the spinners. Nothing this woman or people that behave like her has been or can be justified from the Bible (with or without the spinning).

  74. Blake says:

    @JDG:1Cor 5:11 …great, I have an interview with the Pastor of the church I’m thinking of joining and now I need to come clean about my past and make sure he wants me anywhere near his church. And here I was planning to interview him to see where he stands on certain issues that are important to me.

    I should have known it’s a two-way street.

  75. Red says:

    “Sex before marriage actually makes women better Christians. They have more “life experience”, which prepares them for the usual ups and downs, triumphs and tragedies of married life. They have been through the crucible of dating, falling in love, breaking up, pain, loss, heartbreak and recovery that accompanies the birth, life and death of a failed man-woman relationship. They have endured loving and loss, and come out stronger on the other side because they had to rely on God to get them through it.”

    THIS attitude. It’s like you’re little girl who will never understand life until you’ve been with a man. I got called a “young lady” by some random Baby-Boomer the other day. I’m in my mid-twenties, so “lady” alone would have been appropriate.

    Women who have “experience” think they can treat non-mothers/ the non-promiscuous like they’re their mothers. Age doesn’t always matter: younger women will even behave this way toward older virgins. I think two parents is enough for anyone, and these women should focus on mothering their own families, lest their kids grow-up to disturb society.

  76. Gunner Q says:

    Puzzled Traveller @ 4:54 pm:
    “She should show up at church next Sunday and testify about these things.”

    I’d pay money to watch that. In fact, you could use her as a Rorschach test. Show the article to a church leader and note the response:

    “There are many path to salvation.” Apostate
    “I feel sadness for her.” Churchian
    “I know someone like her.” Megachurchian
    *Bible quotations to prove her wrong.* Conservative/Catholic
    *Impolite reference to unclean animals.* Orthodox
    “The ladies were talking about this on Bingo night.” Methodist
    “Our women aren’t allowed to be like that.” Cult
    “Yeah, she divorced me.” Church of Hard Knocks, graduate
    “…But I still miss her.” Church of Hard Knocks, member

    Anybody else got one?

  77. JDG says:

    I should have known it’s a two-way street.

    How could it not be? Aren’t we (all of us) warned to test everything (1Thes 5:21)?

    http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/TM13-6/testing-the-spirits-john-macarthur

    For those who are astonished that people would proclaim false teachings as Christian teaching, it is nothing new. Even the apostles had to deal with this kind of treachery.

    Gal 1:6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.

  78. JC says:

    I don’t even know where to go with this…

  79. Ryder says:

    Sacrament: An outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace instituted by Christ Himself as the sure and certain means whereby we receive the same.

    Goodness, gracious. I don’t think that word means what she thinks it means.

  80. Blake says:

    JDG, I won’t bore you with my story, it’s the same one that’s been replayed a million times over the last 4,000 years. (Nothing new under the sun, as it were)

    Suffice to say, having been burned by “Christianity” in the past and then falling away (I’m not sure if I come under the heading of spitting in the face of God or the Prodigal Son) I’ve been journeying back and it is now time to find a church. My initial contacts have been positive, however.

    I never tried to claim my past actions “brought me closer to God” which is what started my thought process.

    Thank you for the Scripture, JDG. It’s one part of a long string of events that seem to indicate I’m going the direction God wants.

  81. “I’d done everything right.”

    This right here goes deeper than the usual girl stuff. When did Christians start believing that God is a happiness vending machine, where you put the right behaviors in the slot and out pops the good life? Is my Bible the only one with the book of Job in it? If that book doesn’t scream loud and clear that God owes you nothing and you can’t expect to be rewarded in this life for living right, you really weren’t paying attention.

  82. JDG says:

    Blake – Glad I could help. People will disappoint. It is inevitable. Please don’t let the failings of people detour you from following the one who actually is perfect.

  83. Robin Munn says:

    @Cail Corishev –

    Is my Bible the only one with the book of Job in it?

    No, but sometimes it does seem like it, doesn’t it? That is why I hate the “health & wealth” heresy, for its teaching people that “God wants you to be rich and happy.” They completely ignore Jesus’ statement to His own disciples that “In this world you will have trouble, but take heart: I have overcome the world.” And the book of Job, and what Jesus said to His disciples about the man born blind, and what He said about the eighteen people killed by a falling tower in Siloam, and…

    LOTS of Bible passages being ignored in the pursuit of good feelings, these days.

  84. Lovey says:

    Loved what EARL posted

    “The flip side is when a woman reveals some sinful idea in her head to me now I tell a woman she is on the path of sinfulness. I will most likely get a 5 minute lecture of “you’re judging me”, but even still I’d rather tell her that than be like Adam standing there saying nothing.”

    Judgement is called for but not by our opinion or the trends of culture …but by GOD’S WORD ….which IS ‘righteous judgment’

    Jhn 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

    Where do you find “righteous judgment’ ?

    2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

    God’s Word IS ‘instruction in righteousness’ or …HOW GOD DEFINES what is RIGHT!

    For those who do not like to be judged they are going to get a rude awakening….one reason I am not shy to inform people they need to consider that they NEED a SAVIOR who is Jesus Christ ONLY.

    Acts 4:10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.

    11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.

    12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

    Mat 24:12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

  85. Blake says:

    JDG, the failing was all mine. As were the rationalizations. I wasn’t smart enough, nor my faith strong enough, to realize, at the time, what God was trying to reveal to me.

  86. Lovey says:

    Blake….Take heart …in 46 years of study of the Word and being among some who genuinely loved the Lord and the Word of God …I too have known disappointment …but then there is an apostasy going on that rivals some of those in the past ….Continue in the Word as Jesus told us and you will be HIS disciple indeed.
    Some ministries that are good in terms of offering food for thought and then for you to be like a BEREAN and study to see if what is said is SO and in line with scripture would be perhaps ‘The Berean Call ‘ and The Lighthouse Trails ministry which offers materials …free articles written by Warren Smith, Ray Yungen, T A McMahon, and a cast of many who came from many backgrounds and have searched through many kinds of church fellowships to find like minded believers who love the WORD and believe the WORD and are actively searching the scriptures. Also Gracethrufaith offers some good encouragement.

    I have learned early on that one cannot blame GOD for what those who may claim His name do…..some attach His name to lend some authoritative weight to their ‘ministry’ ….which is no ministry but they can deceive those who know not the scriptures …

    Be encouraged….The Lord will not cast off any who are diligent and continue ….

    Jhn 8:31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;

  87. cynthia says:

    @theredpillsetmefree

    My point is, looking for a “good man” in Japan is a quest destined to end in failure. It’s very easy to get discouraged, because the ugliest parts of male sexuality are very prominently on display.

  88. Anonymous Reader says:

    My point is, looking for a “good man” in Japan is a quest destined to end in failure. It’s very easy to get discouraged, because the ugliest parts of male sexuality are very prominently on display.

    Oh, ok. So at least it’s not All Men’s Fault for once, it’s all Japanese Men’s Fault. That’s a bit different.

  89. Roland says:

    Her sign should say: “I want to me some man’s woman, not some man’s whore”.

  90. Anonymous Reader says:

    Roland – why?

  91. Casey says:

    Logic has no place in the article Dalrock posted.

    Women are on paths of self-discovery and self-realization, and purity, and closer to God.
    Just ask one of them………they will tell you.

    No one can re-write rules and traditions to suit themselves faster or more ably than a woman.

    Sad, sad, sad, sad, sad.
    Women keep buying this bunk, and screwing themselves (literally & figuratively) in the process.

    We don’t need women to keep trying to be men. We need women to be women.
    In less than 40 years we have gone from a co-operative family model to a competition family model.

    Fuck it !

    They want the “Have it All !” lifestyle…….they can have it.
    BUT, they can have it ALONE.

  92. DeNihilist says:

    Hmm, seems the Miss missed her true religion. She should really be hanging out in Pune India with the Oshoites.

    But to claim to be Christian, as it was taught to me, I don’t think so.

  93. Lyn87 says:

    Concern Troll is concerned.

    Missy laments, “Missy says:
    September 9, 2014 at 3:52 pm

    What kind of crap is this? … There is so much scrutiny on women regarding sexual status. I’ve yet to see anyone out a magnifying glass to the male population who are simply ” sowing their wild oats.”

    Well, Missy, perhaps you missed the twenty-one comments that do just that in just one thread over a six-day period a few of weeks ago. There have been more since in that and subsequent threads, but this should suffice to negate your concern that everyone excuses sexual sin when men do it. I can’t put all the links without having this go to moderation for excessive linkage, but you can start at this link and work your way down for the next six days and you find no fewer than 21 posts that denounce the practice of men “sowing their wild oats” on Biblical grounds. The following commentators all said what you claim to have never seen here: tickltik, me (x8), JDG (x4), Artisinal Toad, Philyastro, BradA (x2), GunnerQ, Pancakeloach, Girlwithadragonflytatoo, and Boxer (not a Christian himself, but agreeing that the Bible prohibits male fornication). This is tickletik’s post that started the discussion.

    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2014/08/18/from-celibate-boyfriend-to-celibate-husband-true-love-doesnt-wait/#comment-137060

    If you’re going to write stupid things, at least have the good sense to write stupid things that are not so easily refuted.

  94. Snowy says:

    Women’s entitlement mentality is insatiable, and no doubt related to their rejection of all authority in their lives, including God’s authority. Women want it all, they want it now; amoral, with no conception of consequences of actions, cause and effect. This is why I still find it difficult to believe that women love to submit to the ‘Alpha’ man; if they do, it has nothing to do with their respect for, and need of authority. Women do not even realise they need authority/discipline in their lives.

  95. Lyn87 says:

    Snowy, the problem is not so much that women’s entitlement mentality is insatiable. For some women that’s true, and for others it is not – I’ve known a lot of rock-ribbed, nose-to-the-grindstone, stand-by-her-man old girls in my day. Same with men – I’ve know my share of panty-waisted, self-centered, just-wanna-have-fun jackwagons, too (and neither the military nor the cloth makes men immune). The problem is the fact that we have a feminist culture and a feminist legal system that encourages that particular bad trait among women, and then rewards women when they succumb to it. Sadly, the churches, which ought to stand firm against this nonsense in the culture, is failing at the task of even policing it in their own pews.

  96. pancakeloach says:

    re:redpillsetmefree “Every person that I know that has someone that they claimed that God brought into their life was actively searching to get married.”

    Bingo. Worked like a charm for me, but only after I had already taken the step of actively searching for him. If I hadn’t made that effort, I never would have met him and some OTHER woman would have gotten to him instead! My sister-in-law had a more difficult time searching, but she made it her priority and found a suitable husband too. In Ye Olden Dayes before the internet, I can see how people would have found it difficult to find a suitable mate if no one in your immediate social group was eligible. In the days of the internet, you really DON’T have an excuse to not be looking if a spouse is really what you want.

    And if getting married to a Christian man is important to you, you don’t search for your husband by going to a place filled with pagans and renowned for things like tentacle porn, as cynthia points out. (There are Christians in Japan, but not very many!) It’s a clear case of a woman putting her dream career ahead of her family prospects and then being Shocked! that opportunity cost is A Thing.

    Prosperity Gospel = Having It All Magical Thinking? No wonder she felt betrayed – she believed in a false god, and has swapped that disappointing god out for a different faith instead, one that validates her life choices. That’s not Christianity, no matter what a brazen slut claims.

  97. Gunner Q says:

    Cail Corishev @ 8:01 pm:
    ” “I’d done everything right.”

    This right here goes deeper than the usual girl stuff. When did Christians start believing that God is a happiness vending machine, where you put the right behaviors in the slot and out pops the good life?”

    It’s true God owes us nothing but the corollary is God can’t be trusted to help. That’s harsh when times are tough. Drugs help. Sex makes you feel better. Suicide will stop the pain. God won’t.

    I’ve heard formerly Christian men say much the same thing as this woman. Disappointment with God is no joke and expecting people to fight through life without support and encouragement is not realistic. This woman is a casualty, not a harpy.

    Kudos to Dalrock for having a blog that supports us Christians. A little help can go a long way these days.

  98. Spike says:

    After the disgust-induced nausea settles, the objective self starts to look at her:
    -Was the man who “took” her virginity (his fault, remember – she never gave it up) a Christian?
    If so, is he under sin? The Bible would say he is, as she is. Thus she has incited a man to sin and therefore is a temptress.
    -Was the man involved not a Christian? If so, how is her behaviour separate and distinct from that of the women around her?
    Does she expect to marry a Christian man after this?
    If she engages the Hamster to rationalize this, then she will begin rationalizing away justifications for her bad treatment of her husband in marriage. Marriage is trial enough without a wife that constantly vindicates the selfish decisions she makes in life.
    What is in it for her husband?

  99. It’s a clear case of a woman putting her dream career ahead of her family prospects and then being Shocked! that opportunity cost is A Thing.

    This.

    No wonder she felt betrayed – she believed in a false god, and has swapped that disappointing god out for a different faith instead, one that validates her life choices. That’s not Christianity, no matter what a brazen slut claims.

    And this.

    One of these days we’re going to figure out that anyone that has prayed to God for apples has NEVER had apple trees fall from Heaven as a result.
    God will respond by reminding you that you have seeds and garden tools, and then He will lead you to good ground. Then you must do your part and till the ground, and then let time, sunlight and rain do their part.

    THEN you get your apples.
    It’s truly not rocket science.

  100. BradA says:

    > There are no emotional/psychological/massive issues I’m dealing with as a result of having sex with women who are not my wife.

    Please prove that assertion.

  101. BradA says:

    Robin,

    > That is why I hate the “health & wealth” heresy, for its teaching people that “God wants you to be rich and happy.”

    Then you may want to investigate the Scriptures a bit more. God does want good for us. I see no Scripture where He wants bad. The OT covenant was good things, why would we lose all that with the NT covenant?

    We will have tough times and many who proclaim “good times” stray from the Word, but you need to seek the principles, not the feel good. Even Job only suffered for a very limited time (less than a year I believe).

    We will have tribulation, but the source of it is not our Lord. If you really want to follow Job’s example, where is the step of getting back double what you started with? Read the whole book!

    I have plenty of personal challenges, but I will not blame God for them. That is why such accusations irk me so much. You are accusing my Father!

  102. BradA says:

    Pancake,

    You would have to disprove a lot of Scriptures for me to not believe the core of what is maligned as “the Prosperity Gospel.” Too much to dive into, but it is quite Scriptural. Walking it out takes a balance of reality and many have twisted it to be a giant slot machine in the sky, but the principles are there.

    Christians still live in the world they live in, so they are subject to the flaws of that world. This has been true and will continue to be true until He returns to rule. Good promised good to those who were obedient in the OT, He didn’t swipe it back in the NT. It may be really tough to walk out and take the kind of serious self evaluation we refuse to face today to figure out, but I have yet to find Scriptures that say “God wants you poor,” for example. They may indicate we will face many bad things, but that is a far different thing than God’s desire.

    Though I suppose that is the difference between believing that God micromanages everything and a world where we often get the result of our own actions and those of others that impact us.

  103. Robin Munn says:

    @BradA –

    Gotta run, but the short version is: God is interested in our holiness, not our comfort. See James 1, or Paul’s long list of what he suffered for the sake of the Gospel.

    I’ll write more when I get back to the computer.

  104. Luke says:

    jzb says:
    September 9, 2014 at 5:05 pm
    “I was an overly zealous evangelical christian and a virgin until 30 years of age. I’ve since had sex with a few women to find that:

    1.) Sex is no big deal
    2.) There are no emotional/psychological/massive issues I’m dealing with as a result of having sex with women who are not my wife.
    3.) Sex can be overrated.

    Anyway I think she’s onto something in the context that the black and white thinking is often responsible for a lot of emotional/psychological pain and struggle. Nobody is ruined because they are no longer a virgin or have had premarital sex. I think on some level we have to treat people as individuals, and we simply can’t imply that they’re all good or all bad based on some of the things they have done or do. I’m not defending sluttery, I’m just saying I think life/emotion/sex is more grey than Christians want to admit.”

    Actually, the Christians have it more right than you do. Sex is a very big deal, both for motivating (or not) men to marry and be married — and for women’s suitability as wives, or lack.

    One simple graph for you:

    See how even an N of over 3 makes a woman a questionable candidate to be a wife?
    So, the innumerable >15 N women in America are just ticking bombs for foolish men who want marriage, and don’t understand what wretchedly poor choices they are.

  105. MarcusD says:

    Husband Wants More Intimacy, But Doesn’t Want to Make an Effort for It
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=907947

    Should I accept my wife’s proposal to separate
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=907997

    The real truth about my sex life – HELP
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=908026

    Plenty more (and worse), if you care to go look.

  106. Eidolon says:

    @BradA

    What would you say about the Israelites who lived and died in Egyptian slavery, seeing neither freedom nor delivery during the course of their lives? Were all of them not true believers?

    God intends good for all, but “health and wealth” in the earthly sense are not what He means. If it is good that we should suffer, either as recompense for our sins or to force us to improve, then He will have us suffer, just as a doctor will cause great pain in order to heal. Doing all the right things does not automatically guarantee health or wealth.

    Were the early Christians persecuted by the Romans because their faith was imperfect? What about Peter, the rock on which God would build His church, who was crucified upside-down? Why would Christianity so greatly value the martyrs — wouldn’t their martyrdom indicate that they aren’t very good Christians?

    It’s no insult to God to say that the lives of His followers may not be happy or pleasant, and they may get no reward for their virtue in this life.

  107. “When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. is thirsty enough to accept your dominance. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. act like men. Someone who values fairnesssupplicates as though his life depended on it, and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. both your shares of the housework, (cuz, like, you’re too busy being a strong independent woman to cook and clean for a treacly manbaby.) These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier.” funnier than watching the look on their face as you serve him with divorce papers after four years of marriage and run off with half his income to Acapulco with Rico the Pool Guy.

    ― Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead

  108. Lyn87 says:

    I have two formatting questions unrelated to the thread. I’ve looked and looked and can’t figure this out, which means I’m looking in the wrong places. It’s time for me to just ask.

    How does one line through text like cosplayconstruction did?

    How does one create a link that doesn’t contain the entire http.//… ?

  109. Robin Munn says:

    @Lyn87 –

    The answer to both your formatting questions lies in HTML. I’ll demonstrate how to do each of those things (strikethrough text and links) using [square brackets]. Replace the square brackets with angle brackets (the less-than and greater-than signs) to make real tags:

    To [del]strike through[/del] some text, use the DEL tag. This will look like:

    To strike through some text, use the DEL tag.

    To create a link without showing the HTTP text, write your link [a href=”http://example.com/”]like this[/a]. This will look like:

    To create a link without showing the HTTP text, write your link like this.

    I hope this helps.

  110. Robin Munn says:

    Note that there’s a space between the a and the href part. The tag should look like this:

    [a href=”http://example.com/”]link text[/a]

  111. Robin Munn says:

    @BradA –

    Okay, now I have time to write a longer response.

    I may have shortened it too much when I summarized the “health & wealth” heresy’s view as “God wants you to be rich and happy.” It’s true that our Father loves to give good gifts to His children. Where it becomes heresy is when they say, as the “health & wealth” preachers always do, “God wants you to be rich and happy, and if you aren’t. [b][i]you just don’t have enough faith[/i][/b].” The answer to their heresy lies in Hebrews 11:35-38, but you’ll never hear one of these heretics preaching on that passage: it would destroy the foundation of their false teachings. These people who suffered so much are ones “of whom the world was not worthy” (11:38) because their faith was so great.

    By the way, when you say, “We will have tribulation, but the source of it is not our Lord” — I agree 100%. The source of all the tribulation that Paul went through, or those unnamed heroes of the faith from Hebrews 11 went through, is the world, not the Lord. Jesus warned us that “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours. But all these things they will do to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me.” (John 15:18-21). So if you thought I was saying that God gives us trouble, that’s not what I was saying at all. Rather, the more we serve Christ, the more trouble the world and the devil will try to subject us to — and God will often allow it, so that our service to Him may bring Him all the more glory. It’s easy for anyone to serve God when things are going well, but when all seems dark and we are suffering and yet we go on serving Him anyway, that is so much more of a testimony. It says we know His character, and His ultimate goodness, and that we know that this circumstance is only temporary.

    C.S. Lewis had it right when, in The Screwtape Letters, he puts the following words in the mouth of a fictional demon: “Do not be deceived, Wormwood. Our cause is never more in danger than when a human, no longer desiring, but still intending, to do our Enemy’s will, looks round upon a universe from which every trace of Him seems to have vanished, and asks why he has been forsaken, and still obeys.”

  112. Lovey says:

    Amen! Robin Mumm! Well said!

  113. KP says:

    Wait — she moved to Japan, and then was surprised there weren’t a lot of men from her Christian subculture around? I sure hope she just accidentally elided some of the time-sequence details here…

  114. Lol, me thinks Missy is discovering that men still value purity and Chasity in a woman. Haha. Given it away, have we?!

  115. Tam the Bam says:

    Is that a slutwalk in the pic? Wandering around a leafy suburb in broad daylight dressed as The Riddler or something? I’d have expected a flash of well-turned ankle at least. And maybe just a hint of gritty urban peril.
    Eccentric, yes; slutty, not so much.
    I am disappoint ..

  116. Brad, you may be unfamiliar with the New Age-influenced “health and wealth” or “prosperity gospel” teachers that Robin is talking about. They go much further than, “God wants good for you.” They take “ask and ye shall receive” out of context and to the extreme, while defining “good” as “whatever you desire.” As I mentioned, they see God as a vending machine containing the perfect spouse, more money, a great house, good kids, health, wealth, and so on; so “religion” for them becomes how to get the God machine to give up the goodies.

    A mere glance at scripture gives the lie to that viewpoint. Job is a particularly striking example, but there are plenty of others. Jesus Himself, of course, was tortured and crucified and challenged us to follow in His footsteps. Does “take up your Cross and follow Me” sound pleasant? Only one of the Apostles managed to die of natural causes. Our greatest saints through the centuries have often been people who were tortured and experienced great pain for their faith — if not at the hands of men, then from demonic forces. St. Francis of Assisi, for instance, received the stigmata and was physically beaten by demons. Did those things make him “happy”? Well, yes, in the sense that they were signs that he was following God’s will. But “happy” in the modern sense that this girl or prosperity gospel would use? Not hardly.

    Scripture and Christian Tradition are a long litany of people being happy in the Lord despite suffering or even because of it, not avoiding it.

    The parable that applies to this girl, and to most of us in this time of great freedom and wealth, is the one about the rich man and the eye of the needle. In the West, none of us (yet) have to worry about being killed for our faith. We’re wealthy enough that we don’t have to steal or otherwise sin to feed our families. Compared to Peter and Paul, our crosses are laughably light. It should be easy for us to live right, yet mere boredom and ennui lead us into sin more often than not. This girl is “rich” in opportunities to live right and be happy in the Lord, but look how small she’s making the eye of that needle for herself!

  117. earl says:

    “When did Christians start believing that God is a happiness vending machine, where you put the right behaviors in the slot and out pops the good life?”

    When they started believing snake oil salesman like Joel Osteen.

  118. ballista74 says:

    @BradA The “health and wealth” heresy has been explained well. But to add something, the problem is in the definition of what is “good”. It differs between us and God. For us, our definition of “good” leads to the “health and wealth”, “God as a vending machine”, Personal Jesus type stuff. Then we look to the Scriptures to justify ourselves instead of justifying God.

    We are mere children (if that) before Father God. So we don’t know any better. This is akin to what real children on earth are. “Good” in their sight might mean nothing but a candy and soda pop diet, but parents know better and don’t fulfill that. You can use a whole host of other examples, but the point is made.

    For some, “good” might be having just enough to get by. For others (and this is true one guy I know), getting cancer is “good” in God’s sight. This guy didn’t realize this until after the fact, of course. Anyway, we do much better in the sight of God when we realize we don’t know what is best for ourselves, and just accept His will as good for our lives.

  119. Neguy says:

    Don’t forget that Job got 2X of everything back in the end.

    I think there’s as much danger in denying that God has anything good for us in this world – which means practically speaking, you’re a deist (or someone who believes God only intervenes in the world to do hurtful things) – than in the prosperity gospel. In Psalm 27 David said that “I would have despaired unless I believed I would see the goodness of the LORD in the land of the living.” If David, a man after God’s own heart, couldn’t survive on solely a hope for a future world, it’s tough to believe any of us will. 3 John 2 says “Beloved, I pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health, just as your soul prospers.” Did St. John have bad theology or something?

    The Bible is replete with promises that at least in part apply to this world and in various pleas for help in worldly circumstances (e.g., the Psalms). Jesus himself encouraged us to ask our heavenly father for “bread” and “fish”.

    I don’t think these are magic formulas we can use to manipulate God into giving us what we want, or that it makes us immune from the suffering and sin of this world. They aren’t guarantees of worldly prosperity or health. But they do tell us that we serve a God of blessing, and we should see him as such.

    I think another trend of worldly adaptationism in Christianity is adopting what amounts to philosophical materialism by putting all our hopes in the world to come and punting to the eschaton. How much faith in God does that actually require when you’re not under active persecution?

  120. Dave says:

    Has anyone seen this heart-rending article?

  121. Red Knight says:

    As much as the two last paragraphs are atrocious examples of how a woman’s feeeelinngggsss are held as the ultimate font of morality, everything up to that point does manage to touch on some of the issues with conteporary Evangelical purity culture.

    In the great majority of all societies (past and present) that adhere to a morality of no sex outside marriage, the average age of marriage has been relatively low. Young people were not expected to spend a significant part of their highest-sex-drive years without getting any. I had been thinking about this before, but only with Dalrock’s recent blog post about the Celibate Boyfriend did I realize the full extent of the folly of the whole purity movement to insist on chastity *while* assuming that the young ‘uns will go through the same [dating/hookup] -> [extended boy/girlfriend] -> [eventual marriage] sequence that their secular counterparts do and that has become standard in America.

    And that’s before considering that the whole movement has assumed a salesman-like stance to purity. They’re not primarily trying to answer “What does God command?” but rather “What’s in it for me?”, and are doing it by promising happily-ever-after. They are offering something they often can’t deliver, but what alternative do they have, really? They could tell them straight that “This is what God commands!”, and that would be more honest, but once you’ve gone the way of enticing people in with promises of there being something in it for their self-interest, how well would that go down? Kind of hard to make a u-turn and require sacrifice for the sake of righteousness after you’ve let Princess Snowflake of Churchiania know that “God wants you to be happy”.

    It is undeniably stupid of her to act like God is a giant happiness vending machine in the sky which you just need to insert the right actions into and get your happily-ever-after, but at least as much blame belongs on the whole purity movement which has made it its selling point.

  122. I think there’s as much danger in denying that God has anything good for us in this world

    Yes, that would be equally wrong. But no one here is suggesting that, and the modern context is so far in the other direction that we really don’t have to worry about stumbling into that particular error these days. In another time, there would have been a danger of that, but not in today’s churches.

    These people aren’t praying for good health like St. John and then ending the prayer with, “Let Thy will be done.” If St. John prayed for good health and then got sick, he would have said, “Well, God knows best, so I’ll make do.” They’re praying (or visualizing, or whatever) for good health, and then if good health doesn’t come, they’re confused and wonder what went wrong, because Best Friend Jesus wouldn’t want them to be unhappy. In the words of this girl, they “did all the right things” and didn’t get what they asked for.

    I don’t think these are magic formulas we can use to manipulate God into giving us what we want, or that it makes us immune from the suffering and sin of this world.

    You may not think that, but prosperity gospel believers (I’ve known several) do. When suffering comes into their lives anyway, they react in various, sometimes bizarre ways which are rarely productive.

  123. Lyn87 says:

    Thanks Robin:

    test

    That answers my question

  124. sonofdeathswriter says:

    I’m dumbfounded. I guess fornication is ok now??????

  125. Neguy says:

    @Cail, it’s not just feminism that the modern church has imbibed whole. We should be looking at every aspects of worldly values and asking if we’ve drunk them in. Clearly the church has embraced rationalism/materialism to a tremendous practical degree. Just because we’ve had our eyes opened to feminism doesn’t mean we should think we’re not deceived in other areas.

    I don’t want to derail this thread, but I think the health/wealth and charismatic movements are to an extent a product of this too. How so, you might ask? Because they require a special, unusual “supernatural” breakthrough of God into this world. They demand that God put on a supernatural show instead of believing that he’s actually sovereign in the ordinary, everyday world. They need a “sign” as Jesus might have put it.

    The typical Christian manosphere blog goes the other way, more or less saying that red pill type “self-improvement” is the best route to a successful marriage. It strikes me candidly as a form of Churchian self-help advice. There’s not a lot of God in the results, other than that following his wisdom tips is supposed to give us the best chance of success. Look for this kind of woman. Be this kind of man. Operate according to this and that principles. This is all good to be sure, but human works oriented. You don’t see the call to prayer about the matter featured nearly as much, although prayer for a wife and for God to be prepare us for marriage, etc is the most important thing we can do.

  126. Just saw this. Deeply disturbing.Oh well, there is no after taste of of Hoppes from the swallowed gun barrel, There is no taste at all.

  127. BradA says:

    Robin,

    > God is interested in our holiness

    Why must the two be exclusive?

    Eidolon,

    > What would you say about the Israelites who lived and died in Egyptian slavery

    Life happens. Some situations are worse than others, but God’s intent was not that they remain their. The promises of earthly blessings were still given to Abraham and his seed, whatever its current state. It would have been a tough time to live, but they still got results of their own obedience to that promise.

    Outward circumstances have a significant impact on us, but our approach to it controls many more things than we want to admit. How many in tough situations today are there purely because of external circumstances and how many played a role in what happened?

    The principle of “the harder I try, the luckier I get” applies. Most don’t really do what is necessary, so they reap negative consequences.

    I could blame good for my current financial state (not as bad as it could be, but not as good either) on some arbitrary “will of God” or I could own up to the fact I haven’t managed my money as effectively as I should have. Too many Christians who harp about the “evils” of believing in health and wealth fall in the former camp.

    It may be changing somewhat, but most Americans who are not doing reasonable today are there because of their own idiocy. We are far more prosperous than most of history, yet we cry about how much we don’t have. Being grateful for what we do have would be a good first start to gain a positive Biblical attitude.

    Note that persecution does not require a lack of provision or health. You could be quite healthy and in jail all your life. It may be VERY tough, but they are not the same thing.

    Jesus said:

    [Jhn 16:33 KJV] 33 These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

    Why the note on the overcoming if it is not an important part?

    Jesus likens God as better than any earthly good father:

    [Mat 7:11 KJV] 11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

    And I am supposed to believe that God either does not do this or that He will give a scorpion or rock instead of something good? You can take your false theology, I will take His words.

    Note that you may argue all you want against a straw man I did not erect. I do not support the lifestyles or claims of many who have been labeled with such. I only go by what is written. Too many Scriptures point to God wanting to do well for His children. That was not removed in the NT so I apply it now. Tough situations don’t prove that is not present any more than tough situations prove anything else.

    > It’s no insult to God to say that the lives of His followers may not be happy or pleasant, and they may get no reward for their virtue in this life.

    So we can freely ignore the promises of God’s blessing in our lives if we do well. Exactly which promises really are firm and which are squishy? We may have a challenge working them out, but I refuse to ignore promises that are present.

    Robin,

    > Hebrews 11:35-38

    I am sure I had heard sermons on that when I was walking in those circles more, though I could not guarantee it. The focus their is not on wallowing in crap, it is on receiving better. Taking its focus would go against what those who attack what they call a heresy.

    I don’t really have the time now and may not for a while, so I am doing a poor job on the topic, though it would take an entire thread (outside the scope of this blog) to discuss. I may try to put some tighter thoughts together on the topic later, if an appropriate time comes up.

    ======

    It really seems to come down to several issues:

    – Is what is written accurate, all of it? Some may be accused (reasonably so in some cases) of only presenting a positive case, but others then go to the other extreme and deny the positive case as having any validity and thus being a heresy.

    – How much personal responsibility do each of us have for what happens in our own life? It is a very common trend to push all responsibility off on someone else today. I find it very ironic that many of you would definitely hold individuals accountable for their activity in the sexual realm and rightly laugh at attempts like the individuals in recent posts to blame God for their situation. Why is that acceptable in areas of health and wealth, but not in personal morality?

    – Outcome does not necessarily specify intent. The results of life have many more factors than anyone normally accounts for. It is far too simplistic to say “God intends them to suffer, be sick and poor” based on their circumstances.

    – Few have a proper Biblical understanding of health and wealth today. Most have incorrectly equated it with perfection in both areas. Health would aim at being sickness free, but wealth means enough to do whatever God has called us to do, not “driving a Rolls Royce and living in a mansion.”

    – Suffering persecution does not require one bit of sickness.

  128. BradA says:

    Cail,

    > Brad, you may be unfamiliar with the New Age-influenced “health and wealth” or “prosperity gospel” teachers that Robin is talking about.

    I am quite familiar with the claims and assertions that are made on both sides in this area. Much of my early life was strongly influenced by those who are very well known as “health and wealth” preachers.

    I have rejected a great deal of their extremism as I saw it didn’t fit reality or the entirety of the Scriptures. However, I still reject the idea pushed by those who oppose that extreme that the idea of God wanting us to be healthy and have our needs met is a heresy. That is just as much, if not more, bunk. It is not consistent with the entirety of the Scriptures, which has always been my focus.

    The problem in this area is that it is like arguing macro evolution. Too many side trails to go down and small issues to cover. I am trying to keep this concise, but it is not, so I am sure I am glossing over many issues. I would be glad to respond to specific tight points, but I doubt just going on is helping any of us and I can only sneak some time in now because I am in an online meeting I am only listening to.

    Cail, you bring up Job. Why do you only focus on the suffering part, not the outcome at the end of the book?

    [Job 42:10 KJV] 10 And the LORD turned the captivity of Job, when he prayed for his friends: also the LORD gave Job twice as much as he had before.

    The entire passage could bear study, but I rarely hear that exposition. Yes, his situation was horridly rough, but it was time limited and changed afterward. How many even believe for that today? You need to expect double blessing after the suffering if you want to truly follow the example there.

  129. BradA says:

    Ballista,

    > For some, “good” might be having just enough to get by.

    Then they are selfish. What about caring for others? They don’t have to support every ministry in the world, but only caring enough for them to get by is selfish. We have no problem identifying the one who has lots of assets and keeps them for himself as selfish, but what about the one who refuses to do more than the bare minimum (including prayer and believing) for himself and his family?

    > For others (and this is true one guy I know), getting cancer is “good” in God’s sight. This guy didn’t realize this until after the fact, of course.

    That is as foolish as saying being subject to sin (as in the base post here) was a good thing. It may have seemed to accomplish good goals, but those same goals could have been accomplished in other ways.

    A car crash may bring me to the point I realized alcohol and sin were controlling my life, but the car crash would never be good. You sound like you have falling for the “all is relative” meme of modern life. See the Scripture I mentioned above. Earthly fathers give good gifts and know what they are, we should look for nothing different from our heavenly Father.

    Would you accept the same excuse you note if it was intentional sin on the part of the individual? Is their inability to overcome sin in their life excusable? Or would you continue to tell them they need to keep fighting to overcome sin?

    Sickness and poverty came with the Fall and thus proceeded out of sin. We should seek to overturn that in all ways.

  130. BradA says:

    Cail,

    > If St. John prayed for good health and then got sick, he would have said, “Well, God knows best, so I’ll make do.”

    You make a huge leap here. Are you really going to assert that God willed St. John to stub his toe during the day if that happened? Did God will for every bad thing that ever happened to him? Have you become a Calvinist?

    Would you say someone falling back into a major sin was God’s will? Why the inconsistency if not?

    ====

    No magic formulas, but we do have many solid principles many refuse to apply. I also find that those who decry heresy almost always never push for provision. We are in a battle in this life and we will lose much ground if we merely sit back and wait for God to do things we are called to do.

    Some have overemphasized the control of the individual, but then others fire back and effectively eliminate it. The truth is out there, but is not at either extreme. I am betting the “we can have little control” side is more prevalent here.

  131. BradA says:

    Neguy,

    I agree with much of what you have written and you have said some of the things I am saying much more succinctly. Though I would dispute that “self help” of some sort is not required in life. We are stewards and God expects that we will use what we have as effectively as possible. Burying our talent in the ground (per the parable) is not acceptable even if we do it by default.

    We can’t control every last thing, but we can and should use the principles of how things work to do what we can and seek God’s involvement where appropriate. You do seem to exile the supernatural from our daily lives, as many do. That is as much of a danger as running from one revival area to another is.

  132. Kyo says:

    White guys don’t have to court you – you’re meat to be picked up at a bar, fucked, and left at the love hotel. There are no “Christian boys” in Tokyo, and men there favor the slut.

    Cynthia, there is no reason for such a gratuitously offensive comment with such disgusting language. What kind of crowd were you hanging out with?

    — A Christian man in Tokyo who loves his wife and has never picked up a woman at a bar or gone to a love hotel, and certainly does not “favor the slut”

  133. Neguy says:

    @BradA, I agree completely about self help.

    Here’s the key. Christianity is always truths in tension. One God, three persons. Jesus Christ as fully God and fully man. God’s sovereignty and man’s free will.

    Most heresies have tended to simplify by focusing on only one part of the truth. For example, Arianism denied the eternal divinity of Jesus.

    It’s the same here. We are called to work hard and steward well what we are given. But as Paul said, “It’s Christ who gives the increase.” Or “Unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labor in vain.” As Puritan John Owens put it, the use of means is up to us, the dispensing of grace is up to God. Forget the first, and we become passive and slothful. Forget the second and we come frustrated and/or prideful.

  134. Gunner Q says:

    Neguy @ 8:21 am:
    “We should be looking at every aspects of worldly values and asking if we’ve drunk them in. Clearly the church has embraced rationalism/materialism to a tremendous practical degree. Just because we’ve had our eyes opened to feminism doesn’t mean we should think we’re not deceived in other areas.”

    I haven’t noticed materialism. Americans are much more aware of wealth’s limitations than poorer areas of the world, which is where you find most prosperity gospel. American Churchianity doesn’t try to substitute for God; it’s straight rebellion, like the OP woman.

    Rationalism is just the age we live in. There are times when God works miracles left and right (Jesus), then there are times when God is completely absent (the four hundred years before Jesus). Waiting for guidance and intervention from God is not a mark of Christian maturity. 2 Thessalonians expounds on this.

    If you don’t like rationalism then just wait a few years. Witchcraft is closely associated with female rebellion because the occult provides a non-masculine path to power. I predict this will be the next wave of feminism, when the welfare state begins to fail and no men want to wife up the crazy desperate cat ladies.

    No wonder feminists love to hate those Eighteenth-Century witch trials. Although they don’t get referred to much anymore.

  135. HawkandRock says:

    @sonofdeathswriter: “I’m dumbfounded. I guess fornication is ok now??????”

    No. It’s much, much better than just “ok”. It is now a deep, mystical holy sacrament.

    2,000 years of Jewish law; scripture inspired by God himself, followed by 2,000 years of Church authority and Christian cultural practices have been overturned by a 20 something twit writing for The Frisky.

    You want to get to heaven? Then you have to keep up with these things, man.

  136. Neguy says:

    @Gunner Q, sorry I meant “philosophical materialism” in that post, not consumerism type materialism. That is, idea that physical stuff and forces is all that exists, that everything is, as someone once put it, molecules in motion, and that scientific truth is the only form of truth.

  137. Here’s the key. Christianity is always truths in tension. One God, three persons. Jesus Christ as fully God and fully man. God’s sovereignty and man’s free will. Most heresies have tended to simplify by focusing on only one part of the truth.

    Exactly this, and this is extremely well said.

    It’s the same here. We are called to work hard and steward well what we are given. But as Paul said, “It’s Christ who gives the increase.” Or “Unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labor in vain.” As Puritan John Owens put it, the use of means is up to us, the dispensing of grace is up to God. Forget the first, and we become passive and slothful. Forget the second and we come frustrated and/or prideful.

    Again, completely agree.
    I believe that God does this to keep us focused on Him…..we can’t fall in love with a doctrine or a principle(even though we always do), because something will come along to challenge it, rebalance it, or outright replace it(as the New Covenant did with the Old). The test, God’s question, is always, do we love Him, or just our religious traditions?

  138. Pingback: Real vs Valid | Something Fishy

  139. Pingback: gaming made him (dalrock) a better christian. lzozozlolzollzlo just as he writes “Slutting made her a better Christian.” | Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM(TM) GB4M(TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN(TM) GREATBOOKS4MEN(TM) lzozlzlzlzlzomglzozzl

  140. Ok, ok, granted, she’s baiting you Dal, but look who’s decided to become a theologian now…
    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2014/09/10/politics-and-feminism/hookup-culture-and-the-golden-rule/

    Yep, Aunt Giggles, will tell you how to be a better Beta Christian now.

  141. AdmiralBenbow says:

    Now taking wagers as to how long it takes Mark Driscoll to blame this on Christian men.

    Well, given that he is in trouble for referring to women as “penis homes” and his career is falling apart as a result of his own hubris and avarice, no one will listen to him.

  142. Mark says:

    @Feministhater

    “”Given it away, have we?!””

    No!……..she got a 6-pak beer for it! A very fair trade in today’s culture!…….L*

  143. TexasEngineer says:

    On review of her CV, one big thing jumped out at me: Baylor University. 2 things here: 1) Baylor is a highly insulated trad-con Christian culture (it’s not called the Baylor Bubble for nothing) and everyone’s faith is on display all the time. 2) Even when I was there in the 90’s, the number one complaint for the woman was nobody would “ask them out”, which of course is code for “take them on dates and buy them stuff”, and the response from the men was “you aren’t approachable”, which I can personally attest to being true. Combine that with a 2/1 female/male student body and the tacit knowledge that many were there to get their “MRS” degree, it doesn’t surprise me that her reaction was what it was when she went from that culture to Japan. It doesn’t excuse her heresy, however.

  144. Mark says:

    @Earl

    “”When they started believing snake oil salesman like Joel Osteen.””

    I have watched this guy a few times.I really don’t know what to think of him.He seems like the Anthony Robbins of the pulpit(for lack of a better description).I have to hear him speak about the Jews or read a book of his before I form an opinion of him….

  145. Anonymous Reader says:

    Mark, here you go. Although you might find better prices second hand.

    Joel Osteen’s Book Store

  146. DrTorch says:

    I believe this is a (another) consequence of the idolatry of evangelicalism.

    Evangelism of course is a crucial element to Christianity, but Jesus himself warned not to throw pearls before swine, and told his first crew of evangelists to leave a town and shake the dust from their feet if the town wouldn’t receive them.

    Modern evangelicals have distorted the gospel, insisting that it is the “only” thing of importance, and trying to “reach out” to everyone, in every way possible. They have made evangelism an idol, worshipping it over the Savior, and His clear teachings (as well as those of His apostles).

  147. deti says:

    @ rollo:

    “Yep, Aunt Giggles, will tell you how to be a better Beta Christian now.”

    File this under “sociosexual politics makes strange bedfellows”.

    STD Check $u$an can’t see this herself, but in terms of sociosexual thinking, she and the tradcons are of like mind.

    Tradcons hate game and helping men navigate the current marketplace because they think Game is immoral and promotes male inchastity.

    $u$an and the HUSsies hate game and helping men navigate the current marketplace because they think game is manipulative and deceptive, and gives men an unfair advantage.

    Peas in a pod.

  148. Pingback: My Favorite Manosphere Post This Week: 9.10.14 | RedPillPushers

  149. deti says:

    Tradcons: Man up and marry the sluts!

    Secular Game opponents/New Moralists: Man up and buy the slut dinner and a movie!

  150. KP says:

    Deti, you are way behind the times. It’s “… buy her birth control for her”.

  151. Anonymous Reader says:

    KP maybe more accurately “buy her contraception for her and her alpha“.

    Another variation on AF-BB…

  152. Mark says:

    @AnonReader

    Thanks for the link.There is a Christian bookstore here in Toronto that I usually do all my shopping at for Christian books.In fact,I bought a New Testament there about 2 months ago and will look for Olsteen books while there tomorrow.I also have to go talk to the landlord of the bookstore as he is a fellow Jew and from what a good Pastor friend tells me,and asked me for my assistance,is that the landlord has raised the rent and the owner might soon be out of business.So,essentially,I have to go and talk to the landlord and see what I can do about getting the poor guy’s rent back to normal.In other words,I have to try and “Jew down” the Jew.

  153. Mark says:

    @deti

    I was doing some reading over at Return of Queens(I do not post.I like to see their hamsters do back flips).I was reading the article “New Rules for Women”.I started to read the comments and see that you posted a “New Rules for Men”.I just want to commend you for your brilliance on that post and your comments.You got their hamsters doing cartwheels! Also,since your comments “NO MORE MEN POSTERS ALLOWED”……Brilliant!….Absolute Brilliance!!!

    http://returnofqueens.com/new-rules-for-women/

    http://returnofqueens.com/roq-seeks-to-be-more-female-friendly/

  154. MarcusD says:

    @Mark

    Did you read the comments on the Daily Mail article? “Wailing and gnashing of teeth” doesn’t even begin to describe them.

  155. Boxer says:

    Wife it up! Wife it up! Waaaayyyy up! (Football chant style).

    Umm, no.

    A normal person would write a cautionary article, about how stupid she had been, and how after a period of self-reflection, she realized how self-destructive her chuckleheaded behavior was. She’d then go on to describe getting into psychoanalysis or some sort of counselling, and end with a warning to those younger peeps who thought this sort of sexual irresponsibility was fun or harmless.

    Any man who marries a woman who doesn’t approximate that level of appreciation for her own behavior, deserves what he gets, which is usually a long, miserable trip which eventually ends in the docks of the divorce courts.

  156. Boxer says:

    Most of you will either burst out laughing or collapse into uncontrollable vomiting spells when perusing this material. It’s rare to find literary work so perfectly humorous and simultaneously emetic…

    The Female-Led Marriage

    http://worshippingyourwife.blogspot.com.au/2014/09/dennis-renewal-of-wedding-vows-in.html

  157. JDG says:

    Return of the queens = just another flavor of feminism. It’s still the man’s fault. Any man that’s handy will do.

    Where are all these awesome woman the queens were raving about?

    Good job Deti.

  158. JDG says:

    The Female-Led Marriage

    Is Dennis Rainey’s wife named Nancy?

  159. deti says:

    JDG:

    Dennis Rainey’s wife’s name is Barbara.

    Mark, JDG:

    Well, I don’t think I caused the “no men” rule at ROQ. That looks like it was a result of a more recent thread. In any event, ROQ is run by a group of women claiming to be “traditional”. Queen A, the head Queen, claims to be divorced. At least a few of the contributors are divorced, claiming husband misconduct of one form or another. I don’t wish them ill. But they do have some quite misguided and wrongheaded ideas on how attraction and intersexual dynamics work.

    If they really want to believe that Steve Buscemi is the next George Clooney, well, OK. If they really think that they are “oppressed”, I can’t persuade them otherwise. If they really want to believe that women find providers sexy, they can knock themselves out.

    It was only my intention to engage in discourse, but I was, of course, met with vociferous opposition. It’s more evidence that by and large, men and women cannot discuss intersexual relationship issues in a frank and explicit way.

  160. Red says:

    “It’s not just feminism that the modern church has imbibed whole. We should be looking at every aspects of worldly values and asking if we’ve drunk them in. Clearly the church has embraced rationalism/materialism to a tremendous practical degree. Just because we’ve had our eyes opened to feminism doesn’t mean we should think we’re not deceived in other areas.

    I don’t want to derail this thread, but I think the health/wealth and charismatic movements are to an extent a product of this too. How so, you might ask? Because they require a special, unusual “supernatural” breakthrough of God into this world. They demand that God put on a supernatural show instead of believing that he’s actually sovereign in the ordinary, everyday world. They need a “sign” as Jesus might have put it.

    The typical Christian manosphere blog goes the other way, more or less saying that red pill type “self-improvement” is the best route to a successful marriage. It strikes me candidly as a form of Churchian self-help advice. There’s not a lot of God in the results, other than that following his wisdom tips is supposed to give us the best chance of success. Look for this kind of woman. Be this kind of man. Operate according to this and that principles. This is all good to be sure, but human works oriented. You don’t see the call to prayer about the matter featured nearly as much, although prayer for a wife and for God to be prepare us for marriage, etc is the most important thing we can do.”

    First of all, Jesus gave signs as miracles, such as in John 4:48. Second of all, he was upset at the Pharisees for needing a sign in Matthew 16:4, but I take it that the signs they were looking for were similar to star-gazing (because they were looking at the sky). I could be wrong, but I think that’s what was going on, and there was a difference. Jesus didn’t seem happy about the reliance that people had on miracles, but he gave them a miracle, because they needed one. In the second case, the Pharisees are described as being wicked and adulterous.

    If I remember correctly, “adulterous” and “idolatrous” often share the same word. I think what you’re talking about is more along the lines of the second scenario: that is, looking toward worldly things as a sign of Godliness. This is often done in the Christian manosphere, and could lead to scamming. I’m thinking about when Mona Vie was being sold in churches, promising to provide health, and therefore (by extrapolation) Godliness.

    Something to bear in mind is that history underlies current events. According to Max Weber, Puritanism (something that he calls “The Protestant Ethic”) has shaped the American worldview in a large way. Apparently, the early Puritans would read nature, much like the Pharisees in Matthew. Although they weren’t big-spending materialists, this idea eventually evolved into a Work Ethic: someone is moral if their work is good> if I can see them being paid well. This is a big part of how American culture and it’s Christianity developed.

    Basically, Churchianity eventually came out of this attitude. However, even though Churchianity is separate from the culture, it shares with the culture the Protestant Ethic. My point is, this is typical. Everyone in the U.S. thinks this way. You’re right, there’s something off about it, and it falls under the Joel Olsteen category of #thingsjesusneversaid. That’s my first thought.

    New thought now, it’s this idea that’s promoted above talking about people as though they’re human beings. There’s nothing inherently manly about naming people sluts, bitches, whores, or what have you. That’s usually something men do when they’re not feeling particularly manly. It would be more manly (and in my case, womanly), if people on here took their understanding of the ways of the world, and could discuss them as intellectuals. It looks puerile, and gives your opposition legitimate troll-bait. Everyone appears to fall right into the woman-hating category that Planned Parenthood advocates, and the like, want them to. It also causes the public to be turned-off unnecessarily.

    Matthew 5:20 says to be better than the Pharisees. The language and attitude of the manosphere does the exact opposite of this. I can’t take a lot of these posts seriously any more. They’re 15% content and 85% venting/ name-calling, which is ironically beta.

  161. Red says:

    Stick to your beliefs, and act even better toward women than other men, or even other women. Find the expecting single mother a place to stay. Don’t condone other men sleeping-around. Basic common sense, people will see you as a real man. If they don’t like it, whatever, you’re alpha.

  162. JDG says:

    Red as in big Red?

  163. JDG says:

    Naw, it couldn’t be. there weren’t any F bombs. My apologies.

  164. Tom C says:

    Thank you for the Worshipping Your Wife link. What an undiscovered gem! I am going to get lots of mileage out of this one.

  165. SirHamster says:

    Rationalism is just the age we live in. There are times when God works miracles left and right (Jesus), then there are times when God is completely absent (the four hundred years before Jesus). Waiting for guidance and intervention from God is not a mark of Christian maturity. 2 Thessalonians expounds on this.

    Quibble. Silence (lack of prophets and revelations) is not absence. There was work needed to prepare the way for the Messiah, and that it happened on schedule indicates that God was present and working.

  166. SirHamster says:

    Yep, Aunt Giggles, will tell you how to be a better Beta Christian now:
    “Hellfire and damnation are not themes that resonate with today’s youth.”

    So we are to judge our Christian doctrine on the standards of youth. Buddy Jesus, here we come!

  167. Mark says:

    @deti

    “”I don’t wish them ill. But they do have some quite misguided and wrongheaded ideas on how attraction and intersexual dynamics work.””

    My take also.The only good comments that were worth reading were posted by men.

    @Boxer

    Thanks for the link.

    “”We are members of a group that worships Female deities and explores the Divine Feminine.””

    Obviously,a pagan site.Same as the environmentalist “tree huggers” and “Gaia worship”.

  168. SirHamster says:

    First of all, Jesus gave signs as miracles, such as in John 4:48. Second of all, he was upset at the Pharisees for needing a sign in Matthew 16:4, but I take it that the signs they were looking for were similar to star-gazing (because they were looking at the sky). I could be wrong, but I think that’s what was going on, and there was a difference. Jesus didn’t seem happy about the reliance that people had on miracles, but he gave them a miracle, because they needed one. In the second case, the Pharisees are described as being wicked and adulterous.

    Consider that the Pharisees asked for signs *after* Jesus had already done many, in healing the sick/blind, casting out demons, feeding thousands, etc. We also see some Pharisees rationalize Jesus’ miracles as being from the Devil

    Their problem was not asking for signs. Their problem was the unbelief that made them ignore all the ones they had already seen, that indicated Jesus Christ was who he said he was.

    Matthew 5:20 says to be better than the Pharisees. The language and attitude of the manosphere does the exact opposite of this. I can’t take a lot of these posts seriously any more. They’re 15% content and 85% venting/ name-calling, which is ironically beta.

    Vipers. White-washed tombs. Sons of Hell. Your “above namecalling” standard is higher than the one Jesus practiced.

  169. Mark says:

    @Boxer

    “”We seek to use scripture that rewrites traditional Biblical passages with Female references.””

    A warped view of the Bible.

    “”Women hold all positions of authority and leadership within our congregation.””

    YIKES!

    “”“Ma’am” isn’t used here! men are permitted to speak only when spoken to, and are not allowed to speak at all for their first year in the congregation. men are also expected to financially support the congregation with weekly contributions as well as making appropriate contributions when receiving special services such as submitting a question to the Council of Wise Women””

    Men are not allowed to speak?….but,must support the “Church” financially? This is a new level of pussification.Actually,this is almost unbelievable to read! If I knew a man that belonged to a “Church” like this,I would spit in his face! Any men that would join an organization like this has to be the most spineless,gutless,clueless,ignorant men to walk the face of the earth.

  170. Just Saying says:

    the innumerable >15 N women in America are just ticking bombs

    While I have done everything that I can to up the N count of women in general – the above statement is true. I just give women an excuse – you cannot “make” anyone do something they don’t want to do without force, and what is the fun of that? I enjoy it when women will argue with themselves – they know that something is wrong (cheating on their BF or hubby) but they want to do it and will come up with excuses to justify it. (including – “this is for him, so that I’m not such a b*tch to him.”) I see it all the time – that’s one of the reasons that I don’t play their games. When they come to my bed, I’m not going to wear a condom, so they can’t use that excuse, and I will cum in them so they can’t say that it wasn’t “sex” – although I’ve run into more than a few who do back-flips as far as what is and isn’t sex. I’ve had one that informed me after a night of sex, that “technically I’m still a virgin”. I found that interesting since in my book we had had sex several times that night, and quite a bit more over the last few months. But she defined “sex” to basically be whatever she wanted it to be, and it wasn’t having a man cum in her. That didn’t count. But that is the non-sense that women do. In her case she saw “sex” as missionary, and that was a very specific thing, so just because man came in her – that didn’t count. If her ankles were over his shoulders – it wasn’t sex, Doggy-style? Not sex. Pretty much anything other than a man between a woman’s legs bent on either side of him with her feet flat on the bed – and it had to be in bed – wasn’t sex. That is the type of nonsense women use to justify what they do – complete BS, but it allows them to excuse their behavior, and that is all that matters when it comes to women – something that removes any responsibility from them. And other women will agree with them.

    Anyway – I found the above interesting, since the three women in my core group all have and N of less then 5 – of course, I get them young, right out of high-school if I can. The ones with the lowest N tend to last the longest – the one that I’ve been seeing for 3 years, I was her first man. I say that as she was with women – but no men. She still is with other women – brings them to my bed, but to me, that’s fine. We enjoy them together – she’s informed me that she’ll stick around as long as I’ll have her. And I’m convinced that is because I was her first and so far – only man. Of course, that may be BS – I don’t really care. She does what I want, and enhances my life – and isn’t that what a woman should do for a man?

  171. Lyn87 says:

    Boxer,

    Great find with that Female Led Marriage blog. And… you taught me a word I didn’t know: emetic. Gotta’ remember that, it sounds so much more forceful than the “nauseated” I would have used. Dare I say it’s a more manly word?

    At first I wasn’t sure if you had linked a deliberate parody, but somewhere in a corner of my mind where I prefer not to look often, was the knowledge that there are people like that out there… voting, breeding, holding position of authority. Yikes.

    But it IS of a piece with the OP – I meant what I wrote about Temple Prostitution literally. This is part of a trend toward Goddess worship that picked up steam in the West when the hippies of the 1960’s and 1970’s turned into New Age middle managers in the 1980’s. Danie Amneus wrote about female-centric religious practices extensively in his book “The Case For Father Custody.” He described the stone-age Goddess cults in which both Miss Anderson from The Frisky and the nut-jobs in your link would feel right at home.

    What I don’t understand is what’s in it for the men. The husband in your link positively relishes his role as doormat for his wife. That is a seriously odd fetish, and there just cannot be very many men who would actually bow down before their wives as if they were Greek goddesses in the flesh, and declare themselves to be their literal slaves in front of all their friends. Just like our intrepid “Slut 4 Jesus” Miss Anderson, it’s all about the elevation of female sexuality. There’s a particularly good quote in the Amneus book that will take me some time to find, but I imagine few women will find men willing to publicly grovel at their feet, nor women who would put up with that for very long before they felt the need for a… well… a man in their lives.

    But what man would want one of those damaged creatures in his house?

    The men in those sorts of “marriages” must fall into one of two camps: 1) The ones who have been cuckolded or 2) the ones who are about to be. The main difference is whether their wives will require them to watch.

  172. Anonymous Reader says:

    Lyn87
    And… you taught me a word I didn’t know: emetic

    Your musical education is defective, then, becase W.S. Gilbert rhymed “poetical” with “emetical” over a century and a quarter ago. Don’t take it personally, I was the same way until about 10 years ago.

  173. pancakeloach says:

    Vipers. White-washed tombs. Sons of Hell. Your “above namecalling” standard is higher than the one Jesus practiced. -SirHamster

    Unfortunately I know from experience that the Christian Concern Troll, upon hearing passionate language that they find offensive, will respond to anyone pointing this out by claiming that Jesus Is A Special Case and that no one should ever emulate Him or the Apostle Paul in calling a spade a spade. Because using accurate descriptions of people’s sinful behavior isn’t “loving” or “kind,” because it will give them feelbad.

    I am of the opinion that giving sinners feelbad (ie, confirming their own conscience’s condemnations of such behavior) is the requisite first step in evangelism – because if they don’t need to be saved from their sins, they’re hardly going to repent of them, are they? If you’re perfect as you are, you don’t need Jesus.

    Also I find the prospect of a healthy dose of social shaming is an excellent motivator when reason fails in the face of temptation. The entire OP article is essentially an admission that this mechanism works – it’s a long don’t-you-judge-me rationalization for why nobody should look down on Dianna even though she’s deliberately chosen to be a brazen slut and a declaration that she will self-righteously reject anyone who tries to warn her about the consequences of her behavior and rebellious attitude. But mostly I expect she hopes that it will serve to quiet her own conscience; consciences are much easier to sear if they don’t have backup from others.

  174. Boxer says:

    Dear Lyn87:

    At first I wasn’t sure if you had linked a deliberate parody, but somewhere in a corner of my mind where I prefer not to look often, was the knowledge that there are people like that out there… voting, breeding, holding position of authority. Yikes.

    I sorta suspect that it’s something like some weak looney’s wet dream in print, to be bossed around by some woman who will abuse him the way mama did. The author may well be some celibate nerd who is spewing out a fantasy.

    Not that there aren’t people out there living that weirdo “wife headship” lifestyle, but I think the fetishist types are more numerous. Even if there are a population of dweeby men who like this crap, the population of women who want to be responsible for such ninnies must be vanishingly small. Even damaged women want a man to be, like, manly; and it’s much more common for messed up women to be in relationships with violent nutcases than with wimpy ball-less wonders.

    This is part of a trend toward Goddess worship that picked up steam in the West when the hippies of the 1960’s and 1970’s turned into New Age middle managers in the 1980’s. Danie Amneus wrote about female-centric religious practices extensively in his book “The Case For Father Custody.” He described the stone-age Goddess cults in which both Miss Anderson from The Frisky and the nut-jobs in your link would feel right at home.

    In my estimation, the resurgence of new age “Dear Woman” types are roughly balanced by ultramasculine Pagans who are into Asatru and overplay a Conan the Barbarian mentality. In either case, it’s probably an outgrowth of men not really knowing how to be a man, at this point. We have lost our own culturally specific rites of passage into manhood, so individuals try to figure such stuff out on their own, with varying degrees of success. (Hell, you can’t even join the US Marine Corps now without going to boot camp with a bunch of chicks…)

    The same can be said of the bizarro “purity balls” where girls marry their fathers symbolically. Most of them probably start out with good intentions, and then get sidetracked into pathological weirdness along the way.

    Best, Boxer

  175. Pingback: the Revision Division

  176. Asher says:

    @BradA

    All the promises to bless in the OT were either made to specific individuals or they were made to peoples, as a polis. You, as an individual, have no sure access to either of those types of promises and to the latter only as a member of a people, a polis. Stories that tell of prosperity, ala Job, are merely examples of the power of God, not of the just desserts of serving Him, and they in no way should be taken as concrete examples of what any one person should expect from serving the Lord.

  177. Lovey says:

    Boxer …I think you would find ” Missing From Action’ an interesting read …it examines the effect of the Industrial Revolution on the family ..and especially the men and how they were basically ‘removed’ from their influence upon their families as head, teacher and trainer and spiritual leader….sadly it also tracks the feminizing of young men left in the care of women far beyond their boyhood and your comment struck a chord in how being brought into manhood has been left to a hit or miss and mostly miss ..led by whomever has had the best advantage to gain from the loss of learning among young men to grow into men who are led to care for , protect and provide for women …who themselves were then vulnerable for being turned against their own womanhood and lost so much due to the feminist movement …begun as sufferage and moved into more militant and destructive plans against both men and women …but ultimately left the children prime to be ‘raised’ by the state leading to a population easily led …ala the Prussian govt model..

    Read also ‘The Underground History of American Education” by John Gatto for more lengthy exposition on this agenda now well seen and less apt to be turned around sadly…

  178. infowarrior1 says:

    @Boxer
    Initiation rites were crucial from rescuing the boys from the tyranny of their mothers to be welcomed into the band of brothers where they can become their own man and hence return as Lord, Master and Protector of their future wives.

    Else we get the phenomenon of both simps and men who excel in all the manly attributes yet when it comes to women fold and submit.

  179. infowarrior1 says:

    @Red Knight

    The culprit is the Social purity movement:

    ” Social Purity Movement was a movement to elevate morality and improve the sexual treatment of women, largely through the abolition of prostitution and the double standard.
    From the last three decades of the nineteenth century to the end of World War I, an international crusade to purify sexual conduct focused on the need to reeducate society, particularly men, in the control of sexuality. Rooted in earlier women’s temperance and moral reform traditions, the American Social Purity movement was influenced by the “rescue” work of British prostitution reformers like Josephine Butler and W.T. Stead and the revelations of international groups for the suppression of “white slavery.”

    Composed of widely diverse groups divided on the issues of free love and women’s political and economic rights, the American movement, like its British counterpart, was united in the need for a single moral standard, and the word “chastity” figured frequently in the literature. Because Social Purists believed in woman’s need to resist sexual subjection by men, the movement had feminist participation. Suffragists were featured speakers at the first American Purity Congress in Baltimore in 1895, and Purists and feminists alike favored abolition, rather than regulation, of prostitution and moral equality in the relations between the sexes.

    Prostitution was clearly the focus of much Social Purity agitation. Americans were particularly effective in combating systems of regulated tolerance. Women’s voluntary religious and charitable organizations lobbied successfully to abolish legalized prostitution in St. Louis in the 1870s, and there were no further regulationist attempts in the United States thereafter. From the 1880s onward, Social Purists fought for a variety of abolitionist reforms, including prosecution of customers as well as prostitutes, improved prison conditions and rehabilitation for prostitutes, and centers and activities to safeguard the virtue of urban working girls. Movement advocates were also instrumental in establishing municipal vice commissions, raising the age of consent laws, and passing the 1910 Mann Act.

    Since its inception Social Purity was criticized, not without reason, as morally repressive. Women like Deborah Leeds, whose husband, Josiah, was an ally of the nation’s chief censor, Anthony Comstock, herself personified the movement’s censorship wing with her Department of Pure Literature. However, recent research has demonstrated that the movement was also dedicated to the dissemination of sex hygiene information, suggested by its motto “Purity through knowledge, not innocence through ignorance.”

    As Linda Gordon has pointed out, the birth control ideas of Social Purists were feminist in that advocates urged voluntary motherhood and woman’s control over her own body. Yet Social Purists were opposed to contraception and abortion. Furthermore, their eugenic arguments, which at first were aimed to increase woman’s power, foundered in a “cult of motherhood” essentially opposed to woman’s professional advancement.
    At the core of the Social Purity movement was the conviction that sexuality had to be controlled. Many reformers believed that because incontinence was basically associated with man, it was woman’s mission to reeducate him. To the extent that it accepted the idea of feminine moral superiority and, by implication, the traditional “separate sphere” for women, the movement was not fully feminist. Nonetheless, in urging women to resist sexual domination and exploitation, it aided the advancement of feminine autonomy.”‘

    http://gem.greenwood.com/wse/wsePrint.jsp?id=id614

  180. Lyn87 says:

    Boxer,

    Yeah… it was my remembrance of the “Dear Woman” video that helped me to realize that what I was reading wasn’t parody. (For those who haven’t checked out Boxer’s link: do so, it is… instructive.) I was still not completely convinced that it was real until I got to the comments. Good grief, there are some seriously damaged people out there.

    Side note: when I went to the article to get the simpering husband’s name, I realized that it was not capitalized, although his wife’s name was. Then I looked through the rest of the article and saw that all the male pronouns were in lowercase (which is grammatically correct), but all the female pronouns were capitalized (an honorific reserved for God – the real one: pagan gods don’t even get that in proper English grammar). His name is never capitalized, while hers is always capitalized. Even in his vows, he used a lower-case “i” to denote himself, and capitalized “You” to denote her. When she said her vows (if you can call them that), she did the opposite: for her, “I” was capitalized and “you” was in lower-case.” Likewise with “men” and “Women” (lowercase – uppercase). In-freaking-credible.

    It’s bad enough that there are women like the girl in the article, and the women into all that Goddess crap in your link, but the fact that grown men accept it, and consider themselves superior to other men because they grovel in awe of the Universal Feminine just blows my mind. Like you, I imagine the number of women who would want that for very long to be vanishingly small. But I don’t think even they want all men to be simpering eunuchs like “dennis.” Any woman who would want to be married to a man that literally kneels at her feet in public and declares that he is her property – a worm suitable only to do her bidding if she deigns to allow even that – is a damaged woman indeed. But surely no woman, even a messed up one like “Nancy,” would find that satisfying for very long before she wanted someone more… substantive. My guess is that most of those women are bi-sexual with heavy lesbian tendencies, or they are getting it on with actual men, probably with their husbands being commanded to watch. Nothing could be more emasculating to a man than being forced to watch as his wife is “serviced” – and properly – by another man, with her enthusiastic participation. (Its not like he’s ever going to elicit that sort of response from her, after all.)

  181. Pingback: Reality Versus Reason | Donal Graeme

  182. Lovey says:

    wow…. Many men are rightly resenting the way women have entered into their domain …and the PC expects men to ‘go along’ but the forced having to deal with women competing in what GOD actually gave Adam to do …before the Fall in that Work and keeping or guarding the garden was HIS god ordained part in protecting and providing in not just ‘material ways but emotional and spiritually leading a woman …and Jesus said NOT as the gentiles do in lording over …but the leader/head was to be self sacrificing.

    God told husbands to love their wives AS CHRIST LOVED the CHURCH and GAVE HIMSELF for her…but that did not imply becoming a door mat for either spouse! it was to demonstrate how GOD loves and initiates tenderness and care as well as wisdom in leadership.

    A man who is ignoring Christ as his head is not going to be ‘under the Lordship ‘ of the Lord and thus will take his position as head in terms of FLESH and thus we have the mess that denies the Lord and the important role of man to represent Christ rightly in how he relates to his wife.

    If a man listens to Christ he will not oggle other women which degrades himself and causes a wife to feel degraded in HIS EYES …thus she will retreat ….those women who are feminists have become so by having not been taught the truth of how God intended women to be protected first by fathers …GODLY fathers….and then by husbands.

    Protection of relationships by the biblical standard begins with the beam in one’s own eye …male OR female that the carnal fleshly nature does not laud itself and examines oneself in the mirror of the scriptures.

    The devil loves to encourage flesh …the Bible tells us that the ‘carnal mind is ENMITY AGAINST GOD ….’ ….a natural minded person will act upon his self will and will not submit to godly wisdom …does not know it …it is foolishness unto him” thus he is subject to the flesh and the god of this world …male or female will err GREATLY in relationship and take the world’s view of marriage and relationship …serving SELF first and that ends up as we see….

    The enemy is not the gender …it is the devil who is presently working both sides of the natural fallen world among natural minded fallen people to cause chaos and destruction.

    The thief comes not but to steal , kill and destroy , Jesus Christ came that we might have LIFE and have it more than abundantly AND HE IS LIFE.

    All who know not Jesus Christ as their Savior and LORD …risen again from the dead ‘know not love’ for God IS LOVE …the God of the Bible does not just love with soft words and flattery, good times and pleasure but will expose the lie and things that have been ‘killing’ people through their lack of understanding …The word of GOD is truth and it is understood by submitting to the Lord OF that Word …the Bible…and anyone who will receive the Word with meekness …will receive it unto Salvation.

    All else is a distraction from seeking the Truth who is Jesus Christ Lord of all found in the scriptures and not the new age isms and occult spiritisms that are being fed to those who do not know their Bibles.

  183. Bee says:

    @Mark,

    “I have watched this guy a few times.I really don’t know what to think of him.He seems like the Anthony Robbins of the pulpit(for lack of a better description).I have to hear him speak about the Jews or read a book of his before I form an opinion of him….”

    I have listened to a lot of sermons by Joel Osteen and he preaches a very practical Christianity which is good. He encourages Christians to get out of debt, to be generous, to be big tippers, to show kindness to others, to forgive others, to have good manners, to return the shopping cart at the grocery store, etc.

    I have never heard him say to pray for a new Cadillac or a mansion. I have heard him share, many, many times, that God blesses us so we can be a blessing to others, We should not just store up wealth for ourselves.

    When it comes to sex, marriage, divorce he is very blue pill. IMHO he is too casual about divorce and re-marriage. He also suffers from apex fallacy, high status, and pre-selection. At a young age he was able to find and marry an attractive women, have 2 kids, and not get divorced. So, he seems to think it is easy for everyone. Most other pastors have these same blindspots.

  184. Opus says:

    Mark cracks me up; he is definitely my favourite Red Sea Pedestrian.

    I had a look at a video of Osteen appearing with a woman who looked old enough to be his mother – I guess his wife, though my Gaydar was pinging – and that level of enthusiasm, such that he might be taken for a used car-salesman, would not go down well over here. A church the size of Earl’s Court and a feel-good message to match. To his credit, however, he was word perfect and articulate, handsome and well attired, perhaps he has missed his calling as a stand-up.

    I assume that the 20,000 seat Lakewood Church is not attended by the Dalrocks.

  185. Hank Flanders says:

    @Missy:
    “What kind of crap is this? All this post is generating is hate and negative judgement. Sure, this girl may have a viewpoint other than yours but to be honest who do you think you are? Take a look in the mirror, sir. We are all sinners and we do not have the right or authority to meddle and probe into the lives of other people. This post is anything but uplifting or helpful. You set a bad example to Godly men. There is so much scrutiny on women regarding sexual status. I’ve yet to see anyone out a magnifying glass to the male population who are simply ” sowing their wild oats.” This is wrong.”

    I love when people confuse hate and negative judgment of sinful behavior with hate for that sinner and negative judgment of that sinner’s heart. I also like how commenting about someone’s willfully and shamelessly published article, which is likely to encourage sin in others, is “probing and meddling” into that author’s life. YOU set a bad example by implying that we’re not supposed to recognize sin in others, even when they brazenly advertise it.

  186. Hank Flanders says:

    @Opus
    “I had a look at a video of Osteen appearing with a woman who looked old enough to be his mother – I guess his wife, ”

    I’m not sure who you saw, but Osteen’s wife isn’t a bad looking woman. However, after that incident the other week, I’m not sure she should be given a microphone. I have to wonder if Joel is thinking the same thing. I also wondered how Barack Obama felt after Michelle said, “For the first time in my adult life…” Well, you know the rest.

  187. Opus says:

    @Hank Flanders

    As it happens I don’t. What happened the other week? I just felt that a woman so caked in Make-up as the woman I saw could not be the wife of the youthful Joel Osteen.

  188. Hank Flanders says:

    Haha, OK. Anyway, she made some comments about how when we’re worshipping God, we’re not doing it for God. She said something like we’re doing it for ourselves, because it makes us happy, which makes God happy. A lot of people don’t agree with that, and I’m not sure if she’s standing by it or just got carried away in the moment, but a lot of people are taking issue with what she said. It’s on youtube if you’re interested.

  189. Opus says:

    @Hank Flanders

    Thanks. I found the clip – the very criticism that atheists would make, followed by a call from the glamorous Mrs Osteen to haaaaaapiness! (argumentum ad felicitas). Reminds me of the dim-witted stuff beauty contestants come out with and looking much the same – all she needs is a bathing suit.

  190. jbro1922 says:

    “Growing up in the purity movement as I did, you’re taught some very specific things about sex:
    Having sex outside of marriage will take away pleasure from sex within marriage.
    Having sex outside of marriage with make connection with your future spouse harder.
    Having sex outside of marriage means disappointing God, disappointing family, and causing unnecessary pain and heartache for yourself.
    Having sex outside of marriage will essentially destroy you, ruining your witness, your faith, your relationships.
    Having sex outside of marriage is the slippery slope to hedonistic atheism.”

    All these reasons are stupid. I know of churches that push this. And wonder why young people leave in droves. The only reason to remain a virgin until married is because God’s word commands us to. As true Christians, we want to be pleasing to God and follow His rules. Plain and simple. Until the people who go to church get this, there will always be problems.

    “Snowy, the problem is not so much that women’s entitlement mentality is insatiable. For some women that’s true, and for others it is not – I’ve known a lot of rock-ribbed, nose-to-the-grindstone, stand-by-her-man old girls in my day. Same with men – I’ve know my share of panty-waisted, self-centered, just-wanna-have-fun jackwagons, too (and neither the military nor the cloth makes men immune). The problem is the fact that we have a feminist culture and a feminist legal system that encourages that particular bad trait among women, and then rewards women when they succumb to it. Sadly, the churches, which ought to stand firm against this nonsense in the culture, is failing at the task of even policing it in their own pews.”

    This should be the quote of the day.

    ““When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. is thirsty enough to accept your dominance. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. act like men. Someone who values fairnesssupplicates as though his life depended on it, and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. both your shares of the housework, (cuz, like, you’re too busy being a strong independent woman to cook and clean for a treacly manbaby.) These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier.” funnier than watching the look on their face as you serve him with divorce papers after four years of marriage and run off with half his income to Acapulco with Rico the Pool Guy.””

    Love this! The more reviews I read of Sandberg’s book, the less I want to read it. Sounds like “Lean In: How to Exploit People for Your Gain.” I have a friend who is hunting for an alpha male as a dominant woman. She’s currently dominating her now boyfriend (they’re been on again off again for the last few years). I called her on it and now she may be avoiding me. Sounds exactly like this paragraph.

  191. Robin Munn says:

    Will wonders never cease? I actually agree with Mrs. Osteen about something! On the surface, at least, though I’m going to take it in a totally different direction than what she appears to have meant.

    I think that one common danger that Christians fall into is that “when we’re worshipping God, we’re not doing it for God … we’re doing it for ourselves.” But unlike what Mrs. Osteen seems to think, I don’t think that’s a good thing. Rather, I think it’s a danger to be strenuously avoided.

    The song “I’m Coming Back to the Heart of Worship” (which I dislike, but more on that later) is all about that danger, actually. The lyrics “I’m sorry, Lord, for the thing I’ve made it / When it’s all about you, it’s all about you, Jesus” are a confession that the writer had turned worship into an “all-about-me” experience (probably as an Alpha McWorshipleader status display / performance, would be my guess). And he’s recognizing the problem, confessing it, and promising to return. Very commendable.

    So, then, why don’t I like the song? Because while the song contains the lyrics “It’s all about you, Jesus”… it isn’t actually about Jesus. Or rather, it isn’t sufficiently about Jesus. Yes, it contains the one verse “King of endless worth / No one could express / How much you deserve.” But that’s it. The rest of the song is about the singer’s experience, or about the concept that “worship should be about Christ”. Which is a commendable thing, don’t get me wrong — but why is it being sung in church as a worship song? It’s a good piece of CCM… but as a worship song, it fails miserably when compared to, say, “Before the Throne of God Above.” Or, if you say it’s not fair to compare a modern piece to one that has stood the test of time for a century, then compare it to “In Christ Alone”, another modern piece. “In Christ Alone” is truly about Christ — it’s practically a mini-theology lesson. Whereas “Heart of Worship” is, at its core, still about the author’s experience — the very thing it says the author is trying to get away from. Oops.

    So Mrs. Osteen, while utterly wrong in the point she was intending to get across, has nonetheless done us a service by identifying a major problem in modern American churches. (Consider: how many churches do you know that play “Heart of Worship” on a regular basis? How many play “Before the Throne of God Above” on a regular basis?) That she thinks it’s a good thing says volumes about her, and why no Christian should listen to her (unless she repents of her false teaching, which I doubt will ever happen — but God does sometimes do miracles in people’s hearts, and I’m certainly not going to presume to say what He might or might not do). But even the proverbial stopped clock can be right twice a day, and in this case Mrs. Osteen has unintentionally pointed us to a very uncomfortable truth.

  192. Robin Munn says:

    And when I say “play (song) on a regular basis,” I mean have the congregation sing it as a worship song. Write in haste, and you’ll end up poorly choosing your words. Mea culpa.

  193. JDG says:

    The enemy is not the gender …it is the devil who is presently working both sides of the natural fallen world among natural minded fallen people to cause chaos and destruction.

    The devil is the enemy of Christians, and one of his most common tactics is to distort and deceive. Gender is a word that is being misused by feminist (who distort its meaning) to sell the lie that men and women are essentially the same, only women are better. The like to use the word in place of the word “sex”. It is to the point now that even dictionaries have changed the definition of the word.

  194. JDG says:

    Bee says:
    September 11, 2014 at 7:30 am

    He never warns of the consequences of sin or eternal judgement. If your best life is now, what does that say about your next one in the hereafter?

  195. JDG says:

    She said something like we’re doing it for ourselves, because it makes us happy, which makes God happy.

    Actually, this is in line with her husbands teachings.

  196. JDG says:

    Robin when I re-read my posts I see what you mean about writing in haste.

  197. anonymous_ng says:

    @Robin, you’ve identified one of the reasons I turned to the Orthodox church. Here is a portion from the liturgy.

    Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy on us.
    Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit,
    both now and ever and unto ages of ages AMEN

  198. Lyn87 says:

    Interesting point, Robin – I need to mull it over. I come from a hymn-singing background and I find much of the CCM lacking in some ways. I’ll grant that it tends to be more overtly worship-focused than a lot of hymns, but it also seems designed to elicit worshipful feelings. It’s not that I can craft a well-articulated objection to that, but I think it misses the point to a degree. Sure, coming into the presence of Almighty God ought to be a moving experience, but to pursue that feeling by stirring music is to put the cart before the horse – or so it seems to me. Who knows? Maybe it’s a chicken-egg thing that I’m just not “getting.”

    As Anonymous Reader was good-naturedly teasing me earlier – my musical education really is lacking. My brother got a big dollop of that gift, while I got practically none of it. If one’s “Musical Intelligence Quotient” (MIQ?) was an important and measurable quantity I would be considered a window-licking moron. Having said that, I refrain from presenting my thoughts as anything other than my own thoughts after many years of observation, and not deriving from scripture or musical expertise.

    But one of things I find lacking in CCM has nothing to do with the music, but with the words. The old hymnals are positively filled with solid theology. Most of the CCM I have encountered focuses heavily on things out of some of the Psalms and similar passages of scripture (in before… “there’s nothing wrong with Psalms” – I know there isn’t). But Christian music used to have a much broader theological range than it does now. Although not a hymn, Handel’s Messiah is entirely comprised of quotes from the King James Bible – every single word comes is a direct quote from scripture – and it is well over two hours in length. As for being “worshipful” – I still can’t listen to it without tears coming to my eyes.

    Or take “Amazing Grace.” Several CCM writers have “jazzed it up” for contemporary church-goers, and several songs are based on it, but you won’t find a much better example of both reverential worship and the state of fallen man in so few words than the original.

    But even the hymnals sometimes reflect a different mindset. The original words written by John Newton are not normally found in their entirely. I’ve never even see the original Stanza 5/6 until a few minutes ago when I was looking this up. And song leaders sometimes skip one or both of Stanzas 2 and 3 (“‘Twas Grace that taught my heart to fear…” and “Through many dangers, toils and snares…”)… too much feelbad for today, maybe? The original fourth stanza (“The Lord has promised good to me…” seems to usually make the cut, for some reason).

    Worse is what some people have done to the Isaac Watts classic, “At the Cross” where:

    ”Alas! and did my Saviour bleed,
    And did my Sovereign die?
    Would he devote that sacred Head
    For such a worm as I?

    is sometimes replaced with, “For sinners such as I?,” or “For such a one as I?”

    We can’t have feelbad about our sin, can we? But as Pancakeloach noted yesterday:

    I am of the opinion that giving sinners feelbad (ie, confirming their own conscience’s condemnations of such behavior) is the requisite first step in evangelism – because if they don’t need to be saved from their sins, they’re hardly going to repent of them, are they? If you’re perfect as you are, you don’t need Jesus.

  199. Lovey says:

    2 Peter 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:

    4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

    5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;

    6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;

    7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.

    8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

    9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.

  200. tz2026 says:

    She lost her virginity, which is irrecoverable.
    However she also seems to have lost her mind first. Perhaps she will find it.
    A mind is a terrible thing to lose.

  201. Buck says:

    Being over 50 and pretty aware, I know the tough, self denial road of God’s law pays rewards in the long term on earth and greater rewards for eternity. I well recall the friends and relatives who mocked and ridiculed me for staying away from drugs, partying, rampant promiscuity etc. They made their choice, I made mine. Now 40 years later father time has come calling and it’s not pretty. The divorces, the DUI arrests, the wrecked cars, the jail sentences, the bankruptcy, drug rehab costs, lost employment, denied opportunities, failing health, premature aging and deaths, birth defects attributed to prior drug use by parents.
    I don’t laugh, but I could, instead I mourn. God was never a cosmic killjoy denying fun, but a loving father admonishing right conduct to protect his children. I thank God every day that those spirits of decadence didn’t effectively whisper to me. Their message was enticing and many times I thought God abandoned me as I watched the pagans having their “fun”. Sure, I failed too, just not as much and not as harmfully.
    It’s really all about perspective, we either believe God is inherently “good” and he directs us out of love or we don’t. Sometimes God’s greatest blessing is a closed door, an unanswered prayer, a desire unmet.
    Just recently I ran into an old crush….OH MY GOD!!!! I’ve been thanking God for days that nothing every happened with her! Talk about a dodged bullet!

  202. Robin Munn says:

    @Lyn87 –

    Sure, coming into the presence of Almighty God ought to be a moving experience, but to pursue that feeling by stirring music is to put the cart before the horse – or so it seems to me. Who knows? Maybe it’s a chicken-egg thing that I’m just not “getting.”

    No, you’re “getting” it all right, because you’re entirely correct. Too many worship services I’ve attended have had a large element of chasing feelings. As a matter of fact, when I was doubting my faith my sophomore year of college, the worship services I attended during that time just created further doubts — because I could see the emotions on the faces of everyone around me, and I was feeling nothing. Which started me wondering, “Are we really getting these emotions from something real, like the Holy Spirit helping us to worship God as the Bible says? Or are we just working ourselves up into an emotional state, essentially manipulating our own emotions?”

    Now, of course, I’ve resolved my doubts… but I’d still answer “Both of the above” to that question of mine. It’s quite clear that sometimes (thankfully not all the time) we do manipulate our own emotions in worship services, or the worship leader is manipulating them for us. Almost never with malicious intent, I should add. (If I did think anyone was doing it with malicious intent, I’d be out of there so fast your head would spin, and I’d probably feel required to confront the church about the problem.) But by choosing the musical styles, or by putting a slow, contemplative number after a couple of fast, upbeat ones, the worship leader can make people feel what he wants them to feel — and the congregation is going to willingly go along with it. Now, if he’s choosing the songs well, and using ones with good theological lyrics, the feelings induced can be the genuine result of understanding God’s glory (in some infinitesimal way, since the full weight of His glory is far too large for the human mind to comprehend). That’s happened to me from time to time, and that’s what should be the goal of worship: to grasp God’s glory as best we can. But sometimes the feelings are induced not by contemplating God’s glory, but by the music itself, and that’s when it turns into unintentional manipulation. Those are the feelings that go away fast when you leave the service; the ones that come from truly grasping a small piece of how awesome God is… those feelings will stay with you. But the ones induced by the experience of being in a crowd of people all focused on the song, and letting the song flow over you… those feelings wash right out the moment you step outside the church building.

    And that is why worship leaders should be more careful. They only see the people’s reaction during the singing, so they think they’re doing people some spiritual good by drawing them closer to God. And if they’ve chosen good, “meaty”, theology-laden songs, then they probably have done people some good. But if they’ve just been giving people that “spiritual high*”, then they’ve done no lasting good — and therefore some harm. Because instead of giving people a genuine closer connection to God, that will last during the week when they encounter difficulties and temptations… they’ve just given them a temporary “high” that’s going to fade and leave them with no extra spiritual strength.

    Choosing worship songs well is more important than many people realize.

    * By the way, there’s a reason I’m using language that sounds like drug use. At one point I took a class on how the brain works. For one of my papers for that class, about the effect of drugs on the brain, I interviewed a Christian woman who had used drugs when she was in high school. The thing she told me that stuck in my mind was that when she was using drugs, the “high” she got from them felt spiritual — it felt indistinguishable from the experience of worshipping God. That explains a lot about several things (why people like the content-free style of worship, why marijuana users often talk about it in quasi-religious terms, even a lot about the hippie movement), but unpacking it will take more time than I have right now. I’ll try to remember to revisit this comment thread and write a new comment about my thoughts on seeking “spiritual highs”.

  203. BradA says:

    I am sure I got at least some replies since my last post, but I may not have time to spend on this for a while and it may be better to let it drop at that point. I wanted to let everyone know I wasn’t intentionally ignoring replies, I just don’t have time to respond now and may not for several days.

  204. Lyn87 says:

    Robin,

    I’m digging’ what you’re streamin,’ maaaaaaaaan.

    Sorry – I couldn’t help myself.

    It’s no coincidence that the word translated as “sorcery” in the KJV New Testament is the Greek work pharmakeuō. Strong’s number 5331:

    5331 pharmakeía (from pharmakeuō, “administer drugs”) – properly, drug-related sorcery, like the practice of magical-arts, etc. (A. T. Robertson).

    You probably already know this, but it’s the root word of modern English words like pharmacy and pharmaceutical. Like temple prostitution, the use of drugs (particularly hallucinogens) has been closely linked to pagan religious rituals all over the world for millennia.

  205. Robin Munn says:

    @Lyn87 –

    Heh.🙂

    Yeah, I first learned about the word pharmakeía several years ago. (It’s the word the Septuagint used for translating Exodus 22:18, for example, which suggests that they thought the word מכשפה, translated “witch” in the KJV, was someone who practiced that kind of ritual.) After my interview with “Mary” (funny how I don’t remember her real name anymore, but I do remember the pseudonym I used for her in my paper) and what she said about what a drug high felt like, I’m not at all surprised that drugs are linked to spiritual practices in many parts of the world.

    And earlier I said I’d write a separate comment unpacking the connection between drugs and the fake “spiritual high” that we can work ourselves up to, but now I’m not sure I need to write that separate comment to unpack it. If anyone needs me to unpack it, let me know and I’ll do my best, but I think I just need to say that we should be pursuing genuine knowledge of God, not a “spiritual high” that is, ultimately, a feeling we could produce by many artificial methods. (For example, self-hypnosis or drugs — and note that the way that some “spiritual highs” happen during worship services comes far too close to self-hypnosis to be healthy.)

    Having said all that, I do think I need to back off from my stated position a little bit. There are people for whom a simple song like “Jesus, Name above all names, Beatiful Saviour, Glorious Lord, Emmanuel, God is with us, Blessed Redeemer, Living Word” can help them enter into true worship of the Lord, contemplating His glory. For me, that song is far too simple: I need something with far more spiritual “meat” to it, because I need my intellect to be engaged in order to worship God with my whole self. But there are those who can worship the Lord with just those simple words, who are not engaging in self-hypnosis nor in anything fake or artificial. I don’t want to suggest that their less-intellectual approach is wrong, or somehow less worthy in any way than my approach that needs my intellect engaged.

    But note that the song I chose, “Jesus, Name above all names” is all about Jesus, and isn’t focused on the worshipper’s experience at all. It may not engage my intellect to the level that I need, but it’s a good worship song. Because the song encourages the singer to contemplate Jesus, not his/her own navel. That’s the difference, ultimately: where the song draws your focus to.

  206. KP says:

    Robin M.,

    Re “Heart of Worship” as a congregational worship song–oh my yes, I’m with you 1000% on this.

    In your 7:57pm comment, I think you come down a bit too hard on the “by the music itself” aspect. I have no trouble with that, rightly done, for the simple reason that I think we react to music the way we do because God made us that way. But note the caution “rightly done” is important here.

    That being said, the most moving musical worship experience I ever had was just me and a college buddy, sitting in my dorm room playing our guitars and singing whatever worship song came next to our minds. Totally unplanned, totall uncontrived…

    Lyn87,

    coming into the presence of Almighty God ought to be a moving experience

    Sure, but who can be failed to be moved by “The God of Abraham Praise” or “Immortal, Invisible”? I think one of the BIG problems with CCM (and I say this as a practioner with several decade’s experience) is that it’s all too new and so no filtering has (yet) taken place. The worship leader / minister of music hears something on CCM radio, thinks it’s catchy (or gets requests from members of the congregation) and BINGO it’s in next Sunday’s worship. I can’t begin to tell you how many questionable, if not downright ghastly, songs of this type I helped perpetrate on our unsuspecting congregation. (If you learn that I’m now on a self-initiated long-term leave from this mileau, and wonder if there’s relation: heck yeah!)

  207. Robin Munn says:

    @KP –

    Yeah, that’s another place where I’m realizing I need to back off my position just a little bit. At other times, I’ve commented on songs like “I Can Only Imagine” commenting that their really boring tune makes me unable to pay attention to their lyrics*. The corollary is that a good (musically interesting) tune is necessary to make a good worship song. And I can imagine something like “Jesu, Joy of Man’s Desiring” bringing people to worship God without any words at all, if it’s done in the context of a worship service. Though there’s nothing inherent in “Jesu, Joy of Man’s Desiring” that would make people think about God other than the title, which is why it is also used very effectively in many secular contexts as well. Still, it’s a fantastic piece, which Bach wrote soli Deo gloria, and I would never want to imply that its lack of lyrics means it could not be used as a worship piece. And as you said, our reaction to music was created by God and can be used properly to help us worship Him. But as you point out, “rightly done” is very important, and most of my comments were about times when it’s not being rightly done.

    So thank you for that comment; I agree with you. Oh, and one other thing you said is quite insightful:

    … it’s all too new and so no filtering has (yet) taken place …

    Are you familiar with Sturgeon’s Law**? If you aren’t, the gist is that science-fiction author Theodore Sturgeon was once asked why most science-fiction was poorly-written crap. He answered, “90% of science fiction is crap, because 90% of everything is crap.” I once owned a hymnal from the early 1900’s (I may still have it somewhere, but it might have been lost or given away in one of my moves across continents), and realized that most of the songs in there were trite, musically boring, or both. So what’s going on with modern worship music is that 90% of it is crap, but 10% is good and will ultimately survive the test of time. With old hymns, though, the 90% that was produced that was crap has been filtered out already, and all we have is the 10% that was really good. Which is why you can pick just about any well-known hymn and it’s better than 90% of modern worship songs, because the hymns have been filtered and the worship songs have not yet been filtered. And that, in turn, is why the biggest job of a good worship minister is to filter, and learn how to tell the good from the bad (or the merely mediocre) in CCM. Some of what’s being produced is really good, and will survive the test of time and still be sung 100 years from now if Christ delays His return for that long. (I find that most of what Keith & Kristyn Getty have produced has been excellent, for example, and would not be surprised if “In Christ Alone” is still being sung in the year 2114.) But 90% of what we’re singing in churches now will be forgotten in fifty years, let alone a century or two.

    * And I find the lyrics of “I Can Only Imagine” to be pretty good. While the surface of the lyrics is about the worshipper’s experience of seeing Jesus, I find that unlike “Heart of Worship” its focus ends up being on Jesus instead of on the worshipper’s navel. So if it had a halfway-decent tune, I could approve of it. But its tune, with the long, monotonous lines sitting on the same note with a change only at the end of the line, just puts me off completely.

    ** Which I initally wrote as “Spurgeon’s Law” before I corrected myself. No, silly brain of mine, Charles Spurgeon was not a science fiction author.🙂

  208. KP says:

    Robin,

    Au contraire, “Jesu…” is a chorale, it has words:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesu,_Joy_of_Man%27s_Desiring#English_text

    And yes I’m familiar with Sturgeon’s Law; that’s the whole point: Isaac Watts had his off days, too, and those hymns didn’t make it into our hymnals.

  209. Lyn87 says:

    Robin,

    I think you’re onto something with the filtering bit. Like I wrote, my musical education is lacking and I have practically no gift for music at all.

  210. Opus says:

    au contraire…

    There is a Chorale at the end of Cantata 147 where Bach has harmonized an old Hymn Tune and provided an orchestral accompaniment in triplets, the choir singing the hymn to the words ‘Jesus bleibet meine Freude (Jesus is my boyfriend). The English words (Jesu, joy of man’s desiring) is a complete re-write by Robert Bridges. Outside of its original context and scoring especially if a soprano decides to Aaah aaah aaah the triplets it is just awful. You’ll find the Chorale (minus triplets) in your copy of the Riemenschneider.

    What do you mean you don’t have a Riemenschneider.

  211. Pursue Alpha says:

    This is really sad yet very simple. Other than the obvious sexual immorality she is promoting, if you look deeper into what she has stated, finding a husband became her god (the idol) and being “pure” previously was her good deed or “works” to obtain that husband. The root cause of the big messy sin in our lives usually is something very simple. This starts at the First Commandment “You shall have no other gods before me” Exodus 20:3. Hardcore idolatry (the husband) like this is tough because she may have been raised in a “works” based church / family / etc. Legalism in the church / Christianity is nasty because it removes what Salvation truly is (God’s grace / Jesus work on the cross). Now she has totally flipped because God didn’t give her what she wanted (the husband) and is preaching a false doctrine.

  212. Boxer says:

    Legalism in the church / Christianity is nasty because it removes what Salvation truly is (God’s grace / Jesus work on the cross). Now she has totally flipped because God didn’t give her what she wanted (the husband) and is preaching a false doctrine.

    The irony is that if she’d just change her attitude (what I’d imagine would be a real “repentance” in Christian terms) she’d get a husband almost immediately. Then her article would read like:

    I’m writing to all the young women and men today who think it’s fun to waste their youths whoring around, chasing carnal pursuits. This is actually very damaging in the long run. I did it for a while, and I’m terribly embarrassed at my poor judgment.

    Thankfully, my mother and father intervened, and I quickly realized that acting like a trashy ho’ was a bad idea, not only for my own physical and mental health, but also for society. I immediately sought out serious help, both with a psychoanalyst, and with my local (priest/rabbi/minister) to get to the bottom of my bad behavior.

    After about a year, I met Carl, who is a very nice accountant, and we got married. I am very lucky that Carl doesn’t hold my history of bad behavior against me, and I know how fortunate I am to have found a decent man at all. I make it my business to keep house for him, and work hard at a part time job to help with bills. We are trying to have a baby. I am the lucky one, since I managed to get out of this loser lifestyle before I picked up a disease, became a skank-ho single mom, or had to abort an illegitimate child. My hope is that I can save some other kids from making a train-wreck of their lives like I almost did…

    That, my brothers, would be someone I could respect as a human being; and that might be someone who would make a decent wife. She’d also be someone that I would take at face value, as a religious woman who lives the discipline of her faith.

    Boxer

  213. ballista74 says:

    Robin,
    This has been an interesting discussion on music. However, what I find missing in today’s songs is a mental engagement. The lyrics are pablum in that sense. Much more so in that there are no admonishments, and consequently nothing to give mental assent and purity of heart towards. The word “understanding” is used in the Scriptures. As it is written:

    For God is the King of all the earth: sing ye praises with understanding. (Psalm 47:7)

    What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. (1 Corinthians 14:15)

    Simply put, most of the lyrics are nonsense. Coupled with the common use of projection systems, and the quick switching of songs to match the CCM market, it just becomes impossible for most to get the chance to learn the words of the songs and digest what they mean in order to be able to give assent to them in their hearts. Never mind that theological difficulties exist in some of the songs that aren’t nonsense. The idea before the Lord is not to make the noise, but to be genuine about it and not be false flattery.

    Overall, the old hymns were simply much better because they had the correct theological grounding, and the lyrics weren’t nonsense. You literally had to digest the words into Ephesians 5:18-19 and Colossians 3:16.

  214. Pingback: Random Musings And Links- #5 | Donal Graeme

  215. Robin Munn says:

    @Opus –

    Your translation of “Jesus bleibet meine Freude” as “(Jesus is my boyfriend)” is incorrect. The German word friend, which can also carry the meaning of boyfriend, is Freund, with an n. Freude means joy. “Jesus bleibet meine Freude” means “Jesus remains my joy” or “Jesus is still my joy”.

    If you want to see a full translation of Bach’s words, my German isn’t good enough to translate Bach’s words myself, but I do have enough German to tell when a translation is a “free translation” (meaning it’s basically writing another set of lyrics that more-or-less resembles the first) and when it’s being literal. And this translation is a pretty literal one:

    http://www.emmanuelmusic.org/notes_translations/translations_cantata/t_bwv147.htm

    The chorus at the end, which starts with “Jesus bleibet meine Freude”, is translated thus:

    Jesus shall remain my joy,
    my heart's comfort and sap,
    Jesus shall fend off all sorrow,
    He is the strength of my life,
    the delight and sun of my eyes,
    the treasure and wonder of my soul;
    therefore I will not let Jesus go
    out of my heart and sight.
  216. KP says:

    Robin, indeed:

    “O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
    …”

  217. Opus says:

    ‘Jesus is my boyfriend’😉

  218. Edwin says:

    guys, come on, The Frisky? This and all these MRA sites have some good analysis in them that can be hard to get anywhere else, but you guys kinda tend to beat the dead horse of “women are terrible” and “everyone is terrible and hates men and marriage” thing.
    The Frisky is CLEARLY not representtive of church-going people. The churches may be fucked up on the marriage issue, but even they wouldn’t go this far. Hell, the author’s claims about her Christian life are probably fake; note how vague they are.

  219. John Nesteutes says:

    @Missy

    I’ve yet to see anyone out a magnifying glass to the male population who are simply ” sowing their wild oats.” This is wrong.

    I spent several mornings with a young man, exhorting him to put aside sexual immorality and to obey 1 Corinthians 7:1: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.”

    He doesn’t seem to be choosing to submit to God, so we are facing the prospect of removing him from fellowship. Primarily because it sets a horrible example for freshly-saved young men & women who have laid aside sexual immorality.

    Few things are as sweet as watching new believers stop having sex with their boyfriend/girlfriend, move out of the apartment where they’re shacking up, and embrace righteousness. The other partner usually either also gets saved, or leaves for good. (We advise a short engagement and marriage after the couple can be separate and not fornicate for six months.)

    Get out there, preach the gospel, and let Jesus save people from sexual sin.

  220. John Nesteutes says:

    @ballista74

    Find a fellowship where the old hymns are still sung.

  221. Pingback: Lightning Round – 2014/09/17 | Free Northerner

  222. Pingback: This one made me laugh with Job like joy…..

  223. Pingback: Diana Anderson: A Wolf in the Pen | Free Northerner

  224. Pingback: Truth Is Subtle | The Society of Phineas

  225. Rhodes says:

    Sad.

  226. Frank K says:

    Sluts 4 Jesus. Churchianity at it’s finest. Perhaps had Luther and Calvin known this was going to happen, they might not have revolted.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s