God’s Drill Instructors (language warning)

Conservative Christians are facing a masculinity crisis.  The traditional/biblical roles of men are no longer palatable in our feminist era.  Yet part of being conservative/complementarian means stressing the difference between men and women.  The challenge is, how to take on the appearance of being traditional without upsetting feminist sensibilities?

At the same time, we’ve been so successful in stamping out biblical masculinity that we very often lack real life masculine role models.  Because Christians enabled the divorce revolution in the 1970s, large numbers of Christian men and women grew up without fathers in the home.  Making this worse, for those fathers who weren’t ejected from the home, the constant threat of ejection very often worked as designed.  As a result, modern Christians are left vehemently rejecting masculine leadership while at the same time starving for it.

I’ve written separately about this phenomenon with respect to cartoonish chivalry, which is a modern Christian caricature of masculinity based on secular entertainment.  Another closely related phenomenon is pastors as drill instructors.  Since biblical instruction on masculinity is taboo and many in the church (including perhaps even the pastor) themselves grew up without a strong father, the temptation to mimic popular caricatures of masculinity and declare them as the Christian model is extremely powerful.  This is why we so often find pastors addressing the men in the congregation by mimicking (with slight alterations) R. Lee Ermey’s character in Full Metal Jacket:

…you are pukes! You are the lowest form of life on Earth! You are not even human fucking beings! You are nothing but unorganized grabastic pieces of amphibian shit! Because I am hard, you will not like me. But the more you hate me, the more you will learn. I am hard but I am fair. There is no racial bigotry here. I do not look down on niggers, kikes, wops or greasers. Here you are all equally worthless.

The poster child for pastors-as-drill-instructors is former Mars Hill Pastor Mark Driscoll, with his famous “How Dare You!” tirade:

This famous clip is actually the climax of an hour plus sermon Driscoll preached, and his abuse of the men in the congregation began in his opening prayer:

Father God, I pray that our time would be pleasing to you, that it would be profitable to us, Lord God, as well. I pray for those men who are here that are cowards, they’re silent, passive, impish, worthless men…

The focus of the sermon is one verse of Scripture, 1 Peter 3:7:

Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with youa]”>[a] of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.

Driscoll is using this one verse to teach the men of his congregation about godly masculinity.

…most of you men don’t know what masculinity truly is.

The irony here is profound, since Driscoll clearly has a massive hole in his life in this respect.  It was Driscoll’s complete inability to model godly masculinity and his corresponding unwillingness to submit to authority which ultimately destroyed Mars Hill.  According to Infogalactic:

He described a difficult family history of abuse and crime, writing: “The men on my father’s side include uneducated alcoholics, mental patients, and women beaters…. One of the main reasons my parents moved from North Dakota to Seattle was to get away from some family members when I was a very young boy.”[22]

Very often in the sermon Driscoll’s words cause me to think he is merely repeating to the congregation the emotional tirades he received as a child, claiming they come from the Holy Spirit:

Some of you right now, you guys will get all- “Oh, how dare he yell at me.” That’s the Holy Spirit telling you, it’s you. I didn’t name you, he did. You change now, little boy. You change right now. You shut up. You put your pants on. You get a job. You grow up and maybe one day, you can love a woman. It’s for men, not for boys.

This would help explain how Driscoll came to the conclusion that the way to teach men understanding and patience was to scream at them for over an hour.  This is something a good father would have modeled for him, but clearly this either didn’t happen in Driscoll’s case or it didn’t take.  Driscoll goes so far as to claim the drill instructor model of masculine leadership and instruction is what the Bible requires:

Now my tone is for the men. We speak to men differently than women. Part of this is theological. Peter will say it in 1 Peter 3:7, that women are the weaker vessel. Think of a goblet and men are like a thermos. You could drop a thermos, bang a thermos, you could dent a thermos, it’ll be fine. You treat a thermos differently than you do a goblet. Were this a women’s conference, I would not call you all idiots and imbeciles and fools, that you’re a joke, okay? But you men, this is where it needs to go.

While Pastor Driscoll is the most famous and over the top example of this, the basic pattern is very common in a less extreme form.  As Sunshine Thiry’s pastor explained, this is most common on the day set aside to honor fathers:

…I have to tell you from history I’ve learned that often Father’s Day is one of the worst days that dads can ever choose to go to church.  Because often it’s the only time churches feel like they’re going to have the ears of dads and so what they do is they plan to beat them up royally for all they’re not doing right.  Ever been to one of those Father’s Day services?  Oh man, I have.  In fact, here in the early days of my ministry here, you know what we’d do?  Oh man, we planned.  We planned for you guys.  And then what we did is we’d sing “Cats in the Cradle and the Silver Spoon”.  And we’d talk about how you have so royally blown it, the world has gone to hell in a hand basket, and then we’d try and help you recover.

While less obvious, this is still clearly the drill instructor (or if you prefer sports training camp) theology Driscoll practiced.  In saccharine Christian culture WWJD? has morphed into WWED? (What Would Ermey Do?)  And thus, a sermon on 1 Cor 13 morphs into something like:

Listen up maggots!  Love is patient!

Didn’t your mama teach you worthless fucktards that love is kiiiind?

You are the most miserable excuse for Christian husbands and fathers on the planet!

I feel sorry for your wives and children for having to put up with such worthless nancy boys!

Fast Food Fatherhood

The boot camp/sports training model itself is not the problem.  In the right context it can be a very effective way to mold a group of men into a team.  But it is being used in the wrong context, to teach what it cannot teach.  Fathers do at times need to strongly discipline their sons, but the vast majority of the time their instruction is far more subtle.  There is no shortcut to teaching patience.  You can’t scream love and kindness into a man.  You won’t teach courage by taking the easy path.  And you won’t teach that love does not boast by declaring yourself the only real man in the room.

In a very real sense modern Christians have become the Saddest Boy Ever, craving strong fatherhood so much we seek out pastors who will abuse us.

The big difference however, is the drill instructor in the video quickly realized that the boy craving a father didn’t need to be publicly humiliated.  He hugged the boy, and took him away from the cameras.

Sorry son, mommy had to cut daddy from the team.

There is yet another problem with the drill instructor model, and that is that the model is not just about tearing men down so the instructor can build them back up as a unit over time (something the pastors can’t do in a sermon).  The boot camp/sports training model is also about weeding out the weaklings.  There is no way around this when adopting this model. The quote from Full Metal Jacket that I referenced above is bracketed by this fact:

If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training, you will be a weapon. You will be a minister of death praying for war. But until that day you are pukes. You are the lowest form of life on Earth. You are not even human fucking beings. You are nothing but unorganized grabastic pieces of amphibian shit! Because I am hard, you will not like me. But the more you hate me, the more you will learn. I am hard but I am fair. There is no racial bigotry here. I do not look down on niggers, kikes, wops or greasers. Here you are all equally worthless. And my orders are to weed out all non-hackers who do not pack the gear to serve in my beloved Corps. Do you maggots understand that?

Not only do pastors never get around to building the men in the congregation back up after demolishing them in front of their families, the whole model invites more of the very rebellion that started our masculinity crisis.  The message is that the men in the congregation are worthless pukes, but those who survive the divorce revolution the pastor is enabling will be an elite team of whipped husbands.

Even more sick is the fact that the very husbands and fathers this method is ostensibly intended to help are the ones most harmed by it.  More accurately, it is the wives and children of these men who are most harmed by the pastor-as-drill-instructor routine. The wife and children of a failing man aren’t helped in their already difficult situation by having him abused and undermined in front of the congregation.  A strong family will survive the pastor’s onslaughts with just a few more bruises, just as they survive the onslaughts from the rest of the culture.  But the weak families, the suffering ones, are the families the pastor’s drill instructor strategy will most likely “weed out”.  This is after all the intent of the model the pastors are thoughtlessly adopting, but in the new context pastors are using it in it is truly evil.  The only person in the congregation who benefits from this model is the pastor himself, who is able to promote himself as the only real man in the room, the man the other wives should wish they married, and the man the other children should wish they had as a father.

This entry was posted in Armchair Husbands, Attacking headship, Cartoonish Chivalry, Complementarian, Disrespecting Respectability, Fatherhood, Rebellion, The only real man in the room, Threatpoint, Traditional Conservatives, Wake-up call, Weak men screwing feminism up. Bookmark the permalink.

156 Responses to God’s Drill Instructors (language warning)

  1. Pingback: God’s Drill Instructors (language warning) | Aus-Alt-Right

  2. IMGrody says:

    Masturbatory self aggrandizement at everyone else’s expense. Pretty run of the mill for most congregations in my experience. I guess thats what your blog is all about… Trying to fix this.

  3. feeriker says:

    A grand slam, Dalrock!

    Right now I would love to copy this and rub it in the nose of every Protestant pastor of my acquaintance for the last ten years (that would be the only way to make any of them read and heed).

    [Driscoll] described a difficult family history of abuse and crime, writing: “The men on my father’s side include uneducated alcoholics, mental patients, and women beaters…. One of the main reasons my parents moved from North Dakota to Seattle was to get away from some family members when I was a very young boy.”

    Y’know, I’m coming to the conclusion that a sizeable number of pastors out there today, especially those who are under the age of 50, far more of them than I ever imagined, have serious “Daddy issues,” very much like the women of their congregations to whom the abase themselves and supplicate. Thinking about the church I’ve been attending for the last two years (and am about to exit for reasons stated in another thread), the pastor has on several occasions talked about his father back in Latin America being a hopeless drunk, the path he was on until he was saved. The pastor’s gringo SiL was raised by a single mom who left his drunken and drug-addicted father, who still managed to continue to abuse his son while he was growing up after mom kept taking him back. Other pastors of churches I’ve attended have told of variations of this in their own lives. If you tell them that you grew up in a normal, intact, two-parent Christian household with a dominant, loving, father who filled his role as God commands, you get a look of utter disbelief from these pastors, almost as if they cannot even grasp the concept. That this is the case tells us that these guys are the LAST people on earth fit to teach another other man about what it means to be a Christian husband and father. Indeed, they need to be on the other side of the pulpit in the pews learning a lesson from someone who has both the life experience AND the biblical perspective to do this the right way. Of course this will never happen, given that no pastor wants his authority challenged (which is how he would interpret instruction in this manner, even if it did not take place in front of the congregation).

    If me perception of the pervasiveness of the number of pastors with Daddy issues is true, then this explains why it has been so difficult for Godly masculinity to gain any traction at all in the church today. Feminism has done even deeper damage than we imagined.

  4. Fathers, husbands and bachelors who would just sit there and accept this abusive, anti-male vitriolic tirade within a holy sanctuary – a house of worship – and allow it to continue right in front of their spouses, families and children, cannot be considered men.

    I would say that instead they are either cowards or masochists, because they allow their human dignity to be destroyed at no price. For free.

    Men do not allow this.

    If they were men, then they would stand up and shout right back at these false preachers and demagogues and publicly and set them to right. Unapologetic.

    If they were men, then they would stand up and walk right out of the church, head held high.

    There is no shame in leaving those who would brutalize you for no legitimate reason.
    The greatest shame and dishonor toward one’s self and unto God would reside with those who agree to stay.

    As for the pastors themselves, they are comical. I don’t understand why anyone could take them seriously in any context, let alone within Christian dogma. They are obviously not holy men of virtue and wisdom who can guide a flock, but rather modern day money-changers seeking maximum tribute, attention and profit.

  5. An important piece of context you have to account for with Driscoll is that the guy is still stinging from the fact that his perfect ‘Bride’ had sex with some other (allegedly church youth group) guy before they were married, but while they were dating. There’s a long painful recounting of this in one of his books or a sermon of his where she felt convicted to tell him she wasn’t a virgin after he’d been going on about how he and she had done everything God’s way before marriage.

    His attitude is typical of the Beta mindset that modern Evangelical Christianity farms in men, but he’s unaware of how he perpetuates the same feminine-primacy that’s made him an Alpha White Knight with a Blue Pill belief set. He’s EXACTLY what the modern church wants him to be, an AMOG for Jesus and perpetual victim-class women in church. And he’s made all the more potent because of his impression that some other idiot, imbecile or fool banged his poor girlfriend (who couldn’t have known better) before he got to have his ordained sex with her.

  6. Truth be told I’m not even sure the DI/Sports Team model is what people think it is. This is basically a way to get young men to get with the program fast through psychological domination but it is a temporary phenomenon that you see less and less of as you go higher up. Eventually they teach you real skills to excel at your profession/sport. Incidentally they also test you before hand so they don’t let anyone into stage one who isn’t built up enough for it.

    It’s also honestly an idiots idea of what a man is like when it leaves this context. World War I veterans were tough as nail and legendarily wrote a lot of poetry. Socrates was infantry and Ignatius of Loyola had his epiphanies after being hit by a cannon ball.

    The shepherds aren’t feeding the sheep and are then yelling at them for starving. John Eldredge called it “posing”, I think. They put on a front that’s obvious to anyone who has met actual bad asses.

  7. RPchristian says:

    Being from Seattle and connected to the evangelical community here (as small as it is), I know many people who were regular attendees of Mars Hill. I actually attended a sermon once while I was in college. All I remember is the tattooed rock-stars leading “worship.”

    What’s crazy is that so many men I know continue to passionately defend Driscoll and believe he was pushed out unfairly. You don’t hear the same sentiments from women. It does has a Stockholm Syndrome-type feeling.

    Also, that video of the saddest kid ever. Man, that got me! I’d never seen that before. It should be required watching for any primary school teacher before he/she berates and shames some boy in class.

    Actually, wait. I forgot. We have a solution for boy behavior problems brought on by fatherless homes. It’s called Adderall, Concerta, Ritaline, Vyvanse…..

  8. The Question says:

    @ Rollo Tomassi

    What happened as described in their book is that Driscoll started dating/sleeping with his to-be wife after she left an abusive boyfriend she had met at a youth group. However, while she was out at a senior trip, still dating Driscoll, she had sex with some guy and didn’t tell Driscoll about it until they were about to have their first kid. It was several years later that he finally learned she had been in an abusive relationship.

    Meanwhile, their post-marriage romantic life was exactly what you’d hear about in any reddit forum. That was the source of grief for him; he had to deal with a frigid wife and baggage caused by other men, at least one of whom attended church.

    That explains the rage behind his “How dare you!” speech.

  9. The Question says:

    @ RPchristian

    “Being from Seattle and connected to the evangelical community here.”

    Glad to know there’s other Seattle area RP men besides me.

  10. RPchristian says:

    @The Question

    Would love to chat with you. PM me: RPchristian3891@gmail.com

  11. Dave says:

    I am getting more convinced everyday, that the evangelical church in America has been hijacked by non-Christians. I will not be surprised if it is later found that the church was deliberately infiltrated by those involved in social engineering.
    It is very obvious that most of these preachers were never Christians in the first place. Christ said “My sheep hear my voice”. When a follower of Christ falls into error, the Holy Spirit, has a way to reach such a person, either through conviction, or some other way. These preachers seem to be completely in the dark. As the Apostle puts it, they have “grown past feeling” (Ephesians 4:19), and are no longer able to feel God.

  12. infowarrior1 says:

    Problem with the 1950’s “conservatism” and after is the appearance of traditionalism without its essence

  13. Lost Patrol says:

    Tour de Force Dalrock.

    You’re breaking my heart with these assessments, but truth must will out. I can barely believe some of the things like this you find, but they make it all a matter of public record.

    @greenmantlehoyos:

    They put on a front that’s obvious to anyone who has met actual bad asses.

    Check. This is just one of the things that makes it all so pitiful. They don’t even know this is happening, and that it makes everything they say totally ineffective. This approach is 100% guaranteed leadership failure.

    @constrainedlocus:

    Men do not allow this.

    No. No they do not. An old cowboy would say it calls for a reckoning.

  14. Gunner Q says:

    Then there’s the other side of the weeding-out: the welcoming-in.

    https://baptistnews.com/article/baptist-pastor-defends-muslim-friends/#.WBvHc_orKUk

    They tear down and drive out Christian men then welcome anti-Christians like CAIR in our absence… and our neighborhoods! How much longer can the deception survive?

    On the bright side, perhaps there is a sitting Congressman who will NOT burn in Hell.

  15. Pingback: God’s Drill Instructors (language warning) | Reaction Times

  16. Frank K says:

    “Meanwhile, their post-marriage romantic life was exactly what you’d hear about in any reddit forum. That was the source of grief for him; he had to deal with a frigid wife and baggage caused by other men, at least one of whom attended church.”

    I guess that explains why he always telling young virgin males to “man up” and marry a single mother.

  17. Mike J Baron says:

    InfoGraphic to send to pastors who bash husbands and fathers:
    https://app.box.com/s/gdafkaspo0otq7j4f0dacdy0afw6hedb

    AMBEC fb page you can visit and join:
    https://www.facebook.com/groups/reportAMBEC/

  18. The Question says:

    @ Rollo Tomassi

    “And he’s made all the more potent because of his impression that some other idiot, imbecile or fool banged his poor girlfriend (who couldn’t have known better) before he got to have his ordained sex with her.”

    I’m dipping a little deep into the psychological here, but one wonders if much, not all, of the effort for men to marry either single mothers or overlook the pasts of prospective wives is in part a desire by the male leaders to see other men suffer as they do by marrying women they think to be worthy of life-time commitment only to find out after the vows are exchanged that their bride has no intention of providing the same sexual access or enthusiasm she did to her prior lovers, whom she may or may not have disclosed during the pre-marital counseling sessions that include a requisite “tell-all” opportunity.

    It’s “Man up and marry those sluts (who act like prudes in the marriage bed), (because I sure as hell did!)”

    The reason for this is because they don’t want to feel like “they” are the fools, that they’re the ones who got duped while other men were clever or discerning enough to see the charade for what it is. They don’t want to see other men avoid the same entrapment because it would deliver a terrible blow to their pride.

    In short, it is a massive campaign to protect their egos and rationalize their life choices they would otherwise have to accept were made in folly.

  19. The Question says:

    “The big difference however, is the drill instructor in the video quickly realized that the boy craving a father didn’t need to be publicly humiliated. He hugged the boy, and took him away from the cameras.”

    The drill instructor realized something very important that Robert Heinlein discussed in Starship Troopers:There is no such thing as a juvenile delinquent.

    “There never was, there cannot be a ‘juvenile delinquent.’ But for every juvenile criminal there are always one or more adult delinquents—people of mature years who either do not know their duty, or who, knowing it, fail.”

    The drill instructor grasped the fact that the boy wasn’t failing; somebody else was failing him. And that is why he quickly took him away from the cameras.

  20. evilwhitemalempire says:

    Is that guy even aware that the top of his head makes him look like Godzilla when he’s ranting like that?

  21. Jed Ekert says:

    Everybody wants to be a Drill Instructor, but very few can pull it off correctly.

  22. Anon says:

    the pastor-as-drill-instructor routine.

    That is an insult to drill instructors, who are respectable professionals.

    These pastorbators have more in common with trigglypuff..

    Pastorbators-as-trigglypuff….

  23. JDG says:

    Once again a very thoughtful and thorough essay. Well done.

  24. Oscar says:

    Man, that “saddest boy ever” video was heart breaking! When the boy said, “I don’t have a daddy”, they cut to the mom’s face, which to me looked guilty. Which probably means she’s the reason her boy doesn’t have a daddy.

  25. Anon says:

    they cut to the mom’s face, which to me looked guilty. Which probably means she’s the reason her boy doesn’t have a daddy.

    Of course. I think widows + father leaving comprises only 10% of missing fathers. The other 90% are due to cash and prizes AF/BB slutty mothers…

  26. These screaming/shaming methods do not work. At all. For anything. I don’t know why this continues.

  27. feeriker says:

    The Question says:
    November 3, 2016 at 9:23 pm

    I’m dipping a little deep into the psychological here, but one wonders if much, not all, of the effort for men to marry either single mothers or overlook the pasts of prospective wives is in part a desire by the male leaders to see other men suffer as they do by marrying women they think to be worthy of life-time commitment only to find out after the vows are exchanged that their bride has no intention of providing the same sexual access or enthusiasm she did to her prior lovers, whom she may or may not have disclosed during the pre-marital counseling sessions that include a requisite “tell-all” opportunity.

    It’s “Man up and marry those sluts (who act like prudes in the marriage bed), (because I sure as hell did!)”

    With some of them that is no doubt the case. If not with the pastors themselves, then with so many “good Christian men” (read: gameless beta-minus schlubs) of their acquaintance (or within their own families) that they want all of male Christendom to suffer in sympathy.

    These screaming/shaming methods do not work. At all. For anything. I don’t know why this continues.

    It continues only because Red Pill Awareness is still a very rare thing among the men in most churches. Most men KNOW that they’re being verbally sodomized by their pastors, but still lack the backbone to stand up and fight back. There are still too many brainwashed white knights in the average congregation, their condition being the result of living under Threat Point that is all too real and all too likely to be turned into action.

  28. feeriker says:

    Gunner Q says:
    November 3, 2016 at 6:58 pm

    From the linked article:

    Mitch Randall, pastor of NorthHaven Church in Norman, Okla., said in a blog Oct. 26 that the people lumped together as terrorists include two of his good friends. Randall is one of a number of pastors across the country to reach out to local Muslims in response to anti-Islamic sentiment across the nation rising from the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

    “As a Christian and Baptist minister, I stand beside my Muslim brothers and sisters because I truly believe this is what Jesus would do,” Randall said. “As an American citizen, I stand beside you because I still believe that the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land for every citizen, not just the powerful elite. In closing, to my Muslim brothers and sisters, ‘I, for one, do not consider you an enemy, but a friend.’”

    Dare I ask what seminary/Bible college this moron attended?

    No, “Pastor,” Jesus would NOT have “stood by [your] Muslim brothers and sisters.” He would have TOLD THEM TO REPENT OF THEIR EVIL, FALSE RELIGION AND FOLLOW HIM OR FOREVER BE DENIED ETERNAL LIFE!

    I’m beginning to think the Baptists are headed in the same direction as the Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and Methodists, if this assclown is representative of the new generation of Baptist “pastor.”

  29. Anon says:

    The Question,

    is in part a desire by the male leaders to see other men suffer as they do by marrying women they think to be worthy of life-time commitment only to find out after the vows are exchanged that their bride has no intention of providing the same sexual access or enthusiasm she did to her prior lovers, whom she may or may not have disclosed during the pre-marital counseling sessions that include a requisite “tell-all” opportunity.

    Yes. They double down on their cartoonish overcompensation by extolling the fat chicks in church as ‘beautiful, beautiful, beautiful’ (three times).

    This is not just cringeworthy manginatude, but even worse, a complete lack of genuine faith.

  30. It continues only because Red Pill Awareness is still a very rare thing among the men in most churches. Most men KNOW that they’re being verbally sodomized by their pastors, but still lack the backbone to stand up and fight back.

    I have never heard it in any church I have ever attended. Of course I don’t go to mega churches and there are/were (basically) no young men there, except me when I was younger. That was it. I was surrounded by old people and listened to a pastor drone on and on about…. nothing. I’m not saying this doesn’t happen since Marc Driscoll did it (and I would have had words with him after words, one on one in his office) but it never happened to me.

  31. Josh the Aspie says:

    Dalrock, you’ve got an insightful post, with things to think over, in regards to how to teach patience and love (and, as a consequence, how to learn them).

    However, there was a bit near the end that I vehemently disagree with.

    More accurately, it is the wives and children of these men who are most harmed by the pastor-as-drill-instructor routine.

    This is very similar to the often criticized line: Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat.

    If, as a result of these fathers being abused and having esteem for them lowered, their families blow up, the Fathers will be cut off from the rest of their families. It is the fathers who will loose their possessions and be enslaved, often winding up in and out of jail for inability to pay. These men are quite likely to commit suicide.

    Meanwhile the wife usually gets alimony/child support, the house (if there is one), and is eligible for a host of government benefits.

    As a rhetorical device to say “see, I’m concerned about women too”, I can see the use of this phrase, but my understanding of the evidence says it is far from the actual truth.

  32. Josh the Aspie says:

    And the quote tags did not take. I know it’s possible to quote here, but I don’t recall exactly how. My apologies if that makes for difficult reading.

  33. Cane Caldo says:

    For reference:

    1 Timothy 5:1-2 Do not rebuke an older man but encourage him as you would a father, younger men as brothers, older women as mothers, younger women as sisters, in all purity.

  34. Lyn87 says:

    One has to wonder who is the real target of Mister Driscoll’s anger. From what I know of him and Mars Hill, I doubt it’s righteous anger aimed at the sinning men in the pews – it if was he would have behaved similarly toward the sinning women fornicating with those very same men rather than rationalizing why men require screaming while women committing the same sin simply require encouragement.

    So if that’s not it: what is it? As others have noted, Mister Driscoll married a whore who didn’t come clean until she had him by the balls in the form of a marriage and a baby, and he had a terrible family life growing up (filled with bad men and the – enabling – women who love them). But since he MUST. NOT. EVER. BLAME. A. WOMAN., and he hasn’t worked through his issues, that rage has to go somewhere, and since he can’t blame God, the only places it can go is either inward toward himself or outward toward other men. Since society is all-too-willing to hold men accountable for the faults of women, it’s an easy choice. The men in the audience become proxies for the men who failed him as a child, and also – especially – for the alpha(s) his wife so enthusiastically spread her legs for.

    … You see I got a worried mind, sharing what I thought was mine…

  35. @Lyn87:

    I like to make the point that Christians aren’t careful. And they should always be. When one isn’t careful, you have no ability to listen to God. And, without that, you’re just a pagan that follows some different rules.

    When a Christian does this to themselves, they are reduced to their instincts & impulses. Which is what we see all of the time. It’s why you can’t discuss the deep topics. It’s why honesty is ruthlessly punished. It replaces Shame with Vanity and Repentance with Self-Delusion, thus outbursts like Driscoll.

  36. Hmm says:

    @Innocent: “These screaming/shaming methods do not work. At all. For anything. I don’t know why this continues.”

    The problem is that they do work, at least in the short term. Producing anger and fear in men can motivate them to do things. I remember my boot camp, and how the Chief motivated me to accomplish things I thought impossible. But it will not work forever. I could stand it because I knew it would end in a few weeks. How relieved I was to get out of camp and into my training school, and discover how different things were in the real Navy!

    The problem arises when boot camp becomes the way of life – where, in Orwell’s description of communism: “If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.” This is the view of marriage pushed by some of these pastors. The boot is his – and your wife’s.

  37. @The Question, thanks for that clarification, I had read about 4 years ago his story was along those lines but I couldn’t place where I’d read it.

    I think you’re right in your assessment, his anger at men’s prolonged adolescence in the church is really just redirected from his anger at the ‘idiot boys’ who his wife got after it with before him (or while with him) and his Promise Keepers mentality, due to his father’s failings, prevents him from putting any blame on any woman.

    https://therationalmale.com/2012/11/21/promise-keepers/

    Slay the Father

    One common theme I’ve encountered amongst the more zealous beta White Knights I’ve counseled over the years has been this determination, bordering on fanaticism, with outdoing the life-performance of their asshole fathers. Before I go on further, many of them had legitimately rotten, alcoholic dads, who were abusive to them and their mothers. Others had the perception of their fathers colored for them either by their ‘strong independent®’ single mothers, or by watching their fathers resolve their own beta tendencies in a post-divorce life. Whatever the case, each of these guys had a mission – to be a better man than their father was, protect their mothers, and by extension the future mother their girlfriends and wives would become for them. His father’s personal failings would be his personal triumphs.

    The problem inherent in this modern day Oedipus scenario is that the feminine imperative is more than happy to use it to its universal social advantage. Feminization and its blue-pill conditioning of boys to be better “men” is defined by how well that “man” is acceptable to a feminine culture. Thus we get gender blurring, and boys are taught to pee sitting down by single mothers because “your asshole dad always made a mess and left the lid up.” Better ‘men’, uniquely feminine-acceptable men, pee like women.

    The father-hating boy becomes the masculine-hating adult beta male. Feminine social conditioning is cruel to be sure, but nothing cements that conditioning in better than a living example of what a man is not to be and then committing your life to not becoming it. As I stated earlier, those considerations may be legitimate, but the end result is the same; a beta who thinks women will categorically appreciate his devotion to the feminine by his promise not to become like “other guys” – like his asshole dad.

  38. Dalrock says:

    @Josh the Aspie

    As a rhetorical device to say “see, I’m concerned about women too”, I can see the use of this phrase, but my understanding of the evidence says it is far from the actual truth.

    This isn’t the point of the rhetoric there. A kick in the ass when you are failing can be loving. This is the core justification of the model, and there is a kernel of truth here. Letting the man fear he will lose his family (which is certainly a risk) is seen as just the kick in the ass these men need to motivate them to become godly husbands and fathers (the wakeup call). And yeah, sure it is harsh, but these men aren’t just hurting themselves by failing, they are hurting women and children. To borrow Driscoll’s metaphor, sure it will dent the thermos a bit, but they are men, they can take a few dents. And if they aren’t tough enough, they need to get tough enough.

    The problem with this particular model of tough love though is it forgets that the wife of this man is commanded to submit to him whether he is worthy, whether he is deserving or not. There is a strong temptation to all wives to decide their husband isn’t worthy of submission, and rebel. But put yourself in the shoes of the Christian wife who is married to a man who really is failing to be a godly man. This is extremely difficult, but as Peter explains we at times will have to suffer for doing good. It is the same for such a man’s children. They are commanded to honor their father and their mother. And what about the child with a father who is very difficult to honor, who isn’t acting in a way deserving of being honored? Like his mother, he is carrying a difficult load. The pastor as drill instructor sees himself as the mother and child’s white knight. Finally someone is doing something about this man who is making his wife and children suffer. But the reality is he is making their already heavy burden all the heavier.

    One of the main reasons the good men in the congregation put up with this stunt is they know that they are failing in some way, and as such see the kick in the ass as loving (which it could be in the right circumstances). There also could be pride involved, where they know they stack up favorably to other men in the pews. Hey, I’m tough enough to handle a little abuse, nut up man and straighten up! Again, this could be loving under the right context, but everyone is forgetting about the reality for the women and children they are using to justify this method.

  39. Frank K says:

    “These screaming/shaming methods do not work. At all. For anything. I don’t know why this continues.”

    I would be hard pressed to not burst out laughing were I to witness a triggly-pastor start such a tirade.

  40. Frank K says:

    “It’s “Man up and marry those sluts (who act like prudes in the marriage bed), (because I sure as hell did!)””

    It really is painfully obvious that this is the true reason Driscoll utters such rubbish.

    Is Mrs. Driscoll perchance his official “co-pastor”

  41. Novaseeker says:

    The problem with this particular model of tough love though is it forgets that the wife of this man is commanded to submit to him whether he is worthy, whether he is deserving or not. There is a strong temptation to all wives to decide their husband isn’t worthy of submission, and rebel.

    This is absolutely right. The husband is to love his wife regardless of what she is doing, and she is to submit to him regardless of what she is doing. These are independent obligations to God, not to each other, and they are not conditional. They are owed to God Himself, not to the spouse.

  42. Lost Patrol says:

    A kick in the ass when you are failing can be loving.

    This is true, and if it is meant to be loving it is delivered at an appropriate time and place; one on one, or in a group of men only. If it is not loving, it can be delivered publicly, in front of a man’s wife and children; by some pastor who has forfeited credibility by the very act. This too harms the wife and kids, who are left with the uneasy feeling they are saddled with a husband and father that can be held up to open ridicule like that. “Why should we submit to or honor that guy? He is weak and unworthy, pastor said so. I’m actually kind of ashamed of him now.”

    Maybe these pastors rose to power without ever being taught, or developing actual leadership skills. Maybe they don’t understand fundamental concepts like praise in public, criticize in private.

    Maybe a church elder, or more seasoned veteran of life will do them the courtesy they’ve denied others, by meeting them man to man and helping them understand. Maybe the wrong guys are getting the kick in the ass.

  43. RPchristian says:

    Did anyone else find it odd and unsettling how at the end of the tirade, after shaming and humiliating the men, he asks them to turn to their wives and apologize, and then immediately transitions to passing the offering basket?

  44. Art Deco says:

    Gentlemen, the Eastern Churches are calling you. Traditional liturgy, traditional hymnody, sermons derived from the lectionary (11 minutes long), women in the choir rather than the sanctuary, and pastors who administer the sacraments and don’t fancy themselves coaches or Marines.

  45. Novaseeker says:

    OT but relevant for discussions we were having earlier this week here …

    My sense of the election is changing. Trump is making a massive surge right now. Among F&F here in the DC region, as well, which is telling, because this is a place that HATES him. I now do not know what will happen on Tuesday, but this is now beyond polls. It’s clear there is a substantial move happening right now, and I do not know what the result will be on Tuesday. All bets off at the moment.

  46. @RPchristian:

    Odd, no. Driscoll is upset about losing the 2mil per year salary from Mars Hill, still. Gotta make his money.

  47. Novaseeker says:

    Gentlemen, the Eastern Churches are calling you.

    Amin!

  48. Frank K says:

    “Driscoll is upset about losing the 2mil per year salary from Mars Hill, still. Gotta make his money.”

    By their fruits you will know them.

    I wouldn’t be surprised at all if it turned out that he is nothing more than an unbelieving con man.

  49. Frank K says:

    “Gentlemen, the Eastern Churches are calling you.”

    Many are called, but few are chosen.

    Few will heed the call of any of the ancient, apostolic churches.

  50. @Novaseeker:

    It’s important to remember that the Lord has a deep sense of irony. And the “November” surprise is actually Podesta’s occult stuff. Among much of Hillary’s base, that stuff just doesn’t fly. It’s INSANE.

    As for the technical aspect, all of the assumptions of an easy Hillary win was based on a 2008 turnout model (not even 2012). Obama got Blacks to turn out at 25% higher than historic average levels. They were his entire margin of victory in 2012. (Youth vote put him over the edge.) I’m sorry to inform all of the fools in the media, but the collapse in Black turnout was utterly predictable. Much in the way that Mormon turnout was at an all-time high in 2012.

    This was a 50/50 election in the best Democrat case. But the Republicans *knew* Hillary was going to win the Primary. This is why Jeb! ran: it would have been a fairly easy victory for the GOP, or so they thought. But it’s the same reason Trump ran as well. Trump understood how the election was actually going to go (seeing as we have 2015 Podesta emails with the Hillary camp knowing there was no way to raise her favorability rating, this wasn’t rocket science), so he came in prepared. But it’s been something of a mess because that’s the only way Hillary was going to win: destroy the GOP candidate and suppress his voters.

    The Dem “advantage” is based more on voter suppression than much else. But this election has had the smell of a landslide for a while, it was just going to take some time to build. Trump has demolished political correctness, so that was always the worry: would people come around in time? We’ll see. I’m still expecting about a 5% win, but there’s enough data to suggest it might be a lot higher. (There’s an interesting question about Trump getting a 60/40 to 65/35 split on Male voting. But the polling is so terrible it’s not really possible to “uncuck” that far.)

  51. thedeti says:

    @ novaseeker:

    “My sense of the election is changing. Trump is making a massive surge right now. Among F&F here in the DC region, as well, which is telling, because this is a place that HATES him. I now do not know what will happen on Tuesday, but this is now beyond polls. It’s clear there is a substantial move happening right now, and I do not know what the result will be on Tuesday. All bets off at the moment.”

    I don’t know, Nova. Yeah, RCP polling average is Hillary +1.7 which is well within MoE (usually 3 points). In a 4-way race which I think is probably Dem-GOP-Libertarian-Green, it’s Hillary +2.6, also in the MoE. I think Hillary will still pull this one out. I don’t think the emails have hurt her as much as people think. They’ve hurt her, but not enough to cost her the election. I still think Trump is perceived as so toxic that many can’t bring themselves to vote for him. The worst crime in American society is racism; followed closely by rape, misogyny and sexism. Trump is perceived as a borderline rapist and certainly a sexist misogynist. Hillary is perceived as neither of these despite her corruption and, let’s just say, moral ambiguity.

    If Trump “wins”, it will not be because of his campaigning, it will be because Hillary “lost”.

  52. thedeti says:

    @ The Question (and feeriker and anon):

    “one wonders if much, not all, of the effort for men to marry either single mothers or overlook the pasts of prospective wives is in part a desire by the male leaders to see other men suffer as they do by marrying women they think to be worthy of life-time commitment only to find out after the vows are exchanged that their bride has no intention of providing the same sexual access or enthusiasm she did to her prior lovers, whom she may or may not have disclosed during the pre-marital counseling sessions that include a requisite “tell-all” opportunity.

    It’s “Man up and marry those sluts (who act like prudes in the marriage bed), (because I sure as hell did!)””

    I don’t think this is it. I tend to give these pastors the benefit of the doubt, though not much.

    I think what’s going on here is that these pastors know the women aren’t marrying, and they’re unhappy about it. The men aren’t marrying or dating (or anything else, either), and they’re unhappy about it too. So the pastors think, the problem here is there’s not enough marriage going on. If we can just get these men and women married off to each other, all will be fine. The women will have the husbands they want. The men will have the sex they want, because they’ll be married to their wives and can have legitimate sex instead of fornicating. Win-Win!

    The problem isn’t sex, or fornication, or dating, according to pastors. It’s not single motherhood either. The problem is that these men and women aren’t married, and they all clearly want to be. So they need to get married. Once they do, it will solve everyone’s problems.

    These pastors aren’t thinking about inflicting pain on the men with bad marriages, because the pastor has a bad marriage. Perhaps the pastor has a good marriage. Or perhaps his marriage is like most others – he gets some sex, but his wife really isn’t all that attracted to him, and she really wishes she could have had Hottie McHotterson, but she couldn’t, so she settled for Pastor Billy Beta, who’s OK, but he’s not Hottie. See, he thinks that’s a good marriage. he thinks he has a good marriage, because, well, see, he gets some sex, and it’s in marriage, so it’s legitimate and not sinful, it’s not fornication. He and his wife get along OK, there’s rough spots, but you’ll have that. He isn’t thinking about his “bad” marriage. In his mind, he has a good marriage, even if he has a bad one.

    It’s not about spreading the pain around. It’s about pastors in (more or less) good faith, trying to get people married, because those pastors really do see that as the solution to the problems their single/unmarried/divorced congregants are all complaining about.

  53. Frank K says:

    I see your point. But why aren’t the pastors exhorting young women to a life of virtue to begin with, and not become single mothers? Instead they shame young men into marriages that are almost guaranteed to fail.

    ” It’s about pastors in (more or less) good faith, trying to get people married, because those pastors really do see that as the solution to the problems their single/unmarried/divorced congregants are all complaining about.”

    Surely these pastors are not that blind, are they?

  54. Dalrock says:

    @Frank K

    ” It’s about pastors in (more or less) good faith, trying to get people married, because those pastors really do see that as the solution to the problems their single/unmarried/divorced congregants are all complaining about.”

    Surely these pastors are not that blind, are they?

    This is where another toxic modern idea, the “women as responders” theology comes in. Under this modern theology, if a husband is good, his wife will naturally follow and submit. If he is good, she will want to. This is at times written and spoken directly, but it is generally unspoken. The assumption is if a good man comes and marries a single mother, his goodness will be irresistible to her. She won’t be able to keep her hands off of him, because the clitoris is after all the world’s most compact divining rod for virtue. In this view the clitoris is God’s messenger, always pointing to what is holy. All these single mothers and divorced women need is a good husband, and they will naturally respond with virtue. I have a post on this in the works, and the idea is older and more widespread than I originally thought.

  55. thedeti says:

    “why aren’t the pastors exhorting young women to a life of virtue to begin with, and not become single mothers?”

    Because they are Blue Pill through and through. They still see women as sugar and spice and everything nice. They still believe the pap that says “women aren’t like that, they all just wanna be wives and mommies, they all just wanna find nice kind men and settle down, they all would settle down if only the men would man up and start marrying them. These very, very nice paragons of virtue are being forced into single motherhood because the drive to have children is incredibly strong and so they do what comes naturally.” They do not see women as acting immorally when they have extramarital sex and have a child. They see women as doing this because they have no other choice.

    And they say and believe these things because they don’t want to commit the very, very serious crime and faux pas of Making A Christian Woman Feel Bad. That’s very, very bad, and pastors especially must never, ever do this. Because if they do, it will mean women will leave the church, will report him to his bishop, and most importantly, the offerings will decrease.

    “Instead they shame young men into marriages that are almost guaranteed to fail.”

    That’s because these pastors also say “all men are pigs and horndogs, the drive to have sex is really really strong and they will have sex whether they’re married or not, and they are bad men because they don’t wait until marriage. If only these men would get married, they can have all the sex they want.”

    “Surely these pastors are not that blind, are they?”

    Most of them are. Most of them really do think that marriage is the solution to everyone’s problem. If only everyone would just get married, there would be no problems.

  56. thedeti says:

    “In this view the clitoris is God’s messenger, always pointing to what is holy.”

    Ah. I forgot about this. This is a very important part of the analysis. Because if she’s attracted to him, he is “good”. If she is not attracted to him and doesn’t want to have sex with him, he is “bad”. Not only is he “bad”, but also, she should not have married him. She was obviously mistaken, and therefore God will “release” her from her marriage and “give her permission” to divorce. Because this is the only way she can find the man she was meant to be with.

    Another part of this is that a woman’s having sex with an attractive man and getting pregnant is not “bad”. This is because women are never, ever attracted to “bad” men. Women just don’t operate that way, according to the theology. Women don’t have sex with “bad” men, because women are never sexually attracted to “bad” men. If she decided to have sex with him, he must be “good”, and therefore the sex is legitimate. This is so because women don’t do immoral things. If she was attracted, and had sex, it was “good”.

  57. Oscar says:

    @ thedeti says:
    November 4, 2016 at 12:25 pm

    “Because they are Blue Pill through and through. They still see women as sugar and spice and everything nice.”

    True. It’s also fear. Since Dalrock mentioned Driscoll in his post, let’s use him as an example. I googled “pastor mark driscoll misogynist” and received 30K+ results. Here are just two articles.

    1. From feminist “theologian” Jory Micah.
    http://jorymicah.com/why-no-woman-should-support-mark-driscolls-new-church/

    2. From “Christian” author Rachel Held Evans
    http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/driscoll-troubled-mind-william-wallace

    I just have to include a quote from Evans’ article.

    “Listen up, Church: Misogyny is real. Homophobia is real. And a man this notorious for both, a man this severely disturbed, should not be in a position of leadership in a church.”

    If this is how conformist “Christians” treat a pastor who studiously sucks up to women, imagine how they’d treat a pastor who actually admonishes women. Now imagine how secular feminists would treat a pastor who actually admonishes women. Few pastors can handle that kind of heat.

    What few pastors understand, however, is that it ultimately doesn’t matter what they do. Christianity must be eradicated. Christians MUST conform themselves to the world or be destroyed, and no amount of boot-licking will change that.

  58. Oscar says:

    Breaking news:

    “A federal court jury decided Friday that a Rolling Stone journalist defamed a former University of Virginia associate dean in a 2014 magazine article about sexual assault on campus that included a debunked account of a fraternity gang rape.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/jury-finds-reporter-rolling-stone-responsible-for-defaming-u-va-dean-with-gang-rape-story/2016/11/04/aaf407fa-a1e8-11e6-a44d-cc2898cfab06_story.html?tid=notifi_push_breaking-news&pushid=breaking-news_1478281715

  59. feeriker says:

    I think what’s going on here is that these pastors know the women aren’t marrying, and they’re unhappy about it. The men aren’t marrying or dating (or anything else, either), and they’re unhappy about it too. So the pastors think, the problem here is there’s not enough marriage going on. If we can just get these men and women married off to each other, all will be fine. The women will have the husbands they want. The men will have the sex they want, because they’ll be married to their wives and can have legitimate sex instead of fornicating. Win-Win!

    The problem isn’t sex, or fornication, or dating, according to pastors. It’s not single motherhood either. The problem is that these men and women aren’t married, and they all clearly want to be. So they need to get married. Once they do, it will solve everyone’s problems.

    Sorry, deti, but I have to disagree here with the idea that pastors are obsessed with the idea that women aren’t marrying. My experience, at least with the evangelical denominations of Protestantism, is that the subject of Christian marriage and family formation is the VERY LAST topic pastors want to address, the proverbial “third rail.” Like the culture they are immersed in an hold dearer than anything else, the subject of marriage is downplayed, mocked, or avoided at all costs.

    IME, pastors, like everyone else in the modern churchian franchise, are all about exhorting Christian women to “find themselves,” “be all they can be,” “assert their independence,” etc. Exhorting Christian women to get married is leading them in the polar opposite of this goal, even when pastors viscerally avoid Scriptural prescriptions for wifely behavior. As I’ve pointed out before, if one were to compare the number of memorial services that the typical church conducts every year with the number of weddings it conducts, the disparity would be depressing. Pastors would sooner discuss Sunday Night Football predictions from the pulpit than the subject of Christian marriage.

  60. feeriker says:

    If this is how conformist “Christians” treat a pastor who studiously sucks up to women, imagine how they’d treat a pastor who actually admonishes women. Now imagine how secular feminists would treat a pastor who actually admonishes women. Few pastors can handle that kind of heat.

    Imagine a pastor with the personality, charisma, and Alpha masculinity of Donald Trump and the spiritual maturity of Billy Graham.

    What few pastors understand, however, is that it ultimately doesn’t matter what they do. Christianity must be eradicated. Christians MUST conform themselves to the world or be destroyed, and no amount of boot-licking will change that.

    I wonder how many pastors are prepared for this truth to become unavoidable. How many of them realize that the days of straddling the fence are over? That it is INEVITABLE that there will be spiritual bloodshed within their churches, that some (many? MOST?) of their congregation, when the rubber hits the road, will apostatize and choose the World over the Word – and that many (MOST?) will be women, who will finally admit that this “God” guy and His son Jesus whom they’ve pretended to love and obey all these years of their lives is unacceptably misogynist and that their God is the World? That the corporate 501C3 church is a sham and a fraud and always has been, a temporal corporation rather than a part of the Body of Christ?

    I’m in serious doubt that most pastors are ready for this rude awakening (“Oh, nooooo, never, not MY church…”). Time is running out and soon the wheat will be separated from the chaff. Expect some of the chaff to be those long considered to be leaders.

  61. Oscar says:

    @ feeriker says:
    November 4, 2016 at 1:34 pm

    “Imagine a pastor with the personality, charisma, and Alpha masculinity of Donald Trump and the spiritual maturity of Billy Graham.”

    That’s like imagining a man who can win a gold medal in the Olympic marathon on Monday and Olympic weightlifting on Friday. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but I sure don’t see it happening.

    “I wonder how many pastors are prepared for this truth to become unavoidable. How many of them realize that the days of straddling the fence are over?”

    Very few. We’ll find out, though. The Church will be refined by fire. I don’t know when – maybe the Lord will show mercy and give us another reprieve – but the dross needs to be burned away.

  62. Dave says:

    Breaking news:
    “A federal court jury decided Friday that a Rolling Stone journalist defamed a former University of Virginia associate dean in a 2014 magazine article about sexual assault on campus that included a debunked account of a fraternity gang rape.”

    My response

  63. Dalrock says:

    @Oscar

    “Imagine a pastor with the personality, charisma, and Alpha masculinity of Donald Trump and the spiritual maturity of Billy Graham.”

    That’s like imagining a man who can win a gold medal in the Olympic marathon on Monday and Olympic weightlifting on Friday. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but I sure don’t see it happening.

    Moreover, as individual husbands we should be very leery of relying on another man’s charisma. Much of the problem is that pastors are tempted to see themselves as surrogate husbands for the unhappy ladies in the church. We don’t need a big strong man to come save us. What we need is a group of families (mostly) lead by strong godly husbands, backing a pastor who isn’t afraid to suffer for teaching the whole word.

  64. Gunner Q says:

    Frank K @ 12:16 pm:
    “I see your point. But why aren’t the pastors exhorting young women to a life of virtue to begin with, and not become single mothers?”

    Occam’s Razor: the pastors tear down the Church Betas because the women hate them. It’s that simple. This perfectly explains why they never fault women, never try to build men back up and cling to Big Man status so desperately.

    In other news, I just voted Trump for Manosphere solidarity’s sake. Also voted for the local Democrat crime family because the Reps ran a female candidate and Christ said no women in power over men. That sucked. Hopefully pot doesn’t get legalized, the death penalty is streamlined instead of retroactively outlawed and none of the 25 million new taxes and bonds get approved.

  65. To respond to Dave way up there, there was a secular invasion of the church, and I think this lecture does the best job of explaining just how significant it is, and how long it’s been in the making:

    http://www.piratechristian.com/fightingforthefaith/2016/6/resistance-is-futile-you-will-be-assimilated-into-the-community

    The TL;DL version is that many modern Christian churches are running off post-modern philosophy, and are just using the banner of Christianity as a means to create a new “post-economic community”. Take the underpinning philosophy of political fascism, where the individual only exists to serve the community at large, put a biblical spin on it where instead of the “community” being the nation, it’s the Church, and BOOM you’ve got modern Churchianity with a big focus on works and social control, and no desire for people to be sanctified and mature in Christ. You are only a “Christian” if you’re doing and sacrificing as the Church deems appropriate, and small groups are used to reinforce the propaganda video feed you watched on Sunday.

    I was at Mars Hill Everett. There’s much to be learned from all that went wrong at Mars Hill, and they were just one of many churches that are doing the same exact thing. They’re just a symptom of the deeper problem.

    Most Christians have no clue how deep the problem runs, or for how long it’s been festering. I was one of them, until the problem affected someone we knew closely. I still see Phil every Sunday. He read and agreed with the letter I wrote to the local pastor before we also left.

    It’s a topic about which I still feel very strongly, and have no problem putting my name to that.😀

  66. Oscar says:

    @ Dalrock

    Agreed.

    @ Dave

  67. The last couple of days have been a good reminder that we, as Christians, are always living in Occupied Territory. But the Lord is with us. It’s always important to remember that.

    For anyone not quite up on the political news, we’ve gone from:

    – Hillary is a felon (classified documents illegally possessed).
    to
    – Hillary is the head of a wing of an organized racketeering/Pay-for-Play extortion group.
    to
    – Extortion group is involved in child sex slave trafficking.
    to
    – Pack of Satanists running the entire show.

    AND the stuff that we know is out there (all of those classified documents) probably drops tomorrow.

    John 8:31-32 ESV:

    “So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

  68. RPchristian says:

    IME, pastors, like everyone else in the modern churchian franchise, are all about exhorting Christian women to “find themselves,” “be all they can be,” “assert their independence,” etc. Exhorting Christian women to get married is leading them in the polar opposite of this goal, even when pastors viscerally avoid Scriptural prescriptions for wifely behavior.

    There is a church I previously attended. It was your typical, medium-sized evangelical church. They had their year-end presentation with all the graduating seniors up front talking about their future plans. A young woman described her life-goal as to go to graduate school and develop prosthetic limbs for amputees, which elicited huge applause and head nods galore from the congregation. There were some other meek, godly women in the group who were not going to college. They had been home-schooled, and were preparing for marriage. The applause was lukewarm. The irony is the pastor proceeded to preach a sermon about the danger of “cultural assimilation.”

    This is one of those churches that prided itself on it’s “pro family” beliefs, including taking a no-compromising, outspoken stance on gay marriage. Easy to criticize gay marriage because so few gays in the congregation. Criticize no-fault divorce? Encourage women to marry young and not go “find themselves” at college? Of course not, that might affect attendance! In fact, let’s encourage the opposite! Then we can berate the men when they don’t want to marry at 30 year-old, pretentious, independent, career woman with five prior sex partners she was “discovering herself” with. A “godly” man would love that sort of woman….

  69. RPchristian says:

    I’ve been thinking all morning about why so many men are attracted to pastors like Driscoll. Dalrock is correct when he says:

    One of the main reasons the good men in the congregation put up with this stunt is they know that they are failing in some way, and as such see the kick in the ass as loving (which it could be in the right circumstances). There also could be pride involved, where they know they stack up favorably to other men in the pews.

    I think another important reason is that men in church are bored. Men want a mission, they want an opportunity at greatness, they want to feel like they are fighting for a higher cause. One of the greatest ways that Christianity again shows itself to satisfy our innate longings is by providing that sense of mission and purpose. As C.S. Lewis puts it, we are undercover soldiers in enemy-occupied territory, on a mission from the rightful king, on a campaign of sabotage.

    Instead, all we get is fluffy, ineffectual bullshit. So, when a pastor like Driscoll stands up and starts screaming and berating the men, it feels important, simply because his delivery is so outside the norm. Men think, finally, someone is going to give me something important to do.

    I’m reminded of a comment by SeventiesJason that was embedded in Rollo’s piece about the church:

    How did the early church turn the world upside down? All God did was send a few men, and they made it happen. We have so many tools today…..and we’re “helpless” and we tend to think a “building program” will help everything and if we let the men fix things on the property they will feel “useful.”

    A previous church I attended, the same one I mentioned above, spent a whole year raising over a million dollars so they could build a new gym. Build a new gym. This is the best the church has to offer in this fallen world?

    Men are the church’s greatest untapped resource, which is why The Deceiver puts so much effort into keeping them subjugated. Driscoll is just another unwitting tool to that evil end.

  70. @RPchristian:

    The power of the Echo Chamber is that no one really thinks they’re in one. This works to make people think that “this is how you Christian”, when that really isn’t the truth. The modern Church is little different from the rest of the culture, so beating down those calling out the problem is acceptable. Why would we assume that “Christians” would act any different?

  71. feeriker says:

    Dalrock says:

    Moreover, as individual husbands we should be very leery of relying on another man’s charisma. Much of the problem is that pastors are tempted to see themselves as surrogate husbands for the unhappy ladies in the church. We don’t need a big strong man to come save us. What we need is a group of families (mostly) lead by strong godly husbands, backing a pastor who isn’t afraid to suffer for teaching the whole word.

    Excellent point. Cosigned.

    For anyone not quite up on the political news, we’ve gone from:

    – Hillary is a felon (classified documents illegally possessed).
    to
    – Hillary is the head of a wing of an organized racketeering/Pay-for-Play extortion group.
    to
    – Extortion group is involved in child sex slave trafficking.
    to
    – Pack of Satanists running the entire show.

    AND the stuff that we know is out there (all of those classified documents) probably drops tomorrow.

    I really wish I could have more faith in the basic human decency of my fellow man, but from what I observe and hear on a daily basis, these facts are very unlikely to sway the average zombie who intends to pull the lever for Hitlary. Such people pretty much lack any kind of moral compass.

    A young woman described her life-goal as to go to graduate school and develop prosthetic limbs for amputees, which elicited huge applause and head nods galore from the congregation.

    Well, gosh, nobody else out there is doing that. What would the world do for prosthetic limbs if this young lady didn’t go out and re-invent what was invented hundreds of years ago? /sarc

    There were some other meek, godly women in the group who were not going to college. They had been home-schooled, and were preparing for marriage. The applause was lukewarm. The irony is the pastor proceeded to preach a sermon about the danger of “cultural assimilation.”

    Not only is the cognitive dissonance jarring, but the fact that these people don’t even think before they open their mouths is enough to make you lose faith in anything else they say or do.

    I think another important reason is that men in church are bored. Men want a mission, they want an opportunity at greatness, they want to feel like they are fighting for a higher cause.

    I dunno about greatness, but making a difference, yes. Doing something to evangelize the faith, yes. Taking up LEADERSHIP in bringing the Word to those who desperately need it, yes.

    Unfortunately, all of these, especially the last one, threatens Pastor AMOG’s leadership and authority (people might evangelize in ways he hasn’t thought of, doesn’t approve of, or are more effective than his own). Therefore he gives them no sanction or support.

  72. The Question says:

    @Dalrock

    I would add that what made Driscoll’s screaming rants popular is because it was something a lot of young men are accustomed to experiencing from their own fathers if they have one. Modern men are so profoundly confused about masculinity that they think being an assertive father means yelling at your kids like a drill sergeant for any altercation and crushing any form of dissent. His antics have a sense of familiarity.

    It’s sad, because many cultures including the Celts who immigrated to the South believed in building and strengthening a person’s will, not destroying it.

  73. @Dalrock

    A Donkey who is too tired and broken down or diseased to pull at the mill-wheel is failing at his task. A kick in the ass, so to speak, isn’t going to be helpful, except perhaps in the extremely short term to startle the burro a few steps around the circle. Of course then, with even more damage, he gets even slower than before.

    As I recall, the marriage vows include “in good times and bad, for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health” for a reason. If someone fails, that does not mean the person is a bad person, or in need of a ‘kick in the pants’.

    In fact, given the history of how the ‘kick in the pants’ method has been used during my lifetime, and how beaten down men are these days, I have trouble seeing it as anything other than abuse, or encouragement to self-harm through over-exertion. But then, that may be a generational difference.

    Also, in your given scenario, you presume that the failing man has a wife who is not at fault. I consider that a poor assumption. If both the husband and the wife are doing poorly, the fellow is going to get blasted coming and going, and a Driscol-Sermon is only going to exacerbate the metaphorical (or literal) beating he gets at the hands of his wife, and likely at the hands of the black-robed mafia as well, when she decides to divorce him.

  74. CSI says:

    Has anyone ever been in a church where someone, male or female, got up and exhorted the women in the audience to improve themselves?

  75. Don Quixote says:

    The drill instructor from Full Metal Jacket:

  76. feeriker says:

    Has anyone ever been in a church where someone, male or female, got up and exhorted the women in the audience to improve themselves?

    Yes, once. But before there was any reaction to the exhortation, the alarm clock went off and I woke up.

  77. @Josh:

    Your life experience requires no correlation to all situations. You put “Aspie” in your nick, you should know this.

    @feeriker & thedeti:

    This is just one of many, many breakdowns you can do on the polls. And we don’t know what the impact of #SpiritCooking is going to do on Hillary’s base turnout. Blacks & Hispanics don’t mind corruption, in general, but voodoo they’re checking out of.

    Deti brought up the RCP average. We’ve seen over the course of the last 4 months that all of the pollsters have been manipulating their samples & skews to produce results. They *always* do this to an extent (especially as they’re trying to figure out the turnout model), but like with the Media, it’s plain as day now that their numbers are all but fiction. (And that’s not taking into account some of the insanity in the sub-samples. We’re seeing more than a few samples with Trump @ >30% of Blacks and >50% of Hispanics. I wouldn’t expect that to hold out, but, clearly, someone is actually responding as pro-Trump from those groups.)

    After the Election, I’ll type up the way Trump is clearly realigning the country. When he wins, the Republic still has some time left. A Hillary win means its dead. Never thought we’d end up with an existential election, but that’s where we’re at.

  78. @Looking Glass

    If I meant life experience I would have said so. I said lifetime. As in, the usage of the term, over-all, in the time since I was born, until now. That includes but is not limited to personal experiences of myself and others, media portrayals, and the legal environment.

    I am aware that in the time before I was born, circumstances were different, and as such, people that grew up or raised children during that period would have formed their long-standing opinions in a different environment, using different data. Thus, my bringing up the possibility of a generational gap.

  79. Among the Internet set, they’ve liked to use the phrase “God-Emperor Trump” a bunch. It’s a reference to Warhammer 40k. (See here for the details: https://infogalactic.com/info/Imperium_(Warhammer_40,000) ) I never quite expected the Election to end up where it’s Trump standing against the forces of Chaos. (In the Lore, the God-Emperor keeps the Chaos forces from entering our plane of existence. Yes, the lore is insanely “Metal”.)

    Never let it be said the Lord doesn’t have a sense of humor.

  80. Dan says:

    “The challenge is, how to take on the appearance of being traditional without upsetting feminist sensibilities?”

    Stop worrying about ‘female sensibilities’. Let them accept or be PO’d…..be a man and don’t worry about catering to female whims. THEY don’t know what they want most of the time so no man can ever really satisfy them. The solution is to STOP TRYING and live your life. Either they accept it and are part of that life or they won’t…and you are better off without them. And it’s best to live this way BEFORE you are saddled with kids and the threat of Marriage 2.0 and the divorce court lottery….that you will lose.

  81. infowarrior1 says:

    @Dalrock

    ” What we need is a group of families (mostly) lead by strong godly husbands, backing a pastor who isn’t afraid to suffer for teaching the whole word.”

    Amen. A church should a band of brothers and Patriarchs standing together against this world that is ruled by the dark powers in the high-places.

    @Art
    Were it not for theological issues and practices I find objectionable I would convert.

  82. Avraham rosenblum says:

    I try to grade institutions on a % basis. That is I do not think any of them are perfect. But f I think they are above the 60% level then I say they are worth supporting. And in fact I try to support any institution that I think is doing good even if I do not agree with their theology. And I have been doing that for along time. But if I think the Dark Side is using that institution as a front or as a disguise then I say the fact that the core is evil makes the whole thing evil. So in teh case of hat this blog is discussing I think I would have to go along with the consensus here that pastors that belittle husbands do not get a passing grade.

  83. SJB says:

    “The Saddest Boy Ever” has a crushing yearning. May God fulfill his thirst in good measure and protect him from those who would stunt him from full manhood.

  84. Chris says:

    The verdict against the burnt-out hippies at Rolling Stone is great news. I hope they end up paying out the ass and that Erdely never has another gig.

  85. feeriker says:

    “The Saddest Boy Ever” has a crushing yearning. May God fulfill his thirst in good measure and protect him from those who would stunt him from full manhood.

    Amen. That boy reminds me of my own grandson and his mother is probably a clone of my train wreck of a daughter. May God help her as well. As someone upthread said, she is almost certainly the reason why her son doesn’t have a daddy.

    I would like to believe that a special place in hell awaits unrepentant single babymommas, most of whom always knew better than to get themselves AND their unfortunate offspring into that predicament in the first place, whether they can admit it or not.

  86. n. Vandenberg says:

    “Because Christians enabled the divorce revolution in the 1970s, ….”

    Correct! Even the feminist apologist, Albert Mohler, acknowledged this:

    http://www.albertmohler.com/2010/09/30/divorce-the-scandal-of-the-evangelical-conscience/
    EXCERPT:

    Evangelical Christians rightly demanded laws that would defend the sanctity of human life. Not so for marriage. Smith explains that the inclusion of divorce on the agenda of the Christian right would have risked a massive alienation of members. In summary, evangelicals allowed culture to trump Scripture.

  87. Jed Mask says:

    “The challenge is, how to take on the appearance of being traditional without upsetting feminist sensibilities?”

    Mr. Dalrock I have to say there is no genuine way over to “maneuver” this.

    Rather the challenge for Christian traditional masculinity character has to be *SPEARHEADED* regardless to “upsetting feminist sensibilities”.

    I often wonder, ponder even: WHAT WOULD JESUS DO WALKING AROUNG THIS ANTI-MALE, ANTI-MASCULINE, ANTI-PATRIARCHAL western society and how He would manage Himself?

    Seems like everywhere in public society He would go amongst people He would face nearly “constant persecution” from liberally-minded people of wicked feminist mindset; but only Christ would properly, correctly and *perfectly* overcome all His Engagements with people.

    ~ Bro. Jed

  88. Anonymous Reader. says:

    I’m surprised no one has posted something like this yet. Must be my job…

  89. GCM says:

    “Has anyone ever been in a church where someone, male or female, got up and exhorted the women in the audience to improve themselves?”

    Actually, I led a lecture series at my church that demanded men and women to improve themselves, in particular advocating the congregation to become involved in helping the fallen refrain from having sex outside of marriage. The anti-Christian manosphere led by Roissy and Roosh, for example, is laden with supposed Christian men who employ “Game” to entice women to bed. The anti-Christian grrll powr movement is another instance by which women are encouraged to fulfill their sexual desires.

    Have YOU done your part?

  90. Scott says:

    But the weak families, the suffering ones, are the families the pastor’s drill instructor strategy will most likely “weed out”.

    This is exactly why my blog exists, and in the format it does. You have just explained it much more eloquently, as usual.

  91. MarcusD says:

    Perspective on my marriage?
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1030573

    “Sex forms a permanent bond between two individuals”
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1030638

    Help me by telling me about your marriage!
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1030681

  92. @GCM:

    I don’t recognize you around these parts. And you seem to be concern trolling. Stop.

    On other topics, the Political Tracking polls are currently shifting their samples from D+8 or higher to D+2 through D+4. They’re still manipulating their samples to prevent a huge Trump lead from materializing, but this stuff has been noticeable for Months. I haven’t been smoking anything when I say Trump has had a solid 3-4% lead since the Conventions. And the final vote could easily stretch to 7-8%.

    On our world here, there’s actually a lot to learn from the Trump campaign. Not in the “run an Alpha and that solves most problems” way, but in the communication & direct approach style. The campaign tells us a lot about the way modern Christians work, and it’s simply a good reminder that you can’t Logic anyone into dealing with their Emotions.

    Plus, we can now analyze what the tell-tale signs of collapse of power structures look like within our Modern cultures. That’s more useful information for a lot of things.

  93. Lost Patrol says:

    @Josh the Aspie:

    In fact, given the history of how the ‘kick in the pants’ method has been used during my lifetime, and how beaten down men are these days, I have trouble seeing it as anything other than abuse, or encouragement to self-harm through over-exertion.

    You did not address this to me, but I did pick up on the theme earlier and don’t want that to be what added to your confusion. I think you are misinterpreting Dalrock’s point here. I’m not sure if it is inadvertent or by design. He is not advocating for a kick in the ass in this situation. He is saying that is Driscoll’s approach here, and that approach is a problem.

    The problem with this particular model of tough love though is it forgets that the wife of this man is commanded to submit to him whether he is worthy, whether he is deserving or not.

    As for kicks in the ass generally, iron sharpening iron is a way for men to help one another improve. It includes exhortation, but also discernment and encouragement. No real friend or leader metaphorically kicks the obviously down trodden donkey or man.

  94. Otto Lamp says:

    RPchristian said: What’s crazy is that so many men I know continue to passionately defend Driscoll and believe he was pushed out unfairly.

    In generations past pastors were RESPECTED. Today they are WORSHIPED.

    Driscoll claimed he had the ability to see people’s sexual sins in visions. He claimed that God spoke to him via direct revelation (in the Bible, direct revelation is usually prefixed with “Thus saith the Lord…”)

    Driscoll’s claims are not unusual today. Pastors routinely claim God speaks to them, some claim outright the mantle of prophet, others to be apostles. What they are really claiming is a special relationship with God, one that marks them out as being special/superior/holier than others.

    Churches today are built around a celebrity pastor, not the Word of God. The attendees are not there to hear the Word, they are there to hear the pastor.

    My relatives in rural KY attend a small church where the holds down a job during the week and preaches on Sunday. He’s not in it for the money or the fame. He is simply someone that has studied the Word and felt called to spread the Gospel as a preacher.

  95. Otto Lamp says:

    Testosternone.

    I recently watched a documentary called “The Secret Life of Breasts” which portrayed breasts as being the “canary in the coal mine” for environmental problems. It talked a lot about xenoestrogens (substances in the environment that act like estrogen when ingested) and their effect on humans.

    * Breast cancer occurring in men becoming more common
    * Men developing breasts (gynecomastia) becoming common
    * Infertility in men on the rise
    * Testosterone levels tanking in men
    * Estrogen levels rising in men

    Breast milk is full of xenoestrogens. Breastfeeding doses infants with high levels of estrogen.

    Maybe the problem with modern men is that they aren’t physiologically men. High estrogen levels, low testosterone levels. That describes a woman. It also describes most modern men.

    We know hormones how people think and act. Is the problem with modern men as much hormonal as anything else?

    There is some, but not a lot, of talk in the red-pill world about testosterone levels. Maybe there should be.

  96. Kenny says:

    American Evangelical hostility to men is not a new trend. It all goes back to the 19th Century, when sermons started getting corny and treacley. this caused the men to sleep in and end of going to all-male meetings of the Masons and other fraternal orders, which was not a good thing. That’s why you go into a typical Evangelical church nowadays and the women outnumber the men by huge numbers. Ditch American Evangelicalism and stick with Confessional Lutherans and Reformed groups or even Rome or Constantinople

  97. I think dalrock and some others here might enjoy “awesome *stuff* my drill sarge said”

    One of them came to my mind after watching that saddest kid vid.
    http://asmdss.com/story/3101

    2005, on the bus for 0 day and I’m sitting beside a kid who’s somehow too shook up for Basic and has way too many bags. The Drill comes on and starts yelling and we all start shuffling off, but again I’m stuck behind this kid who’s moving way too slow with all these f*cking bags. When we’re finally about to get off the kid gets stopped right outside the door and Drills start to swarm on this poor bastard like fat chicks on a Specialist.

    “What the f*ck is wrong with you Private?!” they spew at him with knife hands and oniony breath. “Why the f*ck do you have so many bags?!”, “You going f*cking camping Private?!”. Finally the kid mumbles out, “My Mom said if I joined the Army I had to move out, this is all I have”.

    The Drill swarm, without lowering their intensity or anger a notch, start to grab his civilian bags from him. “F*cking hooah Private” “We’ll lock this shit up for you” “Let’s go son, get your ass in there”. They take his extra stuff to secure it and the swarm breaks up with one Drill personally escorting him to the killing fields with an arm around his shoulder, supporting and yelling at him for the rest of the day.

  98. Oscar says:

    @ Otto Lamp

    Modern life is pretty much designed to lower a man’s testosterone. Sitting in an office all day staring at a computer screen decreases your testosterone. Lack of sunlight decreases your testosterone. Lack of physical activity decreases your testosterone. Excess body fat decreases your testosterone AND increases your estrogen.

    How do we mitigate this? Lift weights, eat red meat and get as much strenuous physical activity outdoors as possible.

  99. Hose_B says:

    Off topic:
    I’m sitting in church right now listening to ad for Beth Moore. The church has “already bought tickets” (getting a cut). I have the flyer which says “leadership training for every woman”.
    if a husband is to submit to his wife’s leadership, this is apparently the place to learn to lead.

    I am beyond disgusted.

  100. Oscar says:

    @ Anon says:
    November 5, 2016 at 9:27 pm

    “Budweiser ads now shriek about the ‘pay gap’.”

    Feminist sermons don’t sell beer: Bud pulls ads with Amy Schumer yacking about equal pay

    https://blogstupidgirl.wordpress.com/2016/11/03/feminist-sermons-dont-sell-beer-bud-light-ads-pulled-featuring-amy-schumer-lecturing-about-equal-pay/

  101. @Lost Patrol
    I have no problem with the idea that women and children have additional burdens placed on them when the husband/father is attacked publicly in church. And I know that Dalrock is criticizing Driscol’s approach generally.

    However, I take issue with the idea that women are those who are primarily harmed when men get attacked by their pastors. Harmed? Yes. Certainly. Agreed. Emphatic confirmation of parallel thinking #4. Primary victims? No.

    This concept of women being more harmed by than their husbands by these attacks appears based on the accusations of weak husbands being the problem in homes that are ‘most vulnerable’, and that ‘a kick in the pants can be loving’. Or “weak men are screwing up traditionalism”.

    Well, I disagree that in the homes most vulnerable to harm by these accusations, it is likely that the wives are upstanding citizens, and the husbands are louses. It’s entirely possible (and I would argue likely, in the current environment) that in the most vulnerable homes, the husband is the equivalent of a beat down mule, living under the same roof as a quarrelsome woman, and all she needs is the pastor’s permission to send that mule to the butcher (the family courts).

    It’s also quite possible that both parents are doing poorly, and neither had decent parents to model for them how to be parents.

    In either of these scenarios, I don’t think that kicking the husband is going to hurt the wife more than the husband.

    Now, maybe I’m misunderstanding a point that Dalrock is making here, but I’ve re-read the conversation chain multiple times, specifically attempting to see if I misunderstood something.

    Perhaps Dalrock thought that the rhetoric I was talking about in my first post was Driscol’s, and we’ve been talking past each-other this whole time… but it seems he understood that I am taking issue with the idea of women being most harmed by these attacks.

  102. As an additional note, I find it interesting that in discussing who is most harmed, once again, the husband has been placed in one group, and women and children in another, rather than discussing them as three distinct groups, with different characteristics and responsibilities to one annother.

  103. Cane Caldo says:

    There is yet another problem with the drill instructor model, and that is that the model is not just about tearing men down so the instructor can build them back up as a unit over time (something the pastors can’t do in a sermon). The boot camp/sports training model is also about weeding out the weaklings.

    I agree that sermons are not the time and place for drill. But I want to push back on this a bit for the sake of deeper understanding.

    Suppose a weak Christian man named Bob. Bob is a husband and father so it is true that he is oppressed by American society as a whole; in church and out of church. It is also true that the oppression actively discourages Bob from asserting himself in his family and in his church, and actively encourages rebellion from his wife and kids. It’s also been my experience that Bob has no desire to challenge the oppression even when you encourage him. Because we’ve all found our way to the Men’s Sphere I think we get the idea that every man out there is interested in restoration/reformation, or at least open to the idea. That’s not what I’ve found.

    My push-backs are questions: Do we want to keep the weak Christian men around? If so, how around–how involved–do we want them to be?

    I make no assertion that Driscoll’s sermon is correct. He was wrong in what he said, and how, when, and where he said it. But the truth is that most churches don’t suffer under a Driscoll. They suffer under men like Tim Keller who praises his wife as a Godly woman and example for all Christian wives: for throwing a temper tantrum! As I wrote that last sentence, another question occurred to me: Suppose Driscoll’s sermon had been aimed at Tim Keller and those like him. What would be our response to that? What should it be?

  104. Anonymous Reader says:

    Otto Lamp
    There is some, but not a lot, of talk in the red-pill world about testosterone levels. Maybe there should be.

    One way to increase testosterone: lift weights. Upper body weight work is proven to increase T.
    “Do you even lift?” is not an idle question, it is a serious and crucial one.

  105. Gunner Q says:

    Cool story, Nate. Interesting website, too.

    Looking Glass @ 6:40 am:
    “On our world here, there’s actually a lot to learn from the Trump campaign. Not in the “run an Alpha and that solves most problems” way, but in the communication & direct approach style.””

    The two look the same to me. Trump wouldn’t have been dominant and sexy if he’d focused on policy discussions.

    Otto Lamp @ 7:49 am:
    “In generations past pastors were RESPECTED. Today they are WORSHIPED.”

    Priests of every religion have been happy to be confused with the deity they represent. This is why “priesthood of the believer” was worth killing over: no more gatekeepers.

    Cane Caldo @ 12:10 pm:
    “My push-backs are questions: Do we want to keep the weak Christian men around? If so, how around–how involved–do we want them to be?”

    We must keep the weak Christian men around. The Church exists to help them, not the strong. While we cannot dictate how he should lead his family, the Church can confirm him as the family leader and show him due respect. He can’t advance to leadership unless he rises to the occasion (1 Tim. 3:12) but shouldn’t be put outside unless he’s hostile to God’s plan.

    Most of us need crutches of one kind or another. It’s unfortunate but not shameful. A healthy society gives the weak enough support they can meet their social obligations. If most men are incapable of properly leading a wife then that’s a indictment of society not hubby.

  106. Lost Patrol says:

    @Josh the Aspie:

    There is precedent for my missing the target – metaphorically of course, given that my actual marksmanship is enviable, he humbly said – so I also reviewed all previous.

    I was concerning myself with the ridiculous and dangerous pastors and their techniques, and how everyone is damaged by that; but as you say, the original post does state the wives and children are most harmed.

    I don’t fully understand why they would be MOST harmed in comparison to the man being excoriated, so I believe it’s now more clear to me where you were going with your comments.

    A related sidebar: I have learned here that misandry in the church can often be better addressed when reframed to show how it is harmful to women. This tactic will often make a church white knight stop and think about an issue in a way he would not have otherwise.

  107. Snowy says:

    My Dad was/is a New Ager, at the ripe old age of 84. His religion is an eclectic mix, which still claims Christ, but in name only. He still has no idea what being a Christ-one, a son of God, is really all about, after 60 odd years of his eclectic BS.

    My mother rebelled against the Catholicism she was brought up in, prior to marrying Dad at 23 years of age. My mother was/is your typical cantankerous, contentious, rebellious woman. She tried a second marriage, which also failed miserably in short time. To the best of my knowledge she is still as lost and as miserable as she has ever been.

    With neither parent fit to be a good ensample to their three sons, typical results followed. My older brother is a drug- and alcohol-addled mummy’s boy loser; I, the middle son, at the age of 50, have a lot of lost ground to make up; and my younger brother is a moderately successful atheist family man (how he manages to hold his family together is beyond me; I think it is primarily his provision of material resources, because I’m extremely doubtful it has anything to do with spiritual leadership).

    We are a totally fractured, non-existent family. My Dad is the only one I interact with, and that on a very casual basis. A lifetime of eclectic New Age BS has rendered him a virtual brick wall to any sanity I try to inculcate with him.

    However, when all is said and done, with the quality of teaching on the family in the Church today, as exampled in this and numerous other of Dalrock’s posts, I’m kind of glad that I wasn’t exposed to such further destructive derailment.

    I praise God that He led me to the sound Biblical teachings of Norman Percy Grubb, and the like-minded individuals who have followed after him. These are fine ensamples who lead in truth to truth, and without whom I would have remained truly lost.

  108. Dalrock says:

    @Josh the Aspie

    This concept of women being more harmed by than their husbands by these attacks appears based on the accusations of weak husbands being the problem in homes that are ‘most vulnerable’, and that ‘a kick in the pants can be loving’. Or “weak men are screwing up traditionalism”.

    Well, I disagree that in the homes most vulnerable to harm by these accusations, it is likely that the wives are upstanding citizens, and the husbands are louses.

    There is much packed in here, and I’m not sure I’ll do justice to all of it. But I’ll give it a shot. First, keep in mind that the section of the OP that you are objecting to is my refuting the ostensible reason pastors use the model:

    Even more sick is the fact that the very husbands and fathers this method is ostensibly intended to help are the ones most harmed by it. More accurately, it is the wives and children of these men who are most harmed by the pastor-as-drill-instructor routine.

    I’m refuting supporters of the model, not defending the model. I think you and I would agree that the supporters of the pastor-as-drill-instructor model are (in their minds at least) targeting men who are louses, who are victimizing their upstanding wives. This is the best case use scenario for the defenders of the model. The pastor as drill instructor (and his supporters) see themselves as riding to the rescue of a poor damsel in distress. But what they are really doing is adding to her already heavy burden, all the while tempting her to stray from her path of righteousness. This is absolutely evil and cruel, and it is the best case scenario.

    Well, I disagree that in the homes most vulnerable to harm by these accusations, it is likely that the wives are upstanding citizens, and the husbands are louses. It’s entirely possible (and I would argue likely, in the current environment) that in the most vulnerable homes, the husband is the equivalent of a beat down mule, living under the same roof as a quarrelsome woman, and all she needs is the pastor’s permission to send that mule to the butcher (the family courts).

    But even here, we should have sympathy for the wife as a fellow sinner. What is the worst thing, the cruelest thing, you can do to someone mired in sin and rebellion? You can discourage repentance and encourage more rebellion. The husband could suffer as Job suffered, and those who make him suffer are doing evil. But the wife is already deep in rebellion, and her very pastor encourages her to more rebellion. I’m not saying his suffering isn’t real (no matter his fault or lack thereof). Nor am I saying the system which creates this suffering isn’t profoundly evil. I’ve written extensively about this. But the spiritual harm done to her is even more evil. It would be better for those who do this to her to have a millstone hung around their neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea.

    And keep in mind, it isn’t as if we are weighing two actions to decide which is more evil, with one causing the husband to suffer and the other causing the wife and children to suffer. This is all the same action. The pretense is that it is being done for the benefit of the wife and child, but a closer look shows that this is a lie. This lie is the essential point. Because it is this lie, even more than the gruesome appetite for making men suffer, that is underpinning this model.

  109. Otto Lamp says:

    Hose_B says: I’m sitting in church right now listening to ad for Beth Moore.

    Run.

    Leave that church and never enter its door again.

    Beth Moore is a full blown heretic. She believes she is a prophet; she believes she hears directly from God; she believes the voice in her head has the same authority as scripture. She is not leading people to Christ; she leads people to herself and damnation. If your church can’t recognize that, then you should get out of there.

  110. infowarrior1 says:

    I noticed a modification in the NIV translation in the bible gateway that is quite insidious:

    1 peter 3:1-2
    3 Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives,

    The ESV meanwhile

    1 Peter 3:1-2
    Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word , they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives,

    Be wary gentlemen be very wary.

  111. Dalrock,

    To ensure that we’re at least on the same page, I’m going to try to focus first on what we agree on.

    I understand that you are refuting those who say that a white-knighting pastor attacking husbands is good for the wives of those husbands. As you say, I agree with you on this.

    I also agree that encouraging others to sin is harmful, and take no issue with that.

    Encouraging wives to rebel against or divorce their husbands is harmful to these wives.

    The only issue I have taken, which I did not think would cause this much confusion and this long a post chain, already, is with the bold bit in the following paragraph.. assuming some version of the formatting actually works.

    Even more sick is the fact that the very husbands and fathers this method is ostensibly intended to help are the ones most harmed by it. More accurately, it is the wives and children of these men who are *[b]most[/b]* harmed by the pastor-as-drill-instructor routine.

    I do not agree with “most harmed”. “Also harmed” makes perfect sense. I’d also agree with “seriously”. I am tired of having attacks on and damage to men ignored or minimized relative to the needs of women, be it in feminist or traditionalist circles.

    Now, if I misunderstood something, I am open to accepting clarification.

  112. Reading back over several other posts, I see that I did a poor job in focusing on that point, and there was some confusion on my part. I’ll be reading over things yet another time.

  113. *face rub* Okay, I feel rather foolish. Dalrock, I hope you and your other readers can forgive me for what may have been a mental block. I’ll try to walk bullet point what I think I misunderstood, and you can tell me if I goofed it up or not.

    Driscol presumes or asserts two points.
    1. That families in trouble are due to men screwing up traditionalism.
    2. That boot-camp is the right way to straiten them out.

    Dalrock rebuts,
    A. that when A is true, B is false, and the whole family is harmed.
    B. Dalrock makes no statement or implication about how often or infrequently A is true.

    Josh the Aspie, gets all muddled, and while understanding point A, critical fails on point B.

  114. Greg Nikolic says:

    This post by Dalrock reminds me of something Joel Osteen once said.

    Osteen, a pleasant mild-mannered pastor (utterly unlike the drill sergeant mode), once said, “If you can’t be positive and optimistic, than at least be quiet.”

    Although the drill-sergeant approach is preferred for its simplicity and directness, there is a saying that backs up Osteen’s approach, and that is “You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.”

    I’m inclined to agree with the saying — and Osteen.

  115. BillyS says:

    Otto,

    Why would prophets be gone today? We don’t have the flu rational apostles, but the four/five-fold offices remain in the church. I have not heard anyone who believes they operate in the office of a prophet claim their words were as certain as the Scriptures.

    Also keep in mind that being a prophet, even in the OT does not mean the individual is infallible. Study Elijah’s life a bit to see that.

    I have no idea about Beth Moore, but that Biblical office has not been rescinded.

  116. Feminist Hater says:

    I’ve always maintained that if you are going to cut a person down, you had better be there to build them up, no two ways about it. You’re just a common school yard bully if you don’t.

    I have an inclination that this approach is used because they really do not have the carrot anymore. Only the stick left.

  117. Dave says:

    Beth Moore is a full blown heretic. She believes she is a prophet; she believes she hears directly from God; she believes the voice in her head has the same authority as scripture.

    I never heard of Beth Moore, but a quick Google search leading to a Wikipedia page showed that she claimed to be an evangelist and a teacher.

    Wanda Elizabeth “Beth” Moore (born Wanda Elizabeth Green; June 16, 1957) is an American evangelist, author, and Bible teacher. She is the founder of Living Proof Ministries, a Bible-based organization for women based in Houston, Texas. The ministry focuses on aiding women who desire to model their lives on evangelical Christian principles.[1]

    Source

    And the statement of beliefs on her website sounded legit and Bible-based. Maybe I am missing something though…

  118. feeriker says:

    [Beth Moore’s] ministry focuses on aiding women who desire to model their lives on evangelical Christian principles.

    “Evangelical Christian” principles, rather than biblical ones.

    Yeah, sounds par for the course…

  119. Lost Patrol says:

    “Evangelical Christian” principles

    Sometimes, it’s easier to work with a moving target…

  120. feeriker says:

    I have an inclination that this approach is used because they really do not have the carrot anymore. Only the stick left.

    THIS.

  121. BillyS says:

    Dave,

    It is common for cessationists and similar beliefs to discount anything close to what is Written in this case.

    Note that “flu rational” should say “foundational” in my previous post.

  122. BillyS says:

    Everything is not necessarily a conspiracy feeriker. Note that disagreement here on whether someone can be a prophet now. I am leaning toward the idea she has other flaws, but that is not one I would pick on. Some of that because I am near what would be considered “evangelical” I suppose.

    I find very few are really Biblical today. That is unfortunately true across a wide range of beliefs.

  123. Dalrock says:

    @Cane

    I agree that sermons are not the time and place for drill. But I want to push back on this a bit for the sake of deeper understanding.

    Suppose a weak Christian man named Bob. Bob is a husband and father so it is true that he is oppressed by American society as a whole; in church and out of church. It is also true that the oppression actively discourages Bob from asserting himself in his family and in his church, and actively encourages rebellion from his wife and kids. It’s also been my experience that Bob has no desire to challenge the oppression even when you encourage him. Because we’ve all found our way to the Men’s Sphere I think we get the idea that every man out there is interested in restoration/reformation, or at least open to the idea. That’s not what I’ve found.

    My push-backs are questions: Do we want to keep the weak Christian men around? If so, how around–how involved–do we want them to be?

    After reading this a few times I think I understand the question. At any rate, my reply comes from my understanding that this is a topic shift, that we aren’t discussing how a DI routine might have the unexpected benefit of weeding Bob out of the congregation.

    Should Bob be in church leadership? No. Should he be encouraged by other men to fight the feminist culture’s influence on those he is charged to lead (at home)? Yes. Should he be encouraged to leave the church if he fails to embrace the fight against feminist wickedness? No, unless his transgression is worthy of this via church discipline.

    So under that scenario, Bob won’t be a church leader, but assuming the pastor and elders are on the right path, he likely will be uncomfortable with the message being taught (and lived) at the church. If he vocally argues that Scripture should be ignored, this is one problem. But Bob is more likely to either go along (since this is Bob’s MO), or follow his wife (also his MO) out of the church to find one more congruent to her feminist rebellion. I would prefer for Bob and his family’s sake that he stick around. It is possible that eventually he will gain in wisdom and courage. But if he leaves because the church is too dedicated to following the Word, then so be it.

    I make no assertion that Driscoll’s sermon is correct. He was wrong in what he said, and how, when, and where he said it. But the truth is that most churches don’t suffer under a Driscoll. They suffer under men like Tim Keller who praises his wife as a Godly woman and example for all Christian wives: for throwing a temper tantrum! As I wrote that last sentence, another question occurred to me: Suppose Driscoll’s sermon had been aimed at Tim Keller and those like him. What would be our response to that? What should it be?

    Tim Keller is calling evil good. This is very serious business. Those who are in authority over him should address this, and he should publicly repent of what he has publicly proclaimed. Even here though I don’t see the proper method being a DI modeled sermon.

  124. feeriker says:

    Everything is not necessarily a conspiracy feeriker.

    To which of my statements are you referring? I don’t recall ever making the case for “conspiracy” here.

  125. BillyS says:

    I was talking about your short reply on

    Evangelical Christian” principles, rather than biblical ones.

    Just noting a view on that.

  126. Dalrock says:

    @Josh the Aspie

    *face rub* Okay, I feel rather foolish. Dalrock, I hope you and your other readers can forgive me for what may have been a mental block. I’ll try to walk bullet point what I think I misunderstood, and you can tell me if I goofed it up or not.

    Driscol presumes or asserts two points.
    1. That families in trouble are due to men screwing up traditionalism.
    2. That boot-camp is the right way to straiten them out.

    Dalrock rebuts,
    A. that when A is true, B is false, and the whole family is harmed.
    B. Dalrock makes no statement or implication about how often or infrequently A is true.

    Josh the Aspie, gets all muddled, and while understanding point A, critical fails on point B.

    I think this is a fair assessment of my point, but no apology is required. I get (and share) your frustration at the idea that women are simply innocent victims forced by bad men to blow up their families. Especially since our system encourages this destruction as “empowerment”, and works to shift as many of the consequences as possible on the father. It is truly disgusting.

  127. @Dalrock,

    Thank you for the clarification, and confirming I had figured out that misunderstanding.

    And, as previously stated, I agree that both the husbands and wives (and of course the children) in this situation are harmed, and I think every sinner deserves sympathy as a fellow sinner, even if it’s sometimes hard to show it and feel it.

    I still disagree with “most harmed”. You said yourself

    “What is the worst thing, the cruelest thing, you can do to someone mired in sin and rebellion? You can discourage repentance and encourage more rebellion.”

    So when the man is attacked he suffers both serious temporal damage, and serious spiritual harm. Those men who commit suicide as a result of divorce are quite viciously harmed in both respects.

    I don’t think it is healthy to try to compare harms in some kind of ‘victim’s olympics’ of the spirit, so I’d rather not get into a contest over it, on behalf of others, and that is not what I’m trying to do here. Rather, given how often and unfortunately it happens, I feel an obligation to speak up when I hear or read something in the form of “Men attacked, women most harmed”.

  128. Gunner Q says:

    Josh the Aspie @ 11:23 am:
    “I still disagree with “most harmed”.”

    Dalrock is using a debate tactic. You make arguments that will convince your opponents, not your allies. The latter are already convinced.

    We know this blog has grown in popularity to the point many feminists lurk here. It is appropriate that some of Dalrock’s posts are phrased to, as it were, hoist them by their own petard.

  129. RPchristian says:

    Because we’ve all found our way to the Men’s Sphere I think we get the idea that every man out there is interested in restoration/reformation, or at least open to the idea. That’s not what I’ve found.

    I’ve discovered this as well. Very disappointing. For some, their eyes just glaze over. Others, there seems to be a distorted belief that anything that works so directly in their own best-interest is immoral. It’s a cartoonish version of the Protestant ethic. Their wife’s pedestalization is a proxy for their own personal holiness.

  130. Scott says:

    O/T, but in case anyone wants to discuss election related stuff. Pretty much left it as an open forum.

    https://americandadweb.wordpress.com/2016/11/07/my-obligatory-pre-election-post/

  131. Oscar says:

    @ RPchristian

    In my experience, one can expect outright hostility from many men when one mentions the truths we routinely discuss here.

  132. Dakota Breeze & Vegas James says:

    Novaseeker says:
    November 4, 2016 at 11:09 am

    Gentlemen, the Eastern Churches are calling you.

    Amin!

    Amin is arabic. The Muslims also say amin. American Christians will never adopt a Christianity with so much in common with Arabian culture and Islam.

  133. Dakota Breeze & Vegas James says:

    “Amin” is Arabic and also said by Muslims. American Christians will never adopt the “Eastern Churches” because they are too entrenched in Arabian culture and Arabic language, as well as too close to Islam for us.

  134. Scott says:

    Dakota-

    Every Sunday we sing almost our entire liturgy in Serbian, ending with

    “Slava Ocu i Sinu i Svetoga Duhu, Gospodi pomuljui, Gospodi pomuljui, Gospodi pomuljui, Amin.”

    (Glory to the father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy, Lord have mercy, Amen).

    And still to this day, the “Amin” part sounds Arabic to me, so I get what you are saying.

  135. Novaseeker says:

    Amin is Greek and appears in the original Greek texts of the New Testament, which is why it’s also in the Greek texts for the Divine Liturgy. When the Greeks created Church Slavonic, they also didn’t create a new word for “Amin” but simply transliterated it. When the Levant became Arab, the Christians there did the same thing with the word.

  136. Scott says:

    I wish I had my own personal Novaseeker when I am driving home from church (for 2 hours) and Mychael and have a million questions.

  137. Scott says:

    “Mychael and I”

  138. @Scott:

    Don’t we all.🙂

  139. Scott says:

    It would make a funny commercial. Kids are fast asleep, in their after church food coma.

    Me: I wonder why the priest signs himself 3 times like that before closing the curtain and then prays that exact prayer.

    Mychael, shrugs her shoulders, not knowing.

    Novaseeker pops up like a genie in the back seat, and steals a sip from my sons sippy cup.

    “Well, Scott, you see during the moments before the litany of the departed….”

    [D: Hilarious.]

  140. Micha Elyi says:

    The only person in the congregation who benefits from this model is the pastor himself, who is able to promote himself as the only real man in the room, the man the other wives should wish they married, and the man the other children should wish they had as a father.
    –Dalrock

    He benefits from a lot of snickers, that is, when the congregation starts whispering to each other about the abominable behavior of his PK’s (preacher’s kids).

    There’s a Bible verse about the difference between the hired man and a true shepherd (pastor).

  141. BillyS says:

    OT: I would appreciate prayer that I make it through this week well. My wife is finishing picking stuff from the house to take. I am like Luke in Star Wars. I see a glimmer of hope, but it is unlikely. I just need to get through 1 more week of direct contact. Then she will move out of town and I can push past this stage a bit better.

    (I would still rather have restoration, but that is not likely barring a supernatural level conversion.)

  142. thedeti says:

    OT also re: Election, pertinent to mine and Nova’s on November 4, 3 days ago.

    RCP polling averages have Clinton at +2.9 in a two way race; at +3.2 in a 4 way race with Libertarian and Green Parties. Looks to me like the Feds’ “exoneration” over the weekend is causing her to tick up a little. I still think Hillary will pull this one out.

  143. @thedeti:

    Those polls are still an abomination to mathematics and they’re intentionally skewed to give that impression.

  144. http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/

    The model, from RAND Corp in 2012, was the most accurate in that election cycle. That’s the only tracking poll that’s *generally* played it straight with their turnout model.

    Most of the polls in the RCP average has moved, in the last week, from D+7 through D+10 samples to D+2 or lower. The only reason Trump isn’t ahead 3-5 in those is that they keep playing around with the internals to goal-seek an outcome. And you’re the intended audience for it.

  145. Dakota Breeze & Vegas James says:

    actually amin is arabic not greek

  146. feeriker says:

    BillyS says:
    November 7, 2016 at 4:00 pm

    Most definitely I’ll keep you in my prayers.

    Hang in there, brother. I’ve been where you are. Trust and believe me when I say that it WILL get better for you – much better than you can now imagine.

  147. BillyS says:

    I know that and I believe God has told me that personally, I just hate to walk away (even if forced) from a woman who I have lived with over half my life.

    God will continue to use me, and perhaps more. He is ultimately the only thing keeping my mind steady, but it will be nice when I don’t have the ongoing reminder packing stuff to move out.

    It looks like just a week of that.

  148. @BillyS:

    God bless, Billy. Prayers for you.

  149. Gunner Q says:

    BillyS @ 6:20 pm:
    “I just hate to walk away (even if forced) from a woman who I have lived with over half my life.”

    That’s because you still want to do right by God. Only the dead don’t feel pain.

  150. My best stab: Trump 50.5, Clinton 46, Johnson/Stein 3.5 (This is amazingly variant on NY & CA turnout; it could stretch to 52/44 split if those are down.)

    Highlights in the EC, Trump gets:

    FL, NH, ME(at-large), PA, OH, MI, VA, NV, IA and CO.

    If we shift from the Trumpening to the Trumpeslide: NM, OR and MN go as well.

    VA & MI are the wonky ones to call. VA was fairly close for Romney and, but for the record Black turnout, probably would have been won. It’s under the same non-degreed White up / Black down effect the rest of the region is under, but Trump does worse with degreed Whites than Romney. And, well, it’s the DC area for a reason. This, oddly, is the one place that the Media’s PsyOps could backfire badly: if the DC crowd & Blacks don’t turn out highly but the rest of the state does, Trump could win by 2-4% and no one really sees it coming.

    MI is even wonkier. While Obama won without much issue ( http://infogalactic.com/info/United_States_presidential_election_in_Michigan,_2012 ), there’s the little issue that 85% of his margin was from Wayne County. And I can’t find it at the moment, but there was talk that Early Vote was massively down there. Every major campaign figure (both sides) being in MI in the last few days isn’t an accident. It’s also possible that a lot of the 2012 margin was voter fraud in Wayne County that could be found this time.

    PA comes down to how much voter fraud is prevented, sadly.

  151. feeriker says:

    BillyS @ 6:20 pm:

    “I just hate to walk away (even if forced) from a woman who I have lived with over half my life.”

    Gunner Q replied:

    “That’s because you still want to do right by God. Only the dead don’t feel pain.”

    Heartily cosign Gunner’s response. The pain is a sign that you have Word and Spirit in your heart. Like all pain, howevrr, it will esse off over time and the Lord will give you the strength to endure it and any challenges you may face moving forward.

  152. M Petersen says:

    May God bless and raise Mark Driscoll and his family from the depths. He needs our prayers along with every other pastor who adopts this kind of attitude.
    I have fallen, Lord, Once more. I can’t go on, I’ll never succeed. I am ashamed, I don’t dare look at You. And yet I struggled, Lord, for I knew You were right near me, bending over me, watching. But temptation blew like a hurricane And instead of looking at You I turned my head away, I stepped aside While You stood, silent and sorrowful, Like the spurned fiancé who sees his loved one carried off by his rival. When the wind died down as suddenly as it had arisen, When the lightning ceased after proudly streaking the darkness, All of a sudden I found myself alone, ashamed, disgusted, with my sin in my hands This sin that I selected as a customer to purchase, This sin that I have paid for and cannot return, for the storekeeper is no longer there, This tasteless sin, This colourless sin, This sin that sickens me, That I have wanted no more, That I have imagined, sought, played with, fondled, for a long time, That I have finally embraced while coldly by-passing You, My arms outstretched, my eyes and heart irresistibly drawn; This sin that I have grasped and consumed with gluttony, It’s mine now, but it possesses me as the spider web holds captive the fly. It is mine, It sticks to me, It flows in my veins, It fills my heart, It has slipped in everywhere, as darkness slips into the forest at dusk and fills all the patches of light. I can’t get rid of it, I run from it, like the master of an unwanted and mangy dog, but it catches up with me, and rubs joyfully against my legs. Everyone must notice it. I’m so ashamed that I feel like crawling to avoid being seen, I’m ashamed of being seen by my friend, I’m ashamed of being seen by You, Lord, For You loved me , and I forgot You. I forgot You because I was thinking of myself, And I can’t think of several persons at once. One I must choose, and I chose. And Your voice, And Your look, And Your love hurt me. They weigh me down, They weigh me down more than my sin. Lord, don’t look at me like that, For I am naked, I am dirty, I am down, Shattered, With no strength left. I dare make no promises, I can only stand bowed before You.
    [The Father’s Response]
    Come, son, look up. Isn’t it mainly your vanity that is wounded? If you loved Me , you would grieve, but you would trust. Do you think that there is a limit to God’s love? Do you think that for a moment I stopped loving you? But you still rely on yourself, son. You must rely only on Me. Ask My pardon And get up quickly, You see, it’s not falling that is the worst, But staying on the ground.
    – written by Michael Quoist

  153. The SouthWest went harder Dem that I expected, and NH could take into tomorrow to sort out.

    And PA came down to preventing the voter fraud. Which is pretty fascinating. Social Media coordination has prevented a lot of their dirty tricks.

  154. Avraham rosenblum says:

    I was very surprised about PA.I thought for sure the machines were rigged there. apparently someone was watching.

  155. RPC says:

    I forwarded this post to a friend of mine who used to be an elder at Mars Hill and has known Mark Driscoll for years.

    He replied:

    “I think he was spot on with Driscoll.”

    Just thought you’d like confirmation from an insider that your analysis is accurate.

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