Father’s Day sermons are the symptom, not the disease.

Father’s Day is a day of tradition.  In the secular world the tradition is to honor fathers on Father’s Day.  In the modern Christian world, especially the conservative Christian world, the tradition is to mock fathers and expresses contempt for them on Father’s Day.  But it is important to remember that the anti father Father’s Day sermon is a symptom, and not the disease.

The disease is a profound contempt for fathers, especially married fathers.  This condition exists largely beneath the surface the other 364 days of the year.  Father’s Day provokes the disease, often driving it to the surface.  Father’s Day is the day the urge to hide the condition is overwhelmed by the disgust at the sight of the culture honoring fathers in even the smallest ways.

If you aren’t involved with conservative Christian culture, you are likely taken aback by the statements above.  Everyone knows that conservative Christians are dyed in the wool patriarchs who treat every day as if it were a day to honor fathers.  Likewise, if you are a part of conservative Christian culture, mocking and expressing contempt for fathers is so ingrained in the culture that you likely don’t even notice it.

Last year for Father’s Day I did a series on Honor Your Father Today, a group that recognized the problem (to a degree) and set out to try to honor fathers on Father’s Day.  They failed miserably, but we should at least credit them with attempting.

This year I decided to  search for Father’s Day sermons online and read through a sample to see if I could find any that went against the anti father grain*.  I went through a total of 17 sermons in the process (16 on this page, the other one here).  Out of the 17, I found two that broke with conservative Christian tradition.  But before I share the details, I’ll outline the common anti father themes in Father’s Day sermons.

Common Anti-Father Father’s Day Sermon Themes:

  • Mock fathers, following the lead of feminists who for decades have portrayed married fathers as (at best) useless oafs.
  • Blame fathers for the single mother revolution and the host of social maladies feminism has wrought.  More on this topic here.
  • Blame fathers for children (and fathers) falling away from the anti-father church.
  • Tell men to man up and/or accuse them of being bad fathers.
  • Jokes about how Father’s Day is less important than Mother’s Day.

As I noted above, two of the sermons didn’t follow these common themes.  The first was Like Father, Like Son, by Dr. Lewis W. Gregory.  Gregory’s sermon contains none of the anti father messages above, and ends with the words “happy Father’s Day”.  Admittedly this isn’t a high hurdle to clear, especially since Gregory wasn’t (directly) wishing the fathers in the congregation a happy Father’s Day.  But by not attacking fathers in a Father’s Day sermon Gregory is doing something radical.

Summary: Do you bear the family likeness? Whose image is expressed in your life? When you are born again of the Spirit of God, you have a new father. God is your Father! So, you are just like your Father God. You share His image in order to express His likeness.

D. Now that’s a happy Father’s Day everyday!

The other Father’s Day sermon I found that wasn’t anti-father was from Douglas Phillips**.   Pastor Phillips’ sermon is titled Our Father In Heaven and opens with Phillips honoring his own father and concludes with a story featuring a father not as a joke but a protector:

CONCLUSION:

A FAMILY WENT TO A LAKE FOR A VACATION ALONG A LAKE. DAD WAS WORKING BY THE BOAT HOUSE WHILE HIS 12 YEAR OLD AND 3 YEAR OLD WERE PLAYING ON THE DOCK. OLDER BROTHER WAS SUPPOSED TO BE WATCHING YOUNGER BROTHER BUT GOT DISTRACTED SO LITTLE BILLY DECIDED TO CHECK OUT THE FISHING BOAT AT THE END OF THE DOCK.

BILLY PUT HIS FOOT IN THE BOAT BUT THE BOAT SHIFTED AND HE FELL IN. THE OLDER BROTHER SCREAMED AND DAD CAME RUNNING. HE JUMPED IN BUT COULDN’T FIND HIS SON. DAD TOOK ANOTHER GULP OF AIR AND WENT UNDER AGAIN FEELING EVERYWHERE FOR HIS SON.

ON HIS WAY UP FOR ANOTHER GULP OF AIR, BILLY’S FATHER FELT BILLY WITH HIS ARMS CLINGING TIGHTLY TO THE POSTS UNDER THE DOCK. HE PRYED BILLY LOOSE AND TOOK HIM UP FOR AIR.

WHEN EVERYONE HAD CALMED DOWN BILLY’S DAD ASKED HIM, WHAT HE WAS DOING CLINGING TO THE POST UNDERWATER. BILLY REPLIED, “I WAS JUST WAITING FOR YOU DAD, I WAS JUST WAITING FOR YOU.”

THAT LITTLE BOY TRUSTED HIS DAD, THE SAME WAY WE CAN TRUST OUR HEAVENLY FATHER.

The remaining 14 sermons are listed below.  Many of the sermons included good parts along with the bad, but all of them fit with one or more of the bullet points listed above.

Father’s Day Let Us Be Transformed (Message With Humor) Sermon by J Jeffrey Smead

Let us Pray….

O’ Gracious Father – bless now the words of my lips and the meditations of our hearts. Breathe your Spirit into us and grant that we may hear and in hearing be led in the way …… you want us to go. We ask this in the name of your son Jesus the Christ. Amen.

Someone noticed that the word “father” appears in the dictionary …..just before the word “fatigued” …..and just after the word “fathead.”

So to all us fatigued, fathead fathers, ……Happy Father’s Day! (Pause)

One time a little boy was asked to define Father’s Day and he said, ……”It’s just like Mother’s Day,…… only you don’t have to spend as much on the present.”

Father’s Day: Joseph Sermon by Scott Bayles.  In addition to hitting several of the bulleted themes, this one also features a fascination with cuckoldry.

Well, let me start out today by saying “Happy Father’s Day” to all of our Dads. One little boy, when asked to explain about Father’s Day, said, “It’s just like Mother’s Day, only you don’t spend as much on the present.”

That’s a joke, of course, but really, Father’s Day never seems to be as big a deal as Mother’s Day, does it?

I’m glad there is a Father’s Day (not just because I’m a dad myself). Even though it may not be as significant or special as Mother’s Day, it still gives us a chance to honor those who stand at the helm, who gather their team in a huddle, and who lead their family through life’s battles. And, since my Mother’s Day message last month focused on Mary the mother of Jesus, I thought it would only be appropriate for us to take a thoughtful look at Joseph, the step-father of Jesus, for Father’s Day.

Joseph understood clearly what God expected of him, and was ready to obey! He would take Mary to be his wife and suffer the cutting remarks of a child conceived prior to their wedding. He would obey in spite of the fact that this child of divine promise would be born under a cloud of adultery. He called his adopted son “Jesus,” just as he was told to do. Joseph believed God, obeyed God, and accepted the responsibility that God had given him.

How much better would our world be if every father did the same thing?

In 1960, 17% of children in the United States were raised apart from their biological fathers. By 1990, that number had risen to 36%. Today, nearly half of all the children in the U.S. are raise without a father in their home. How could we have become so irresponsible? So caviler in our relationships with our own children?

Dads, we can’t leave the rearing and raising of our children to the television or the daycare teacher or even to mom alone. It’s our responsibility too. We need to be actively involved in our children’s lives. We need to take responsibility, especially in their formative years. I once heard a psychologist say that whatever you plan on teaching your children (values, morals, etc.) must be taught within the first five years—after that, it’s just reinforcement. Do you know what an awesome responsibility that it!?

The Echo Sermon by Ken McKinley.  This is a sermon on the lack of faith by young people.  The Father’s Day tie in is that fathers are to blame.

Now I don’t know if you all remember a few Sunday’s back when I read to you the statistics from Lifeway and from the SBC, about the state of the church, but those statistics tell us a story, and what we saw at Falls Creek tells us a story as well. If you don’t remember what I quoted from LifeWay and the SBC I’ll remind you. They state in their studies and research that there are over 16 million members in the Southern Baptist denomination, but only about 6 million regularly attend church on Sunday. They also state that if the Southern Baptist denomination does not begin to replenish its numbers with younger people, ie: the next generation, we are going to have some serious problems…

Church, we have got to be committed to getting our children and grandchildren to be radically surrendered to Jesus and radically committed to His cause. Because if we aren’t, where is the next generation of Christians going to come from? They aren’t going to grow in our garden. Where are they going to come from?

Well dads, that’s where we come in to this picture. God’s ordinary way of shaping children and youth into radically committed, wise, thinking, loving, mature Christians is through parents who teach and model a God-centered, Bible-saturated worldview into their children. Turn with me to Deuteronomy 6:4-7 (Read). Now turn to Psalm 78:5 – 7 and see what Asaph says about this (Read), and since we’ve been studying Ephesians go ahead and turn to Ephesians chapter 6: 1-4 (Read). Keep your place in Ephesians because we’re going to be coming back to it in a second.

You see, the Biblical pattern is for parents, especially fathers is to not relinquish their role as the primary teachers of their children’s minds and hearts…

Burn A Hole In The Fire Sermon by Philip Harrelson

Men, we have to take the journey to the house of God! One of the reasons that our nation is in the mess that it is in is because men are more concerned about recreation than they are about worship. Leisure, sports, relaxation, and I will add in work are very poor idols that will never get our kids out of the fire!

  • Men in our day will smoke joints with their children but not take them to worship.
  • Men in our day will share alcohol with their children but not the Word of God.
  • Men in our day will take their kids to the movies but not to God’s House.
  • Men in our day will yell at a ballpark for their kid but never have a lick of emotion in their worship.

Have You Seen My Daddy? Sermon by Charlie Roberts:

I can remember, my dad would call and the first thing he would say would be, “Dad here” at the time I would think of course you’re there, and I’m here. But over the years, I came to realize that, when he said those words…it gave me comfort, knowing I could call anytime and he would come running to help me, no matter what the need was!

I could sense his presence was there, even though physically he wasn’t.

So many fathers nowadays, aren’t that way.

It’s no wonder why churches all over the globe are closing their doors, and are dropping in attendance.

Dads aren’t going, so why should the children. Fathers are supposed to be the spiritual leaders of their households. If we’re ever going to see revival in our church’s, it’s going to have to first start in our homes!

Man Up Sermon by Anthony Zibolski

Are you strong enough to be a man?

Churches filled mostly with women.

Women pulling the majority of weight in the families.

The world says:

I wear the pants,

The John Wayne type,

The Dirty Harry type. Make my day , don’t be a whimp No crying allowed

But it has shifted gears:

They paint a picture today of men that have nothing to say.

They have given up their authority in the family.

They imply that women have by force taken the lead.

Today is Fathers day, a day of cologne, neck ties, long distance phone calls, but it also a reminder to the men to man up…

…10 things you’ll never hear Dad say

10. Well, how about that? I’m lost. Looks like I will have to stop and ask someone for directions

9. You know pumpkin, now that your thirteen, you’ll be ready for unchaperoned car dates.

8. I noticed that all your friends have a certain hostile attitude. I like that.

7. Here’s a credit card and the keys to my new car. Go crazy.

6. What do you mean you want to play football? Figure skating’s not good enough for you son.

5. Your mother and I are going away, you might want to consider having a party.

4. Well, I don’t know what’s wrong with your car. Probably one of those doo-hickey things. Tow it to the mechanic, whatever it costs, ‘ll pay for it.

3. No son of mine is going to live under this roof without an earring. Now quit you belly aching, and let’s go to the mall.

2. Whadda wanna go and get a job for ? I make plenty of money for you to spend.

1. What do I want for my birthday? Aahh, don’t worry about it. No big deal.

So God still needs to work on a few things in most men.

They say it is an age for women to rise up and be noticed. Amen.

Equal pay for equal work. Amen.

The problem today is not rebellious women. It is men who have not taken the rightful spot in leading their families. I know there are rebellious women. I’m sure none here. Some men are comfortable giving up the lead role.

…ladies, couldn’t you follow a man who is following after God’s heart? Pray for the men in your life.

Fathers Day 2009 Sermon by Bruce Ball.  This one wins the irony award.

TODAY IS THE ONE DAY EACH YEAR

* We set aside to honor our fathers.

* What a shame we don’t do this

* Every day of the year

FOR THE MOST PART

* Men do a pretty good job

* Of being husbands and fathers,

* Even though we do tend to forget dates

[Tells a clueless husband joke]

THE MORAL IS:

* while men are not perfect,

* we need to be appreciated

* for trying so hard.

A FATHER HAD 5 KIDS

* One day, he brought 1 present home.

* He told them he could only give it to one of them

HE SAID HE WOULD GIVE IT TO THE ONE WHO

* Had obeyed their mother,

* Did what she told them to do

* And never talked back to her

THEY WERE ALL SILENT,

* And then all of said

* ’You take it, Daddy!’

SOCIETY PORTRAYS FATHERS

* as being incompetents

* and as people who can’t do anything right

* so they don’t deserves any respect

A Praying And Concern Father Sermon by VAN WILLIAMS

Summary: It is a fact that in today’s time most children grow up and never serve the Lord after becoming adults. Ever notice that? Wonder why so many adults don’t serve the Lord? David’s son Absalom rebelled against him and tried to take the throne away from him

CONCLUSION:

1. The Old Sin Nature, our corrupt part that separates us from God is inherited from our father/dad. – If it is not changed by God’s divine grace, that Old Sin Nature will send us to hell.

2. One would think that every father/dad would be concerned that his children not go to hell and if concerned then that father is bound to pray for his children, correct them, bring them up in the ways of the Lord and never cease to be concerned for them even when they are grown.

3. What about that father who never warns his children about hell or fails to instruct them in the ways of the Lord that would lead to their salvation?

4. God expects the father to raise his children in the ways of the Lord and if he doesn’t and they go to hell because of his neglect, their blood will be on the father’s hand.

5. Fathers, impress upon your children their duty to God. Too often fathers try to express or show their love to their children but never tell their children about Jesus who loves them more.

6. Fathers, seeing your children saved is more important than anything else on this earth.

7. Fathers, do not rest until every one of your children know the Lord Jesus as Savior.

8. But, how can a father lead his children to the Lord if he is not saved himself?

Fighters Vs. Flyers Sermon by Michael Catt

Summary: We must fight against evil and against complacency and fear. We must flee from evil and protect our kids.

Sadly, that is the case of 24 million children in this country. Their dads have simply left, opting for a life other than full-time care of the family they started. Many of these kids have been fathered in the foundation of a family where the mother and father exchanged vows and made promises that are now broken.

Regardless of the situation, fatherhood can be frightening, but it must never be flown. Our responsibility is too great, and the stakes are too high.

As a church, we cannot assume that just because a dad is in the home that he is being a dad. We cannot assume that his hand is on the heartbeat of the family. The church’s role is to support and encourage and equip.

Sometimes men, in the context of the flight, get distracted by their sin and neglect to consider how their sin so deeply affects their family. Some men need to stand up and fight against the sin in their lives and in the lives of their children. That fight begins and ends in repentance, perhaps the art of Christian living that requires the most skilled fighter.

Fathers Day 2008 Lessons From A Famous Father

Summary: Miles of distance and centuries of time separate us from King David. He was a king and we are commoners. Still, despite the distance and the differences we can learn much about being fathers in this present day by looking at this father of long ago.

A. David had been immensely successful in most of the things he had done.

1. He had been successful as a musician.

2. He had been successful as a soldier.

3. He had been successful as an administrator.

4. He had been successful as a politician.

B. David failed as a father and that outweighed all his successes.

1. In fact, David would gladly have given up his other successes if he could have traded them for success as a father.

2. Many today give up success as a father and trade it for success in business or a profession.

Illustration

Six year old Tommy came downstairs crying. “What’s the matter?” asked his Mother.

“Daddy just hit his thumb with a hammer, “ the boy replied.

“A big boy like you shouldn’t cry over a thing like that,” said the Mother. “Why didn’t you laugh?”

“I did,” he replied.

Fathers Day – A Charge To Walk Worthy Of God sermon by William Akehurst.  As far as man up Father’s Day sermons go, this one is pretty mild.

Summary: We have been trusted with the Gospel to bring it to others. AS A FATHER TO HIS CHILDEN, Exhort, Comfort, Charge and Implore, to Walk Worthy of God. To Walk: in Love, in Light, in Wisdom, and in Worship

Dad Talk Sermon by Michael McCartney.  This one started out with great promise, and for the first three pages I thought I had found a third Father’s Day sermon that broke the anti father pattern.  Then in page four it fell into the standard groove before taking a surprisingly dark turn:

Summary: Today we follow the teaching of the Bible and we honor our dads today. Dads are different from moms and they are to be honored for being who God created them to be.

a. Thanks to all you dad’s who have made this proclamation to serve the Lord.

b. Sad to say many women have made this statement. Many more mothers have made this commitment than fathers.

Conclusion:

Dad’s I want you to listen to a poem from a teenager in Chicago who expresses how important you are as fathers and fatherly figures:

Maggie’s Poem

…Do you know, do you understand

that when I hear you talk about arguments

And conflicts and scars

from the past, that I think,

“Maybe I am just a regular person

instead of a bad, no good little girl

who deserves abuse.”

If you care, I think maybe He cares.

And then there’s this flame of hope

that burns inside of me for a while

I am afraid to breathe because it might go out

and I will once again have nothing

But a God who mocks and laughs

and ignores me.

Do you know, do you understand

that your words are His words?

Your face, His face

to someone like me.

Please be who you say you are.

Please God, don’t let this be another trick.

Please let this be real

Please.

Do you know, do you understand

Who you are?

Who Are You? Sermon by Anthony Zibolski

Summary: Faking the presence of God in your life is not only foolish but unproductive for the kingdom of God. We must be honest with the Lord of where we are at in our journey of life.

Introduction-

This is not a direct at you Fathers day message. Fathers sitting here this morning will have the same opportunity as everyone else to take a look at their lives. Men, we don’t always communicate well. We don’t always listen 100 %. Some times that get us in trouble. Can some one say Amen Women, let me help you. When a man says- “ it would take to long to explain’. He really means “ I have no clue how it works”. When a man says, “Take a break, honey, you are working too hard” He really means- “I can’t hear the game over the vacuum cleaner”. When a man says- “Can I help with dinner?” He really means, “Baby, I’m hungry, isn’t it done yet:” When a man says “I’m not lost, I know exactly where we are”. He really means- if you do not buy me a garman, we will never be seen alive again”.

Love – Key Ingredient For Family Sermon by Bobby Stults

Summary: Dads the family is our responsibility to lead, guide and protect. We are not called to “lord” over them, but to love them and lead them!

So many times we jump to the conclusion that because God placed the man as the head of the family that God believes the man to be superior to his wife or children. This could NOT be further from the truth. It is NOT that God believes men to be superior, but it is that God has called men to be the leaders of the family unit. It is the role God has chosen for men.

Likewise, in just the opposite direction, there are many who believe that because God has chosen the woman to be in the support role and that Scripture instructs women to submit to their husbands… they jump to the conclusion that God is somehow ‘anti-woman’ and that women are somehow inferior to men in God’s eyes.

Let me ask you a question today. How long has it been since you tried a little kindness on your family? On your spouse? On your children? On your brother? On your sister? On your parents? When is the last time you put your love INTO action when it pertains to your family?

Kindness is a tangible expression of the LOVE in your heart… of the love you SAY you have… Love expressed through actions speaks loudly… We must bring ACTION to our love with our families… Men it is NOT enough for you to tell your wife that you love her, although that is very important… but words are empty if they are not back up by action!! Show your wife you love her!!!

 

*I started with a Google Search of “father’s day sermons”.  The first actual sermon to come up on the list was this one.  At or near the top of the list was Sermons for Father’s Day at Sermon Central.  All of the sermons I went through above were highly rated.  My intent was to take the top 15-20 sermons listed on the site.  However, for some reason I seemed to periodically get different results when I returned to the page.  The sort order is fairly dynamic, so I pulled whatever was top of the list when I returned until I couldn’t bear to read any more sermons.

**Update:  I originally believed that this was the same Pastor Douglas Phillips whom I wrote about  here.  However, after looking at more of his entries on the same site I am convinced I was in error and this is a different Baptist pastor by the same name.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Attacking headship, Disrespecting Respectability, Father's Day. Bookmark the permalink.

105 Responses to Father’s Day sermons are the symptom, not the disease.

  1. Anonymous Reader says:

    The sort order is fairly dynamic, so I pulled whatever was top of the list when I returned until I couldn’t bear to read any more sermons.

    Thanks for doing that so many others do not have to.

  2. Damn Crackers says:

    “Equal pay for equal work. Amen.”

    Is this from the Nicene Creed? I don’t seem to remember it.

    Also, you have 354 days in the paragraph after the lede. I don’t think you meant the Lunar calendar.

    [D: Thanks! Fixed.]

  3. Pingback: Father’s day sermons are the symptom, not the disease. | @the_arv

  4. Hmm says:

    For myself, I never minded the “be the man God called you to be” stuff in Father’s day sermons, so much of what you copied above didn’t trigger me much. But the one about the kids giving the present to Daddy really honked me off.

  5. Dalrock says:

    @Hmm

    For myself, I never minded the “be the man God called you to be” stuff in Father’s day sermons, so much of what you copied above didn’t trigger me much.

    Right. It is more subtle, and more to the point perfectly normal (in Christian culture). The thing to keep in mind is this is the response to a day set aside to honor fathers. They could follow their mother’s advice and not say anything at all if they don’t have anything good to say. Many pastors do just that (and others don’t preach topically on holidays in general). But these pastors felt the need to take a day set aside to honor fathers (which corresponds to a biblical command), and go after fathers instead. Secular culture provoked them into going after fathers. Remaining silent as secular culture honored fathers was simply too much to bear.

  6. Cane Caldo says:

    Remaining silent as secular culture honored fathers was simply too much to bear.

    Boom!

  7. Anonymous Reader says:

    Anti-man sermons are a symptom the same problem as Patterson’s firing from the Fort Worth seminary. Feminization of the churches manifests in multiple ways, and anti-man sermons are one means of preparing the conflict space for future feminist gains. The SBC women who signed the open letter are able to operate within the SBC partly because men have been demoralized and even demonized by the denomination itself

    But all these women demanding Patterson’s head on a plate didn’t just appear overnight. Without women’s studies departments in SBC-approved seminaries the rot might not be so deep.

    Anti-man, anti-father sermons are an easy problem to point to. Some tradcons might even be able to notice them, if right in front of their eyes in big, easy to read typefont.

  8. Dalrock says:

    @Anon Reader

    Anti-man, anti-father sermons are an easy problem to point to. Some tradcons might even be able to notice them, if right in front of their eyes in big, easy to read typefont.

    Indeed. What makes this even harder to deny is when secular commenters take note, as I’ve shown with War Room and Mom’s Night Out.

    But this creates an intractable dilemma. Should they double down on denying that it is happening? Or should they defend the anti-father messages they love as either perfectly normal or justified? To deny the message is to admit that it is evil. To defend the message is to admit that this is how they really feel.

  9. Jonadab-the-Rechabite says:

    Is that the same Doug Phillips formerly of Vision Forum, son of Howard Phillips?

  10. feministhater says:

    The problem today is not rebellious women. It is men who have not taken the rightful spot in leading their families. I know there are rebellious women. I’m sure none here. Some men are comfortable giving up the lead role.

    And this is why I don’t care anymore. If they are so blind as to not be able to admit that women are in rebellion, then there is no point. None so blind as those who will not see. No fixing this I’m afraid.

  11. Dalrock says:

    @Jonadab-the-Rechabite says:

    Is that the same Doug Phillips formerly of Vision Forum, son of Howard Phillips?

    That was my original belief. However, looking at other sermons I no longer think so. For one, he has submissions from 2018. Another clue is in one sermon he references going to the big city, and both cities he mentions are in Canada. The Vision Forum Doug Phillips is in Texas. I just updated the post accordingly.

  12. Cane Caldo says:

    @Dalrock

    Indeed. What makes this even harder to deny is when secular commenters take note, as I’ve shown with War Room and Mom’s Night Out.

    It’s easy to under-estimate the powers of equivocation wielded by Christians. When it suits them, secular criticism can be ignored by the mere observation that the critics aren’t Christian and therefore can’t understand. Yet, in the twinkling of an eye, the same Christians can turn about to marshal secular criticism against fathers.

    Criticism of Christians for portraying fathers as dolts? They just don’t understand the higher calling of being a Christian father that all Christian fathers fail to achieve. Total out of wedlock birth rates high regardless of faith? That’s self-evident judgment upon Christian fathers because they’ve set a bad example for everyone else.

  13. thedeti says:

    All women have a rebellious streak. It’s their nature. Eve, not Adam, was the one who disobeyed FIRST. Eve, not Adam, was the one who was deceived, in large part because she WANTED to be deceived. God announced the curse of Eve: “Your desire shall be to rule your husband, and he shall rule over you.” Women constantly chafe and bristle against the constraints and boundaries and rule of men. Daughters do this with their fathers. Wives do this with their husbands. Can women overcome this? Yes, through prayer and effort and mindfulness. Do women who overcome this occasionally relapse? Yes, every one of them.

    Do most women overcome this? No, mostly because men are constantly told to indulge and allow and placate. (Just as Adam did by “hearkening to the voice of [his] wife. His sin was listening to what his wife told him he should do, which led him directly into disobedience to God’s command. The clear implication of what God told Adam was “If you had listened to me and done what I had told you to do, instead of listening to her and doing what she told you to do, you would have been fine. But you listened to her anyway, just like I knew you would.”)

  14. Anonymous Reader says:

    But this creates an intractable dilemma. Should they double down on denying that it is happening? Or should they defend the anti-father messages they love as either perfectly normal or justified?

    Patterson’s head on a platter suggests Door #2: double down on beating up other men in order to please their Mommies, Dominatrixes church sisters. In the longer term it means driving more men out of church and seriously betaizing, if not gelding, the rest. Of course it also means a split in the SBC is now baked in the cake – not “if” but “when”. Beth Moore may yet wind up queen of the SBC, only to have about half of the churches leave, shrinking her empire quickly.

  15. Anonymous Reader says:

    Related topic: a couple of local churches held “Lady’s Movie Night” last week on Friday.
    They showed the Kendricks War Room.
    A friend of mine sends his children to a Christian school. One of the last assembly / chapels in May featured Fireproof.
    This is considered to be “pushing back” or “resisting” the popular culture.

  16. vfm7916 says:

    @thedeti

    Yep, the first commandment was violated before it was in existence when Eve desired to be as God. She also wanted Adam to receive the fruit from her, not God, and become his God.

    That is the struggle of every man and every woman and the underlying driver of sexuality. Anytime a man puts his woman over himself it’s the violation of that commandment. Women are always driven to attempt to become Gods, explaining their solipsistic thought processes.

    It’s when they follow God’s order that they achieve peace and happiness. In order to do so Women need those external behavioral controls from religion, culture, relationships, etc. Men develop internal controls on behavior, as they constantly orient themselves to the world that can kill them at any time. This is the faculty that creates headship, civilization, and worship. As the controls break, so does everything that follows on until the savagery reaches a point where Women must mitigate the risk of violence to themselves through full submission to their Men. That point will probably be the rebirth of Christianity, though it will be a very militant Christianity not interested in turning the other cheek.

  17. Oscar says:

    @ thedeti says:
    June 12, 2018 at 12:27 pm

    All women have a rebellious streak. It’s their nature. Eve, not Adam, was the one who disobeyed FIRST…
    Do most women overcome this? No, mostly because men are constantly told to indulge and allow and placate.

    Few women are even aware that their flesh naturally rebels against their husbands’ authority. Even fewer acknowledge that natural tendency. Even fewer actually struggle against it. Even fewer conquer their rebellious tendencies.

  18. The demand to “show more emotion in worship” is a specific demand for men to stop being masculine and act more feminine. I always felt this tension in church, when I was younger and still attended, as though my natural masculine nature was being rejected in favor of effeminate displays of emotion. I remember hearing those sorts of admonitions, that I must not be a “real man” because I wasn’t (*acting like a woman*) emotional enough.

    The church’s message seems to be, “Men: act like women, submit to women, submit to your children, submit to our leadership and the church, and then maybe, just maybe, if you’re a good little boy, we will accept you as a second-class citizen who can be ejected from his family at your wife’s command.”

    That Top 10 List is completely insane, if that pastor is suggesting that fathers should be doing the opposite of all the “jokes” contained therein. We’re supposed to give our kids the keys to the car and our credit card? To encourage our sons to figure skate? This is just horrendous advice. And I would have taken it as a bad joke, except the pastor afterward states, “Men have a lot to work on.”

  19. Anonymous Reader says:

    As another aside, “contempt of husband by wife” is one of the 4 marriage-killers that Gottman discovered during his relationship research in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s. It’s no secret that men need respect at a basic level. In a sense, churches that engage in man bashing are just another form of nagging, disrespectful, contentious wife.

  20. Pingback: Father’s day sermons are the symptom, not the disease. | Reaction Times

  21. ys says:

    Amazing work here. I am sure it took a lot of time, so thank you.

  22. vfm7916 says:

    If a woman can’t respect the person she chose as her husband, how can she respect God?

    Rhetorical, naturally.

  23. Jonadab-the-Rechabite says:

    @vfm.

    If a woman can’t respect the person she chose as her husband, how can she respect God?

    The Greek word used in Eph 5:33 is Phobos which means to fear with reverence. The evangelical church has removed the fear of god from their culture and worship so it is natural that there is no respect/reverence/fear of husbands. The new spiritual path is the fear of women is the beginning of wisdom and the contempt of husbands is the second step.

  24. Hugh Mann says:

    Isn’t Father’s Day a creation of the greeting-card industry? In the UK we have Mothering Sunday, originally a day when you’d visit the church you were baptised in (your ‘mother church’), but ‘Father’s Day’ is a complete and utter fake day, unless you celebrate St Joseph’s Day as they do in Europe.

    I do actually tell my kids not to get me anything for Father’s Day, because “Every day is Father’s Day!”

  25. Nathan Bruno says:

    @Hugh Mann

    Father’s Day was championed by a woman who was raised by a widower because America had celebrated Mother’s Day for 50 years prior. Our greatest president, Calvin Coolidge, urged every state to celebrate it.

  26. RichardP says:

    @deti said: If you had listened to me and done what I had told you to do, instead of listening to her and doing what she told you to do, you would have been fine. But you listened to her anyway, just like I knew you would.

    That is close, but still misleading.

    … Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. He was chosen before the creation of the world. 1 Peter 1:19-20

    … the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world. Revelation 13:8

    The final sacrifice was chosen before the creation of the world. The final sacrifice was chosen before the creation of Eve. God knew what Eve was going to do before he even created her – and so he created a rescue from her punishment before he even created her.

    God knew how he was going to create Eve before he created her. God could have created her to be different, but he did not. Actually, he could not. Because God created a rescue from what Eve would do – before he even created Eve.

    Why would God have created the final sacrifice, our rescue from the wages of sin, before he created Eve – unless he planned to create Adam and Eve with the ability and desire to rebel against him? When someone looks at something and says “it is good”, that does not mean it is perfect. It means that it turned out just the way the creator of the thing wanted it to turn out.

    We cannot argue that, out of God’s foreknowledge, he realized that Adam and Eve would need a savior, and so he created one. We cannot argue that – because God created that savior before he created Adam and Eve. That means he knew that he was going to create Adam and Eve so that they would need a savior. That shows intent. Not just foreknowledge. Unless you want to argue that God did not know what he was doing when he created Adam and Eve – and that argument just makes no sense. As Isaiah 29:16 says, the clay doesn’t say to the potter “do you know what you are doing?”. (paraphrased).

    God saw that Adam was alone and saw that it was not good for Adam to be alone. Assuming that God was looking at the actual man Adam, that means he was saying it was not good for Adam to be alone AFTER God chose the lamb that would be sacrificed as recompense for the sin Adam had not yet performed. God did not intend for Adam to reject Eve. Had Adam done so, he would have been right back in the predicament that God created Eve as a rescue from. Why would God create a rescue from Adam’s aloneness and then expect Adam to reject her? Why would God choose the final sacrifice – before he created Adam – and then expect Adam to not need the final sacrifice?

    This may not make sense to us, but that is what the words say. This may not make sense to us, but it is God’s game, not ours. He says as much in Isaiah 29:16, referenced above, and in Isaiah 46:10, quoted below:

    I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say, ‘My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please. (NIV)

    This is God’s game, not ours. And whatever he pleases to do does not have to make sense to us. And yet we continue to impose on the words a meaning that makes sense to us, a meaning that is clearly at odds with what the words atually say.

    … Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. He was chosen before the creation of the world (before the creation of Adam and Eve). 1 Peter 1:19-20

    … the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world. Revelation 13:8

    Those words mean something. And yet, all of our discussions about the Adam and Eve story fail to account for these words.

  27. Frank K says:

    Common Anti-Father Father’s Day Sermon Themes:

    Mock fathers, following the lead of feminists who for decades have portrayed married fathers as (at best) useless oafs.
    Blame fathers for the single mother revolution and the host of social maladies feminism has wrought. More on this topic here.
    Blame fathers for children (and fathers) falling away from the anti-father church.
    Tell men to man up and/or accuse them of being bad fathers.
    Jokes about how Father’s Day is less important than Mother’s Day.

    I am fortunate enough to say that I’ve never heard such tripe during a homily. I guess it really is different on the other side of the aisle these days.

    Perhaps some of you should talk with Scott about joining the Orthodox Church.

  28. Frank K says:

    Here’s the real Father’s Day slap in the face:

    http://pulpitandpen.org/2018/06/11/united-methodists-remove-father-from-apostles-creed-to-be-more-gender-inclusive-to-god/

    Why do the United Methodists even recite the creed? I seriously doubt they believe even a fraction of it.

  29. Oscar says:

    Jonadab,

    I’m not so sure that phobos means “fear with reverence”.

    Phobos is the name of a Greek god, one of Ares’ (god of war) twin sons, Phobos and Deimos (fear and terror). Supposedly, Ares would send Phobos and Deimos through an army, spreading fear and terror among the ranks.

    In other words, phobos is the kind of fear that makes warriors’ hands shake, their knees knock, and their bowels run at the sight of the enemy.

    We see that kind of fear throughout the Bible when people encounter God’s glory.

    Exodus 20:18 All the people perceived the [f]thunder and the lightning flashes and the sound of the trumpet and the mountain smoking; and when the people saw it, they trembled and stood at a distance. 19 Then they said to Moses, “Speak [g]to us yourself and we will listen; but let not God speak [h]to us, or we will die.” 20 Moses said to the people, “Do not be afraid; for God has come in order to test you, and in order that the fear of Him may [i]remain with you, so that you may not sin.”

    ….

    Isaiah 6:6 In the year of King Uzziah’s death I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple. 2 Seraphim stood above Him, each having six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. 3 And one called out to another and said,

    “Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of hosts,
    The [a]whole earth is full of His glory.”

    4 And the [b]foundations of the thresholds trembled at the voice of him who called out, while the [c]temple was filling with smoke. 5 Then I said,

    “Woe is me, for I am ruined!
    Because I am a man of unclean lips,
    And I live among a people of unclean lips;
    For my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts.”

    Revelation 1:12 Then I turned to see the voice that was speaking with me. And having turned I saw seven golden lampstands; 13 and in the middle of the lampstands I saw one like [j]a son of man, clothed in a robe reaching to the feet, and girded across His chest with a golden sash. 14 His head and His hair were white like white wool, like snow; and His eyes were like a flame of fire. 15 His feet were like burnished bronze, when it has been made to glow in a furnace, and His voice was like the sound of many waters. 16 In His right hand He held seven stars, and out of His mouth came a sharp two-edged sword; and His face was like the sun [k]shining in its strength.

    17 When I saw Him, I fell at His feet like a dead man. And He placed His right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, 18 and the living One; and I [l]was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.”

  30. Dalrock says:

    @Frank K

    I am fortunate enough to say that I’ve never heard such tripe during a homily. I guess it really is different on the other side of the aisle these days.

    Perhaps some of you should talk with Scott about joining the Orthodox Church.

    Not all Protestant pastors do this kind of sermon. As I noted above, some pastors choose to say nothing at all if they can’t say anything good, and others don’t preach topically on any holidays. My own pastor falls into the latter camp.

    But more importantly, the sermons themselves aren’t the problem. They are the symptom. Dislike for fathers, especially married fathers, is a near universal modern Christian phenomenon. Go on to CAF and ask what they think about War Room, Courageous, etc. and you will find that aside from obvious Prot vs Cat issues they very much love the anti married father message.

    This is an issue that thrives because it is cloaked in denial. A big part of that is the whole “sucks to be you!” denial each group is tempted to fall back on to avoid confronting the ugly truth immediately around them. This is very much like the smugness of many Catholics on the issue of divorce, when there is nothing to be smug about.

  31. earl says:

    The other thing which isnt pointed out…whenever a husband tries to discipline his wife’s rebellious streak…she can summon the state to throw him out. Or claim abuse because of the badfeelz.

    I’m more than okay with the fact men should set boundaries and temper her rebellion. I’m not okay with state or cuck pastor undermining. So ladies can continue to be rebellious and cry about the fact there is no manning up. A cake and eat it too scenario.

  32. earl says:

    I’m aware that Prots don’t have the book of Ben Sira (or Sirach or Ecclesiasticus) in their Bible…however chapter 3 does have a great message as to what showing honor and kindness to a father is about and what you are considered when you don’t. (of note it also talks about honoring your mother as well)

    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ben+Sira+3&version=NABRE

    ‘Kindness to a father will not be forgotten;
    it will serve as a sin offering—it will take lasting root.
    In time of trouble it will be recalled to your advantage,
    like warmth upon frost it will melt away your sins.
    Those who neglect their father are like blasphemers;
    those who provoke their mother are accursed by their Creator.’

  33. PokeSalad says:

    None so blind as those who will not see.

    “Closing your eyes…is worse than being blind.” – Johnny Adams

  34. A number of factors at work:

    1) too much soy
    2) gay
    3) gay
    4) soy
    5) Boomer

    Get your pastor to lift. More testosterone makes a big difference.

  35. PokeSalad says:

    Get your pastor to lift.

    “Truly, tis easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than to get a cuck pastor in the squat rack.”

  36. Sharkly says:

    Get your pastor to lift. More testosterone makes a big difference.

  37. JB Harshaw says:

    @ Dalrock

    The disease is a profound contempt for fathers, especially married fathers.

    No, sorry Dalrock,you’re close, but that too is just a symptom.

    The REAL underlying disease is a desire to NEGATE or ERASE the very existence of God, the Father, and most specifically to do so because of an overwhelming desire to blatantly REJECT and DISOBEY his LAW (all of it); and by “erasing” him (never mentioning him, essentially just denying HIS existence*), they believe they are justified in creating & substituting their own “laws” (thus we see a whole array of sinful behavior (all “rationalized” away via the substitute “gods”).

    I noted long long ago the absence, almost total AVOIDANCE of even mentioning God the Father in many many churches in recent decades.

    * This is what any/all attempts to elevate either “Jesus” (aka “Buddy Christ”) and/or “The Spirit” (as a sort of Star Wars-y impersonal “Force”) — or for those who are even MORE blatant to substitute some “Mother Earth/Gaia” figure; all of these are really just DENIAL of the existence of God the Father (Psalm 14:1**) and are forms of blasphemy and idolatry.

    ** Note how their behavior MATCHES that of Psalm 14 verse 1, to wit: 14 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

  38. tkatchev says:

    conservative Christians

    The only conservative Christians are the Tridentine Catholics and Eastern Orthodox. Everyone else is not “conservative” and never was.

  39. ray says:

    ‘BILLY REPLIED, “I WAS JUST WAITING FOR YOU DAD, I WAS JUST WAITING FOR YOU.”’

    Not many days go by any more when I don’t think that, at least once.

    He is Papa, after all.

  40. ray says:

    vfm7916 — “That point will probably be the rebirth of Christianity, though it will be a very militant Christianity not interested in turning the other cheek.”

    Good. That’s the kind of Christianity with which King Jeshua is returning. His advance parties already are very active, and He and they are searching the planet for warriors. Not Pillsbury DOUGH BOY ‘pastors’.

    Those are the ones He’s ejecting right now.

  41. DrTorch says:

    Good point by JB Harshaw. Those that are doing this are following the lead of their father, the Devil.

  42. Pingback: What Not to Say | Honor Dads

  43. bdash 77 says:

    I just love DAL!!!
    brilliant post

    FYI

    SOUTHERN BAPTISTS are passing a resolution to ban and punish those who do not tow the line of their SJW leaders.

  44. Spike says:

    One very common theme in the above sermons is that pastors recognise the problem with families: the father is absent, underperforming or not taking on his responsibilities as a father.
    What pastors seem clueless about is understanding the cause: feminism, and the agent of feminism – the modern wife, along with the legal apparatus of The State – has stripped men of their place in the family.
    Most men who marry by choice want the responsibilities of family and children. They aren’t allowed by Mother and State to carry them out, for modern feminist thought has given too much power to mother /wife.
    Had it not been for my own father having been almost destroyed by his second wife, I would have been clueless about it too.

  45. Scott says:

    Perhaps some of you should talk with Scott about joining the Orthodox Church.

    The thread or remnant of patriarchal teachings (and commensurate fathers who still attend) is very fragile indeed and is fraying. In American Orthodoxy especially, it is collapsing under the weight of equalitarian thought and the overwhelming culture.

    Even in the ethnic churches, (like mine) we have Serbs here who within one generation–heck immigrants–who are all grrrrrrl power and there is nothing institutional in the surrounding culture to stop it or slow it down. It would take a very strong priest indeed to speak truth to that power. So much of what looks like patriarchy is aesthetic. (Our rules prevent women from even setting foot behind the icon screen, for example) but the poison has seeped in.

    I’ll give an example. It is not uncommon to see a woman wearing a low cut, pencil tight dress that stops 3 inches above the knees with 3″ spiked sexy heels wearing a head scarf to receive communion. I mean, come on. Or if you have conversation about this in mixed Orthodox company (like say, me and my wife are standing around during coffee with a, shall we say, less traditionalist oriented cradle Orthodox couple), and the subject of submission or obedience comes up, you will almost definitely get equivocation from the priest, in order to to not upset the woman standing there. Offline, he will acknowledge the Truth of hierarchy.

    The best you can do right now is find a parish where the priest will not confront you or second guess the way you have your home organized, and to his credit, mine doesn’t.

    On the particular matter of Fathers Day (or mother’s day, or whatever) again, the ethnic churches simply do not have those traditions in [Serbia/Russia/Greece/Bulgaria/whatever] so on those days, the homily is just going to be about whatever saint is being commemorated or whatever the liturgical calendar calls for from scripture. Heck, even the calendar itself is off by 2 weeks, so when America is celebrating Christmas, we are on Advent Sunday. When you enter the door of our church, you are stepping into an alternative, ethnic, Christian dimension that gives zero S&@%s about what American Christianity is doing that day.

    This will not work for most Americans to convert to, because they don’t want to take on all the ethnic traditions and culture to become Orthodox. It’s why I keep saying that America is ripe for a truly American Orthodox tradition to emerge, but I think the whole system of denominationalism will have to collapse first, and an in-home, first century catacombs. style Christianity where serious Christians literally cannot find jobs or be present in polite society for that matter will start up. You only need one canonical priest to walk away from the 401-c-3, pretending to play nicey-nice with the state to take his vestments, his sacraments and go home.

    But rest assured, the poison of egalitarian/feminism is there. It manifests differently. Its not a seething-under-the-surface contempt for married fathers as Dalrock describes. Its more of a resignation that hopefully it won’t infiltrate deep enough to destroy us like it has mainline protestantism. It’s a false hope, but that’s what it looks like to me.

  46. BillyS says:

    JB Harshaw,

    I noted long long ago the absence, almost total AVOIDANCE of even mentioning God the Father in many many churches in recent decades.

    * This is what any/all attempts to elevate either “Jesus” (aka “Buddy Christ”)

    While I agree with some of your points, degrading “Jesus” is quite stupid on your part.

    [Phl 2:9-11 NKJV] 9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and [that] every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

    His Name is above all names and rightly deserves our focus.

    [Rom 10:8-10 NKJV] 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith which we preach): 9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

    Jesus is the only name that allows for salvation. Some misuse it because it is so powerful, but do not arrogantly think that focusing on the Father alone is sufficient, especially not if that father happens to be just an impersonal force in your own eyes.

    In fact, the relationship in marriage is connected to the relationship of Jesus and the Church, not the Father and the Church. Thus the name of Jesus is far more important than many realize.

    Some may find it fun to scoff at a “personal Jesus” (and I would share scorn making Jesus their token “god”), but that very personal relationship with Him is the only way of salvation. He provides the way to the Father.

  47. Oscar says:

    What Scott wrote is why I keep saying, don’t get cocky, kids. This is a spiritual battle, not just an ideological one.

    There’s no logical reason why 1% – 2% of the population (homosexuals) should have led the other 98% of the population by the nose, but they did. There’s no logical reason why a tiny fraction of 1% of the population (trannies) should be leading the other 99.9… % of the population by the nose, but they are.

    We’re watching Romans 1 play out in front of us in real time. The elites – including those in the Church – denied God, and that denial trickled down to the general population. So God “gave them over” (see Romans 1) to a sexual revolution. And then He “gave them over” to a homosexual revolution. And now he’s given them over to “a depraved mind”.

    No Church is exempt from that “giving over”.

    We need repentance, like in the book of Nehemiah, and that can only start with the Church.

  48. AnonS says:

    I don’t think change ever happened with a “saving hearts and minds” approach.

    Initial movements might be lead with a charismatic leader but without additional elements it doesn’t keep going.

    1. Networked elites and hierarchy that can support and defend people in the movement. When you have people watching your back it is easy to hunt down lone wolves one at a time as a group. Also providing services for the group like lodging and encouraging buying within the network whenever possible. Early Christianity had Roman nobles, Jews setup membership groups with dues, and European Nationalists have worked to setup alternative economies for their members. Elites and hierarchy are the different parts of the body working together.

    1 Cor 12:17 If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? 18 But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. 19 If all were a single member, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.

    2. Change bodies and the mind follows. Most Churches have the same basic feel-good / you-should-do-better message every week. It is just emotional Novocain that women and numales keep coming back to ease their constant background anxiety. What happens when the gut biome, inflammation, and hormones return to a healthy level? The large percent of the population that would be more naturally right wing start waking up and getting increasingly bored of basic messages. Their sense of cringe, disgust, and boldness reawaken. When you feel great internally the slings and arrows the world don’t seem as scary. I was one of them, testosterone is a hell of a drug.

    3. The spiritual element. Partly that every culture has a religious element and partly that it provides a legal shelter in today’s environment (Scientology). Starting more American Eastern Orthodox churches with the parish members all due paying members of the larger traditionalist movement is a big opportunity. I’ve found the WELS Lutheran group okay for prots (only one I’m aware that don’t let women vote) but the messages are still going to be pedantic and the pastors milk-toast from what I’ve seen.

    Who is trying to do this for traditionalism in America? Identity Evropa is the only group I’m aware of.

  49. earl says:

    the subject of submission or obedience comes up, you will almost definitely get equivocation from the priest, in order to to not upset the woman standing there. Offline, he will acknowledge the Truth of hierarchy.

    Yet another example most men (clergy included) fear women more than they fear God.

    I think it’s high time we start offending women with the truth. If they have a problem with it, they should take it up with God. Obviously this supplication to their rebellious hearts isn’t working anymore…and is in fact making things worse for everybody.

  50. RedPillNoob says:

    Don’t worry, once the Western World catches on to the PROPER way of doing things, like this, then we’ll all rest easier…. hahaha!

    http://www.bbc.com/travel/gallery/20180612-chinas-kingdom-of-women

  51. BillyS says:

    Oscar,

    Note that rejecting the Creator is what leads to the mess. This is why such a small group could overturn society. God gives societies that reject Him as the Creator to all kinds of evil, as it notes in Romans 1.

    How many Christians really believe He created it all today? Very few, unfortunately.

  52. Damn Crackers says:

    What if one church just refused to let women into service without their head covered. Would that be a good start?

  53. JB Harshaw says:

    @BillyS

    While I agree with some of your points, degrading “Jesus” is quite stupid on your part.

    Except you do me an injustice by misunderstanding/misrepresenting what I was saying.

    It is not ME degrading Jesus, it is the general “church” (and “Churchianity”) that has degraded/corrupted their (mis)representation of him, turned him into something he is not… a “fake” Jesus who is JUST their “best buddy” — and a sort of “wish granting Aladdin’s Genie” — just as likewise they have degraded/corrupted the gospel, cheapened it, and turned it into a “coupon” that has “no cost” whatsoever.

    The problem is that they keep the name, but deny his SON-ship — by denying the Father his FATHER-ship, indeed denying the very existence of the Father. (Cf 1 John 2:23 “No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.” — and note that just using the NAME of “Jesus” is NOT “acknowledging the Son” if it does not acknowledge that he IS the “Son” — who by definition has, and was doing the “will of his Father”).

    but do not arrogantly think that focusing on the Father alone is sufficient,

    This is a strawman — I did NOT suggest any such thing. Simply that the churches who have (effectively) “erased” the Father, in favor of a fake “Jesus” and/or a false “Spirit” — are fundamentally apostate. (And the occasional “hand wavey” mention of “the Father” in a formulaic manner {like when reciting some creed, of as some word tossed into a song} doesn’t count; CF Isaiah 29:13a The Lord says: “These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.”)

    As for this:

    especially not if that father happens to be just an impersonal force in your own eyes.

    If THAT is your viewpoint of the Father… then I would say you know neither the Father, NOR the Son; you may be following a “Jesus” a “Christ” (or a “Spirit”) but you are NOT following THE Jesus Christ who is the Son of the FATHER. (Cf 2 Corinthians 11:14 For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough.)

    Your final note:

    Some may find it fun to scoff at a “personal Jesus” (and I would share scorn making Jesus their token “god”), but that very personal relationship with Him is the only way of salvation. He provides the way to the Father.

    I don’t find it FUN to “scoff” at it… but I do think the MANNER in which salvation has been “cheapened” — and the modern (non Biblical) language & phrasing of the “personal relationship” (especially in an era when the word “relationship” has been so thoroughly tainted, DEBASED to a triviality by people who quickly, instantly “fall in love” and then, just as quickly even flippantly discard/destroy/deny whatever “relationships” they have) — is not only deserving of “scorn” but needs to be removed from our vocabulary (if indeed, it ever really belonged there to begin with).

  54. JB Harshaw says:

    @BillyS

    Also, just as an FYI, my use of the phrasing “Buddy Christ” was a SPECIFIC reference to this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddy_Christ
    Buddy Christ is a parody religious icon in the film Dogma. In the film, he is part of a campaign (“Catholicism Wow!”) to renew the image of (and interest in) the Catholic Church. Viewing the crucifix image as “wholly depressing”, the Church, led by Cardinal Glick (George Carlin), decides to retire it, and creates Buddy Christ as a more uplifting image of Jesus Christ.[1] The icon consists of a statue of Jesus, smiling and winking while pointing at onlookers with one hand and giving the thumbs-up sign with the other hand. The Buddy Christ was later produced as an action figure and a bobblehead.[2] The image has since been turned into a popular Internet meme.

    And arguably is NOT really a “parody” at all… quite frankly that IS the image of “Christ” (a different “Jesus” and a different “gospel”) that “Churchianity/Churchians” worship.

    As sickening as that is, in part BECAUSE it is so blatantly a “parody” I think it is arguably LESS problematic than say these “best buddy Jesus statue” things: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=jesus+sports+statues&t=ffsb&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images– which as I noted, turn “Jesus” (and said “personal relationship” with him) into some kind of “guardian angel” or “good luck charm” or “wish granting ghost/genie” (and in no small part I think so called “parachurch” entities like FCA are responsible for the proliferation of such nonsense; which is at best insipid, and at worst blasphemous).

    Among other problems is that such things tend to UNDERMINE the faith of children & youth (see they ASKED God to help them win the game, or at least stay “safe & unharmed” during it… and because they lost, and got injured… well they conclude that “God doesn’t work/doesn’t exist” etc) that’s the consequence of such horrid/inane theology.

  55. Bee says:

    Damn Crackers,

    “Would that be a good start?”

    YES. Good idea.

  56. Boxer says:

    Damn Crackers writes:

    What if one church just refused to let women into service without their head covered. Would that be a good start?

    It would take much more than a uniform change to reverse the feminist trend. Bear in mind that women love to take on exaggerated behavior in (what Simon Sheppard calls) “the alien role.” The women who go to that church would adopt the head covering, and then flaunt it, while using it as a prop to further their own feminist praxis. For the wearer, the head covering would become a marker to show the world how “correct” she was, and for the observer wimminz, it would become a token of “oppression.”

    A few months ago, I was in Dubai, and this is exactly the sort of communicative signal that Muslim wimminz project. For those wimminz who wear hijab, it becomes nothing more than a fashion statement, and for those who don’t, the non-wearing of it becomes a symbol of rebellion.

    Boxer

  57. DrTorch says:

    What if one church just refused to let women into service without their head covered. Would that be a good start?

    Yes, I think it would be a good start.

    Open query. Many of the churches I’ve attended over the past few years have had laymen from the congregation do the reading from Scripture. There has been a trend in all of them to have a woman do this reading (lead in this reading?) Sometimes there are two readings and it’s a man and woman, sometimes one reading, and as best I can recall, usually a woman gets that slot.

    Thoughts on this? I would suggest that it is “leading” the congregation in reading the Scriptures. I think it’s wrong.

  58. earl says:

    @ Boxer…

    The reason it would be a good start is that it would promote submission amongst women instead of rebellion. Really anything a woman does can be turned into an attention grabber. If they choose to attention signal forms of submission…that could be the start of the change for the herd, who more often than not attention signal their rebellion.

    Obviously the matter of her heart is the bigger indicator…we have plenty of more evidence of what they do when they rebel.

  59. BillyS says:

    JB Harshaw,

    I don’t waste my time on many movies, so references to those will miss the point with me.

    Too many degrade a personal relationship with Jesus, including some here. That was the point of my response. I do not agree with making him an ornament in your car, or effectively like that, but you must personally obey Him, even to get to the Father, since He is the only way there.

    We may not disagree as much as it seemed, but your post implied more.

  60. BillyS says:

    Scott noted above that women can outwardly comply, while completely missing the spirit of things.

    Sad, but that is where we are.

  61. anonymous_ng says:

    @Scott The thread or remnant of patriarchal teachings (and commensurate fathers who still attend) is very fragile indeed and is fraying. In American Orthodoxy especially, it is collapsing under the weight of equalitarian thought and the overwhelming culture.

    I’ve been thinking about some of these issues recently.

    If the priest refuses to address an issue, isn’t that tacit approval of it? If the priests’ wives don’t cover their heads, why would any of the other women?

    I wonder if the people drawn to the priesthood and pulpit aren’t also averse to conflict.

    IDK, just random thoughts.

  62. Anonymous Reader says:

    What if one church just refused to let women into service without their head covered. Would that be a good start?

    It would only happen in a very small church, probably part of a small denomination or an independent.
    Whether it would mean anything would depend on why the women were doing it.
    That would depend on the frame of the men in that church…

    So the answer is “probably not”.

  63. Boxer says:

    Dear Earl:

    The reason it would be a good start is that it would promote submission amongst women instead of rebellion. Really anything a woman does can be turned into an attention grabber. If they choose to attention signal forms of submission…that could be the start of the change for the herd, who more often than not attention signal their rebellion.

    You have yet to address my counterexample. If you go to the Dar al Islam, you’ll find hijabi wimminz who are every bit as slutty as the typical American skank. Their “form of submission” is merely a fashion statement.

    In fact, upscale shops sell burqa and hijab which are adorned with flashy paints and jewels, so that these “submissive” wimminz can get sexual attention from men on the street. Of course, skank-ho princess will excuse this in all the same ways Christian sluts will. “It makes me feel good and boosts my self-esteem,” and such. Truly, there is nothing new under the sun.

    Obviously the matter of her heart is the bigger indicator…we have plenty of more evidence of what they do when they rebel.

    This bit of realtalk comes close to contradicting the first paragraph you wrote. Of course it’s nice to see wimminz dress modestly and all, but in order to stem the feminist tide you need to reverse all the social laws and mores which offload the consequence and expense of female promiscuity onto men. For instance:

    *No child support without a) a marriage, and b) a criminal conviction of the husband.
    *No state sanctioned abortion for any wimminz who doesn’t have a panel of physicians attesting to a) a life threatening consequence, or b) a serious deformity or illness in the child.
    *Criminal penalties for a married wimminz who fucks another man.
    *Criminal penalties for an unmarried wimminz who gets pregnant.

    In the Soviet Union, they used to send unmarried mothers to a work camp, for ripping off the social services agency. This would be a very good start for the U.S.A. In China, they still give a court-ordered hysterectomy to repeat single mothers. This would also be acceptable.

    Basically, if you want to cure our society, you need to reconstruct a healthy social system. You can’t merely encourage some piece of clothing. The wimminz laugh at shit like that.

    Best,

    Boxer

  64. Boxer says:

    Scott noted above that women can outwardly comply, while completely missing the spirit of things… Sad, but that is where we are.

    Why is this surprising to a bunch of self-described Christians and Jews on Dalrock? Your own religious texts allude to this much. In fact, it’s right at the beginning of your Bible.

    https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/otesources/01-genesis/text/articles-books/foh-womansdesire-wtj.pdf

  65. earl says:

    You have yet to address my counterexample.

    Read my second paragraph.

  66. earl says:

    Never mind…you did. The italics threw me off.

  67. Boxer says:

    Dear Earl:

    Read my second paragraph.

    Your second paragraph appears to contradict the first. I noted this, but screwed up formatting, so perhaps it was difficult to read. My apologies.

    You wrote:

    Obviously the matter of her heart is the bigger indicator…we have plenty of more evidence of what they do when they rebel.

    This bit of realtalk comes close to contradicting the first paragraph you wrote. Of course it’s nice to see wimminz dress modestly and all, but in order to stem the feminist tide you need to reverse all the social laws and mores which offload the consequence and expense of female promiscuity onto men. For instance:

    *No child support without a) a marriage, and b) a criminal conviction of the husband.
    *No state sanctioned abortion for any wimminz who doesn’t have a panel of physicians attesting to a) a life threatening consequence, or b) a serious deformity or illness in the child.
    *Criminal penalties for a married wimminz who fucks another man.
    *Criminal penalties for an unmarried wimminz who gets pregnant.

    In the Soviet Union, they used to send unmarried mothers to a work camp, for ripping off the social services agency. This would be a very good start for the U.S.A. In China, they still give a court-ordered hysterectomy to repeat single mothers. This would also be acceptable.

    Basically, if you want to cure our society, you need to reconstruct a healthy social system. You can’t merely encourage some piece of clothing. The wimminz laugh at shit like that.

  68. Opus says:

    Boxer has what might appear to be some very good suggestions including considerable restrictions on abortion. I think it worth mentioning (as the English have never heard of Roe -v- Wade) that in Britain the law states and quite clearly that to obtain an abortion a woman must have certificates from not one but two medical practitioners stating that the continuation of the pregnancy (this is up to the end of the second trimester) would involve damage to the mental or physical health of the women. Some fifty-one years after the Act of Parliament reversing the complete ban on abortion there have been eight million abortions.

  69. earl says:

    A big thing which would be a start in offloading the consequence of female promiscuity onto men is banning the pill and any other form of artificial contraception.

    How often do we hear the story about ‘oops’ when in fact she knew what she was doing in tricking the guy.

  70. earl says:

    I’d probably ban abortion altogether as well even in those minor iffy cases. More often than not they use the iffy cases to get it legal so they can turn it into backup birth control for slutty wimminz. The whole safe, legal, rare thing falls apart with the rare part.

    You would know a woman would think twice about lots of sex with random men if…

    a) she didn’t have some blocker to stop pregnancy from casual sex
    and
    b) she didn’t get cash and prizes from the state for it.

  71. earl says:

    Your second paragraph appears to contradict the first. I noted this, but screwed up formatting, so perhaps it was difficult to read. My apologies.

    I suppose it’s could be a chicken-egg thing…which causes which, the clothing forms the attitude or the attitude is the reason for clothing oneself like that.

    I suppose the test is to find a modestly dressed woman and see how she acts. It’s pretty simple to figure out how a scantly clad woman acts.

  72. Damn Crackers says:

    @Boxer @Earl – In a strange way, women in the US did and do flaunt their head coverings in church. Look at a church scene from an old movie or look at a modern AME church in the hood. The women their have the largest and most ornate hats you will see anywhere.

  73. Random Angeleno says:

    I am a Catholic. Will say the homilies remain about the particular liturgical time of year and about the readings of the day. The most mention of Mother’s and Father’s Day I’ve seen is at the very end of the Mass when the priest will typically take a moment to mention some announcements from the weekly bulletin. All I’ve seen done is they will ask mothers to stand on Mother’s Day and fathers to stand on Father’s Day, then they often engage the parish to bless them. This is only to say the rot hasn’t proceeded that far in the parishes I’ve attended Mass at.

    Last time I saw Fireproof mentioned at CAF, this was awhile back, someone posted that he thought the wife behaved like a whore and it got to him that she never apologized onscreen for doing so. Think that shut up that discussion as no one came on to debate this fellow. So while there is considerable feminist yakking over there, inroads do get in now and then. Don’t know what they thought of Courageous and War Room as I don’t scan it very often. Used to rely on Marcus to give us the CAF gifts that keep on giving; whatever happened to that guy?

  74. Jacob Nessamar (Jacob) says:

    You folks talking up Eastern Orthodoxy and catholicism make me facepalm. You know your religions are just neoplatonism for the masses, right? Mix in a little paganism and ancestor worship. Just like “conservative christianity”. I’ll give you this, though… If the hypostatic union is true, then you Eastern Orthodox boys have the true and most consistent of the Christian faith. But it’s not, and you don’t. According to the Protestant Historicist understanding your religion and kingdoms were judged: The rest of mankind who were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the works of their hands. They did not stop worshiping demons and idols of gold, silver, bronze, stone, and wood, which cannot see or hear or walk. 21Furthermore, they did not repent of their murder, sorcery, sexual immorality, and theft.

  75. poetentiate says:

    It’s takes some serious hormone poisoning and endless immersive propaganda to get young men to go for this in any numbers. You would think that they would want to try to avoid scaring them all away with the fabulous prospect of being the butt of jokes, the buffoon, the barely worthy of respect “servant-leader”, but no, they continue to barrel on down on the way over the cliff.

  76. Frank K says:

    Its more of a resignation that hopefully it won’t infiltrate deep enough to destroy us like it has mainline protestantism. It’s a false hope, but that’s what it looks like to me.

    Take heart, Scott. The Soviets and their puppets were never able to destroy the church, and they certainly tried. They bulldozed churches or converted them into other uses (I recall that St. Stephen’s in Budapest was used as a stable by the communists), but the church survived and is back.

  77. Sharkly says:

    Damn Crackers says: What if one church just refused to let women into service without their head covered. Would that be a good start?

    Yes. Any start at rolling back Feminism, and following God, is good, even if it fails.

    One man scorned and covered with scars still strove with his last ounce of courage to reach the unreachable stars; and the world was better for this.
    ~Don Quixote, de la Mancha 1605-1615 ~Miguel de Cervantes

    Boxer says: It would take much more than a uniform change to reverse the feminist trend. … it would become a token of “oppression.”

    True. You are correct. But that is not why we should or shouldn’t do it anyway. Just because it would really bother feminists is almost reason enough. LOL

    1 Corinthians 11:3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, 5 but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven. 6 For if a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short. But since it is disgraceful for a wife to cut off her hair or shave her head, let her cover her head. 7 For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. 9 Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10 That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

    We should do this because God asks us to do it because of the angels. His ways are higher than ours and at many points completely inscrutable to us.
    Here are some other translations of the last verse that may explain it better:

    1 Corinthians 11:10 This means that a wife should wear a veil on her head as a sign she is under authority, especially when gathering in the company of heavenly messengers. (VOICE)

    1 Corinthians 11:10 Therefore, a woman should wear something on her head to show she is under someone’s authority, out of respect for the angels. (NOG)

    1 Corinthians 11:10 Therefore she should [be subject to his authority and should] have a covering on her head [as a token, a symbol, of her submission to authority, that she may show reverence as do] the angels [and not displease them]. (AMPC)

    We need to do it because God specifically asked for it, of us. And if we start throwing out commands we don’t like, we’ll never stop throwing parts of the Bible out, until society is opposed to it all, and completely opposed to the God who sent it to us.

    If my wife ever reconciles, I may have to have church at home to set the appropriate ‘church rules’. The church my wife currently takes my sons to has taught them to repeatedly chant “Jesus is my best friend”, I’m not sure if the fear of the Lord is adequately taught in that thought alone.
    Right now I fellowship with you gentlemen, and I almost never wear a head covering, except when I’m required to for safety.

  78. DrTorch says:

    You would think that they would want to try to avoid scaring them all away with the fabulous prospect of being the butt of jokes, the buffoon, the barely worthy of respect “servant-leader”,

    Men joke around and tease each other all the time. I don’t think the newcomers or young mean recognize the disdain behind it is real.

  79. BillyS says:

    Boxer,

    Why is this surprising to a bunch of self-described Christians and Jews on Dalrock? Your own religious texts allude to this much. In fact, it’s right at the beginning of your Bible.

    Many of us know this, but it is still sad.

  80. Luke says:

    Satire, but sadly plausible these days:

    http://babylonbee.com/news/man-forced-to-give-up-headship-of-home-after-failing-to-open-jar-of-peanut-butter/

    Man Forced To Give Up Headship Of Home After Failing To Open Jar Of Peanut Butter

    “EAGAN, MN—In a tragic end to his long-running role as head of the Johnson home, family patriarch Jared, 39, was forced to give up his biblical headship after failing to open a stuck peanut butter jar at the request of his wife Friday.

    The husband and father of three attempted to open the jar several times but was unable to loosen the cap in the slightest, prompting him to immediately give up his God-given authority over his household, per biblical guidelines.

    “It’s been an honor serving as head of the home for the past 15 years,” Johnson said in a statement. “I made some mistakes—that camping trip in Michigan three years ago wasn’t a highlight, that’s for sure—but I like to think my time as patriarch was beneficial to my wife as well as my kids. I’m definitely a better person because of it.”

    The man’s family wished him well in his new position as pathetic, submissive, beta father. “Frankly, we always suspected he wasn’t cut out for this. He had to call a mechanic to replace the transmission in our Pontiac last summer, and he only owns two power tools,” Johnson’s wife, Heather, told reporters. “His new role as passive wuss suits him much better.”

    Mrs. Johnson was subsequently able to open the jar, and immediately assumed Mr. Johnson’s former position as God-ordained leader of the home.”

  81. Anonymous Reader says:

    BillyS
    How many success stories of dating can you present?

    I’m not defending “dating”. “Dating” is largely dead, thanks in part to the hookup subculture.

  82. BillyS says:

    Then why do you demand strong alternatives if you say dating isn’t working anyway?

  83. Anonymous Reader says:

    BillyS

    Then why do you demand strong alternatives if you say dating isn’t working anyway?

    1. Wrong thread. This is supposed to be in “Payback”.
    2. Asking questions is not issuing a demand.
    3. Because fixing part of a problem, even if only at the micro level, is better than just whining about it. Your mileage may vary, though.

    I’m going to copy/paste this comment to “payback”.

  84. BillyS says:

    Moving there as well. Hard to keep these straight when we have multiple active threads.

  85. Anonymous Reader says:

    Apropos of nothing at all, the World Cup soccer match (“football” for Opus and others) started today in Russia. There is a team from Saudi Arabia. It’s Ramadan. But guess what? That Saudi team got a special exemption from the Ramadan daylight fast. I have no idea how that kind of thing works in Islam, it’s just a form of religious legalism that’s pretty funny.

  86. Dota says:

    That Saudi team got a special exemption from the Ramadan daylight fast. I have no idea how that kind of thing works in Islam, it’s just a form of religious legalism that’s pretty funny.

    There’s no exemption as such because they will have to make up the missed fast some other day. The same applies for any of Islam’s other obligatory rituals. If one of the 5 daily prayers is missed, it must be performed later on. In Islam, God isn’t really a father, more of a lenient creditor.

  87. earl says:

    In Islam, God isn’t really a father, more of a lenient creditor.

    That’s true, or you could argue He’s a demanding master…which is why it’s closer to a Matriarchy.

  88. Dota says:

    you could argue He’s a demanding master

    He’s an accountant and creditor, and this is the most peculiar aspect of Islam in my view. I guess the point was to envision a just God that takes every single action into account, but this has made Islam’s God so impartial so as to becoming nearly impersonal. Every deed (good or bad) is recorded by a pair of angels and if the good outweighs the bad, one enters paradise, else down the other way you go. I suppose in Christianity one owes God gratitude for bestowing his bounty and grace upon mankind, in a general sense. In Islam, the debts the are very real and have a numerical score attached to them. If an individual (for example) lives to the age of 70 and then dies, he owes God (70-7) * 5 = 315 prayers. I wonder if the Catholics are big on numbers in this same way while I’m guessing you Protestants aren’t.

  89. Opus says:

    It always strikes me as Hubris for there to be a World Series in Baseball when the only teams come from your country, and yet, the World Cup is always when you get down to the last sixteen – which is all that really matters – an inter-european tournament with the odd additional added South American side (South Americans usually having European ancestors). American soccer is a great joke here and yet in no less than two World Cups we have been beaten by your eleven. For a country wherein Soccer is seen as girl’s game you do very well and it is a pity that this time you are missing.

    We call it Football (at least unlike your Football we actually use our feet to kick the ball) and yet Soccer is an English term being a contraction of the expression Association Football hence soccer – but we don’t tend to use it preferring footer or footie.

  90. OKRickety says:

    Opus,

    I don’t think I’d ever heard that the word soccer was derived from “Association Football” or “Association Footballer”. It seems a rather tortuous etymology, but one site pointed out that another possible derivation would have been “asser”. 🙂

    Your point about the location of the teams in the World Series is generally true, but do note that one team, the Toronto Blue Jays, is located in Canada. There was also a team in Montreal from 1969 to 2004, but they relocated to Washington, D.C.

  91. ray says:

    The past few weeks I’d been hoping for just such a post. Thank you.

    The incidence of father-hatred and woman-idolatry in American Protestantism — particularly of the Celebrity Christian/Professional Christian type so favored by females — has been conclusively illustrated herein over the years.

    But requiring full treatment was contextual evidence of the consistency and pervasiveness of these anti-Kingdom attitudes and behaviours. The canvassing technique of this OP fills that gap; indeed, many anti-masculine and anti-father Christians are amongst the most popular preachers and ‘pastors’ in the land. What you ably present is now the standard of modern Protestantism, not the exception. More like plummet than falling-away.

    These individuals and their false churches are in rebellion against Malachi 4:6, and that verse should be sufficient to convince them that God takes this rebellion very hard, and does not forgive it. Jeshua suffered and died to facilitate the Kingdom of the FATHER. To work against it is bad enough, but to profit from works against Christ’s Kingdom is especially vile, and utterly self-destructive. The LORD hates cowards, as they shame the gift of masculinity the Holy One placed in creatures fashioned of mud. It betrays the trust and faith He placed in them.

    We initiate war by following the King’s examples opening the ‘dossier’ for our times (the Book of Revelation) — the churches, meaning any group with Christ as ostensible focus of worship, gets fried first. Those too proud and/or timid to get the message now will stay here as long as it takes. Their nonsense about being raptured is sad, collective dreaming. Strong delusion. Why would Jeshua snatch them into His (heavenly) army, at the thresh-hold of the planet, when they labor against His very commands and purposes?

  92. JRob says:

    The eunuch Evangelical “leaders” hand the reins to the progressives, causing even more men to abandon ship. Twenty years from now one of these sermons may resemble this piece from the Chicago Tribune. **Eye bleach warning.

  93. seventiesjason says:

    Went to the local Salvation Army Corps here in my new city of Santa Rosa. The “fathers day” sermon began with “all the single moms today that have to be the dad….and they deserve to bve saluted”

    Sinking ship, ready to be scuttled……..but the sermon focused on God the Father, and refernces to the Prodical Son…….and no, not the best sermon…..but the ship pulled into port, heavily damanged but saveable. I left feeling okay.

  94. seventiesjason says:

    When I trhink of footsie……..all that comes to mind is a northern soul dance step. Better that “soccer” and “football” IMHO 😉

  95. Paul says:

    While listening to a Father’s day sermon (which wasn’t too bad until the preacher started emphasizing that God the Father also has characteristics of a Mother), I read a part in my recently acquired ESV translation. I was actually shocked when I read the translation 1 Cor 11 with its explanatory notes:

    But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife[a] is her husband,[b] and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, 5 but every wife[c] who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven. 6 For if a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short. But since it is disgraceful for a wife to cut off her hair or shave her head, let her cover her head. 7 For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. 8 For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. 9 Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10 That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.[d]

    The notes explain:
    1 Corinthians 11:3 Greek gunē. This term may refer to a woman or a wife, depending on the context
    1 Corinthians 11:3 Greek anēr. This term may refer to a man or a husband, depending on the context
    1 Corinthians 11:5 In verses 5–13, the Greek word gunē is translated wife in verses that deal with wearing a veil, a sign of being married in first-century culture

    This is shocking! In this whole section, Greek gune is translated differently depending on an assumed arbitrary context, as is aner, but it is completely inconsistent.

    the head of a wife (NOT woman) is her husband (NOT man). Note that “her” is not in the Greek.
    Every man (NOT husband here!!) … but every wife (NOT woman here!!)…
    For if a wife (NOT woman here!!) … For a man (NOT husband here!!) .. but woman (NOT wife here!!) is the glory of man (NOT husband here!!). For man (NOT husband) was not made from woman (NOT wife), but woman (NOT wife) from man (NOT husband). Neither was man (NOT husband) created for woman (NOT wife), but woman (NOT wife) for man (NOT husband). That is why a wife (NOT a woman here!!!!!) …

    The wearing of a head covering is reduced to (married) women only. The study notes refer to Roman marriage custom for wives to wear head-covering.

    I cannot believe they tortured this section and forced their interpretation upon it, which is clearly inconsistent, illogical, and does not even make sense. The whole reasoning of St. Paul is made to disappear.

    I instantly regretted buying the ESV.

  96. AnonS says:

    Visited an EO Church. Don’t think I would fit in there but for Father’s Day the only difference was a segment giving thanks and reading the names of fathers and grandfathers that had passed and a blessing for current fathers; it was a nice touch.

  97. Oscar says:

    @ Dota says:
    June 14, 2018 at 10:38 pm

    In Islam, God isn’t really a father, more of a lenient creditor.

    In Islam, referring to God as “father” is blasphemy. That may be one reason why feminists prefer Islam over Christianity.

  98. Paul says:

    … and apparently the interpretation on head covering for married women only is promoted by Wayne Grudem in his “Evangelical Feminism and Biblical Truth: An Analysis of More than 100 Disputed Questions”

    http://www.bible-researcher.com/headcoverings2.html

    “Rather, [St.Paul] is concerned because of what wearing a head covering symbolized to people in Corinth. So we should ask whether wearing a head covering symbolizes any of these things today. At least in twenty-first-century America, it symbolizes none of these things!”

    Boom! One-step approach to declare any instruction that St Paul might have to be culturally dependent, and hence irrelevant for today’s culture.

    “the very fact that it does not symbolize much of anything to people today, even to Christians, is a strong argument that Paul would not have wanted us to follow it as sort of a meaningless symbol.”

    Paul would not have wanted us to follow a meaningless symbol…. really?
    And when, how, and by whom did this symbol became meaningless??

    “Therefore in every verse in which head covering is mentioned, the ESV translates gune as “wife.””

    Really? Then tell me, why was not the same “principle” applied to translate man as “husband” in these cases?

    ESV:
    Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head..
    For a man ought not to cover his head…

    ” If wearing a head covering in ancient Corinth was a symbol of being a woman, that is still not the meaning for a woman wearing a head covering in western societies today. And therefore head coverings should not be required for women today.”

    Really? St.Paul is talking about a practice IN THE CHURCH (“but every wife[c] who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered”), he does not mention anything about wearing head covering in public, hence the comparison with “today’s western (!) society” is irrelevant. And he conveniently “forgets” that in other parts of the world women DO wear head coverings.

  99. BillyS says:

    ray,

    Their nonsense about being raptured is sad, collective dreaming. Strong delusion. Why would Jeshua snatch them into His (heavenly) army, at the thresh-hold of the planet, when they labor against His very commands and purposes?

    Because God’s wrath is for His enemies, not the true members of His Church. I will let Him decide who that is and isn’t. I am not smart enough to even pretend to be God like you are.

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.