Never let a crisis go to waste

In my last post I described the surprising wisdom included in a New York Times piece on marriage:

“The way to stay married,” my mother says, “is not to get divorced.”

This is in line with both the Bible and science, but is contrary to modern Christian thought.  In the modern Christian view unhappy wives are an opportunity to invert biblical headship via the wakeup call.

Focus on the Family offers a striking example of this new and unbiblical view of marriage in their radio program Moving From Loneliness to Intimacy in Your Marriage*.  The program is an interview with Christian relationship expert Dr. David Clarke by Focus on the Family president Jim Daly.

The show opens with three clips of women with petty grievances about their marriages.  Dr. Clarke sums the complaints up:

Well, these little stories we heard just a few minutes ago from these ladies, I have heard a million times at my seminars, in my therapy office, oh, just one after the other, good solid Christian women. I am so lonely. I love my husband. He’s a good guy. He’s not in a serious sin and … and he loves me, but … and then they go into what these ladies just said. We’re not together a lot. There’s no real intimacy. I’m dying inside. And the key is, they’re not letting the husband know that. The guy has no clue. He’s perfectly happy. So, when that woman hits the wall and leaves him, he is the most stunned guy on earth.

Clarke’s focus is “catching” these women before they are compelled to divorce, by teaching them how to threaten their husbands into better communication.  He explains that the solution is for the wives to take charge, and for the husbands to let them take charge, which he claims is God’s plan:

This is what God has done to us (Laughing). Now He’s got a master plan, because if we work together and let the woman actually teach us, ’cause she has many more skills interpersonally that we will … ever will have. She’s got a Ph.D. in emotional intimacy and spiritual intimacy very often. We have like a third-grade education. So, we have to let the woman kind of guide us, teach us. And then we come together, we get it.

The premise here is that women are better at marriage because they are unhappy being married.  Since men tend to be for the most part content in honoring their vows, and women tend to be unhappy doing so, this is proof that women are better at marriage than men.  It isn’t just headship that Dr. Clarke is turning upside down;  virtue has become vice, and vice has become virtue.  Being discontent is a virtue according to Clarke, and being content is a sign of foolishness and inferiority.  Also note that Daly is right on board with this, and Daly is the president of Focus of the Family.

To solve the problem of “communication”, Dr. Clarke explains that husbands need to carry a notepad with them at all times and take notes so they will have things to talk about with their wives.

Even if it’s, “I bought batteries at the store for” you know, on sale for 5 bucks (Laughing). Okay, it’s a start. But I … she knows I care about her. But I’ve gotten better with this. I know what she wants. She wants personal things, emotions, anger, frustration, memories that come into my mind. Guys, this happens to guys during the day, but it’s just whoo! It’s gone if you don’t jot it down.

The problem, Dr. Clarke explains, is that wives aren’t nagging their husbands enough to get them to communicate, and this is exacerbated by pastors and others teaching wives to love their husbands (emphasis mine):

If you just love your husband, uh … treat him well, meet his needs, then he’s gonna turn around and just love you back the way you really need to be loved. Absolutely false. He’s a guy. He doesn’t know how anyway. He doesn’t know there’s a problem. And if you keep loving him, he’ll think everything’s fine. He will never get it. You have to get the man’s attention. You gotta sit down and say, “Honey, I’m not happy in our marriage. Here’s why. Let’s change it.”

Dr. Clarke explains that following the advice in the Bible in 1 Pet 3 won’t work.  Instead, wives need to threaten their husbands:

You gotta get a man with a shovel to the head, metaphorically speaking, of course.

He explains in detail how they should do this:

The woman’s got to tell the man, “Look, Honey, I want to have a meeting with you in three days. It’s about our marriage. It’s gonna be very serious. In fact, it’s extremely serious and I want the kids aren’t gonna be in the house when we have this meeting.” And you set a time and that will get his attention. A decent guy, it’s like, wow! This is serious.

Men need to be threatened because when it comes to marriage they are idiots (emphasis mine).

You see a movie. You don’t see a movie to see a mov … a guy thinks … he thinks …. sees a movie just to see the movie. No, no, no, no, dummy, moron. I’m the same way. You see the movie to talk with your wife about the movie afterward. That’s the whole point. And if finally when the mov … of what it reminds you of. Boy, that couple, that one scene reminded me of when we were dating, you know, back and we were at the Del Coronado in San Diego and we were on the beach and we snuck in and used their Jacuzzi.

Later however he acknowledges that both the husband and wife are to blame.  The husband is to blame for being an idiot, and the wife is to blame for not nagging and threatening him enough:

We’ve gotta teach this man skills. First, we have to get his attention. I’m not happy. And the woman will admit, I’m part of the problem. I’ve not shared my needs. And so, we go through a series of steps where she shares her needs very clearly.

Daly and Clarke tie this back to Proverbs 21:9, explaining that the lesson of the proverb is that stupid husbands make their wives be insufferable by not communicating (emphasis mine):

All the resentments make a woman who’s cold, who’s mean, who’s sarcastic, who will pay you back. (Laughing) Oh, it’s terr … and she doesn’t want to; she’s just going to.

Daly jumps on to the stupid husband bandwagon with:

Let’s give a little clue here. You talk about uh … a man’s density (Laughing), you know, but that we’re dense generally.

Dr. Clarke reiterates that while divorce is technically a sin, women can’t be expected to honor their vows if their husbands don’t “communicate” the way wives demand:

Christians now, they have no biblical reason. “I’m unhappy; you haven’t met my needs,” is not a biblical reason to get divorced.

But women especially, are walking away. And so, I’m trying to stop that. They don’t have to if the man would really change. But a lady will love a man with every ounce of her heart until she’s finally … and not having honest … being honest about her needs or “I’m very unhappy,” until the last day. And then when that last (Sound of snap) ounce is gone, boom! I call it hitting the wall. She’s done. And you literally cannot … other than an act of God, get that woman back. She’s through.

The solution of course, is to buy Dr. Clarke’s book.  As luck would have it, if you donated to Focus on the Family immediately after the program ran, you would have received a copy for free.  However, this isn’t merely about money.  Focus on the Family believes strongly that biblical headship has it backward, and that wives are supposed to be in charge.

See Also:

*H/T Oscar.

This entry was posted in Attacking headship, Book of Oprah, Church Apathy About Divorce, Disrespecting Respectability, Divorce, Focus on the Family, Jim Daly, Threatpoint, Turning a blind eye, Wake-up call, Whispers, Wife worship. Bookmark the permalink.

280 Responses to Never let a crisis go to waste

  1. Pingback: Never let a crisis go to waste | Reaction Times

  2. rugby11ljh says:

    “Wives are suppose to be in charge.”
    That’s familiar

  3. Cane Caldo says:

    This is what God has done to us (Laughing). Now He’s got a master plan, because if we work together and let the woman actually teach us, ’cause she has many more skills interpersonally that we will … ever will have. She’s got a Ph.D. in emotional intimacy and spiritual intimacy very often. We have like a third-grade education. So, we have to let the woman kind of guide us, teach us. And then we come together, we get it.

    There’s the imaginary goddess, again.

  4. Pingback: Never let a crisis go to waste | Neoreactive

  5. snowdensjacket0x0x0 says:

    So where are we supposed to turn to? I’ve more or less abandoned my church for all the reasons outlined in this blog. My brothers at church are angry about it but I’m not going to support a church that is teaching anti-Biblical nonsense. I can learn to go against Biblical teaching from secular society. I don’t need to support a church that is only teaching more that goes against the scriptures.

    So what do we do? I’ve made my problems perfectly clear and was told, basically, to sit down and shut up.

  6. The Question says:

    “He’s a guy. He doesn’t know how anyway. He doesn’t know there’s a problem. And if you keep loving him, he’ll think everything’s fine.”

    That has got to be one of the most terrifying things I have ever read on the topic of marriage, especially the second sentence. As I’ve said many times, simply flip the gender around and you see how horrible it is; you also see the hypocrisy in what they advise.

    “If you just love your wife, uh … treat her well, meet her needs, then she’s gonna turn around and just love you back the way you really need to be loved. Absolutely false. She’s a broad. She doesn’t know how anyway. She doesn’t know there’s a problem. And if you keep loving her, she’ll think everything’s fine.”

    See what I mean? This is the exact opposite of what they tell men. They tell the husbands that if their wife isn’t happy it’s their fault and they need to they perform and earn it; if they do, to her satisfaction, she will turn around and love them back.

    Yet they tell the women that she shouldn’t even bother to try to meet his needs; in fact, if she isn’t happy she actually rid herself of any sense of martial responsibility and place the burden on him to make her happy.

    Decoding the Matrix isn’t hard, but when you do, it’s appalling the kind of atrocious what you find.

  7. Anonymous Reader says:

    I don’t usually laugh out loud while reading Churchian marriage advice, but did this time. This stuff is bordering on parody, it is so bad. But heck, if it makes money for a nonprofit then it must be good, right? So why hold back to just one advice market?

    Focus on the Family should branch this approach out, the marriage market is too narrow. Managerial consulting is much more lucrative. All Focus needs to do is help companies by finding the most unhappy and dissatisfied employees & put them in charge of all the internal focus groups, managerial retreats, etc.

    Then there’s k-12 education, Focus could benefit many schools, maybe starting with the privates, by setting up seminars for teachers and administrators. In these seminars the whiniest brats would be consulted on how to “improve the educational experience”.

    I wonder how much money Focus would make by charging schools or companies to pay attention to the most rebellious, discontented and downright obnoxious students / employees when making decisions about curriculum or business plans?

    Say, I have a question: does Focus use this particular problem solving approach within their own organization? Do the managers of Focus go out of their way to find the most dissatisfied, unhappy employees and give them power to fire the management, I wonder? Surely they do, because if it works so well in marriages it must work just as well in nonprofits like Focus, right?

    I’m certain that nobody at Focus would be so big a hypocrite as to basically take the approach of “Do as we say, not as we do”.

  8. From memory, I stopped reading a David Clarke book some years ago, as it was full of the same kind of tripe.

    What I can’t understand is why a wife would want the end result of a carefully trained husband? Just get a puppy…

  9. Anonymous Reader says:

    What I can’t understand is why a wife would want the end result of a carefully trained husband?

    I can answer that in two words: “Tamed. Alpha”, or if you prefer “Fried. Ice.”

  10. donalgraeme says:

    There’s the imaginary goddess, again.

    Yup. Our modern day Astarte, if you will.

  11. Boxer says:

    Dear Snowden’s Jacket:

    So what do we do? I’ve made my problems perfectly clear and was told, basically, to sit down and shut up.

    Two choices:

    1. Quietly approach other solid family men in the congregation and try to get everyone together for a monthly bible study or other such thing. Get a few guys on the regular who get some hardcore redpill truths, then leave and start your own church.

    2. Run for the board of the church or otherwise try to get into an administrative position. Fuck this place up from the inside. It doesn’t deserve to survive if it is teaching feminism.

    The second choice will take a lot of discipline and is a long-term thing, but has the potential to be fun if you have the stomach for it. The first is probably more practical. Either way, read Sun Tzu, Che Guevara and (the great Christian strategist) Baltasar Gracian for moral support.

    http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/aww/

    Most importantly: don’t give these faggots any of your money. These feminist priests/rabbis need to be put out in the street post haste. Most of them have never worked a real job in their lives, which is why they resent the real men in the congregation so much. Anyone who spreads feminism and destroys families is your deadly enemy. That’s true even if he turns his collar around and calls himself “father”.

    Good Luck,

    Boxer

  12. JDG says:

    Focus on the Family offers a striking example of this new and unbiblical view of marriage in their radio program Moving From Loneliness to Intimacy in Your Marriage*.

    Just one more reason why FOtF is not allowed to be aired in our home. Those guys went of the rails a long time ago.

  13. JDG says:

    So what do we do? I’ve made my problems perfectly clear and was told, basically, to sit down and shut up.

    Pray first. Then, since they rejected your attempts to correct them with scripture, rebuke them to their faces in the name of Jesus using the scriptures they are ignoring as a testimony against their bad behavior (unless you have reason to believe you should take a different approach). Don’t let them intimidate you when their behavior is in conflict with clear biblical instruction. That’s what I would do. After that rather or not to look for a more Bible based congregation may be more clear to you.

  14. Hawk&Rock says:

    How any young churchian man could listen to this hogwash and still look forward to marriage is beyond me. This clownification of husbands has become a boring parody of itself at this point.

    The good news is that this is a self-correcting process. Liars like FOTF and their ilk and the churchians who follow them will gradually fail to marry and reproduce. Traditional faithful Christians will keep on keeping on, have large stable families and eventually outnumber those who fell prey to false prophets.

    The bad news is there will be lots of misery and ruined lives until then.

  15. >The premise here is that women are better at marriage because they are unhappy being married.

    Ha! Terrific.

  16. jeff says:

    Dalrock,

    You missed one:
    “Jim: Now given the differentiation that we talked about between Christians and non-Christians, you would think that our walk with the Lord, our practices, our disciplines, reading Scripture, understanding what the Lord has done in male and femaleness, we’d better understand this. But you’re saying that basically there’s no difference statistically uh … about women–Christian or non-Christian–that feel lonely in their marriages. Why is that? It sounds like we utterly fail.”

    Uh, because there is no difference between how non christian women and christian women act.

    Where’s Lilac and LeeLee when you need them!

    At least Jim and Clarke ADMIT that they FAIL utterly…. giggle giggle, ’cause that is a sweeping statement that those who have gone RP do not agree with!

  17. Why would women want to marry such clueless idiots?

  18. Ann Kellett says:

    Snowden, see if there is an Orthodox Church near you. This is the true church–the one Roman Catholicism split away from–and their services are truly awe inspiring.

  19. Looking Glass says:

    Credit to Dalrock for getting through that stuff. After about the 3rd section, my response is thus:

    “Get bent, you whores.”

    In a slightly related topic, a question: does throwing a Bible at someone count as being violent or proper correction via the Word? (I honestly would like some answers, as this really is a natural tendency I appear to have.)

  20. The problem is the rebellious woman won’t screw her husband. The desperate husband becomes even more unattractive and a death spiral ensues.

    NONE of this nonsense the Churchians teach interrupts the death spiral or makes men more attractive to their wives but does precisely the opposite. Talking to a woman turns off the tingles. She doesn’t want the “emotional intimacy” of a mangina or a man who is “present.” She wants an emotional LEADER who is stoic, confident, and who screws her like a cave man. She wants a strong, confident man- not a shell of a man who is constantly told he is an inferior creature while she is a supreme Goddess of light- why she even has a PhD! In IMPORTANT topics like “emotional intimacy.”

    Any man who follows this advice will get a woman who is so insufferably pleased with her victory she doesn’t notice that her little itchy, bitchy private parts are dry as the Sahara. Any man who follows this advice increases his risk of divorce by orders of magnitude.

  21. I have to say this is almost the advice we give on Married Red Pill:

    “SHE’S a GIRL. SHE doesn’t know how anyway. SHe doesn’t know there’s a problem. And if you keep loving HER, She’ll think everything’s fine.”

  22. Pedat Ebediyah says:

    These guys can’t be serious, but, sadly, I know they are.

    It’s actually quite disgusting. One could lose their religion if ever they found themselves in any proximity of these virulent apostate counterfeits. Bitch asses!

  23. gunner451 says:

    Hawk&Rock,

    The problem with assuming that the don’t reproduce and as such will die out is that you are looking at this from a biological stand point rather than a spiritual stand point. They do’n have to reproduce because they have access to your offspring through school, the media, Internet, friends, etc. Look at the vast majority of kids, they may have been born to solid Christian parents but the world can turn them into son’s of the Devil quite easily, and sadly most often do. You can protect your kids somewhat by home schooling but the influence of our fallen society is too strong for many of them.

    As far as what FotF is peddling I do hope that they eventually crash and burn but they probably won’t as this has been the thrust of FotF since it’s inception (in my blue pill days I used to listen to them and send them money, so I’m very familiar with the crap they are selling, has not changed in 20 years by my estimate). Organizations like this thrive on catering to the lusts of women and so will never change, if they did they’d end up like the world wide church of God (when the son took over from his heretic of a father and tried to turn the organization into a true Christian organization it lost almost all of it’s members and financial support). These guys know which side their bread is buttered on so expect this to continue, the only thing we can do is try to keep our women from listening to it. In my case that’s a lost cause as my wife love to read these kind of things, it feeds her anger against me and provides her easy justification for her rebellious nature.

    Lastly would recommend “Grace to You”, they are unapologetically against this sort of stuff and tell it like it is. You can down load the sermons for free and I can guarantee that you’ll be challenged by them.

  24. snowdensjacket0x0x0 says:

    Thanks for the advice everyone. I’ve tried to talk to several of the men in private but they basically seem to be worshipping women and even the most open minded of them has told me it is our duty to obey and that the church leadership is addressing it. It doesn’t seem to matter how often I point out that addressing the problems of marriage by basically advocating women use the threat point of divorce is not actually supporting marriage. But supporting divorce.

    I’ve given up on them now.

    There are four orthodox churches in my area. I guess it’s time to start attending those and see if I can find a decent one.

  25. Miserman says:

    bluepillprofessor wrote: Talking to a woman turns off the tingles. She doesn’t want the “emotional intimacy” of a mangina or a man who is “present.” She wants an emotional LEADER who is stoic, confident, and who screws her like a cave man.

    I want to believe this, but time and again, women keep marrying these manginas and usually meet them while at college. This tells me that modern feminist women have actually become the weak, useless little wallflowers they continue to rail against. They are literally too fragile to live with a genuine leader. Oh, the irony of it all!

  26. @Cane

    “There’s the imaginary goddess, again.”

    She isn’t imaginary. She is real. Khali is the embodiment of all women. A bottomless pit of negative satisfaction, an endless gravity well that seeks less than nothingness. Endless cravings, endless yearnings, destroyer of contentment, AWALT

  27. Women hate your happiness more than you could ever hate anything. All women despise a happy man, they loath relaxation and seek only to meddle in all things, to create chaos and destruction, perpetual drama, slaves who must build and then tear down. You are their puppet, you must dance at their whim.

  28. Peace is a universe full of silence.

  29. Paniym says:

    You know it just sounds like the same Sh*! I’ve been hearing from the church since the 70’s about women being unhappy in their marriage.

    Women search their hearts and souls for reasons why they are unhappy but all they come up with is the same crap that been drilled into christian men’s psyches for generations now. Women think (and modern Christianity agrees) that the problem is poor communication, emotional distance, hubie’s cluelessness, etc. Christian men buy in to this load of crap and capitulate that the problem must be that their not being emotional, sensitive and thoughtful enough (read…feminine, beta enough). Their wives, the church and all of society has been telling them the same thing for the last 50 years.

    It’s now mind-blowing for me to see that women who( supposedly) are more in touch with their emotions and their internal workings always come to this same errant conclusion. (That husbands are clueless, emotionally distant, not in touch with their emotions, etc). Then when their husband responds by becoming what the wives say they want these same women end up despising and loathing their husbands, (and in my case actually literally hating me).

    As taught in the Red Pill World women subconsciously are attracted to masculine men and the last thing they really want or need is what they think and say they want. They subconsciously want strong men. They want to follow a man and not lead a man. They want a man to take control. They want and need to join the man’s frame and not have the man join theirs. I still don’t get it. Why can’t women see this in themselves??? It’s such a dichotomy.

    One last thing………. Rollo is right. BEHAVIOR TRUMPS ALL. How women behave trumps all the feminist influenced christian teaching and cultural inculcations to the contrary. Behavior trumps all. Sad thing is that it’s taken 50 years to realize the Bible is correct after all. When looking at the Bible through a Red Pill Lens you realize it really teaches the truth about masculinity and fulfilling marriages.

  30. Dalrock says:

    @bluepillprofessor

    I have to say this is almost the advice we give on Married Red Pill:

    “SHE’S a GIRL. SHE doesn’t know how anyway. SHe doesn’t know there’s a problem. And if you keep loving HER, She’ll think everything’s fine.”

    That’s nothing to be proud of.

    Loving and leading aren’t mutually exclusive, and in fact a Christian husband who loves his wife needs to display that love in leadership. Ironically what you describe is the same frame as the feminists, that a husband leading his wife means he doesn’t love her.

  31. Pedat Ebediyah says:

    Slightly OT: But here is a dandy for you brothers.

  32. Solomon says:

    I have been going to a men’s group that was just hatched by some guys a while back. We use one of the guys’ office space, and there is usually 20 to 30 guys on any given Thursday morning. (Over 70 on the email list overall) They have been immensely helpful to me in other matters, and I enjoy going to talk with MEN. Women are not allowed. We haven’t gotten into the goddess-worship problem yet, as far as I know, but I will likely bring it up eventually. We have at least one woman-worshipper in there who slobbers all over the War Room movie. He is a good guy but those comments are repellent.

    I may just print up a blog like this one and take it in one day for discussion. Either way, this men’s group is my solution. No FI crap, no sellout pastors, and the only tithe is whoever wants to bring breakfast burritos. Lots of prayer and support from my brothers. Serious and strong discussions. It is effectively my new church.

  33. swanny river says:

    As much as I’ve read and learned from the past year I don’t think of being surprised anymore, but those FoF quotes did it. For their sake, I hope Dalrock tells us tomorrow it was just his audition for writing at the Onion.

  34. J N says:

    Snowden,

    Look for an ethnic Orthodox Church, a conservative Mennonite church, or a very solid Reformed / Calvinist church. In a pinch, a conservative enough Baptist church will do.

    Good signs on a Sunday morning are that women and girls are dressed modestly, veiled properly or don’t have short hair. Look for men who seem to be appropriately masculine.

    Prepare to undergo a big cultural shift – any churches that are still solid are that way because they preserved their own culture.

  35. Spike says:

    After reading that, I’m appalled. Is this what passes for effective Biblical counselling in the USA today? Seriously?
    I imagine it isn’t too far-fetched. If Princess is raised on a steady diet of Disney movies (“Brave” had the young girl with the arrows being a toxic bitch toward the boy in the story), progressing to the prime time cartoons like “The Simpsons”, “Family Guy” and “American Dad”, the sitcoms like “Modern Family”, complete with TV adverts with idiot dads and husbands – then Princess will get the idea that men are indeed idiots.
    So too will young men get the idea that they are emotionally retarded – which is why David Clarke talks the way he does. It is established wisdom, right? Why should the Church be any different?
    Someone good with stats should do an analysis on how (in)effective counselling is. The stats will show what every contributor on this blog knows. When people get the idea it is ineffective, they will get the money signal and the whole thing should wither away.
    At least, I can wish….

  36. J N says:

    Solomon, a group of 20-30 men meeting together is the church. Once you have the men appropriately educated and unified, start assembling the families together, or take over an existing church.

  37. Anchorman says:

    The premise here is that women are better at marriage because they are unhappy being married.

    Gold.

  38. gargoylevirgin01 says:

    “But women especially, are walking away. And so, I’m trying to stop that. They don’t have to if the man would really change. But a lady will love a man with every ounce of her heart until she’s finally … and not having honest … being honest about her needs or “I’m very unhappy,” until the last day. And then when that last (Sound of snap) ounce is gone, boom! I call it hitting the wall. She’s done. And you literally cannot … other than an act of God, get that woman back. She’s through.”

    So, Focus on the Family is saying that whenever a woman is showing love and affection to her husband, she is really just putting on a show to hide her misery and unhappiness in order to appease him!?!?! Unless she is rottenness to the husband’s bones (Proverbs 12:4) , the husband is going to cause his wife to divorce him!?!? If the wife isn’t making known “needs”, more like demands, to her husband, she is unhappy?!?! How low Focus on the Family has fallen!!!!!

  39. snowdensjacket0x0x0 says:

    Scott, been enjoying your posts here and other places for years. Will check out the blog.

    JN, I’m tempted to go back to my regular church and take a picture of the women, in Rollo’s epiphany phase, and you can marvel at their colorful hair, tattoos, and facial piercings. Going to marry some poor beta and ruin his life. I’ve already seen it happen. Girl gets off the carousel, marries Billy Beta, gets pregnant (with him?) and starts taking over all his money. And trying to hook me up with her friends as they are getting off the ride. No thanks. I’ve already married a slut and she didn’t fuck me. Just divorce raped me and stole my house and all my stuff. Why would I ever sign up for that hell again?

    Sure I may be lonely, but I was lonelier when I was married. As sick as that is.

    Still. I have to do something. There is a baptist, a greek, and Russian church in my area. I’ll start checking them out over the next few weeks.

    I can find girls to date. I know how to do that. I just can’t find one to marry. They don’t want to get married until they have proven that they aren’t marriage material.

    And the church I’m in right now? I’m so sick of everything being the man’s fault. No matter how many times I tell everyone that we are failing women, and failing children, they just keep trying to turn it around onto me.

    You wouldn’t believe how many of my brothers in church have told me I should go to a therapist! This is seriously their answer to me pointing out red pill truths. Go to a therapist and get myself brainwashed by some leftist feminist therapist that can try to put me back in the matrix, with them.

    I’ve actually had much better luck pointing out the truth to the women at church. But then they try to start an affair with me rather then submit to the beta husband that has always disgusted them.

  40. gargoylevirgin01 says:

    @entropyismygod said:
    “Women hate your happiness more than you could ever hate anything. All women despise a happy man, they loath relaxation and seek only to meddle in all things, to create chaos and destruction, perpetual drama, slaves who must build and then tear down. You are their puppet, you must dance at their whim.”

    I have noticed this since high school. I was happy being single, not at all desperate for sex, not having a girlfriend, you name it. Girls (and boys too) in high school were shocked that I was not trying to get some action. They would shame me. In fact, much older female teachers shamed me also. During my sophomore year in high school, this female teacher put on the movie The Notebook for the class to watch. This female teacher laughed and pointed me out in front of the entire class. She said that his movie might be inappropriate for him (me) because he (me) had never seen kissing. She and the whole class laughed at me. I responded in panic and humiliation with, “I have seen kissing…”I cut myself off and kept quiet.

    In another incident in sophomore year, another old female teacher at least in her late 50s, suddenly screamed at me in the hallway, while I was waiting for my ride and doing my homework. She said, “All you do is sit at home and do nothing.” She threatened me in a way to attend these club meetings after school. She told a male teacher responding to her screaming in the hallway to make sure he attends the club meetings. The male teacher looked at me with disgust and said he will. The next day, as I am walking to my next class, in the hallway, I bump into that female teacher. She stares at me with a look as if she saw a worthless, unattractive male. I remember, after that, I would take the long way around to get to my classes in hopes of avoiding her and others like her.

    On a side note, I was ugly in high school. I had big ugly glasses, had a decently high body mass index (BMI),and other details I won’t go into. Nevertheless, I lost a lot of the weight near the end of college.

    Despite my unattractive physical state, they could not stand seeing me happy at the end of the day. These women tried to cause me destruction and tear me down.

  41. Tom C says:

    All this time I never realized that the whole point of seeing a movie is to talk about it with a woman afterward. I feel like such a fool. Why did no one ever tell me? I’ve been doing it wrong all these years!

  42. Pingback: Dalrock, About Dying Inside… | See, there's this thing called biology...

  43. @Dalrock: “That’s nothing to be proud of”

    >commenting on advice on the necessary conditionality of marital love given by me and the vast majority of others on Married Red Pill:

    You are right and I confess that I am prideful like a soldier who sometimes does terrible things to fight the enemy. I am prideful because I know it works in the vast majority of cases where men have taken back their marriages and their sex lives with their wives. Turns out when a guy moves well in the direction of realizing that he is fine getting divorced because he could get a younger, prettier version of his wife right away, the wife suddenly decides to go all sweet, sexy and submissive. Who knew, right?

    I am willing to do (and advise men to do) what works, regardless of whether morality or some of our current interpretations of religious doctrine match up with it. Besides I have my own exegesis on the interpretation of the words of the Lord regarding a man putting away his wife which I have articulated before on your blog: In sum, Jesus was talking about a man putting away his wife and prohibited this except for grounds of adultery. He was not talking about the modern day practice of a wife putting away her husband and then the church binding him to her for all eternity while blaming him for her cheating heart- if only he had loved her more like Christ she would never have betrayed the perfect love any more than Judas betrayed the Lord /s. Jesus was a Rabbi, a just judge and he certainly would not have allowed this no divorce of a frigid, controlling, sex denying harpy.

    Finally, I think it is necessary advice for these men. Most of them are in sexless or nearly sexless marriages and the only solution is to begin withdrawing time and attention and conditioning it on her sexual availability to you. If that doesn’t work, you need to take even stronger measures which you (probably most) would characterize as unbiblical. She has all the power and extreme measures are necessary to seize it back from before the man can begin leading, and ultimately loving. I don’t think you (or any who have not experienced it) can comprehend the desperation of a man in a sexless marriage.

    >what you describe is the same frame as the feminists, that a husband leading his wife means he doesn’t love her.

    Certainly not! A man leading his wife IS loving her so it is the exact opposite my friend as you well know. I am not talking about a man leading his wife but a man who is continually disparaged by a fitness testing, disobedient, sexually withdrawing wife. A man often cannot take the lead in that case without bringing his own threatpoint to the table.

    The ultimate female threatpoint is divorce rape with cash and prizes but before that she uses and reuses the threatpoint of sexual access. Men have the threat point of commitment. That’s it. Should we disarm?

  44. Dale says:

    Looking Glass:

    >In a slightly related topic, a question: does throwing a Bible at someone count as being violent or proper correction via the Word?

    This is a misuse of Scripture, but since God gave us a sense of humour I think he has one himself. So, here is my smart-ass answer for you:

    Heb 4:12: For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

    But I guess it might be disrespectful to throw your Bible at him; not to the person mind you, but to the written copy of God’s Word. Follow Christ’s example, and use a whip instead to clear the servants of money, or of Satan, out of God’s house.

  45. So according to FoF if you are a wife: do not submit to your husband, do not have a meek and quite spirit, do not counter his sin without a word, do not let him be intoxicated with your love, but the key to a Christian marriage is to be a bigger bitch! — Words fail me!

  46. Splashman says:

    J-N wrote:

    Solomon, a group of 20-30 men meeting together is the church. Once you have the men appropriately educated and unified, start assembling the families together, or take over an existing church.

    The first sentence is true. The second is BS, unless the goal is to be like every other church.

    God, via the NT, directs those who desire to follow Christ to “meet together”, to pray, to exhort one another, etc.. That’s what Solomon’s group is doing, and that’s what they should keep doing. The instant you start considering how to turn that group into a “church”, that’s the instant it goes down the toilet.

    “Appropriately educated”? Why? Oh, right — so they have a reason to set up an authority structure.

    “Start assembling the families together”? Why? Oh, right — so the women can take over.

    “Take over an existing church”? Why? Oh, right — so they have a reason to start charging admission collect tithes.

  47. Splashman says:

    @Jonadab, words don’t quite fail me, as one comes to mind:

    Un-be-frickin’-leivable.

  48. embracingreality says:

    Attempting to maintain any dignity at all as a man while following the advice for husbands as recommended by quacks like Dr. David Clarke would be virtually impossible. I’d sooner grow old and die alone than live in a marriage like that.

  49. Boxer says:

    The cucks at Focus on The Feminism aren’t actually fools who just don’t know any better. Some of them may have started out that way. Today, there’s plenty of information that has filtered out into popular culture. I’m convinced they know what they’re doing. I don’t know how the money trail goes, but it must be profitable for them to keep selling this poison.

    It’s one thing for people to spew this nonsense if they’re ignorant and are just parroting what they were told by some “expert”, but another thing entirely to be willfully spreading it to increase donations and curry favor with women.

    These people are evil. They want your children to be divorce-bastards and for your family to be broken up, all to increase their bottom line. They’re wreckers. They’re looters. They’re a corrosive, social cancer that society can no longer afford.

  50. snowdensjacket0x0x0 says:

    Yes they know exactly what they are doing. Destroying children’s families and weaponizing women against their own families.

    This is war. Plain and simple. I’m starting to move beyond fighting on their battlefield.

    Men online are starting to form groups and to move to be closer to each other. We can’t fight the old fashioned way. But we can try to preserve the values that built everything around us. As our lords and monarchs are busy stealing everything our ancestors created.

    There is a man in Texas I have found who is trying to revive the old testament and our true values. I have to wonder? Does he post here?

    We know the problems. It’s far past time that we start to prepare for real action. Words on the internet are not going to save anything. And most people are beyond saving.

    Even the men here are ready to send their own daughters off to universities to be trained by feminists to be sluts, mere objects, for lustful men. And nothing more.

  51. feeriker says:

    Focus on the Family should branch this approach out, the marriage market is too narrow. Managerial consulting is much more lucrative. All Focus needs to do is help companies by finding the most unhappy and dissatisfied employees & put them in charge of all the internal focus groups, managerial retreats, etc.

    Sure, why not? For decades they’ve been skillfully bastardizing the Bible* to corrupt and destroy families for their own selfish ends, so why not do the same with other institutions for fun and profit? Isn’t that what modern churchianity is all about anyway?

    (* Made easy by targeting marks who, for all their supposed piety, couldn’t distinguish a Bible verse from a fortune cookie message.)

  52. feeriker says:

    They don’t want to get married until they have proven that they aren’t marriage material.

    Without doubt the most succinct and brutally accurate general description of western women that I have ever read.

  53. Splashman says:

    @Snowdensjacket, based on your last paragraph, I’m guessing your favorite Bible verse is I Kings 19:10.

  54. ray says:

    First-rate.

    And it’s about time FOTF got some heat. Like Planned Parenthood, FOTF sounds good, but does not do good. Hey we’re just Focusing on the Family here, like good Christians are supposed to, what could be wrong with that? Yep we’re just facilitating choice for women here, sanely and benevolently planning out parenthood, while we torture kids in the womb, then part them out.

    Most of the support for both orgs comes from women, acting collectively. FOTF is of the antichrist spirit, denying Father and Son by inverting Biblical authority and headship in marriage. Like many other ‘Christian’ counseling and ‘ministry’ industries, FOTF thrives on separating male from female, husband from wife, and father from son. FOTF tells women and subjugated men what they want to hear, and frontWs Feminine Imperative social and legal agendas. Same formula works for government, academia, corporations, so forth. Even females well-versed in Scripture, and loving the name of Christ, support orgs like FOTF, because all females have some measure of rebellion against God and man in them. Which God ratcheted-up after the original rebellion.

    FOTF is in a lot of trouble. They have plenty of company.

  55. ray says:

    “My brothers at church are angry about it but I’m not going to support a church that is teaching anti-Biblical nonsense.”

    Sure they’re angry. They misuse Scripture and refuse correction. Shake the dust off your shoes and walk if they refute the Bible in favor of the world. The fellowship of such ‘churches’ feels comfortable, but isn’t of Christ.

    Your brothers are here.

  56. — “Women hate your happiness more than you could ever hate anything. ” —

    This may be widely observable, but it is not natural. Women are being taught to resent male happiness. They’re being taught that a happy man is in some way an oppressor of women. And they’re being taught that to whatever extent they fail to get what they want, it’s his fault. Inasmuch as virtually any woman who’s dissatisfied and is given a “reason” that it’s someone else’s responsibility to correct it will wrap herself around that rationale as if it were a fifth Gospel, the results follow inexorably.

    This was not the case before the World Wars. It needn’t be the case today. It prevails because we have yet to take a strong and uncompromising stand against it. In large part that’s because of the prevalence of women as authority figures in the lives of far too many children and adolescents, and women with legally enforced privileges against men in every workplace in the First World. The costs of an unsuccessful stand have been made very high.

  57. Micha Elyi says:

    Is this what passes for effective Biblical counselling in the USA today?
    Spike

    We are not asked to be Biblical, we are asked to follow Jesus Christ. You may recall that even Satan can quote Scripture, so don’t be surprised if Satan’s Jezebels can quote and distort Scripture too.

    Remember, the Bible came from the Church. The Church did not come from the Bible. The Church came from Christ. (Look up the history of the Bible if you don’t believe me. Pro tip: The Bible did not suddenly come into being in the 16th century–sorry, followers of Martin Luther!)

  58. infowarrior1 says:

    @Michel Elyi
    Your comments betrays much ignorance about reformed doctrine.

  59. Bee says:

    Married women don’t need their partner and leader to try to out-emotionalize them. Wives need their husband and leader to be the oak tree in the midst of their emotional storms. Poon Commandment:

    XV. Maintain your state control

    You are an oak tree. You will not be manipulated by crying, yelling, lying, head games, sexual withdrawal, jealousy ploys, pity plays, shit tests, hot/cold/hot/cold, disappearing acts, or guilt trips. She will rain and thunder all around you and you will shelter her until her storm passes. She will not drag you into her chaos or uproot you. When you have mastery over yourself, you will have mastery over her.

    Chateau Heartiste (some of it not NSFW):

    https://heartiste.wordpress.com/the-sixteen-commandments-of-poon/

  60. nick012000 says:

    @splashman:

    >“Appropriately educated”? Why? Oh, right — so they have a reason to set up an authority structure.

    In this case, I’m pretty sure that “appropriately educated” means “red pilled”. If you’re going to set up a red pill church, you aren’t going to want to spend all your time preaching to bluepills, do you?

    >“Start assembling the families together”? Why? Oh, right — so the women can take over.

    Women are social creatures, much more-so than men. If upright men assemble their wives under their supervision, the wives are probably going to want to behave themselves to avoid ostracism and shaming.

  61. Bee says:

    @desiderian,

    “This story hits about every single manosphere trope:”

    But, but, but, but she was an MD. She was smart. She had a college degree. She had a good job, she was a career girl, she was ambitious. She was adventurous. Her life was bigger than her children and her husband.

    This girl is what Western culture tells all men they should be looking for, hoping for, and finding desirable.

  62. Hawk&Rock says:

    Re: the post article…

    Married with three kids… Found crumpled in an entry way topless, panties in purse, blue lipped and dead of cocaine overdose.

    Why?

    Girls night out, y’all!!!!! Whoooohooo!!!! YOLO!!! U GO GURRRLLLL!!!!

    Friends say: “She was a great mom.”

    Obviously. Great wife too. Natch…

    She was indeed the pinnacle of what the feminists promote as having it all (except for the humiliating end part).

  63. Dragonfly says:

    Wow! I can’t believe Focus on the Family is preaching this….

    “If you just love your husband, uh … treat him well, meet his needs, then he’s gonna turn around and just love you back the way you really need to be loved. Absolutely false. He’s a guy. He doesn’t know how anyway. He doesn’t know there’s a problem. And if you keep loving him, he’ll think everything’s fine. He will never get it. You have to get the man’s attention. You gotta sit down and say, “Honey, I’m not happy in our marriage. Here’s why. Let’s change it. … You gotta get a man with a shovel to the head, metaphorically speaking, of course.””

    This is so horrible and backward… obviously, the wives need to be told to 1) respect him, 2) follow his lead and submit to his authority in your marriage, 3) treat him well, 4) and keep loving him.
    Part of having a gentle and quiet spirit is that she is content and full of peace from the inside out, her peace and gentleness overflows into the marriage and beyond. She doesn’t go looking for fights or is at least, carefully avoiding them, being respectful, and certainly not nagging.

    Everything this man said is completely wrong and opposite of what women need to hear.

  64. Dragonfly says:

    @Blue Pill Prof “Turns out when a guy moves well in the direction of realizing that he is fine getting divorced because he could get a younger, prettier version of his wife right away, the wife suddenly decides to go all sweet, sexy and submissive. ”

    You are right. Dread game. I remember recently recounting a story of a man being treated badly on a first date at a restaurant to my husband, and he said how he would have responded to it if he were in that man’s shoes – and it would have been to have left the woman right then, probably not even offered her a ride home (she’s a big girl and can find her own), and then would go out to find someone younger and sexier to have sex with that same night.

    This is the opposite of what nice Christian men are trained to do… supplicate, endure bad treatment of even girlfriends/dates… think or believe they are low value enough to have to put up with the disrespect.

    It’s men that know their worth and value that are (again paraphrasing Rollo here) both desirable but terrifying to women. They can’t be taken advantage of because they don’t allow themselves to be.

  65. Dragonfly says:

    Dalrock, I believe BPP is talking about ways a loving father would lead their children… so it is with a loving husband that would lead his wife. A husband should have the ability to discipline his wife by taking away privileges if she isn’t submitting to him and giving him a fulfilling sex life.

    Biblical Gender Roles writes about this a lot, he’s been in this situation and has corrected it by literally disciplining his wife. http://biblicalgenderroles.com/

    “Certainly not! A man leading his wife IS loving her so it is the exact opposite my friend as you well know. I am not talking about a man leading his wife but a man who is continually disparaged by a fitness testing, disobedient, sexually withdrawing wife. A man often cannot take the lead in that case without bringing his own threatpoint to the table.

    The ultimate female threatpoint is divorce rape with cash and prizes but before that she uses and reuses the threatpoint of sexual access. Men have the threat point of commitment. That’s it. Should we disarm?”

    ^^ Totally agree BPP. I see what you’re saying here.

  66. Dragonfly says:

    @gargoylevirgin01
    How horrible that you had to go through that in high school… talk about Satan using those women to try to tear you down.

  67. feeriker says:

    How horrible that you had to go through that in high school… talk about Satan using those women to try to tear you down.

    That’s the primary purpose of gunverment schools: to tear boys down. That so many Christian families continue to send their children, especially their sons, to these vile, satanic kiddie prisons is inexcusable.

  68. BradA says:

    Celebrating destructiveness and delegating any sex to being unthinking and in effect not responsible is idiotic. All need to be held accountable for sinful behavior.

    trying to revive the old testament

    That would be horrid. The New Covenant is far better. We remain human and not in our transformed state, but I would take that over external rules and regulations any day. It is just as idiotic as those claiming to “follow the Sabbath” on Sunday. That is not the Sabbath, sundown Friday to sundown Saturday is.

    Where are you going to setup the altar for sacrifices?

    Boxer,

    I am still not convinced of the intentionality of this foolishness. Most people really are idiots. Men also convince themselves of the rightness of their actions even without money, though that certainly helps. Idiocy still explains it sufficiently for me.

    Snowden,

    Go for a Reformed, Orthodox or such church if you wish, but they have their own flaws, since humans are a part of them. Their flaws are just different. Though I would argue that a Calvanistic view is just as harmful to society as anything else. It takes away personal responsibility at its core.

    The church we attend now (me not as much) is better than others and the pastors have some things in proper balance, so I will support it. It also doesn’t relegate much of the NT to history.

    On the men’s meeting: That can certainly be a valid thing to do, but believing that will avoid the problems of being human is fanciful thinking. People are still involved and it will take a constant effort to not stray, especially if the poster dies, moves, etc. We need to be hooked with other believers, however difficult and challenging that may be.

    At a root, people are still walking things out in an unregenerate world and we will have problems until He returns. Note that people will rebel after 1000 years under the Righteous Ruler. Are we really shocked we have problems now?

  69. Gunner Q says:

    Looking Glass @ October 12, 2015 at 6:03 pm:
    “In a slightly related topic, a question: does throwing a Bible at someone count as being violent or proper correction via the Word? (I honestly would like some answers, as this really is a natural tendency I appear to have.)”

    Honestly? Violence is the primary language of some people. I’ve heard that some cultures, Arabs in particular, are resistant to the Gospel just because Christian missionaries don’t act excited enough about it for them to think we believe it ourselves. It explains a lot about the Third World: “If you truly believed this, you’d chop people’s heads off for disagreeing.” It also explains why martyrdom advances the church, because we believe enough in God to die for him. Humans always react more strongly to actions than words.

    So yes, throwing a Bible followed by a knuckle sandwich CAN be an effective tool for evangelism, able to reach people who are not as excited about rational debate as they should be, but it’s somewhat situational. Christ was violent towards the temple moneychangers but not the corrupt leadership.

  70. Oscar says:

    Dalrock,

    Thanks for the H/T. I listened to that broadcast in my truck during my lunch break and yelled at the radio the whole time.

    I encourage readers to listen to the archived broadcast to get the full effect of the contempt and condescension Dr. Clarke oozes towards husbands.

  71. Dale says:

    Micha Elyi:
    >Remember, the Bible came from the Church.

    Yes, Satan can and did misuse Scripture. But the Bible did not come from the church. The Orthodox religion (and probably others) use that claim to justify their additions to the Bible.
    The Scriptures came from God. See 2 Tim 3:16-17 and 2 Pet 1:20-21.

  72. Oscar says:

    This FotF broadcast exemplifies the preponderance of Christian marriage experts’ advice.

    1. Nothing is the wife’s fault, unless…
    1a. She’s not nagging her husband enough, in which case see #2.
    1b. She’s submitting to her husband too much, in which case see #2.
    2. Everything is the husband’s fault.
    3. The solution to every problem is for the husband to behave more like a woman.

  73. Gunner Q says:

    Micha Elyi @ 3:44 am:
    “We are not asked to be Biblical, we are asked to follow Jesus Christ.”

    That’s exactly what these Churchians are doing. Is it a coincidence that the Church’s collapse is paralleling its rejection of the Bible?

    Luke 11:27-28.

    Boxer @ October 12, 2015 at 11:45 pm:
    “These people are evil. They want your children to be divorce-bastards and for your family to be broken up, all to increase their bottom line. They’re wreckers. They’re looters. They’re a corrosive, social cancer that society can no longer afford.”

    +1. They neither heed the Bible nor care about the consequences of their teachings.

  74. This is what God has done to us (Laughing). Now He’s got a master plan, because if we work together and let the woman actually teach us, ’cause she has many more skills interpersonally that we will … ever will have. She’s got a Ph.D. in emotional intimacy and spiritual intimacy very often. We have like a third-grade education. So, we have to let the woman kind of guide us, teach us. And then we come together, we get it.

    Virtually every churchian marriage counsellors advice begins from the root acknowledgement that men are morons. This isn’t a Biblical issue, it’s the most obvious, glaring evidence that the ‘counselor’ subscribes to a common secular mindset and this comes through in his advice.

    If there is a legitimate intimacy issue in a marriage it does both parties no favors by presuming one of them is an idiot. If there is a real issue and the husband needs to know it he’s not served by being told he and all flawed men need to learn to accept their idiocy first. Being told he needs to self-deprecate AND then being blackmailed with a woman’s unscriptural threats of divorce might not be the best way to extort more intimacy from him.

    And again, the root of men being idiots aggrandizes women as the ‘intelligent’ ones and lessening the husband to idiocy also doesn’t serve the wife. What woman wants to be married to that base idiot? What message does it send to her Hypergamous doubt as to whether she could’ve done (or should do) better than this moron?

  75. Pingback: Morally Contextualized Romance

  76. Pingback: Synthesizing the Christian Worldview and Psychology, Part I | Morally Contextualized Romance

  77. jeff says:

    Rollo,

    I agree. Every time I decided to counsel with my wife she didn’t want to after a couple of sessions due to the fact that she could not refute the actual actions/behaviors she has committed in our marriage. The counselor is usually stuck between a rock and a hard place because of that. When he/she HAD to confront it, the wife didn’t like it.

    We counseled with a very well know pastor who was on sabatical, and he point blank apologized to me saying he ALWAYS goes into counseling marriages with the forethought that the woman is better than the man. All the sessions were working on her submission, BUT he still said if you lead her in the right direction, she’ll follow. My questions was, isn’t that allowing her to lead by allowing me to lead the way she wants to go? He looked at me dumb founded for an answer.

  78. DeNihilist says:

    Interesting convergence from Uncle Bob’s place – http://uncabob.blogspot.ca/2015/10/rotating-polyandryand-its-enforcers.html

    Seems wimminz have a 4 year sexual cycle, according to some.

  79. SirHamster says:

    @Scott:
    Was wondering where your blog went. Glad you’re still blogging.

    FYI, your name’s URL is wrong. “https://morallycontextualizedromance.wordpress.com/” instead of “https://morallycontextualizedromanceblog.wordpress.com/”

  80. SirHamster says:

    trying to revive the old testament
    —————-
    That would be horrid.

    Very.

    Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

    No picking and choosing. If you wish to keep to that Law, every single word must be kept to the letter.

  81. Pedat Ebediyah says:

    @Rollo

    “And again, the root of men being idiots aggrandizes women as the ‘intelligent’ ones and lessening the husband to idiocy also doesn’t serve the wife. What woman wants to be married to that base idiot? What message does it send to her Hypergamous doubt as to whether she could’ve done (or should do) better than this moron?’

    It’s as if these buffalos are ANTI-MARRIAGE.

    I’m just sayin’ ya’ll, this is wholesale mass redirection, with epic, almost comical overtones.

  82. wordsofgold says:

    This disgusts me. There is no biblical basis for any of this garbage.
    I truly cannot believe this is as far as we’ve fallen. I think it would have been easier reading this if it were voiced by another woman, but two men!?

  83. On Satan’s abuse of scripture, I would point out that when Jesus refuted him He cited the appropriate scripture and let it go to work. He didn’t argue with Satan: “It is written..” BAM.

    How about: “It is written: “Likewise, you wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives”.

    End of conversation, deal with it heretics.

  84. “without A word”.

  85. “She’s got a Ph.D. in emotional intimacy and spiritual intimacy very often.”

    I’m tired of this crap. You know who has a Ph. D. in this stuff? Me. And Dalrock. And many commenters here.

    I’m only half joking. There is basically a phantom academic field that’s been constructed here on the internet, complete with its rival schools, peer review, and specialized vocabulary.

    It’s to the point where I have a hard time talking to normal people about relationships, not because I’m super-smart (I’m not), but because I’ve been steeped in this stuff for so long.

    How conversations would go if I didn’t hold my tongue:

    “How’d the date go Dropit?”

    “Well, it was OK and she was cute, but I don’t think she’s on the chaste-to-marriage train, so…”

    “What’s the problem? Score, man!”

    “No, you don’t get it, the divorce rate jumps astronomically with the first non-husband sexual partner, blah blah hypergamy…”

    “Well, if she was cute and into you, then why not pursue it?”

    “Well that’s for now, once it becomes clear I’m not gonna fuck her she’ll lose attraction, and…”

    “Dude, she’ll love that! Girls just want to get married, man!”

    “*sigh*”

    “Like, are you gay or something man?”

  86. Solomon says:

    @BradA – you said

    “On the men’s meeting: That can certainly be a valid thing to do, but believing that will avoid the problems of being human is fanciful thinking. People are still involved and it will take a constant effort to not stray, especially if the poster dies, moves, etc. We need to be hooked with other believers, however difficult and challenging that may be.”

    I don’t believe that will help me avoid the problems of being human. Rather, it will help me avoid the intentionally evil counsel of sold-out pastors, the heinously bad counsel of women, and will instead keep me focused on Christ, and sharpened by my fellow iron.

    These key factors will help me tremedously to function as a human. I don’t stray afterwards, I go on with my day and later tell my wife what God says per the Word. I am more connected to believers this way than in some typical church, and in fact straying is less likely for me in the counsel of men than in the hallways of a blue-pill church where I am the rare alpha.

    Neither do I need any priest or “Father” to lead me, as I have only one Father, the God of Heaven, per scripture. My new approach also prevents bad doctrine, as these fellow men of God parse the Word wisely, not allowing it to be bastardized by the conflict of interest that a paid pastor brings.

  87. Disillusioned says:

    Men are commanded to love their wives as Christ loves the Church. The Holy Spirit is who empowers us to do so. A woman can not do that no matter what tricks she may try. If she wins it isn’t true love but manipulation and extortion. A Christian woman needs to pray for her man and show him love through respect and submission and trust the Holy Spirit to take care of the rest.

  88. anonymous_ng says:

    Kia gets it.

  89. Boxer says:

    Off Topic:

    Butch dyke priests bless their local abortion clinic.
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/13/thank-god-abortion-providers-episcopal-methodist-clergy-bless-abortion-clinic/

    Maybe next time, the faggots from Focus on The Family will be down there in solidarity with their feminist sisters and brothers.

  90. Boxer says:

    Dear Brad A.:

    I am still not convinced of the intentionality of this foolishness. Most people really are idiots. Men also convince themselves of the rightness of their actions even without money, though that certainly helps. Idiocy still explains it sufficiently for me.

    That used to suffice for me also; but, times have changed. There’s so much information in so many places that I’m starting to find it reasonable to assume everyone knows.

    This change in perception started over a year ago, when I wandered into a colleague’s office and found his browser open to Vox Day lol. This is a very liberal, softspoken guy who is married with (at the time) a newborn baby, in a rather liberal area. I don’t read Vox Day (not much for Sci Fi) but I certainly knew what it was when I saw it, and I realized then that everyone has this stuff available.

    Back to the topic of feminists, I’m convinced we should not be fooled into cutting these miscreants any undeserved slack. It’s harder and harder to excuse the shit these people pull with claims that they’re being misled.

  91. BradA says:

    Could be Boxer, but some of the same tripe is peddled by those who outwardly eschew the trappings, so I remain unconvinced. People can be willfully ignorant even with the truth staring them in the face.

    Note that the Pharisees of old made the Word of God of no effect by their traditions and could even stand in the presence of that very Word and reject it. The Sadducees did so later as well.

    The presence of truth does not mean recognizing that truth.

  92. BradA says:

    Solomon,

    I have one Scripture for you:

    [1Co 10:12 KJV] 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

    I am sure you are a special snowflake though and it doesn’t apply to you.

    Though I suspect you will be subject to equally dangerous issues, however perfect you are.

    I choose to believe in the Gifts Christ gave to His Church, not just the idea that any one man can keep everything guided correctly. Though you are making a church yourself, just one in the image you prefer.

  93. Dale says:

    Solomon says:
    October 13, 2015 at 4:03 pm

    +1

    @Boxer
    >Butch dyke priests bless their local abortion clinic.

    I was half-hoping Boxer’s link was fake. I knew the Episcopalians did not take Scripture seriously, but this is far out there.

    @BradA
    For the 1 Cor 10:12 passage you quoted and your idea that Solomon needs to be dissuaded from pursuing “the idea that any one man can keep everything guided correctly”.
    a) Your Scripture quote is partial, and thus you missed the point of the passage. The point is in verse 13, which is that God will provide a way out. Yes, we are not to be arrogant; but we are to depend on God, not a church group of people. Attempting to use this verse to support the idea of dependency on a church group instead of dependency and trust in God is wrong.
    Trying to use a verse out of context is unwise; it distorts Scripture. It seems ironic to me that you would do so, in a comment in a post where Dalrock is showing how religious people at FotF are teaching ideas which are contrary to Scripture.

    b) Your whole point was in argument against something you knew Solomon did not claim. He is not trying to do it alone, as “one man”, as you acknowledged when you previously wrote, “On the men’s meeting”. You knew it was a group of men, not one person alone. This behaviour seems lacking to me.
    On Solomon’s idea however, I would agree that having a smaller group of genuine followers of God is better than having a big group that is infiltrated with servant’s of Satan, or, at least, infiltrated by those not genuinely submitted to God. 1 John 2:18-19 may be related to that point. (I incorrectly thought Paul had written this passage.)
    I think forbidding women to affect the meeting of believers or what is said therein, such as Solomon’s group not even allowing them in the room, should lead to better theology. Gee, where have I come across this idea before? Maybe 1 Tim 2…

    I encourage you to continue to use Scripture. Just read the entire paragraph (at least) before you decide what it means. That is a first step toward teaching God’s message, instead of looking for verses that support your message. And yes, this is necessary for myself also.

  94. desiderian says:

    “Remember, the Bible came from the Church.”

    Scripture is divinely inspired – i.e. from the Holy Spirit, and thus from God.

    The NT is to the OT as General Relativity is to Newtonian physics. Neither stands alone.

  95. Anonymous Reader says:

    seriouslypleasedropit
    “She’s got a Ph.D. in emotional intimacy and spiritual intimacy very often.”

    I’m tired of this crap. You know who has a Ph. D. in this stuff? Me. And Dalrock. And many commenters here.

    I’m only half joking. There is basically a phantom academic field that’s been constructed here on the internet, complete with its rival schools, peer review, and specialized vocabulary.

    Yep. When I set out to figure some things out back in late 2009 I didn’t even bother looking at books in the library or bookstore, I fired up a search engine, because that’s how research is done now. ‘Bout 6 years later I find it very difficult to talk with the average man over 30 even the “conservative, church going” man, because we do not share very many fundamental premises. Millennials are a mixed bag, some are totally wrapped up in pedestalization, some not so much.

    Here’s an example. I’m chatting with some middle aged men, married, got kids, most of them go to some church or other, and the most bold, radical, fix-up-a-marriage idea they have is: “Love Languages”. That’s it. That’s what they got. That and “His Needs Her Needs” is all they got. Not even John Gottman, nor Shaunti Feldhahn. They don’t know anything about brain differences, they have never heard of hypergamy, they believe in choreplay, some of them have gone to those “marriage weekends”, and all of them have … issues … with their wives. They are pretty much where I was 6 years back, in essence.

    It’s like trying to talk about combustion and fluid mechanics with 19th century men who are well versed in the theories of phlogistin and the “cosmic ether”. Or discussing pistol & rifle shooting with men who only own flintlocks and matchlocks.

    Oh, and some of them are big fans of Focus, too. It’s like watching drowning men grabbing a firehose because there’s not enough water in their lungs, yet.

    Scott can address this probably in more depth than anyone else, but frankly everything that is curently being taught about male / female relations is wrong. It’s blue pill to some degree or other, even the allegedly Christian counselling education so far as I can tell is totally blue pill, and ignores every bit of science regarding the brain that has been discovered in the last 15 or more years, not to mention those alleged Christians who mutilate Bible quotes as Focus does. This shows just how deep the Female Imperative runs, perhaps.

    Offhand I can’t think of any other area of instruction where totally out of date, flat out wrong, ideas are taught by rote and over a decade of science is willfully, deliberately, even maliciously ignored. The evidence of deep differences between male and female brains piles up, and the whole “counselling” industry desperately looks away, in any direction, rather than admit the obvious truths.

    Yes. +1 to the real PhD’s in intimacy, be it emotional, spiritual, physical, whatever.

  96. Yet Another Commenter says:

    @ Ann Kellett [October 12, 2015 at 6:00 pm]

    Ann, Matthew 18:20: “For where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them.”

    Jesus doesn’t do brand names; He does redemption.

    Snowden’s Church’s problem is not that they don’t have the correct registered churchmark, it is that they [aren’t]/[weren’t] gathered in Jesus’ name.

    None of which rebuts your particular recommendation, as such, at all, of course. Just (IMHO) your take.

    Snowden might have anecdotes to offer, providing us with clues as to what his [former] church does gather for. Probably most who comment or lurk here can make good guesses, though.

  97. MarcusD says:

    Mid Life Crisis + I love you, but am not in love with you
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=982806

  98. BradA says:

    No Dale, that is the proper context. Anyone who arrogantly decides they have the one and only way to “do Christianity” is headed for an eventual fall.

    Though lets see how time works out.

    I am not opposed to the meetings, but the idea that we should all abandon churches for such meetings is utter crud.

  99. ray says:

    Brad A. — “Though I suspect you will be subject to equally dangerous issues, however perfect you are.”

    Solomon is doing fine. At least he doesn’t have a hundred wives. :O)

    He found apostasy in his church and questioned it. Perhaps he found Scriptural wisdom amongst his men’s group. I dunno. And neither do you.

    But I do know he found some Scriptural wisdom in this OP, and in some of the comments. He searches for Father and didn’t claim perfection.

    We’ve all got some ‘dangerous issues’ don’t we Brad?

  100. craig says:

    “Remember, the Bible came from the Church.”

    “Scripture is divinely inspired – i.e. from the Holy Spirit, and thus from God.”

    Both are correct. The first statement is not saying that some committee decided what to write down for the New Testament. What it is saying is that what was set apart as Scripture were those writings that the Church recognized as being divinely inspired, and it recognized them as being inspired because they said what the Church already knew and taught before they were ever written down.

  101. Oscar says:

    @ Anonymous Reader says:
    October 13, 2015 at 10:55 pm

    “Offhand I can’t think of any other area of instruction where totally out of date, flat out wrong, ideas are taught by rote and over a decade of science is willfully, deliberately, even maliciously ignored.”

    I can think of three. Climate science, nutrition and exercise science. But those are three whole other cans of worms. Back to your regularly scheduled program!

  102. @BradA

    …I would argue that a Calvanistic view is just as harmful to society as anything else. It takes away personal responsibility at its core.

    I would argue that you have misrepresented Calvinism with a straw-man known as hyper-Calvinism. Your failure to distinguish the two is a false witness against brothers in Christ who hold to the one and repudiate the other. As a Calvinist, I hold you personally responsible for your sin and error. As a Calvinist, I take personal responsibility to forgive you, and ask that you take personal responsibility that with the aid of the Holy Spirit, to not spread the false witness again.

  103. John Calvin had is detractors drowned and burnt at the stake. Just sayin’.

    Isn’t hard to eviscerate a Calvinist without resorting to strawmen.

  104. Pingback: Ride The Rapids | Notes From a Red Pill Girl

  105. Leading irruptions of feminism have also taken place in the same places as Reformed Churches, I for one don’t think this is a coincidence.

  106. craig says:

    “Leading irruptions of feminism have also taken place in the same places as Reformed Churches, I for one don’t think this is a coincidence.”

    Wheat and tares, everyone. Wheat and tares.

    The fact that feminism has infected the old Mainline Protestants, the Reformed, the Catholics, the independent evangelicals, and just about every other group save those like the Amish who willfully isolate themselves from modernity, ought to tell us that feminism is just the way the modern river flows. All who aren’t actively paddling against the current are being swept along by it. (Why they aren’t paddling against it is simply the mystery of sin.)

  107. Scott says:

    MarcusD-

    Not ONE person on that CAF post had the right answer.

  108. Yes, I understand the teaching about wheat and tares. I also understand where the idea of the “Protestant work ethic” comes from. Maybe the argument could be made that Reformed Churches were the first targets of feminism (ordaining their first women “Reverends” in the late 70’s) or maybe it was an underlying ideological flaw, a false teaching that gave ground more quickly to Critical Theory.

    Anyone want to take a field trip to the Netherlands? West Michigan?

  109. Anonymous Reader says:

    Oscar
    I can think of three. Climate science, nutrition and exercise science. But those are three whole other cans of worms. Back to your regularly scheduled program!

    Well. Now that I reflect on this, agreed. I’ve ceased talking with people about climate “science”,continue to disagree with family and friends regarding nutrition – yes, there are people clinging to the 1970’s USDA food pyramid even now, and oddly enough they tend to be fat – and regarding exercise, Todd Hargrove has a very interesting book Better Movement that I’m reading for the 3rd time. Chapter 5 on pain is worth the price of the book alone, although it is tough to read because basically it says “Everything you know is wrong”. Pain is a signal from the brain? Pain is an opinion of parts of the brain? Huh?

    So, ok, the state of knowledge in more than counseling is abysmal. All the more reason to be quite particular about the people one listens to, and definitely any man should stay away from the counseling pit. Either he’s signing up to be beaten verbally by another man who AMOG’s him, or he’s going to be paying for a woman to take his wife’s side. Several friends of mine, mostly divorced, can testify to this.

    There may be some people out there who have benefited from marital counseling. I have not met them in real life or online, not yet anyway.

  110. Anonymous Reader says:

    John Calvin had is detractors drowned and burnt at the stake.

    Interesting. As a student of history I’d like to know more, such as names and dates.

  111. John Calvin had is detractors drowned and burnt at the stake.

    And now you are bearing even more false witnesses. No doubt you are referring to the matter of Michael Servetus. John Calvin has no authority to execute, it was the city council that ordered and executed the death sentence of the heretic. Calvin pleaded for the convicted heretic and disrupter to repent, but he did not and was executed by the the Geneva city council. When Servetus arrived in Geneva, He had recently escaped a prison where he was convicted of Hersey by the Roman Catholic Chruch for among other things his public teachings of the denial of the Trinity. Martin Luther had also strongly condemned the teaching of Servetus and no doubt he would have faced a similar fate in Germany. He was condemned in Lutheran, Reformed and Roman Catholic churches in a time when vocal heretics were not given free reign to speak openly, but were executed for their vocally spreading lies that lead people astray. This is not unique to reformed history, it was practiced by all sects in Europe including the Anabaptist. Yet the lie about Calvin remains, I guess it is as the man says “never let a crisis go to waste”.

  112. I was raised around Anabaptists, I suppose they were “disrupters and heretics” too. “The Pilgrim Church” E.H. Broadbent 1931, was pretty enlightening on this front. I don’t know of any Calvinist Anabaptists, they tend towards Armenianism.

    I’m curious what would have happened to John Calvin if he had landed in Catholic territory. I suspect he would have been imprisoned as a heretic as well.

    Having someone drowned because they don’t believe in infant baptism is pretty typical fair, and nothing to do with the Body of Christ.

  113. Maybe somebody could explain the lack of Church/State dichotomy in the 16th century too. The lack of division between secular and sectarian authority was rife in that era. Suggesting that Calvin was not a secular authority is ignoring the realities of the era and is weak sauce.

  114. Matthew 18:15-20 doesn’t suggest anywhere to have your buddies down at the government burn the dude at the stake. I don’t think there is an interpretation of 1 Cor 5:5 where Paul hands Hymenaeus and Alexander to Caesar (and not Satan).

    I suppose the Calvinist would suggest that if Paul had been a secular authority he would have just had them killed. But I wouldn’t want to be guilty of a strawman argument.

  115. I’m curious what would have happened to John Calvin if he had landed in Catholic territory. I suspect he would have been imprisoned as a heretic as well.

    Calvin had escaped Paris for just such a charge. He originally wrote the Institutes of the Christian Religion to King Francis of France as a defense of his friend Nicholas Cop and of his own positions.

    Suggesting that Calvin was not a secular authority is ignoring the realities of the era and is weak sauce.

    Calvin himself was also exiled from Geneva by the city counsel so there was indeed some separation, not the radical separation of America today, but there was some jurisdictional separation none the less. The English puritans did much of the real work of separation of the civil and church spheres. Samuel Rutherford’s Lex Rex is a fine example of the development of that doctrine. Those who hold dear the doctrines that the civil magistrate is God’s minister and a separation of jurisdiction, owe a debt to the work of Calvinists.

  116. Solomon says:

    @BradA – you said:

    “I am not opposed to the meetings, but the idea that we should all abandon churches for such meetings is utter crud.”

    I did not say we should all abandon “churches” for such meetings, now did I?

    I might suggest, however, that you look into the works of David Bercot, who has done extensive research on the early Christian writers (pre Constatntine)

    Their “church” looked a lot like my meetings do. In addition to not being corrupt by feminist garbage at every level, the leaders of their groups were unpaid, preventing the conflict of interest. Neither did they subscribe to the idea of grand buildings in the way we build churches now.

    seriously, check out David Bercot onlline and his presentation of the early Christians in their own words. It will blow your mind. It has purified and clarified my faith in Jesus, and how I ought to live. They took living a sinless life VERY seriously, including as sheep to slaughter, which they often were. I recommend David Bercot’s work to anyone. Distilled Christianity – the closer to the spring, the purer the water.

    God bless you all.

  117. Don’t get me wrong, I count Calvinists among my brothers. I do however remember the sermon where Jesus was explaining why certain people were of their father Satan because they were liars and murderers like him.

    The Bible says that Noah was a righteous man, perfect in his generations and that Job was a perfect man. Enoch walked with God. (T)

    Hebrews 6:5 (U)

    1 John 2:2 (He died once for ALL). (L)

    Hebrews 6:5 again (I)

    Hebrews 6:5 yet again (P)

    Maybe the book of Hebrews was missing from John Calvin’s Bible, or maybe it was just too inconvenient to address. Romans is also very problematic to this heresy.

    We have a choice, we are responsible for our decisions. Our walk determines whether or not we hear “Well done though good and faithful servant.” not our election.

  118. craig says:

    “I’m curious what would have happened to John Calvin if he had landed in Catholic territory. I suspect he would have been imprisoned as a heretic as well.”

    According to Jonadab-the-Rechabite’s logic of 12:43pm, civil authorities would have been responsible for the imprisonment, so the Inquisition would have been utterly blameless in the affair. 😉

  119. @ Laughing

    I have asked twice, and now a third time to please refrain from your false witness. I do not know if it be from malice or ignorance, but it is false and libelous. You apparently wish to defame John Calvin for falsehoods and by extensions his teachings. It is the same hamster rationalization methods I see from feminists.

  120. False witness? Apparently applying the scriptures is outside of the pale. When you cannot back up your heresy with the word it’s best to run to poison the well.

  121. Playing fast an loose with history to suit ideology is a trait of feminists:

    As far as John Calvin’s character:

    In his letter to Feral dated Feb 13 1546 Calvin wrote of Servetus: “for if he came, as far as my authority goes, I would not let him leave alive.”

    As far as his teachings, the Bible destroys them because he was trying to shoehorn is very limiting understanding of the nature of God into his presupposition of the texts. He apparently never understood that God can stand apart from time and have foreknowledge without taking away free-will. Calvin’s lame construction of reality leads to the errors we see in feminism.

    Grace = unmerited favor (unconditional love) rather than divine enablement.

    God favors us (without our merit) with the ability to stand in His Holy Spirit (divine enablement) which is His Grace. This was the circle that Calvin couldn’t square and leads many to the enervation of “greasy grace” wherein they can get divorced and remarried any number of times and still be “pleasing” to God, covered in the blood. He gives us His Holy Spirit so that we can be pleasing to Him (Roman’s 8) not so we can continue in sin with the assurance of being covered in the Blood.

    Greasy (Calvinist) grace is rotten, and it is the core of Evangelical Feminism.

  122. PuffyJacket says:

    @Anonymous Reader

    Bout 6 years later I find it very difficult to talk with the average man over 30 even the “conservative, church going” man, because we do not share very many fundamental premises. Millennials are a mixed bag, some are totally wrapped up in pedestalization, some not so much.

    If anything I think you’ve understated your case. There is massive generational difference between the under and over 30 crowd, since men in the over 30 crowd are far more likely to be invested (directly or indirectly) in the FI. Home prices depend significantly on continued family formation where married men hold a substantial amount of equity. Social security and pension plans depend on young men working and contributing in the same numbers. Millions of fathers with daughters rely on a) continued taxpayer subsidies enabling their daughters to purse career-girl lifestyles, and b) a fountain of unsuspecting betas to pay for it all when she finally settles down post carousel at age 35.

    Contrast this with the men in the under 30 crowd who frankly do not give a rat’s ass about any of that. As MGTOW grows, the bill for the feminist project becomes that much more apparent. What we already know is that the under 30 male crowd is unwilling (and more importantly unable) to pay the feminist bill. Therefore there may be an ugly generational aspect to the way this all unravels.

  123. RichardP says:

    I value this space for many reasons, but one of the larger reasons is the lack of endless debate over Calvinism vs. Arminianism. Hopefully that lack of debate can continue. There are other places on the web for that debate.

    Re. Solomon’s encouragement to read David Bercot. I recommend this link to help put him into perspective.:

    http://www.tektonics.org/af/bercot01.php

  124. Heidi says:

    “Scott says:
    October 14, 2015 at 12:08 pm
    MarcusD-

    Not ONE person on that CAF post had the right answer.”

    I’ve been interested in that thread. As usual, the man is roundly castigated for his wife’s determination to divorce; as usual, counseling and groveling are held out as the man’s one chance to win back his wife. What is the right answer? All I could think of to advise is to lawyer up for the inevitable moment when she walks out on him and sucks him dry, but maybe there’s better advice to be given.

  125. @ RichardP, I don’t see how having Christianity detached from it’s moorings via the Gospel of Personal Irresponsibility hasn’t contributed to the formation of Churchianity. It is the core of the harlot church message. If you don’t want to talk about causation that’s fine but to morally equivocate, and thus neutralize the discussion, is just sticking your head in the sand. Believing that sin is okay with God because He decided it was before you were born (just because) is like handing the harlot her mouth wiping napkin.

  126. Another way of putting this RichardP is that I think that there is a solid argument to be made that Calvinism isn’t red/blue pill neutral. That you want that argument off the table is unfortunate but really doesn’t change my argument in the least. Tired of thinking critically?

  127. Pingback: More Like Them Than You Realize | Things that We have Heard and Known

  128. Art Deco says:

    Focus on the Family has all but repudiated its founder, who no longer serves on its board.

    I do wonder who the intended audience is for this.

  129. @Art Deco, Dobson’s work on treating boys differently is putting him on the outs with the SJW-bound crowd no doubt.

  130. Gunner Q says:

    Puffy Jacket nails it. The under-30s see the passenger train of delayed consequences approaching at speed, and they also see the over-30s are the happy passengers.

    My experiences with over-30 types make me despair of peaceful resolution. They simply WILL NOT respect young men. I don’t know why.

    God is Laughing @ 4:19 pm:
    “Believing that sin is okay with God because He decided it was before you were born (just because) is like handing the harlot her mouth wiping napkin.”

    That is not an accurate statement of Calvinism, to claim Calvinist predestination is a license for evil. They also teach that those who are saved are conformed to be like Christ, just as Arminians do, only they see it as a purely God-driven process rather than a sort of partnership. Neither side is going to believe you’re Christian if you treat the Almighty as a whipping boy.

    I could just as accurately claim Arminianism’s Boyfriend Jesus or Catholicism’s Mary worship is the cause of modern feminism. No branch of Christianity is immune to the consequences of humanity’s internal corruption.

  131. Looking Glass says:

    As ballista illustrated in going back through some of Dobson’s older work, what we see now was definitely there. But back then it was part of a 100+ years of subtle falsehood about Women. He still had enough functional understanding of Christianity that he could do solid work in other areas. Or at least wasn’t as actively destructive as other would end up being.

    But Dobson was also a major part of the Christian movements that simply “didn’t get it” because they lacked Wisdom. So it was a huge amount of pathetic bluster, in the end. They lost because they were fools.

  132. Looking Glass says:

    Modern Feminism is built off the back of the anti-Christian philosophy that culminated in a new religion in middle of the 1800s. Fascism, Anarchism (the original variety), National Socialism, Marxism, Communism and the Progressive Movement are all the results of different cultures (and sub-cultures) interacting and incorporating the utter evil that it is.

    This is why it was so effective. It was well designed to attack Christians while staying plausible in not attacking them. Yet the outcroppings are very clear: at least 1.5 billion killed between the 20th Century blood baths that followed and the rise of the abortion industry.

  133. Looking Glass says:

    On the Calvin debate, a point:

    I’ve started calling it the “Theologian’s Disease”. It’s a subtle problem that crops up very quickly with nearly all of them. They place their own Logic over God’s Wisdom. What it always creates is a situation of not approaching God with Logic but of attempting to confine God with Logic. The Lord’s actions make perfectly logical sense, if you have the proper assumptions. But the sinful trap is always there to “understand” God better than someone else, opening the door for your own desire to replace God. Then we create a new school of Theology around this “new thought’.

    An honest Theologian would understand that they do the role for prophetic reasons: to bring correction and to go “stop doing that, you fools”. It’s very valuable, but it tends to offend their bookish sensibilities.

  134. Gunnar Q. Not really a big sectarian. You want to bash on Armenianism let’s go, I’ll probably agree with you. I was raised in that, didn’t particularly like it, saw a lot of discrepancies between it and the Word. To overlook the weaknesses though is just a repeat of what let the entryists in in the first place. All teaching is subject to error. I don’t expect to be ecumenical per se, because I think that is the same squish brain thinking that leads to the legitimate truth of the Gospel to be fogged by lazy truces between competing theories on what the truth REALLY is.

    There is a TRUTH. And we should pursue it.

    As far as who is the Body of Christ? His sheep hear His voice and will not heed another. (I think that includes even those people whose believes generally make me uncomfortable).That is my only litmus test. You want to relate with a dead letter text, or worship some dead believer or some living man INSTEAD of the Living Christ and I will doubt He is your head and that you are part of the Body. He will lead us into all truth. Seek, knock, find.

  135. Looking Glass, I try to understand God in a relational way (propensity to “Boyfriend Jesus” there). He leads me to the walking truths (walk ye in it) I need. The path that He has you down is a different path entirely. There are the same principles and truths in each walk, but they are each our own “theology”. Each of us should be studying God as He relates to us. Like any relationship.

    My wife relates differently with me than her dad, I relate differently with her than my mother. I like having a wife and a mother as I imagine Christ likes having eyes and feet (in His body). The only thing that matters is who we are taking our orders from and that we are in right relation with Him.

  136. @ Richard

    I will continue refrain from debates over theological systems, this is not the forum for that. I just ask that all refrain from libelous and false statements/accusations about another’s system.

  137. Starting to sound like a college campus around here for some reason.

  138. Systems suck. They are anti-Christ. They replace the organic relationship with Jesus Christ and the Word was given in such a way as to wreck them all.

    Proverbs 27:17
    Matthew 10:34

    You want to bring a system and defend it, don’t be surprised when the Prince of this World overcomes your man made contrivance and devours it from the inside. It’s his job.

    Offended? Triggered? Good.

  139. PuffyJacket says:

    @Gunner Q

    Yes, it is difficult to watch, much like watching a horror flick where Billy announces to everyone “I’ll go check the attic.”

    Ultimately their hubris will be their own undoing. Not that it will make it any less painful to watch.

  140. Parting shot.

    Doesn’t Focus on the Family have a corpus of systematic theology? Wouldn’t a defender of that theology be able to argue that what the prevailing opinion in this forum is prone to promote libelous and false statements about them? We could endlessly debate (which suggests to some that we shouldn’t bother).

    Last time I checked FotF did not subscribe to Catholic or Armenian principles, they are in fact basically Calvinist. That fruit is growing on THAT tree. Why? Oh my, that is out of bounds. We dasn’t talk about that for fear of offending the poor dear card-carrying Calvinists. Shades of SJW.

  141. Anonymous Reader says:

    Starting to sound like a college campus around here for some reason.

    Yeah. It is.

  142. Paniym says:

    Hey everyone………
    Am I missing something???? Are we missing the errant supposition that all this is based on???? Even more than the fact of FOTFs absolute corruption and delusion on the issue of men being morons is the pre-suppostion that women know what will make them happy. Isn’t one of the main tenants of the RP that women can’t really get in touch with what will make them happy (or what is making them unhappy). Or for that fact… what will turn them on sexually.

    Even if Beta-Hubby does everything she asks and becomes her emotional soulmate that she will still be unhappy and more so??? Why are we even discussing anything else??? Of course the Church is corrupt. Of course FOTB is totally deluded….. Both the Church and FOTB don’t even understand the basics of human behavior.

    I’m wondering if we shouldn’t maybe discuss what might really change marriages. Putting a lid on the american woman’s ego and entitlement might make slight inroads but wouldn’t it be better to help men be better men, (more masculine, more authoritative, more dominate). Isn’t this what most men need to hear. How maybe they might save their marriages instead of complaining about all the forces stacked against us. We need to understand the landscape yes but more importantly is that we need to understand inter gender relations correctly and then take steps to improve things if possible.

    I think most important of all is to understand woman and how they behave. This really doesn’t have much to do with what they say they need or think they want. Their behavior tells you the truth.

  143. Miserman says:

    God is Laughing wrote: Systems suck. They are anti-Christ.They replace the organic relationship with Jesus Christ and the Word was given in such a way as to wreck them all.

    “Organic” can also be used to describe the very individualistic, relative and constantly changing sea of thought that is Christianity. Progressive Christians also have this organic relationship so that instead of truth, all we have is opinion, oft call “interpretation.” Two Christians can come to two completely different thoughts on things like marriage and both be biblical-based and call the other heretic. That is why an “organic relationship” is not always good.

    Of course, I confess that I personally like being my own theologian and answering to no one except Jesus Himself in terms of how I read and interpret scripture. So “organic relationship” allows me to be my own church, tradition, and authority.

  144. BradA says:

    Jonadab, either God decides everything or He does not. No middle ground is possible. Maybe He determined that I would be a heretic by opposing Calvanism?

    John Calvan was quite nasty as far as I have read, as goes with the territory. Any time men set themselves up as the only right way, including those here who claim the entire modern Church is heretical and only their way is right, will end up that way. That is a reason for the Scripture I quoted.

    It is not a false witness to say that he was a very harsh individual. He is well known for reacting harshly to those he believed were heretics, which ended up meaning not following his way.

    Solomon,

    I did not say we should all abandon “churches” for such meetings, now did I?

    Several who immediately replied to you suggested just that. That was the context of my reply. I didn’t hear you dispute that. Do you dispute their claims?

    Someone else already took apart your claim that early Christians are necessarily a good guide. They may be, but they may not be as well. They were far from perfect as well.

  145. BradA says:

    I never did personally figure out why Dobson split from FotF. He seems to be teaching very similar things on his own show now, but I haven’t listened to either for quite a while so I am not certain.

  146. Wheat and tares Miserman, you will know them by there fruits. I don’t want God to conform to my image, Romans 1 warns about this, I also don’t want to worship a God conformed in the image of a systematic theology.

    When God said to Moses, “I AM” He was staying out of that corner that man is always so desperate to try and shove Him into. For the letter killeth but the Spirit giveth life.

  147. Looking Glass says:

    I thought Dodson mostly retired, which is why he separated. From reading up, that’s not quite what happened.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20130609064357/http://www.drjamesdobson.org/about/commentaries/the-rest-of-the-story

    (It’s no longer available on the site)

    The retiring thought (which a lot of people have) would appear to be due to him transitioning away from running the FOTF’s main radio program some years ago. So there was a period he was off the air and now is only on the air in a much smaller presence.

    Oh, oh, now this is getting interesting. http://www.christianissues.com/champ.html

    See point #5. (Though I don’t see much use for the rest of the website) A few other checking around and it does appear that James Dobson’s son was frivorced. Now that’s a wrinkle I probably should have expected, actually, but hadn’t.

  148. But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me. And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
    (Joh 5:36-40)

  149. @Serouslydropit: “I’m only half joking. There is basically a phantom academic field that’s been constructed here on the internet, complete with its rival schools, peer review, and specialized vocabulary.”

    Only half joking? I think this whole manosphere is an untapped gold mine. This is such powerful truth it will have to go mainstream at some point. Even totalitarian dictatorships couldn’t hide the truth and they didn’t have the internet.

    @Boxer: “It’s one thing for people to spew this nonsense if they’re ignorant and are just parroting what they were told by some “expert”, but another thing entirely to be willfully spreading it to increase donations and curry favor with women”

    Except how does this even curry favor with women? This is bad advice for everybody in the relationship. These “experts” MUST know that this advice doesn’t work. Letting a woman lead with her emotions rather than controlling and leading them with masculine stoicism is a recipe for dead bedrooms followed by divorce rape. They know. They also know that women will buy their books and they will get good reviews and press by advocating bowing and scraping. I am convinced they know it is anti-biblical. They must know it doesn’t work.

  150. It was Zwingli in Zurich that did the drowning. “A History of the Churches”.. http://www.wayoflife.org/database/protestantpersecutions.html

    I didn’t see your post AR, as I stated before we have “The Pilgrim Church” by E.H Broadbent.

    also:
    http://gameo.org/index.php?title=Geneva_%28Switzerland%29
    http://www.a-voice.org/tidbits/calvinp.htm

    That first one is telling, it’s almost as if the Scientologists learned a trick or two there. Shut down debate by screaming heresy/witchcraft/offense…..where have we seen that before?

  151. MarcusD says:

    @Scott

    I have to say, that thread is one of the better ones – the husband isn’t being blamed outright (and solely) by everyone.

    Reminds me of the image from FishEaters: http://simulacral-legendarium.blogspot.ca/2014/02/caf-confirms-what-many-already-knew.html

  152. MarcusD says:

    Texas university students in dildo protest over gun law
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34507760

    Texas students are planning to hang sex toys from their bags in protest at a law allowing people to carry concealed weapons on university campuses.

    “You’re carrying a gun to class? Yeah well I’m carrying a HUGE DILDO,” Jessica Jin, organiser of Campus (DILDO) Carry, wrote on Facebook.

  153. Tom C says:

    I think the debate in Texas is primarily over concealed carry vs. open carry. It might be more dangerous to the public to carry your dildo openly since someone could forcibly take it from you.

  154. Boxer says:

    Dear Marcus D.:

    Last Saturday evening, I went to an evening mass at a historic cathedral. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed it, and plan to go again. In any event…

    Mid Life Crisis + I love you, but am not in love with you
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=982806

    Interesting thread. Nice to see Xanthippe is posting non-stop nonsense in the comments section, as usual (one wonders if she ever gets off the computer, even for a few hours).

    One thing I have heard from a diverse group of people is of the effectiveness of retrouvaille. Not that it necessarily always works in keeping marriages together, but if a marriage can be saved, the Catholics know all the tricks to keep it going.

    Alternatively, an errant wife could just come to Dalrock, and talk to Father Boxer, for the scared-straight speech. That man who is so boring loves and adores you is your last chance at a civilized life. Some of us might sex you up, if you’re especially hot or kinky, but none of us is going to call the next day. You aren’t shit to us. Your husband, on the other hand… heh heh. Plenty of younger models will jump at the chance to get with a confirmed family man with a good track record — all of whom are better looking than your tired ass. So know your role. Get down on your knees, ho’, and get to work.

    Regards,

    Boxer

  155. MarcusD says:

    @Boxer

    Last Saturday evening, I went to an evening mass at a historic cathedral. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed it, and plan to go again.

    I always enjoy the Romanesque, Gothic, and similarly-styled cathedrals of Europe, in particular. Add in the organist who might be practicing, and I have a pleasant few hours. Mass is always excellent, and I can understand why some of the ones in larger cathedrals get immense crowds (both participants and onlookers).

    Nice to see Xanthippe is posting non-stop nonsense in the comments section, as usual (one wonders if she ever gets off the computer, even for a few hours).

    I recently put some of her “greatest hits” through a Markov chain text generator and, much to my great amusement, was able to get text strings that mimic her (including some of her comments made recently). I think I’ll write a script to gather all of her comments, then create an account to post the generator output in threads she’s in. If I can automate bad advice, perhaps she’ll leave.

    Plenty of younger models will jump at the chance to get with a confirmed family man with a good track record — all of whom are better looking than your tired ass.

    There’s a book and a few papers on such a phenomenon, e.g.:
    Tuch, Richard. The single woman-married man syndrome. Jason Aronson, Incorporated, 2002.

  156. Urban II says:

    Holy mercy. That thread was just a non-stop validation of feelings of selfishness. Unbelievable.

  157. Gunner Q says:

    MarcusD @ 12:36 am:
    ““You’re carrying a gun to class? Yeah well I’m carrying a HUGE DILDO,” Jessica Jin, organiser of Campus (DILDO) Carry, wrote on Facebook.”

    Isn’t that a fascinating insight into our enemies’ mindset? Responding to more men carrying guns by hanging their manhoods in effigy is not something a rational person would come up with. Is this a shit test or a death wish?

    On the upside, another quote from the article: “As a parent I feel more comfortable with my children having a weapon on campus rather than a dildo.” There’s hope for Texas.

    Also upside, “A student was armed during a recent college shooting in Roseburg, Oregon, but he did not use his weapon. He was not in the building where the shootings occurred, and he also said he feared police could have mistaken him for the gunman, putting his life in danger.”

    In other words, he was willing to protect himself but not the liberals getting shot. White knighting is reaching its limit!

  158. PokeSalad says:

    Texas students are planning to hang sex toys from their bags in protest at a law allowing people to carry concealed weapons on university campuses.

    “You’re carrying a gun to class? Yeah well I’m carrying a HUGE DILDO,” Jessica Jin, organiser of Campus (DILDO) Carry, wrote on Facebook.

    A very useful gesture, as it will allow others to know instantly who self-identifies as an idiot.

    “By their dildos ye shall know them”

  159. Anonymous Reader says:

    I think the debate in Texas is primarily over concealed carry vs. open carry.

    No. At this time Concealed Handgun Licence holders in Texas (Texans and those from states with reciprocity) are prohibited from carrying concealed firearms on university campuses. This will change next year, I believe in August of 2016, and then Texas CHL holders will be able to lawfully carry concealed, loaded handguns onto college campuses. Open carry has nothing to do with it.

    It might be more dangerous to the public to carry your dildo openly since someone could forcibly take it from you.

    I do not always agree with Anonymous Conservative but this is such an obvious rabbit vs. wolf (r / K) disagreement, it is almost textbook quality.

  160. Mariah8 says:

    I am guessing the wife in the CF thread started out with some mental illness(narcissism comes to mind “Look at all my special need kids aren’t I a saint ?” ). Not many sane people think that adopting 5 special need kids is a good plan and every women I have met that does that (and usually seems to be the wife’s idea) is pretty BSC.

  161. Pingback: Against the justice of the Churchians [I Cor 15] | Dark Brightness

  162. Anonymous Reader says:

    Mariah8
    (narcissism comes to mind “Look at all my special need kids aren’t I a saint ?” )

    I’ve seen a few families that don’t just adopt out of sympathy or empathy or for religious reasons, but rather collect certain children as status symbols. Rather like some of the Hollywood types. It doesn’t seem to work out well in the long run or even the intermediate run.

    In this case it is entirely possible the man was the instigator and the woman went along, but now is having serious second thoughts. That would account for some of the things she’s said, IMO.

    This is not to criticize those who have adopted children. Some of my friends and co-workers are raising orphans, or children whose mothers gave them up at birth. But I think there is an obvious subculture that accumulates status points with every child they adopt. Why we are doing something matters a lot.

    I thought about posting a simple observation to CAF along the lines of “Isn’t divorce strictly against the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church?” but decided it would be a waste of electrons, given the nature of the regulars over there.

  163. Mariah8 says:

    I shouldn’t have sad every one I met was crazy, I know a few who have adopted under horrific circumstances and done fantastic, I should have said ” most”.

  164. feeriker says:

    Not many sane people think that adopting 5 special need kids is a good plan and every women I have met that does that (and usually seems to be the wife’s idea) is pretty BSC.

    As AR said, there is a perverse subculture that does this for reasons of narcissistic self-aggrandizement and that has ZE-RO to do with the love and welfare of the children (who often go on to lead lives more miserable than they would have if they’d just stayed in orphanages or foster care).

    This makes sense given the modernist attitude that children are essentially whatever adults find them most convenient to be: abstractions, prescious gifts from God, nuisances, status symbols, or some combination of all four at different times, to be dealt with as the occasion calls for (and in accordance with the feeeeeeeeeelings of the guardian adult at the moment).

  165. MarcusD says:

    Choir replaces ‘Jesus’ with ‘Hillary’ in gospel song

    I was immediately reminded of CAF/CF, for whatever reason…

  166. DannyD on the Cafe post needs somebody to give him a link to Married Red Pill.

    >will be leaving me soon. Really our marriage was not what it should be. She also mentioned she has checked out of parenting the kids it has been too much.

    >Since that time I have made her the number one priority in my life.

    Oh Hell No! Please don’t do that.

    >Unfortunately this has only pushed her away even more.

    These stories are almost starting to get boring. It’s like I can read the lines in the code or something.

  167. @Heidi: “I’ve been interested in that thread. As usual, the man is roundly castigated for his wife’s determination to divorce; as usual, counseling and groveling are held out as the man’s one chance to win back his wife. What is the right answer?”

    The Right Answer is for the man to step up and take charge of his family, stop taking shit from her, take care of his personal bullshit because you know there is more to the story- he fucked up something or other- get in shape, lift weights, get a busy and exciting life, learn how to fuck like a cave man, lead his family, deal with her shit tests and emotional maelstroms (mostly by IDGAF) and ultimately learn approach and seduction and practice approaching other women. I missed a couple steps but basically If all that doesn’t work you tell her fuck me, or fuck you. She doesn’t leave you. You leave her.

    The focus on that thread is on the wife and kids but that isn’t the problem at all. That was never the problem.

  168. The Question says:

    I was thinking over this NYT story quote you included at the top of this post and was wondering; is it possible that the secular world might return to some semblance of traditional marriage at some point in our lifetime, where divorce is only reserved for the most drastic of cases and couples are encouraged to remain together despite challenges? And if they do, will the mainstream Christian Church be ready to embrace them and condemn divorce outright because they no longer fear rebellion, or will they be so slow to adapt that they will actually be the ones justifying frivorce while the culture itself campaigns against it?

    We already see this in the Manosphere. Many non-believing Manosphere writers understand what the Bible says on marriage better and interpret it more accurately than those in churchianity because they don’t feel the need to reconcile it with mutually exclusive views.

    If it ever occurs, it will be a strange day to witness.

  169. MarcusD says:

    Husband is forcing me through a divorce
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=983144

    Dating practicing Catholic women
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=983191

  170. Looking Glass says:

    @The Question:

    Oh, we can expect some really strange cooperation and agreements. History of full of them. I was discussing this with someone the other day about WW2. The USA teamed up with either the 2nd or 3rd most evil regime of the 20th Century to beat, at best, the 4th most evil regime of the 20th Century. The victory in Asia over Japan would also give rise to the most evil regime of the 20th Century (as well as either the 2nd or 3rd most evil, depending on where you compare levels of “evil” by % of own population murdered or raw numbers).

    It just happened to be that Germany had the skill set & ability to be directly expansionist at the time, so we had a very good set of reasons to get into a war with Germany. Would have been nice to remove Soviet Russia as well in the 1940s.

  171. Menotyou says:

    @snowdensjacket0x0x0 says:
    October 12, 2015 at 3:01 pm

    So where are we supposed to turn to? I’ve more or less abandoned my church for all the reasons outlined in this blog. My brothers at church are angry about it but I’m not going to support a church that is teaching anti-Biblical nonsense. I can learn to go against Biblical teaching from secular society. I don’t need to support a church that is only teaching more that goes against the scriptures.

    So what do we do? I’ve made my problems perfectly clear and was told, basically, to sit down and shut up.

    ——–

    If you want to study the bible and truly live a Biblical life i can attest to the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

    I’ve been fascinated with and studied virtually every religion on the planet in my quest for Truth. The Witnesses are the only ones who actually stick to the Word of the Bible. And that’s precisely what grinds the gears of feminists and modern ‘Christianity’ in general. The headship is fully respected by true Witnesses. Which i believe is the undermining factor of most marriages.

    Their detractors are mainly the churches you have been frequenting and they are producing the toxic fruits you are eating.

  172. Dave says:

    @MarcusD

    Husband is forcing me through a divorce
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=983144

    Here is a part of the thread in the catholic Forum:

    Commenter “ProdglArchitect” asked:

    Did something happen, or does your husband have a history of drastic mood swings?

    Clearly, the husband was not forcing her through a divorce; she was forcing him through one, because if she had been honest from the beginning, a divorce would not be necessary, since a marriage would not have taken place. The woman had withheld significant information about the cause of the divorce, so she fessed up:

    To answer your question, yes, something happened. Well, a couple somethings, actually. First being that I was diagnosed with bipolar disorder. The second was that he found out that prior to our marriage, there was an instance of infidelity on my part.

    Did anyone notice that this woman did not take responsibility for her actions, and clearly did not express a remorse? She should have said “I have a mental illness called bipolar disease, and I was sexually loose even before we got married. Although I tried to deceive him by projecting a chaste exterior, he found out anyway. Now he thinks he deserves a better woman (as he should). I am scared of facing the consequences of my thoughtless actions”.

    This woman continued:

    Other than the meeting with the court, I haven’t seen or spoken to him since the beginning of June. We are also a no fault divorce state, so he has an easy out according to the courts.

    I’m not sure what scares me more, having the marriage declared valid or having the marriage declared invalid. I want to fight for this marriage, since for right now, we have to assume that it is a valid marriage. I know we have a lot to work through, but I also know that it can be worked through, with the grace of God.

    No, God will never work it through, because you have not yet repented of your sinful behaviors. You must own your sins first before you can give them to the Lord.

    I’m currently in therapy to help me through this. I believe he is going to therapy as well, but I don’t actually know.

    You don’t need therapy; you need repentance.

  173. Dave says:

    If you want to study the bible and truly live a Biblical life i can attest to the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

    I’ve been fascinated with and studied virtually every religion on the planet in my quest for Truth. The Witnesses are the only ones who actually stick to the Word of the Bible. And that’s precisely what grinds the gears of feminists and modern ‘Christianity’ in general. The headship is fully respected by true Witnesses. Which i believe is the undermining factor of most marriages.

    Their detractors are mainly the churches you have been frequenting and they are producing the toxic fruits you are eating.

    Obviously, you don’t know much about the Witnesses. They are probably the only “Christian” group who deny the Lordship of Jesus Christ. They are so neck deep in error it’s not even funny.
    Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in an eternal hell. Nor an eternal heaven. Thy do not believe that Jesus is God, or that He has the same authority as God the Father.

    If your requirement in a religious group is their respect for the traditional family head, you might as well embrace Islam.

    Here are some JW damnable errors:

    Jesus was “a god”:
    “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” John 1:1

    Hell is in this world (or at least, it’s only figurative): http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2008802

    And hell has no fires at all. Those in hell feel no pain:
    http://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/what-is-hell/

    There is no heaven (it’s in this world too!):
    http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102004255
    You see, that judgement of fire predicted by Peter was just a figure of speech; the earth “is forever”.

    When you die you’re done: you will not live again

    JW are completely deluded, only a little different from the Mormons, who believe in an eternal marriage and men becoming gods and rulers of planets in the future. They might as well talk about the 70 virgins which Muslim “matyrs” receive after they blow themselves up on the streets of Afghanistan.

  174. Pingback: Punishing with her presence | Dalrock

  175. Caspar Reyes says:

    Having just seen the Calvinism-Arminianism debate solved, we’re now about to see the JW issue put to rest. Coming up: the final installment to the infant baptism question. I’ve been waiting 400 years for this.

  176. PokeSalad says:

    As AR said, there is a perverse subculture that does this for reasons of narcissistic self-aggrandizement and that has ZE-RO to do with the love and welfare of the children (who often go on to lead lives more miserable than they would have if they’d just stayed in orphanages or foster care).

    In extreme cases, the parents (usually the mother) have been known to secretly and systematically poison the children so that they a) remain sickly and dependent on her, and b) she can fulfill her fantasy/gain validation by being the ‘suffering saint’, sacrificing everything to ‘save’ the kids.

  177. Gunner Q says:

    Looking Glass @ 1:31 am:
    “It just happened to be that Germany had the skill set & ability to be directly expansionist at the time, so we had a very good set of reasons to get into a war with Germany.”

    In point of fact, we never declared war on Germany. Despite the efforts of a very globalist President, America was determined to stay out of the war until Pearl Harbor. We then declared war on Japan. Germany then declared war on us to honor their pact with Japan.

    The partnership with Stalin didn’t happen until Hitler inexplicably opened the Eastern Front.

    Menotyou @ 2:49 am:
    “If you want to study the bible and truly live a Biblical life i can attest to the Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

    Dave is absolutely correct. If you think the JWs follow the Bible then you’re worse off than a Churchian.

  178. BradA says:

    My grandfather was a strong Roman Catholic and he and my grandmother went to the downtown RC church in Columbus, Ohio in his last years of life because they had a traditional service. My grandmother was maintained she was a Lutheran for all the time I knew, but she continued going to that RC church until she died a few years later. Interesting how strong leadership carries on.

  179. The premise here is that women are better at marriage because they are unhappy being married. Since men tend to be for the most part content in honoring their vows, and women tend to be unhappy doing so, this is proof that women are better at marriage than men.

    Not sure how you arrived at that summation. The women are unhappy in a marriage that isn’t functioning the way a marriage should. And the men are content in their cluelessness. They are happily ignorant of the hurt they do to the people—their wife and children—they should be most invested in.

    How you missed the point is beyond me.

  180. BradA says:

    Mariah,

    We adopted 4 kids who turned out to have more special needs than we realized. Some claimed we were saints (at the time), though quickly turned when the kids learned to play the system as teens. I would definitely agree it is not a smart path toward achieving anything intentional other than perhaps helping the children out.

    I drove that adoption because I wanted a family and it seemed a good thing to do. I have long since been disabused of that notion, far too late. I do have a relationship with my oldest son, but a spotty one with his younger brother and nothing but scorn from my two daughters who are ruining their lives in different ways.

    I definitely hold contempt for those who pursue that route with looking for kudos. It is bad enough for all involved. Self promotion cannot help.

    BPP (quoting someone else):

    >Since that time I have made her the number one priority in my life.

    Depends on what that means. Pandering would be idiotic, making sure she gets what she REALLY needs would be sensible, but might get him thrown in jail.

    Marcus,

    Your video makes me think of this song:

  181. Art Deco says:

    “I never did personally figure out why Dobson split from FotF. ”

    I think they’ve spilt from him.

    My hypothesis would be the Dr. Dobson is simply not intimidated and never has been. As far as I can see, as an older generation dies and retires (e.g. Francis Schaffer, Bill Bright, Charles Colson, Richard Land, and Dr. Dobson) leadership stratum of the evangelical would appears to have been taken over by other-directed people pleasers and manipulators (pretty common among clergymen) who are animated by marketing and unwilling to be trenchant in critiquing the culture. See Russell Moore, the goofball who succeeded Dr. Land as director of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission at the Southern Baptist Convention, who embarrasses every time he opens his mouth (“Jesus was an illegal immigrant”). See the cretins who rechristned the Campus Crusade for Christ “The Cru”. See some of the characters at evangelical colleges, especially the theologians who suddenly discover in late career that Jesus favors homosexual pseudogamy.

  182. Art Deco says:

    “The women are unhappy in a marriage that isn’t functioning the way a marriage should. And the men are content in their cluelessness. They are happily ignorant of the hurt they do to the people—their wife and children—they should be most invested in.”

    Or, they are going about their proper business and are not attention whores.

  183. BradA says:

    Art,

    That could be, but Dobson still pushes enough feminist imperative stuff, so it was not a complete break in the sense of finally going that way.

    My view of ignorance rather than malice may be based more on him and people like him than those who now run FotF.

    Though I still think idiocy explains far more in life than we would like to admit. People can be committed to something outside all reality.

  184. RichardP says:

    BradA – your video post triggered a thought in me. This song could be the theme song for BP men going RP around these parts. “Now in my house there’s been a mercy killing. The man I used to be’s been crucified … Water Grave. Two versions. Taff is in both.

  185. RichardP says:

    @Dave: “… and hell has no fires at all …”

    The Hebrew “sheol” and “gehenna”, and the Greek “hades” are translated as “hell” in the King James Version of the Bible. Sheol and Hades are the grave, the place where dead people are. Gehenna was a place outside of ancient Jerusalem where they burned the garbage. The fires never went out. Thus, anything cast into those fires burned until it was totally destroyed. A good metaphor for where death and the grave will be cast in due time.

    The record shows that the ancient Hebrews at least did not believe that fire existed in sheol, the grave. And the grave, sheol, hades, hell, are not going to last forever.

    And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire … Rev 20:13-15
    Both death and hell die the second death.

    http://biblehub.com/dictionary/h/hell.htm

  186. MarcusD says:

    @Dave

    I’m interested in seeing the responses she get to her most recent comment. I suspect they will minimize the severity of her actions.

    Her account name is also rather interesting.

  187. Mariah8 says:

    @ BradA
    I think staying sane and functional while raising 4 kids like that is an achievement. Outcome in those tough situations sometimes all a matter of perspective and degree, what may feel like a fail now might look very different from the other side. Bless you for taking it on, I think it is very hard for anyone who hasn’t to really understand just how tough and heartbreaking it can be.

  188. Dave says:

    The women are unhappy in a marriage that isn’t functioning the way a marriage should.

    And how exactly should a marriage function? The wife is to be supportive of her husband, to love honor and obey him, and to defer to him and help him be the best husband possible. Which part of that is the wife doing? Why is she unhaaaappy?
    Is the husband responsible for her unhappiness? Wouldn’t she remain unhappy even if single and unmarried?

    The husband is to love, protect and provide for his wife. Which part of that is the husband not doing?

    And the men are content in their cluelessness. They are happily ignorant of the hurt they do to the people—their wife and children—they should be most invested in.

    Which hurts did they cause, specifically? How did they hurt their children?
    Many wives get their husbands to plead guilty on trumped up charges; the husbands comply to preserve peace in the home and stave off the threat of divorce.
    More recently, the men said they had had enough. They would note tolerate these intolerable women any longer. They either look abroad to marry, or remain single. So why are the women still unhaaaaappy?

  189. Dave says:

    The Hebrew “sheol” and “gehenna”, and the Greek “hades” are translated as “hell” in the King James Version of the Bible. Sheol and Hades are the grave, the place where dead people are. Gehenna was a place outside of ancient Jerusalem where they burned the garbage. The fires never went out. Thus, anything cast into those fires burned until it was totally destroyed. A good metaphor for where death and the grave will be cast in due time.

    The record shows that the ancient Hebrews at least did not believe that fire existed in sheol, the grave. And the grave, sheol, hades, hell, are not going to last forever.

    And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire … Rev 20:13-15
    Both death and hell die the second death.

    http://biblehub.com/dictionary/h/hell.htm

    Really? Jesus must have been drunk when He said this:
    I say to you, My friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that have no more that they can do. 5″But I will warn you whom to fear: fear the One who, after He has killed, has authority to cast into hell; yes, I tell you, fear Him! Luke 12:5

    So Jesus was saying, “Be afraid of the One who will wait till you die and have no feelings left, then cast your lifeless bodies into a fireless figurative place resembling the dump site outside Jerusalem?
    Doesn’t that sound ridiculous to you?

    Briefly, this is what the Scriptures teach about man and his destiny:
    1. Once created, man lives eternally, because the breath of God lives inside of him.
    2. Both the righteous and the wicked will live forever.
    3. There is a literal heaven and a literal hell. God dwells in heaven and will continue to do so throughout eternity.
    4. Before the death of Christ, all the dead righteous were held in a place called Paradise—against their will, by the devil. When he died Jesus went there, dispossessed the devil of the key to this place, and liberated the righteous souls therein. Many of them showed up to folks in Jerusalem at the time.
    5. Currently the paradise is empty; when a Christian dies they go straight to meet with Christ in heaven.
    6. Hell, actually, has at least 2 departments. There is the fire part housing the dead wicked; and the Paradise part which housed the dead righteous until 2000 years ago.
    7. Currently, the fire part of hell is occupied by the wicked dead, and everyone who dies between now and the second resurrection. Once resurrected and judged, the wicked will be cast into the lake of fire. Hell too would have finished its job, and will be similarly decommissioned. Same goes for death.
    8. Eternal “heaven” will actually be a new heaven and earth which descends from God after the judgements. The Bible even gave its dimensions. This is where the righteous will live forever.
    9. Yes, the fires in the lake of fire are real, are hot and are forever. The “smoke of their torments will rise forever and ever”.

    I can quote chapter and verse for each of the above assertions when I have the time.

    Please don’t let the JW mislead you. JW are false teachers founded by a false prophet.

  190. Dave says:

    @MarcusD

    I am waiting to learn more about this “Helen of Troy” too.
    It is absolutely distressing to see what has become of the modern American woman. She seems totally impervious to reason and common sense, and unable to grasp the relationship between action and reaction.

  191. RichardP says:

    @Dave: “Really? Jesus must have been drunk when He said this:”

    I truely don’t understand what you were referring to with “Really?” It sounds like you think I said something incorrect. Let’s take the verse you quoted after you said “… Jesus must have been drunk when He said this:” I don’t get what point you were making by quoting that verse. I was simply stating the the Hebrew and Greek words sheol, gehenna, and hades were translated into the word “hell” in at least the Kings James version. In the verse you quoted, “hell” is translated from “geennan”, or “Gehenna”. The rest of this post should be easy enough to follow. If you have trouble, say so and I’ll do my best to help you.

    Click on the first link below, then notice the two column headings – Greek and English. In the English column, scroll down until you find the word “hell” – toward the bottom. Then look to your left and notice the Greek word that has been translated into “hell”. Look to the left of the Greek word, in the Transliteration column. It says “geennan”.

    http://biblehub.com/text/luke/12-5.htm

    To the left of “geennan” at the link above is Strong’s word “1067” That number is hyperlinked. It will take you to this link:

    http://biblehub.com/greek/1067.htm

    I meant to include the following link in my post above:
    http://biblehub.com/dictionary/g/gehenna.htm
    —————–

    This thread is not an appropriate place to discuss this in any more specifics, but I will say the following – because you (Dave) confused me with your answer. The Bible was not written in English, so we do well when we care enough to lean what the original authors were actually saying to their audience in their original language.

    You mentioned that the “smoke of their torments will rise forever and ever”.On the subject of “forever”, note that the Bible also says that the smoke of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah would rise to the heavens forever (plus other instances that I am not including here). We can go to the location of ancient Sodom and Gomorrah and see that the smoke is not still rising. When the Bible uses the term “forever” it does not always mean eternally. Jewish writing contains much hyperbole.

    With regard to the word “hell” in the Kings James version, that word is translated from the Hebrew sheol and the Greek hades, the place where the dead people are – and from the word Geennan or Gehenna, the place where once the fires never went out, and destroyed for eternity what was thrown into the fire. Death and the grave (sheol, hades, hell) will not live forever. Death and the grave (sheol, hades, hell) are going to be thrown into the Lake of Fire, the second death. And that Lake of Fire is not named “hell”.

    Dave, most of what you have said about “hell” above shares more in common with Greek mythology as revealed in Dante’s “Inferno” and Milton’s “Paradise Lost” than it shares with the Hebrew and Greek words that the original books of the Bible were written in.

  192. JDG says:

    Rebecca – How you missed the point is beyond me.

    It’s not that the point was missed, it’s the fact that you, like all feminists, think that woman are the moral authority in marriage (and society for that matter). Having rejected the scrptures you are without understanding. Woman was made for man, not the other way around. If you don’t see this simple little fact, how can you possibly know wether or not a marriage is functioning properly?

  193. RichardP says:

    @Dave (Cont.)

    Finally Dave, here’s a connection between the quote you gave from Luke 12:5 and my quote from Revelation 20:13-15: Except for those who are alive when Jesus comes again, all of us go through death to the grave. That is the punishment that God promised Adam and Eve and their descendents for eating the forbidden fruit. God drove Adam and Eve away from the Tree of Life “lest they eat of it and live forever”. That punshment imposed on all of us because of Adam and Eve, death and the grave, is not final. ALL will be raised from this first death – some to life everlasting and others to destruction everlasting (you can Google on “destruction” or “destroyed” for the scriptures if you aren’t familiar with them. See the last paragraph below).

    Those whose names are not found in the Lamb’s Book of Life will be sent away from the Judgement Seat to die the second death. This second death is final. There will be no resurrection from it. As I’ve quoted above, being thrown into this Lake of Fire is the second death, from which there will be no resurrection. Death will be thrown into there. The grave will be thrown into there. Those whose names are not found in the Lamb’s Book of Life will be thrown into there. Who has the ability to throw death and the grave / hell and those whose names are not written down into the Lake of Fire, the second death from which there is no rescue? God. God has this ability. Man can kill the body, and force it into death and the grave – the first death. Only God can take that dead body, bring it back to life, stand it in front of the Judgement Seat, and then cast that resurrected entity into the Lake of Fire – the second death – from which there will be no rescue. Only God can do that. We should rightly fear him who can do that, as the verse you quoted says (Luke 12:5). As the Greek New Testament rightly says – fear him who has the power to throw you into Gehenna, the Lake of Fire that never goes out, so that what is thrown into it is destroyed for eternity.
    —————-

    Note that Paul spends some time proclaiming that the final enemy to be destroyed/annulled is death. (1 Corinthians 15:25-26) In the English column at the following link, find the word “annulled”. Look to the left to find the transliterated word and Strong’s number. Both are hyperlinked to take you to different pages.

    http://biblehub.com/text/1_corinthians/15-26.htm
    http://biblehub.com/greek/2673.htm

    Whatever Paul meant there that was going to happen to “death” happens when death is thrown into the Lake of Fire (Rev. 20:13-15). Whatever happens to “death” in the Lake of Fire also happens to the grave (hell) when it is thrown in. And whatever happens to “death” in the Lake of Fire also happens to those whose names were not found in the Lamb’s Book of Life when they are thrown in. We know so because the Bible says so.

  194. Menotyou says:

    @Dave says:
    October 16, 2015 at 9:13 am

    “Obviously, you don’t know much about the Witnesses. They are probably the only “Christian” group who deny the Lordship of Jesus Christ.” (Pot, Meet Kettle)

    —They do not deny the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Patently False! I study with Witnesses and Jesus most certainly is their only Lord and Saviour. Not sure where you are getting your information? I get my information straight from an Elder at Bethel, Australia…

    “They are so neck deep in error it’s not even funny. Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in an eternal hell. Nor an eternal heaven”

    —ECC 9:5 – For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

    So If the dead are conscious of nothing, how can they perceive hell? Or Heaven for that matter? Something to think about… How do you reconcile that part of Scripture? Use any version you please!

    Did you know that the original word for hell is ‘Hades’ which is also interchangeable with ‘Grave’. Etymology too is a fascinating field of study which is greatly intertwined with the Bible. The Bible being the first piece of written technology. And all Technology evolves over time…

    In my technologically driven occupation, laser guidance technology has been so well accepted and relied upon now that no one knows how to do it the old fashion way should the technology ever fail. It is exactly the same with words. Over time they lose their meaning or morph into something entirely unrecognisable and we forget the original meaning of the word (over thousands of years) and apply incorrectly.

    “Thy do not believe that Jesus is God, or that He has the same authority as God the Father.”

    —They do not believe in the Trinity because it is a false scriptural teaching. The Son indeed has the Authority of The Father on Earth. But they are NOT One and the Same. You approach the Father through the Son.

    “If your requirement in a religious group is their respect for the traditional family head, you might as well embrace Islam.”

    —That is not a sole requirement but in my opinion is incredibly important (also relevant to this article and the question posed by the commenter to whom i replied) to a stable and fruitful marriage. Two headed beasts are an abomination. JW is the only Christian group that solidly respects AND demonstrates the headship among other things. I respect demonstrations far more than explications.

    “Here are some JW damnable errors:

    Jesus was “a god”:
    “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” John 1:1

    Hell is in this world (or at least, it’s only figurative): http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2008802

    And hell has no fires at all. Those in hell feel no pain:
    http://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/what-is-hell/

    There is no heaven (it’s in this world too!):
    http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102004255
    You see, that judgement of fire predicted by Peter was just a figure of speech; the earth “is forever”.

    When you die you’re done: you will not live again”

    — I answered these questions and objections in my responses above. (re ECC 9:5 and False Trinity Doctrine)

    “JW are completely deluded, only a little different from the Mormons, who believe in an eternal marriage and men becoming gods and rulers of planets in the future. They might as well talk about the 70 virgins which Muslim “matyrs” receive after they blow themselves up on the streets of Afghanistan.”

    — JW’s take the Word to it’s logical end. No mental gymnastics required. They believe Jesus is their one and ONLY saviour. They believe the Word is inspired of God and that all Scripture is worthy of teaching. They believe as Jesus commanded to be like/emulate Him. And they do. To the letter.

    If you doubt this, please organise a bible study with a Witness and request an Elder. I did, just to debate and argue. That’s my nature. So far no other ‘Priest’ ‘Rabbi’ ‘Pastor’ or ‘Monk’ ‘New Age Guru’ (et al), has ever satisfied my curiosities like an Elder Witness with Scripture to back up every single assertion. And it is hard to refute Scripture.

    As an aside, all JW’s are encouraged to read the bible a minimum of once per year. The man i study with has read the bible 23 times since beginning his ministry. Most proclaimed ‘Holy Men’ have not read the bible in its entirety let alone 23 + times. They know their Scripture because it is incumbent on them all to read the bible thoroughly. Everyone is encouraged to become competent in preaching the Word, and Only the Word. The Bible is not just for the Priestly Class.

    And sure, the JW’s may have some failings or bad apples and they acknowledge their imperfections. But they always strive to emulate Christ in everything they do.

    Do yourself a favour and organise a bible study and see if your Scriptural understanding holds any water. You just may be impressed.

  195. Menotyou says:

    @ Gunner Q says:
    October 16, 2015 at 10:43 am

    Menotyou @ 2:49 am:
    “If you want to study the bible and truly live a Biblical life i can attest to the Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

    Dave is absolutely correct. If you think the JWs follow the Bible then you’re worse off than a Churchian.

    As mentioned, I’ve studied them all (religions) purely for personal and philosophical reasons. I was always of the opinion that none of them really stuck to the Words of God. Specifically, Love Thy Neighbour and Love Thy Enemy. That is my litmus test. Judge by the fruits. Buddhism was always my favourite what with their elaborate teachings, penchant for Love/Harmony and cryptic riddles.

    I judge by the fruits. Oh and what fantastic fruit the modern Christian World has produced!

    For instance JW’s will go to death before picking up a rifle against another human. JW’s are probably the most persecuted christian group on earth and yet they defend themselves admirably and will turn the other cheek exactly as Jesus commands. I challenge you to go toe to toe with a good Elder with your understanding of Scripture.

    Do not despise thy neighbour son. It is not becoming of the Lord. There is no reason to hate. Instead you debate. Prove your assertions with Scripture and grow with the Lord. I implore you.

  196. Menotyou says:

    @ RichardP says:
    October 16, 2015 at 4:24 pm

    Thank you for asserting the Truth. This is what we are all here for! To be routinely challenged in our understanding of Scripture is completely necessary to improve our understanding and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as our saviour.

    There is only One truth. And our job is to ferret it out and take a side. Which side you end up on is entirely determined by your understanding and faith in the Scripture. This is why we must continually study and challenge one another. Thank you again for helping me challenge this often misunderstood part of Scripture.

  197. RichardP: the “land of forgetfulness”?

    Wilt thou shew wonders to the dead? shall the dead arise and praise thee? Selah. Shall thy lovingkindness be declared in the grave? or thy faithfulness in destruction? Shall thy wonders be known in the dark? and thy righteousness in the land of forgetfulness?
    (Psa 88:10-12)

    For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
    (Ecc 9:5)

    The only way to have eternal life is to partake of the Tree of Life (Christ Jesus as He hangs on the cross). Barring this we are slated for destruction, oblivion. That’s the way I read it. There is no life.

    And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
    (1Jn 5:11-12)

    Without eternal life there can be no eternal suffering. Total consumption is well supported in the Scripture. The Fire is eternal, what is consumed is not.

    For our God is a consuming fire.
    (Heb 12:29)

  198. Dave says:

    @RichardP

    Man can kill the body, and force it into death and the grave – the first death. Only God can take that dead body, bring it back to life, stand it in front of the Judgement Seat, and then cast that resurrected entity into the Lake of Fire – the second death – from which there will be no rescue.

    Nope. You missed it big time. When a person dies, their body is dead and gone and rotten, and will never rise again. It is their spirits that will be resurrected, and at resurrection, will have a different body—a totally new one.

    But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body. 1 Corinthians 15:35-38.

    Except for those who are alive when Jesus comes again, all of us go through death to the grave. That is the punishment that God promised Adam and Eve and their descendents for eating the forbidden fruit. God drove Adam and Eve away from the Tree of Life “lest they eat of it and live forever”.

    Scriptures recognize three typees of deaths:
    1. Physical death: this is what people generally refer to as death
    2. Spiritual death: this is the natural state of all unregenerated people
    3. Eternal death: this is the state of those who experience physical death while in their state of spiritual death.

    None of these deaths represent cessation of existence. Each means SEPARATION.
    1. When a person dies physically, they are separated from the life they knew, and fail to respond to the stimuli from that life. It does not mean that they cease to exist. In all cultures of the world, people still honor the dead in some way, because they know instinctively that somewhere, the “ancestors still live, and looking down on their descendants”. Animists regularly pray to the spirits of their dead ancestors when in need of help.
    2. When a person dies spiritually, they are separated from God and the purposes He meant for them. Rigght now as we speak, billions of people are walking the earth, dead in sin and alienated from the life of God. As far as God is concerned, they are dead. But that does not mean they cease to exist.
    3. When an unsaved person dies physically, they are judged and then die eternally, meaning, they are forever separated from God and have no hope of a future redemption.It does not mean they cease to exist.
    It would be silly of God to create an elaborate “lake of fire” to cast non-existent people into, if indeed “death” means cessation of existence. Moreover that very fact makes mockery of the justice of God, because someone like Hitler and other tyrants would get away with genocide forever.

    When Adam and Eve sinned, they both DIED instantly—-spiritually (as God had warned), and became sinners. God cannot lie.
    They lost their fellowship with God and rather than loving Him, became afraid and began to hide themselves–just as sinneers do today. They began to live under condemnation, again, as all sinners do today.

    When a spiritually dead person comes to Christ and makes him the Lord of their lives, they become “reborn”—spiritually, and are “raised from a state of spiritual death”.

    …you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. Colossians 2:13

    But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)… Ephesians 2:4, 5

    The Prodigal Son was “dead” to the father, until he came to his senses and turned from his sinful life. We all knew he never ceased to exist:

    For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate. Luke 15:24

  199. Jehovah’s Witnesses are not Christians. I’ve studied with them too. They deny the divinity of Jesus, stating that He was a created being like Lucifer. Brrrrrrrrt, wrong answer.

  200. @ Dave, I was considering this the other day. Maybe you could kick me a thought?

    I was thinking this verse is referring to our spirits (it’s what I’ve been taught).

    Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
    (Eph 2:5-6)

    And where were we before? In death, right?

    The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
    (Isa 61:1)

    I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
    (Rev 1:18)

    I’m thinking that the gates of hell do not prevail against the Church because He has broke us out of them and out of there (and given us the keys).

    And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
    (Mat 16:17-19)

    Thoughts?

  201. Dave says:

    @Menotyou

    You are not “rightly dividing the word”. (2 Timothy 2:15)
    Trying to establish a doctrine with a single verse of scripture is unscriptural, because every word shall be established “under two or three witnesses”. See Deuteronomy 19:15.

    So If the dead are conscious of nothing, how can they perceive hell? Or Heaven for that matter? Something to think about… How do you reconcile that part of Scripture? Use any version you please!

    Haha. Your views are interesting, but doubly erroneous.
    The passage quoted:

    ECC 9:5 – For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

    Obviously sees the dead from human perspective. Yes, a dead person is no longer aware of their surrroundings, can neither feel pain nor pleasure, and soon after, they are not even remembered. How many carpenters and masons who lived a thousand years ago can any of us name today?

    But Divine views are totally different, because there is a reward for the righteous:

    And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them. Revelation 14:13.

    And, the “dead” actually still feels, sees and talks, as clearly shown in the story of Lazarus and the rich man and in many other places:

    And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

    Questions for you to address:
    1. When the beggar died, what part of him was carried by the angels? His physical body, or his spirit being?
    2. The rich man was in hell, and in torments. Did you say this hell was figurative again, or you’d like to retract your earlier statement?
    3. Again, the dead sees, feels, can talk and even prayed–albeit to the wrong person. Does that answer your questioon about the consciousness of the dead?

    As far as humans are concerned, being dead never, ever means cessation of existence. This is because man carrries within him the breath of life, which made him a living soul. Animals die and are gone forever because they do not have the breath of God within them. The breath of God makes us unique, and imparts an ability to live forever within us.

    We will all live forever, whether in the new heaven and earth, or in the lake of fire. I pray it be the former.

    They do not believe in the Trinity because it is a false scriptural teaching. The Son indeed has the Authority of The Father on Earth. But they are NOT One and the Same. You approach the Father through the Son.

    Let Jesus Himself address that:

    I and my Father are one. John 10:30
    That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. John 5:23
    Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost Matthew 28:19

    In my technologically driven occupation, laser guidance technology has been so well accepted and relied upon now that no one knows how to do it the old fashion way should the technology ever fail. It is exactly the same with words. Over time they lose their meaning or morph into something entirely unrecognisable and we forget the original meaning of the word (over thousands of years) and apply incorrectly.

    Actually, words do not lose their meanings at all, except to a section of the population. E.g. to the millennials, text means “a series of letters you send through your cell phone, etc”. To those living thousands of years ago, it may mean a parchment or its contents. The word has not changed or lost its meaning, but simply mean different things to different sets of people, and each group can claim originality.

    The man i study with has read the bible 23 times since beginning his ministry.

    Even if a man reads error a million times, it would still be error.

    Questions for ya;
    1. How does a person become a Christian in the JW circles?
    2. Do they teach being born again?
    3. If there is no heaven and we all die and are forgotten, what is the reward for believing?

    HENCEFORTH, please let us address ALL QUESTIONS with Scripture. We are not interested in what anyone writes on the subject. Unless of course they have the properly applied scripture to back up their assertions.
    Our faith “should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God”. 2 Corinthians 2:5. We do not want to follow “cunningly devised fables” (2 Peter 1:16).

  202. @ Dave, watch this construction closely:

    Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them. And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
    (Gen 3:21-23)

    What had to be eaten to live forever? Did Adam and Eve partake of it (and us as we were found in Adam)? What was the purpose given here for sending Adam and Eve out of the Garden?

  203. Menotyou says:

    @God is Laughing says:
    October 17, 2015 at 12:20 am

    Jehovah’s Witnesses are not Christians. I’ve studied with them too. They deny the divinity of Jesus, stating that He was a created being like Lucifer. Brrrrrrrrt, wrong answer.

    —It would be helpful instead of blindly refuting that you provide some Scripture to back your assertions. I am all for learning the Word. If you have Scripture that supports your arguement it would be incumbent upon you to enlighten me/rest of us so i/we can dissect the scripture and at least learn something.

    Otherwise, we are free to disagree.

  204. Oh, second witness:

    And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
    (1Jn 5:11-13)

    Where do we get eternal life from? It doesn’t abide in us, it abides in Him.

  205. Menotyou:

    KJV:

    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
    (Joh 1:1-14, KJV)

    NWT:

    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. This one was in the beginning with God. All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence. What has come into existence by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light is shining in the darkness, but the darkness has not overpowered it. There came a man who was sent as a representative of God; his name was John. This man came as a witness, in order to bear witness about the light, so that people of all sorts might believe through him. He was not that light, but he was meant to bear witness about that light. The true light that gives light to every sort of man was about to come into the world. He was in the world, and the world came into existence through him, but the world did not know him. He came to his own home, but his own people did not accept him. However, to all who did receive him, he gave authority to become God’s children, because they were exercising faith in his name. And they were born, not from blood or from a fleshly will or from man’s will, but from God. So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of divine favor and truth. (Joh 1:1-14 KJV)

    So was Jesus, the Word “a god” or “God”? The Greek suggests that they were all together at the creation leaving no question about who was doing the creation, the JW text leaves us wondering which “he” it is talking about.

    Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: (Php 2:6-9, KJV)

    Every name? Yes even “Jehovah’s”? Uh, huh.

    Keep this mental attitude in you that was also in Christ Jesus, who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God. No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form+ and became human. More than that, when he came as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death, yes, death on a torture stake. For this very reason, God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name, (Php 2:6-9, NLT)

    Can’t have a created being esus(god) coming out on top of Jehovah (God) can we?

    The texts are subtle, the teaching less so. Ask a Jehovah Witness of Jesus was big-“G” God and they will tell you “No, he was a created being.” Tell them that you are a believer and ask them if they will pray in the name of Jesus and they will refuse, despite:

    And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.
    (Joh 16:23)

  206. Oops, second reference was to the NLT corruption not the KJV.

  207. Dave says:

    @God is Laughing says:

    I was thinking this verse is referring to our spirits (it’s what I’ve been taught).

    Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: (Eph 2:5-6)

    And where were we before? In death, right?

    My understanding is that it addresses our spirit man. We are all naturally dead in sins. Even highly religious ones among us, like Nicodemus, remain unsaved until we make a definite commitment of our lives to Christ, and begin to live according to His words.
    Because of being dead in sins, we are “alienated from the life of God”, with our understanding of spiritual things being “darkened” (Ephasians 4:18), and we consider divine requirements to be absolutely ridiculous (i.e “foolish”):

    But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned 1 Corinthians 2:14

    I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. (Rev 1:18)

    The devil used to hold those keys, until Christ died and took them from him, liberating the souls previously held captive under him:

    When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) Ephesians 4:8-10

    These were mainly the souls of the righteous dead from the Old Testament. Many of them actually appeared to those who were living at the time:

    Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. Matthew 27:50-53

    You noticed that Jesus said He was “dead and is alive again”? To JW, he should have ceased to exist.

    I’m thinking that the gates of hell do not prevail against the Church because He has broke us out of them and out of there (and given us the keys).

    And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Mat 16:17-19)

    My understanding is that “Gates of hell” actually means “Headquarters of hell” (i.e. where all the strategies against the Church are planned). The term was frequently used in the OT as the elders “gathered at the gates” to dicuss matters of mutual importance, and to judge the guilty:

    The husband of the virtuous woman was respected at the gate (i.e. among the elders of the city):

    “Her husband is respected at the city gate, where he takes his seat among the elders of the land. (Proverbs 31:23).

    You can get more info here: http://www.gotquestions.org/city-gate.html

    Excerpt:

    Besides being part of a city’s protection against invaders, city gates were places of central activity in biblical times. It was at the city gates that important business transactions were made, court was convened, and public announcements were heralded. Accordingly, it is natural that the Bible frequently speaks of “sitting in the gate” or of the activities that took place at the gate. In Proverbs 1, wisdom is personified: “At the head of the noisy streets she cries out, in the gateways of the city she makes her speech” (verse 21). To spread her words to the maximum number of people, Wisdom took to the gates.

    Today, the “Gates” could mean “The City Hall” in a small town.

  208. http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/who-is-jesus-christ/

    Screwiness all over.

    Specifically:

    “12. How do we know that the firstborn Son is not equal to God?

    12 Is the firstborn Son equal to God, as some believe? That is not what the Bible teaches. As we noted in the preceding paragraph, the Son was created. Obviously, then, he had a beginning, whereas Jehovah God has no beginning or end. (Psalm 90:2) The only-begotten Son never even considered trying to be equal to his Father. The Bible clearly teaches that the Father is greater than the Son. (Read John 14:28; 1 Corinthians 11:3) Jehovah alone is “God Almighty.” (Genesis 17:1) Therefore, he has no equal. ”

    In light of John Chapter 1 where we told that He was WITH God at the creation and NOTHING was created WITHOUT him. Even the NWT misses this. (Oops, looks like they need to take it on for even more revision).

    The New World Translation is a joke, it changes to suit the requirements of the JW’s and just lining it up to refute you I’ve seen it’s been revised since the last time I worked it over on one of their cultists.

  209. @ Dave, where were our spirits before they were quickened?

  210. The importance of Jesus being God cannot be overstated. He died on the Cross for the sins of the world. If He was a created being why wouldn’t the blood of a created sheep have sufficed?

    And Araunah said unto David, Let my lord the king take and offer up what seemeth good unto him: behold, here be oxen for burnt sacrifice, and threshing instruments and other instruments of the oxen for wood. All these things did Araunah, as a king, give unto the king. And Araunah said unto the king, The LORD thy God accept thee. And the king said unto Araunah, Nay; but I will surely buy it of thee at a price: neither will I offer burnt offerings unto the LORD my God of that which doth cost me nothing. So David bought the threshingfloor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver.
    (2Sa 24:22-24)

    What kind of sacrifice is it when God could have lined an infinite number of created golems to spill their meaningless blood for eternity? Jesus was God, the uncorrupted John Chapter 1 is clear on that topic.

  211. Menotyou says:

    @Dave says:
    October 17, 2015 at 1:08 am

    @Menotyou

    You are not “rightly dividing the word”. (2 Timothy 2:15)
    Trying to establish a doctrine with a single verse of scripture is unscriptural, because every word shall be established “under two or three witnesses”. See Deuteronomy 19:15.

    –Ok, that’s fair enough, Dave.

    “For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun. . . . Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.” (Ecclesiastes 9:5-6, 10 – emphasis added)

    “His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.” (Psalms 146:4)

    “The dead praise not the LORD, neither any that go down into silence.” (Psalms 115:17, cf. 6:5)

    “These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.” (John 11:11-14, cf. 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17)

    Isaiah 57
    1 The righteous man perishes, and no man takes it to heart;
    And devout men are taken away, while no one understands.
    For the righteous man is taken away from evil,

    2 He enters into peace;
    They rest in their beds,
    Each one who walked in his upright way.

    They perish and enter into peace to rest in their beds (their graves) Isaiah 57

    Daniel 12
    New International Version

    2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake:
    some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.

    They awake from their sleep in the dust of the earth (their graves).

    13 “As for you, go your way till the end.
    You will rest, and then at the end of the days
    you will rise to receive your allotted inheritance.”

    Daniel was told by the angle of God that at his death he would rest until the resurrection (at the end of the days you [Daniel] will rise to receive your allotted inheritance).

    So multiple times it teaches that at death we go to our sleep, we are at peace. We rest there until we arise at the end of time, the resurrection.

    There’s a few that i can’t reconcile. How do you reconcile these, Dave? I’m here on this earth to learn and if you have something (you believe) valuable to impart regarding these Scriptures I’m genuinely interested in your perspective. But in my studies i have noted a few scriptures that support their (Those JW’s you seem to loathe?) assertions.

    I’m not here for a fight brother. I have long held the opinion that no single Christian church has all the answers and that’s precisely why they splintered into 30,000 versions and counting. I’m trying to dissect the Truth of which there are many versions and every single one will claim THEY (and only they) know the Truth. And there can logically only be One truth. So far, JW’s explanation has satisfied my questions whereas other doctrines leave only more questions and mental gymnastics trying to reconcile the seemingly contradictive Scriptures i noted above.

  212. We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
    (2Co 5:8)

    I’m also wondering when the last time anyone experienced total unconsciousness? Seems like a curious thought to me.

  213. The JW’s never let the Bible contradict their assertions. They have erasers for that.

  214. Also Menotyou, when do you suppose you will have completely understood God? When do you think in eternity that you will have finally understood all Truth? I posit never. I am a finite, created being learning about the Alpha and Omega who is infinite, without beginning or end.

    When I find something I think is contradictory regarding the Word I’m learning to be patient, inquiring of the Holy Spirit:

    If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
    (Jas 1:5)

    I stopped looking for pat answers, systematic theologies, insisting that everything make sense to me. I’m a child.

  215. Menotyou says:

    @God is Laughing says:
    October 17, 2015 at 2:48 am

    When I find something I think is contradictory regarding the Word I’m learning to be patient, inquiring of the Holy Spirit:

    If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
    (Jas 1:5)

    —That’s the most helpful thing you have imparted so far, thank you.

  216. Dave says:

    @Menotyou,

    You probably missed these questions:

    Questions for ya;
    1. How does a person become a Christian in the JW circles?
    2. Do they teach being born again?
    3. If there is no heaven and we all die and are forgotten, what is the reward for believing?

  217. Dave says:

    JW are not Christians, though zealously religious. They are the Mormons in some respects. They have their own bibles and offer fantastic interpretations to them.
    I have heard about some JW going to check out the best houses in town, because they believe they will “inherit” the earth, and they better pick out the best properties.
    The whole notion would have sounded ridiculous if not tragic. Matters of eternal life are not to be joked about. If you are a JW, please recognize that you are in error, and come to Christ. Honor Him exactly as you would honor His Father. Submit to Him, and turn from your sins. There is no other way to be saved.
    The doctrine of Trinity in the Godhead is very clear in scripture, unless you want to close your eyes to the plain truth of the Bible.

  218. Menotyou says:

    @Dave says:
    October 17, 2015 at 3:14 am

    You probably missed these questions:

    Questions for ya;
    1. How does a person become a Christian in the JW circles?
    2. Do they teach being born again?
    3. If there is no heaven and we all die and are forgotten, what is the reward for believing?

    —This is completely irrelevant to the original argument which was regarding ECC9:5 (et al) and what happens until the Resurrection, except for the 3rd point you raised.

    3. All the dead (in history) are Resurrected and judged according to their deeds and those that have accepted Jesus as their Lord and Saviour will gain Everlasting Life. The others will receive eternal death. I thought this was obvious?

  219. Dave says:

    Actually they are all relevant.
    If a person can become a JW without becoming born again, it means they are still in an unsaved state.
    If JW does not emphasize repentance from sin, and faith in the atoning death of Christ alone for salvation, it means they have not even begun to understand what Christianity means.

    By accepting Jesus as a god, JW are actually practicing idolatry, because they recognize a God and a god. How many gods do they really serve?

  220. Dave says:

    I’m not here for a fight brother. I have long held the opinion that no single Christian church has all the answers and that’s precisely why they splintered into 30,000 versions and counting. I’m trying to dissect the Truth of which there are many versions and every single one will claim THEY (and only they) know the Truth. And there can logically only be One truth. So far, JW’s explanation has satisfied my questions whereas other doctrines leave only more questions and mental gymnastics trying to reconcile the seemingly contradictive Scriptures i noted above.

    If you really mean to know the truth, you will have to ignore the sayings and writings of men, and stick with the Scriptures. Get a copy of the original Greek NT, and a Greek dictionary, and go on your knees before God, asking Him for divine light. If you offer fervent prayers, and do diligent studies, you will find the truth. Forget about what JW tells you. Forget all other denominations. Seek the truth for real, and you will find it.

    Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding; If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures; Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God. For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding. He layeth up sound wisdom for the righteous: he is a buckler to them that walk uprightly. Proverbs 2:3-7

  221. Menotyou says:

    @Dave says:
    October 17, 2015 at 3:46 am

    “By accepting Jesus as a god, JW are actually practicing idolatry, because they recognize a God and a god. How many gods do they really serve?”

    —JW’s do not believe that Christ is God. But the Son of God. One can only be saved via the acceptance of Christ (The Son) in their lives and no one else. Funnily enough. Idolatry is one of the main things they call out Catholics and other religions for with all their prayer focus and worship on Mary and various Saints instead of asking in the name of Jesus Christ as instructed.

    Jesus was for the gentiles too. All that is required for salvation is faith in Christ. That is written in all of the Gospels. We are encouraged by Christ to emulate him and if you listen/respect John, some will even go on to create ‘Greater Works’ which ultimately means that of/or equal to Christ as per John, but that’s another discussion. All with Faith in Christ alone.

    King James Bible
    Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. If ye love me, keep my commandments And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also. At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

    —I used the King James in this instance since that’s the most cited and accepted English translation today. Most versions say the same thing though (check via biblehub) including the New World which i won’t cite if it upsets the sensibilities of others.

    “If you really mean to know the truth, you will have to ignore the sayings and writings of men, and stick with the Scriptures.”

    —I didn’t realise that ECC, Is, Dan, John, Thess and all the others i referenced above as written by men? I thought those books were the inspired Word of God? It is almost verbatim in all translations and i personally never rely solely on one version. It’s the continuity of interpretation and the application that matters.

    I have no allegiance to anyone but Jesus Christ, who i have accepted as my Saviour. That is all that is required other than the commandment to emulate Christ in everything you do and uphold His commandments until he returns.

  222. Menotyou says:

    @ Dave, the sideliners and the curious…

    Questions for ya;
    1. How does a person become a Christian in the JW circles?
    2. Do they teach being born again?

    1) You accept Jesus Christ as your One and only Saviour. You commit to reading and studying the bible for yourself and developing a personal relationship with God through Christ and try to emulate the actions of Christ in your everyday life. They know everyone has inherited sin and imperfection and thus can only try their best. But they try…

    2)The born again (144,000 and The Multitude – Rev) are born again to rule in heaven with God after judgement day. The 144,000 are the ones (they believe could be among their ranks) that served an important role in bringing the Kingdom of Heaven to Earth and eventually rule with the Father in heaven as their reward. The rest of us that Truly accepts Christ as their Saviour will inherit the Paradise on Earth and live an everlasting life with the Kingdom on Earth as was originally intended. Bringing us back to Perfection which has always been the plan. Christ being the New Everlasting Ruler.

    Otherwise what’s whole the point of them going incessantly from door to door preaching the Word trying to save people with Christ?

  223. Opus says:

    Each day I see Jehovah’s Witnesses on the other side of my road attempting to flog The Watch Tower: a small number seen as a bit cranky but harmless. Parading your politics or your religious views, is seen, here, as somewhat inappropriate or embarrassing but what would be even worse would be to say so and so they are left in peace. I learned something interesting last night about another smallish group The Salvation Army: one of their number tried to explain – as best she could – that they are not really a church but a citadel (hence the military uniforms, ranks and so on) – perhaps the last vestige of The Empire, I fear, and with uniforms that makes one think of that now long-forgotten group, The Suffragettes.

  224. Dave says:

    The born again (144,000 and The Multitude – Rev) are born again to rule in heaven with God after judgement day. The 144,000 are the ones (they believe could be among their ranks) that served an important role in bringing the Kingdom of Heaven to Earth and eventually rule with the Father in heaven as their reward. The rest of us that Truly accepts Christ as their Saviour will inherit the Paradise on Earth and live an everlasting life with the Kingdom on Earth as was originally intended. Bringing us back to Perfection which has always been the plan. Christ being the New Everlasting Ruler.

    Too many cunningly devised fables here. Can you cite the appropriate chapter and verse of Scripture to back up these claims?

    1. That only the 144000 are the born again ones
    2. That anyone will live in Paradise forever?
    3. Which earth are you referring to? The current one? How do you reconcile that statement with Peter’s writings:

    2 Peter 3
    10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
    11Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
    12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
    13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

    Are you going to inherit this present earth after it has been burned up?

  225. Dave says:

    They know everyone has inherited sin and imperfection and thus can only try their best. But they try

    When a sinner comes to Christ and becomes born again, they receive a new heart, a heart of flesh, and a new nature—one that is happy to please God. It is not a matter of “trying” or of being moral, or of reading the Bible. Far more than that. When you become a Christian, the Holy Spirit baptizes you into the body of Christ, and Christ sends His Spirit to dwell inside of you. You literally become a new creation, because old things are passed away for you.
    It is not a religion. It is a miracle. A miracle of rebirth. Until you have this experience, you are only a religious person. You do not have the life of God, and neither do you have a hope of everlasting life.

    Please do not be deceived. There is much more to being a Christian than attending church and trying to disprove hell.

  226. Menotyou, you never responded to whether Jesus was God or a god. That is the significant distinction that separates JW’s from the Body of Christ.

    Jesus went to the cross for this statement: “I am.”

    YHWH. That is Jehovah.

    And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
    (Exo 3:14)

    Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
    (Joh 8:58)

    I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
    (Rev 1:8)

    All of the JW nonsense is just the long way round of denying Jesus Christ.

    Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
    (Mat 10:32-33)

  227. Gunner Q says:

    Menotyou @ October 16, 2015 at 10:59 pm:
    “As mentioned, I’ve studied them all (religions) purely for personal and philosophical reasons. I was always of the opinion that none of them really stuck to the Words of God. Specifically, Love Thy Neighbour and Love Thy Enemy. … Buddhism was always my favourite what with their elaborate teachings, penchant for Love/Harmony and cryptic riddles.”

    Okay, so you aren’t JW either. You’re an atheist trying on religions like clothing, looking for a good fit, searching for a god who meets your requirements. I’ve no problem with that. Just don’t suggest the second greatest commandment is actually the first greatest commandment or take offense if we laugh at you for thinking Buddhists make good Christians.

    “I challenge you to go toe to toe with a good Elder with your understanding of Scripture.”

    That could be fun. I haven’t encountered a JW since childhood, when my mother answered the door and evangelized a JW on the spot. He claimed to be one of Revelation’s 144,000. She asked if he was a virgin because the 144,000 are all virgins per Rev. Then she asked which specific Jewish tribe he was from, which is important because not only are the 144,000 all Jews, but the tribe of Dan is not among them. He started asking Mom questions about Christianity. Then the supervising elder cut the visit short and the JWs never visited our street again.

    However, passing the buck to a “good Elder” is weakness. Here in the Manosphere, you defend your own statements.

  228. Dave says:

    I challenge you to go toe to toe with a good Elder with your understanding of Scripture.

    That is JW’s MO: once you get them cornered, they quickly go back to their elders to get a refuel, or bring an elder with them at their next visits.

  229. Then they re-revise their erasable Bible. I’ve been with Elders in person.

    The problem for them is the entirety of the redemption story of the Bible and how the whole thing points at Jesus, NOT JEHOVAH. It’s positively layered by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in ways that sabotage their efforts to revise it. It like trying to reweave a spiderweb with your toes blindfolded and drunk. Any tampering is abundantly clear.

  230. Menotyou says:

    G’day guys,

    Look I’m relatively new to posting around here (and looking forward to future discussions on various RP topics) but i am hesitant to hijack this thread any further than we presently have. We’ve now (d)evolved to a thread bash against JW for what i can only gather are misinformed individuals and i have no real authority to continue. This is why i suggested a JW elder (demonstrably experienced person) of which there is no harm in doing if you are as competent as you believe in your understanding of Scripture. There is no harm! Why are you so afraid/upset? If anything you will only develop more faith. Which is positive either way.

    @ Dave

    “That is JW’s MO: once you get them cornered, they quickly go back to their elders to get a refuel, or bring an elder with them at their next visits”

    —Oh please, Dave. It is only common sense to have/bring the most competent leaders when being challenged. It is their spiritual obligation to provide a more experienced person to explain and defend their position with Scripture. How is this diabolical? The statement above is the equivalent of sending you into spiritual battle/debate for every single Catholic instead of someone entirely more qualified like a Bishop or perhaps The Pope.

    The reason for my original post was in reply to a commenter about feeling disenchanted by the teachings of his local Christian churches. Namely, disrespecting the authority of the Husband.

    I suggested only to investigate JW and discern for himself. I had noticed the headship is fully respected and demonstrated by JW’s and is so far the only Christian group that does not automatically pander to women. They (cruelly according to most ‘Christians’) shun and eject promiscuous women and unrepentant sinners. Which is far more than i observe with almost every other so called Christian group afraid of losing members. Men run the show at JW. Women are to support Men. And that is a fruit i have noticed consistently produced by Witnesses. JW women know their place and never question it.

    This is all i have to say and there is no need to further provide your ‘wisdom’ or ‘knowledge’ of JW as most have proven here that they have no real knowledge of JW. So if you want to start a fight. Start one with a JW Elder and prove your understanding of Scripture from whatever launchpad you please.

  231. Menotyou says:

    @Gunner Q says:
    October 17, 2015 at 2:59 pm

    Okay, so you aren’t JW either. You’re an atheist trying on religions like clothing, looking for a good fit, searching for a god who meets your requirements. I’ve no problem with that. Just don’t suggest the second greatest commandment is actually the first greatest commandment or take offense if we laugh at you for thinking Buddhists make good Christians.

    —Mate, i already stated here above that i believe and have accepted Jesus Christ as my Saviour. And according to the Words of Jesus himself, is all that is required of me. That is truth i have accepted. Which is virtually the only one congruent ‘Truth’ among all ‘Christians’. So i am merely being prudent in as much as only searching (researching religions) for congruent truths.

    Also, if you would read between the lines of my prior statements you must surely deduce my historical position to be that of Agnostic? An atheist has no faith. But i digress…

    Unlike those who were automatically BORN into the ‘RIGHT’ Christian religion, i was (fortunately some would say) not born into indoctrination. And left (encouraged) to try and find the truth on my own. I spent half my life studying all major religions attempting to sort the wheat from the chaff. As such, i have developed a reasonably solid understanding of the tenets of most major religions during my rigorous search for truth. Not the one (truth) Mummy and Daddy said was right. Not the one (truth) i was just born into and never, ever question…

    I am researching religions (narrowed to Christianity) that fit the Holy Scriptures, not the other way around. And i have no allegiance except to Christ and the Word. In my search for truth i have now accepted Jesus as The Truth. but so do 35,000 other Christian denominations all claiming their special and unique version is the right one, when logic dictates otherwise.

    The main/major Christian groups are clearly and utterly failing us and are producing the most foulest of fruits. And this is evident! There is also a high probability that your chosen religion is one of them and i bet you are whinging that your pastor consistently lets women off the hook? Well at least that is what seems according the article and responses above…

    (I have noticed that JW’s will eject promiscuous women and unrepentant sinners without hesitation – Hence a lot of bad rap they get from ‘judging’ these ‘poor little snowflakes’)

    @Gunner
    “However, passing the buck to a “good Elder” is weakness. Here in the Manosphere, you defend your own statements”

    —No, you and others are obliging me to defend JW against YOUR questions and YOUR objections.

    And i made a reasonable effort initially to disclose that i was not qualified/authorized to officially defend JW policy and hence my (humble) deference to those with authority (Elders). This thread is not the place to try and convince you (et al) that JW’s are the truth and the light. We could probably move this discussion elsewhere if you really wished to continue in an appropriate forum, though i doubt it.

    This whole JW discussion came about from people (like yourself) responding to a single comment that was never directed at them. They responded due to an immediate reaction/fit upon hearing the word Jehovah’s Witness. Like one of Pavlov’s Dogs…

    (I made the comment to @Snowdensjacket that JW’s fully respect headship/male authority and they WILL NOT HESITATE to eject promiscuous women and unrepentant sinners from their church – What is your church doing about these women? Declaring them heroes?)

    Apart from the ECC 9:5 related discussion above where i fully supported MY position and statements with about 5 supporting Scriptures (and subsequently asked for reasoning from those in opposition), I’m not sure which other statements you refer…

    It is not my job to defend JW and satisfy (all of your persistent) questions and objections. YOUR church has people specifically for that job too, no? It is rather unfair on ANY religion to insist it’s relatively weakest (least knowledgeable) members defend them. Only a female would ever seek to secure this type of absurd advantage…

    I have probably studied your particular Christian denomination at some length. Would it be fair of me to recommend that others visit your church and make up their own mind? I would think that quite fair! Would it be fair of me to publicly defend YOUR church against it’s most vicious opponents with my relatively limited knowledge compared to say that of your Priest or Pastor? I would think that rather unfair…

  232. There is a slight problem with the formulation that you’ve accepted Jesus Christ as your Savior if you don’t understand that He is God. I could name a dog Jesus Christ and accept Him as my Savior (fulfilling the formula you’ve cited) and it wouldn’t ever accomplish my salvation. Having faith in a fictional character isn’t going to cut it. I’m tired of the JW word games and semantic dodges. I’ve had Elders say to my face that Jesus was a created being and not God. I’m NOT ignorant on the subject.

  233. JW’s carry the pretense that they are Christian. Pointing this out to people so that don’t get deceived isn’t a bad thing. Different Bible, different God, different Christ. Not the same in any way.

    It’s not like they are Calvinists or Methodists or Anabaptists or Catholics. They don’t believe that Jesus was who He said He was and that pretty much settles it for Calvinists and Methodists and Anabaptists and Catholics.

  234. Menotyou says:

    @God is Laughing and side-liners

    I’m not going to go further into the truths of either doctrine as this was never the intended forum for such a discussion. Although our diversion was interesting nonetheless. And in the spirit of returning the comment section back to relevance i will provide a simple observation…

    I believe that JW’s are being logical when reading the bible and as thus, act accordingly. Men rule, women obey, no Mary (vagina) worship. Girls REMAIN virgins until they are married, lest they run the risk of dis-fellowship. Not very kind and forgiving of such sins apparently (some claim it quite unforgiving)… Zero Tolerance for those that know better. They hold people accountable to the truth they know.

    Catholics (et al) seem to have an airy-fairy mystical way of reading the bible. And as thus, Women rule the church and a large majority of those ‘good little Catholic girls are hopelessly well ridden by the time they ever marry. Such is the reputation of these fine fruits produced by Catholicism (et al) that Good Catholic Girls ™ has become a well known cliche… But you are forgiven my child! It was not your fault but the fault of those evil men who tricked you. Come here my child, tell us, what can we do to make your life better? Can one of our Fine Young (beta) Gentleman assist if they ‘Man T-F Up’?

    God is a Male God. Therefore, by virtue of being made in His image, capable of similar attributes we can only deduce that HE is a God of Logic. If it required some real abstract thinking and mental gymnastics and mystical like interpretations God would have assigned Women as rulers over Men. But, i digress…

    I’ll put this really bluntly. The bottom line is this… (incredibly relevant to this article)

    I’ve been to your churches (Catholic/Protestant/Prysb, et al) and found they were full of sluts… How can i listen to you when the fruit of your Churches (in this case women) are so sour?

    Out of a love for theology, i have recently been investigating JW’s churches (Kingdom Halls) and found an absolute chasm between the two. It was truly remarkable and i have been quite impressed. Then later, incredibly sad and depressed knowing that modern Christianity has so miserably failed us as we are forced to reconcile with the enabled sluttiness of our so called ‘Christian Women’. And subsequently berated by so called ‘Spiritual Leaders’ and given advice in violation of the bible’s clear Scriptural guidance.

    The bad fruit consistently produced by the major churches are solely responsible for my dissatisfaction with the major denominations and my continually ongoing search for the truth and those that demonstrate it. I respect Buddhism because true Buddhists demonstrate their principles in their life. That i respect far more than idle proclamations.

    The difference alone between the female attire at Kingdom Halls is absolutely striking in comparison. One has respect for God and Men. The other women clearly do not… At least the JW’s consistently produce virginal young women worthy of the title ‘Help Mate’. This is achieved and maintained with dire consequences for their sinful actions instead of enabling the venomous and debaucherous.

    Modern Catholicism (being generous) is a lot like Feminism, Preach one thing, do another.

    I live opposite a Catholic Parish in Australia and you should see what these young girls wear to ‘Church’ if that’s what you guys call it. You would not believe what women are wearing to church and funerals these days. “Behold the unrepentant Single Mothers. Behold the good little Catholic Girls (read Sluts) in their miniskirts, incapable of covering their buttocks as they take their places at the pew! Behold the Authority of Men being routinely subjugated. The attitudes and clothing that your women display is a bloody disgrace. I don’t care what truth you/they claim to have. They clearly cannot demonstrate it. Women have completely supplanted authority. Evidenced by the article above…

    Behold the fruits of your ‘Religions’!

  235. Menotyou says:

    @God is Laughing

    With all due respect, you are ill qualified and in no position to teach/preach anything when your own house is in such evidenced disorder. You might learn something with ongoing interactions with JW’s but instead you crucify their church.

    If i were to judge by the fruit alone i would write Catholicism and all its related doctrines off altogether. The well has clearly been poisoned.

  236. Dave says:

    @Menotyou:

    I live opposite a Catholic Parish in Australia and you should see what these young girls wear to ‘Church’ if that’s what you guys call it….

    You still don’t seem to get it: we are not advocating a denomination, a church, or an organization. If you’ve spent any time on this site, you would have realized that the mainstream “gospel churches” are relentlessly criticized by folks here, because those churches have missed the way.

    What we’d like you to understand is that your rejection of Jesus Christ as being equal to the Father, calling Him a “god” beside His Father “God” actually amounts to idolatry. If you do not accept the claims of Christ, you are not a Christian at all.

    Jesus minced no words about His divinity:
    I and my Father are one. John 10:30
    I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. John 8:24

    You must honor Christ as God, or you’re dishonoring God the Father:
    ALL MEN should HONOR THE SON, EVEN AS THEY HONOR THE FATHER. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. John 5:23

    Denying the Divinity of Christ while claiming to be His follower, is self-deception:
    Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. 1 John 2:22, 23

    Please stop deceiving yourself thinking you somehow “believe in Jesus Christ” when you rejected His very first claims about Himself!

  237. Menotyou says:

    Dave says:
    October 18, 2015 at 6:27 am

    @Menotyou:

    I live opposite a Catholic Parish in Australia and you should see what these young girls wear to ‘Church’ if that’s what you guys call it…. (that’s all you took from that??)

    You still don’t seem to get it:

    —-No, you still don’t seem to get it, Dave. As per the spirit of the article what i am pointing out is that you are leveling criticism upon a group that adheres to the commandments of Christ far better than Modern Christianity seems to behold. Including the church you probably frequent. Much to your dismay…

  238. Dave says:

    Nope. That was the only statement of yours I chose to comment upon.
    As long as your views are “Us versus them” you don’t get what we are talking about.
    I don’t have a personal problem with JW as a denomination, but the Word of God does. The group is deeply entrenched in error, many of which we have mentioned in previous posts.

    It is left for you to re-examine your beliefs, and humbly align them with Scriptures, or you can continue in your self deception, and miss out in the end. Again, that is your choice. But I don’t want you to go to bed tonight thinking you are a Christian. You are not—until you accept and submit to the claims of Christ, first about Himself, and then about His mission on earth. If you do not give Christ the same honor you would give God, the Almighty, you are in error, and cannot be saved. Take that back to your elders.

    I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. John 8:24

  239. Menotyou says:

    @Everyone

    If the truths of your aligned faith are producing the toxic produce you see today…
    And the Truths of another faith produces the opposite effect/fruit.

    Do you think it about time to investigate other truths and partake of other fruits?

    In the Words of the Master.
    Matthew 7
    Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

    I’ve personally observed as a relative outsider how the Jehovah’s Witness live at Bethel and the meekness of their spirits. They stand a much better chance at redemption than any other Christian denominations. How meek is your spirit? How sure are you about your Truth?

  240. Dave says:

    They stand a much better chance at redemption than any other Christian denominations….

    Again, you still got it wrong. It is not about how nice, moral or pleasant a person or group is, but of their relationship with Christ. That is what matters.
    Many people in the traditional Christian churches are not Christians. Religious? Absolutely. But Christians? Not a chance. And, as long as you keep comparing JW with what you observe in traditional churches, you are showing that you still miss the point. Those who compare themselves with others are not very smart:

    For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise. 2 Corinthians 10:12

  241. nick012000 says:

    Basically, the Jehovah’s Witnesses are nice heretics, whose practices in regards to things like the family are often in line with what we’re called to do as Christians, but they’re still heretics. Like the Mormons, I count them as allies to Christendom in our cultural war against the Synagogue of Satan and their Leftist goyim minions, but they’re not members of Christendom themselves.

  242. Menotyou, with all due respect, why on Earth would wonderful believers such as the JW’s ever want to associate with a house in such evidenced disorder? So they can lie about teachings and convince other people to join them like any other cult would.

  243. Notice how he still hasn’t addressed whether Jesus was a created being or God yet? Typical diversionary tactics. Make a claim (JW’s are Christian) and then refuse to own the doctrine which sets them apart from EVERY Christian denomination. This is doctrine only comes out AFTER you’ve been roped into the group.

    Scientologists have it down pat, they won’t let you find out about Xenu until you’ve already coughed up hundreds of thousands of dollars and are committed to their silliness.

  244. Opus says:

    That number 144,000 is very interesting: 144 is twelve times twelve and twelve itself is an interesting number; divisible without remainder by one, itself, as well as two, three, four and six. Twelve is the number of Apostles, signs of the Zodiac, Notes (I think you say Tones – same letters: different spelling) in a scale and Pennies in a Shilling sterling (old money). The OT seems to be replete with interesting numbers as is the NT.

  245. Boxer says:

    Basically, the Jehovah’s Witnesses are nice heretics, whose practices in regards to things like the family are often in line with what we’re called to do as Christians, but they’re still heretics. Like the Mormons, I count them as allies to Christendom in our cultural war against the Synagogue of Satan and their Leftist goyim minions, but they’re not members of Christendom themselves.

    The choice is quite clear, and religion has nothing to do with it: Do you want future generations to live a civilized life in a well-ordered society, or do you want their lives to be nasty, brutish, and short? If the former sounds like a better idea than the latter, then it’s your duty to oppose feminism and the ongoing deprecation of fathers.

    Doesn’t matter if you’re a Christian, Jew, Scientologist, or Satanist. Doesn’t matter if you’re Black, White, Red or Yellow, either. The only real divide is between decency and filth.

  246. Boxer, if I set up a long con that tells people that they can develop superpowers if they sign a 1 billion year contract I don’t think I represent the side of decency.

  247. Boxer says:

    God is Laughing:

    If you want to fight antifeminists, that’s your prerogative. I won’t, and no sensible person would.

    In some sense it’s amazing that I find myself talking to Christians who believe in a mythological character who allegedly rose from the dead 2000 years ago (despite no historical evidence that any such dude existed), but I don’t give a shit. I also talk to White Nationalists who hate Jews, Tommy Sotomayor, and at least one devotee of Meir Kahane. They’re all against feminism and for patriarchy, so in my book, they’re OK.

    Regards,

    Boxer

  248. Boxer, yes I understand this. But I’m not trying to bamboozle you into believing I’m an atheist while trying to slip communion wine into your drink. Feminism is only one of many unethical, underhanded civilization destroying form of shitiness. Agree to disagree within the bounds of rational argument. Abandoning rational argument is a sign of insanity and I don’t care to be on that “side” at all. Is there any standard worth upholding besides antifeminism? If not I don’t see what the point of fighting against feminism is.

  249. TL;DR, respect your tools. They are honesty, rationality and accountability and the apply to more than feminists.

  250. JDG says:

    I’ve personally observed as a relative outsider how the Jehovah’s Witness live at Bethel and the meekness of their spirits.

    When I was a young man I studied intimately with the JW for about a year and a half. My experience was different than yours. I remember their little books they always wanted me to read along with a couple passages of scripture from the JW bible, which they claimed was the correct translation (which I later discovered to be untrue). After they left I would read the rest of each book in the bible that contained the selected passages and often discovered a contradiction to the JW books (and this from the JW bible version).

    One day I told them that I wanted to continue studying with them, but only from the Bible. I told them that I didn’t want to study from the JW books any more. They never came back after that. To me that said a lot.

  251. JDG says:

    In some sense it’s amazing that I find myself talking to Christians who believe in a mythological character who allegedly rose from the dead 2000 years ago (despite no historical evidence that any such dude existed)

    I find it amazing that there are still people who believe that Jesus never existed. No self-respecting historian (secular or otherwise) would say such a thing. Writings from Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Josephus, the Babylonian Talmud, and Lucian all confirm the existence of Jesus.

    Whats more amazing is that people will use the Bible to affirm their own pet theories, yet discount it as evidence for Christ or anything Christian that they disagree with.

  252. Dave says:

    I find it amazing that there are still people who believe that Jesus never existed. No self-respecting historian (secular or otherwise) would say such a thing. Writings from Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Josephus, the Babylonian Talmud, and Lucian all confirm the existence of Jesus.

    The mind of a bigot is like the pupil of the eye; the more light you pour on it, the more it contracts.
    —–Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

  253. I don’t have a problem with Boxer’s atheism in this setting. He’s not trying to insinuate himself as something he’s not. Would I like to see him believe on Jesus Christ, of course. But, I know that this will not be accomplished by tricking him. I’m not calling what is clearly not A, A in order to count coup on him. I’m not so much interested in a sectarian fight regarding Calvinism or Jehovah Witnesses and what they door don’t believe, I do expect their proponent to own their garbage. When they resort to appeals to emotion, deflection and other logical fallacies they SHOULD be called out on it. If a logical fallacy arises it should be addressed in the forum it rears its head in. (That is my opinion anyway).

  254. JDG says:

    But, I know that this will not be accomplished by tricking him.

    Who was trying to trick Boxer? Nothing personal was meant. Nor am I attacking him. This erroneous idea that Jesus never existed has been repeated so many times that scholars gave it a name, “Christ myth theory”, and the hypocrisy of many unbelievers (not saying this is Boxer) is laughable when they use the Bible to support “item A” while refusing to allow others to use it to support “item B”.

  255. Looking Glass says:

    Jesus of Nazareth most definitely existed. Of that, there is no question. Much like Socrates, Aristotle or Mohammed. The argument is about whether he was the Son of God.

  256. I wasn’t saying you were JDG. I’m poking at the JW who insists that they are Christians while denying the divinity of Christ. I’m a Christian, he’s an atheist, that’s all above board. That’s the only point I was trying to make.

  257. Ah, my writing. Boxer is an atheist. And I agree with him that we can collaborate against feminism. What I dispute is that when people make false representations they should be called out on it and not necessarily allied with simply because they also understand the evils of feminism. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.

  258. JDG says:

    GiL – Got it. Sometimes it need it spelled out clearly. Much appreciated.

  259. BradA says:

    Boxer,

    You are normally right, but your indirect comment about Jesus lacks significant thought. He clearly existed and plenty of evidence exists for the empty tomb, with no other valid explanation for a vanished body.

    Believe what you wish though. I still think you are close to a saving faith than you or anyone else realizes.

  260. Looking Glass says:

    @MarcusD:

    You do the Lord’s work.

    But the real gem is the comments at the linked article: http://mattfradd.com/there-isnt-someone-out-there-for-everyone-and-yes-you-might-die-alone/

    It’s like the hamster found out it could wear nice clothes and drink tea all the while spinning furiously. It’s a high-class hamster on display. But, boy, is it on display.

    On the topic in general, a point on what Christians are called for: while statistics are useful, I see no one seems to ever start with God’s discussion on the topic. Marriage and sexual relationships are a secondary issue when it comes to the Christian Walk. You start with dealing with God, then you move from there. And if you ask, he’ll tell you.

    After reading more of the comments, I’ve come to realize that “God’s Plan” always means “Whatever the Hell I want to do” for 99% of the people that use the phrase. God is so far removed from all of these people.

  261. Dragonfly says:

    @LookingGlass

    I agree everything we do as Christians should begin first with our consideration of what God wants from us in dealing with them, and then “you move from there” like you said. The simple truth is that if we’re following God, becoming more spiritually mature, then we will complex things like marriage and sexual relationships will become easy to see what is right and good. Romans 13:9-10 says that

    “All the commandments are summed up by this: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. Love does no wrong to a neighbor. Love, therefore, is the fulfillment of the law.”

  262. Anonymous Reader says:

    Looking Glass,
    It’s like the hamster found out it could wear nice clothes and drink tea all the while spinning furiously. It’s a high-class hamster on display. But, boy, is it on display.

    Any comment stream that starts off with a contribution from bossy old Lydia McGrew is going to be special, that’s for sure. As for the rest, well, it’s pretty high octane “tea”. Laced with meth?

  263. Pingback: She lost her best friend. | Dalrock

  264. Looking Glass says:

    @AR:

    I think it’s more crack than meth.

  265. Pingback: FotF and Dr. Hegstrom: Check your male privilege. | Dalrock

  266. Pingback: Way ahead of you | Dalrock

  267. Pingback: God’s secret plan for every married man’s life. | Dalrock

  268. Pingback: Synthesizing the Christian Worldview and Psychology, Part II | Morally Contextualized Romance

  269. Pingback: Not listening. | Dalrock

  270. Pingback: The cult of women’s self esteem. | Dalrock

  271. Pingback: The fear of confonting sexual sin by women. | Dalrock

  272. Pingback: Not enough cash and prizes. | Dalrock

  273. Pingback: What happens when society “puts the pussy on a pedestal”. – Adam Piggott

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

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