Every woman’s battle.

Lori Alexander warns wives in her excellent post Discontentment is a Marriage Killer:

Eve stopped being thankful for the position that God put her into in the garden and seeds of discontentment were placed in her mind that reaped tragic consequences. Satan beguiled her with the question: “Hath God said….?” His desire is to kill, steal, and destroy. He wants women asking, “Hath God really said that young women are to marry, bear children, and guide the home? Hath God said that women should be keepers at home and silent in the churches? Hath God said that wives are to be submissive to their husbands in everything?” Feminism is simply acting as Satan’s agent of destruction.

If a woman believes she is “dying inside” and blames it on her husband, she has made her husband an idol instead of finding her satisfaction and fulfillment in Christ. Women naturally rebel against their husbands (Genesis 3:16) so we must always be on guard against doing this. God wouldn’t have had to tell us so many times in His Word for us to submit to our husbands if it came naturally and easy for us.

Discontentment among women in marriage is a common malady today since 70 – 80% of divorces are initiated by women. We must constantly be aware of this in us, women. We must do everything we can to fight against Satan’s questions and doubts he tries to plant in our minds and put on the full armor of God every day.

Part of the problem is our whole culture has lined up to do Satan’s work here and whisper discontentment into women’s ears.  It isn’t just secular culture either.  Christian pastors, including conservative pastors, regularly encourage Christian wives to embrace discontentment.

In Where Men Blow It Pastor Raymond Force teaches wives that not only is it essential that they complain, he teaches that there is something wrong with a woman’s husband if he discourages her from complaining (emphasis mine):

What I love about scriptures as such is they teach us that it is okay to reverentially offer our concerns, fears, worries, and even complaints before the Lord. What I also feel is fascinating is that one never finds God taking these complaints as though they are an attack against his person, nor do they find God getting defensive or taking things personally.

A woman needs a place to express, complain, vent, et cetera without condemnation. But, if a man is too wrapped up in his own sensitivities, he will fail to provide that which Christ offers to him on a daily basis.

Force cites Numbers 11 as the primary supporting Scripture for this absurd claim.  Yet Numbers 11 is all about God’s wrath at the Israelites for complaining.  Numbers 11 opens with God burning Israelites alive because they complained (KJV):

11 And when the people complained, it displeased the Lord: and the Lord heard it; and his anger was kindled; and the fire of the Lord burnt among them, and consumed them that were in the uttermost parts of the camp.

As the chapter continues, the Israelites keep complaining.  When they complain about not having meat to eat, God punishes them by making them eat meat until it comes out of their nostrils.   The Israelites keep complaining, so God smites them with a great plague.  When the complaining continues, God declares that he will wipe all of them out and make a new, better people for Moses to head!

I will smite them with the pestilence, and disinherit them, and will make of thee a greater nation and mightier than they.

–Numbers 14:12, KJV

Moses convinces God to show them mercy they don’t deserve, and God relents.  But the message of Numbers 11-14 is clear;  God despises discontentment and lack of thankfulness.  Pastor Force wanted to encourage women to complain so much that he took this Scripture and used it to teach the opposite of what it plainly says.  Force gambled that he would get away with this because other pastors regularly teach the same message.

For another example of this, in his sermon Women’s Hurdles Acts 29 president Pastor Matt Chandler explains that if a wife is susceptible to being tempted to feminist discontentment it is proof that her husband is oppressing her!

If the most secularized feminist in the world showed up in your home and began to kind of coach your wife toward freedom and liberation from your tyranny, our wives should be so well cared for, so nourished, so sowed into and loved, they would say, “What you’re describing is actually tyranny. I love where I am…

Men, here is a good opportunity. If you’re like, “Well, gosh, I don’t think she would say that at all,” then, men, I think on the way home, you should probably repent and confess before the Lord to your wife.

Likewise, Pastor Doug Wilson teaches in Reforming Marriage that the way to tell if a man is good is if his wife is happy.  He explains that very often husbands seem to be doing everything right.  The husband goes to marriage seminars, reads books on marriage, and does everything he is told to do to make his wife happy.   But very often despite the husband doing everything right, his wife is still unhappy.  Wilson tells us this is common, and the reason it happens is God isn’t happy with her husband.  He tells us that her discontentment is actually God’s voice, pronouncing divine judgement upon her hypocrite husband (emphasis mine):

In other words, keeping God’s law with a whole heart (which is really what love is) is not only seen in overt acts of obedience. The collateral effect of obedience is the aroma of love. This aroma is out of reach for those who have a hypocritical desire to be known by others as a keeper of God’s law. Many can fake an attempt at keeping God’s standards in some external way. What we cannot fake is the resulting, distinctive aroma of pleasure to God.

This is why I am afraid that this book will be of little use to those who simply want a “formula” to follow that will build them a happy marriage. When it comes to the externals, the mere copyist can always say of himself what the unregenerate Saul could say, “concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless” (Phil. 3:6). However hard the externalist tries, he cannot produce the aroma of godliness. This is why so many people attend marriage seminars and read marriage books with so little result. The obedience of the Christian man is not limited to new actions—actions which, after all, can be copied mechanically. This does not appear to be a rare or unusual error; many people who are miserable in their marriages are also those who have read all the books on how not to be. Of course, certain actions—godly obedience in externals—must be present in all healthy marriages; but in order to produce this distinctive aroma, the externals must proceed from new hearts.

the love of the Christian husband does not proceed from reading the “right books,” including this one, or going to the right seminars. God will not patch His grace onto some humanistic psychological nonsense—even if that nonsense is couched and buried in Christian terminology.

When a husband seeks to glorify God in his home, he will be equipped to love his wife as he is commanded. And if he loves his wife as commanded, the aroma of his home will be pleasant indeed.

H/T Heidi

*Edit:  I originally wrote that God’s declaration in Numbers 14:12 was in response to Moses pleading to God.  This was incorrect.  God was directly responding to the complaining of the Israelites at that time.

See Also: Whose job is it to keep mama happy?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Acts 29, Dr. Raymond Force, Lori Alexander, Pastor Doug Wilson, Pastor Matt Chandler. Bookmark the permalink.

94 Responses to Every woman’s battle.

  1. Anon says:

    These pastorbators are the worst. The divorce stats understate the problem, since even an ‘intact’ marriage is full of henpecking.

    But very often despite the husband doing everything right, his wife is still unhappy. Wilson tells us this is common, and the reason it happens is God isn’t happy with her husband.

    How is that for an unwinnable game? Heads she wins, tails you lose.

    Of course, Pastorbator Wilson is correct, except that it is not quite for the reason he thinks. God is *not* happy with the husband, because God wants the husband to recognize the woman’s biology and Evo-psych, and run Game. That is in fact God’s will, which will lead to happiness in the wife.

  2. Joe says:

    No longer is a Biblical model for marriage taught anywhere.

    It’s all scripture twisting and secular psychology.

  3. earl says:

    Modern ‘pastors’ see it as…

    Every woman’s battle…every man’s fault.

  4. And we wonder why all of the single fellas out there don’t even want to touch marriage with a barge pole?

    Note the conflicts inherent with No. 8 vs. No. 16, No. 2 vs. No. 14 and No. 9 vs. No. 18, etc., etc.

    Not a good look.

    Female discontentment: The Top 20 Complaints From Unhappy Wives
    https://www.redbookmag.com/love-sex/relationships/g788/womens-marriage-complaints/

    1. “He Never Helps Around the House”
    2. “He Doesn’t Know Anything About the Kids”
    3. “He’s Always Playing Video Games”
    4. “We Have the Same Arguments Every Damn Day”
    5. “He Drinks Too Much”
    6. “His Family Drives Me Nuts”
    7. “He Always Brings Calorie-Bombs Into the House”
    8. “He Always Wants to Have Sex”
    9. “The Credit Card Statement Is Always A Surprise”
    10. “A Little Appreciation Would Be Nice”
    11. “He Has to Be Taught Basic Life Skills”
    12. “He Snores”
    13. “He Gives Me the Silent Treatment When He’s Mad”
    14. “He’s Gone All the Time”
    15. “He’s Friends With All of His Exes on Facebook”
    16. “He Never Wants Sex”
    17. “It Feels Like I Can’t Do Anything Right”
    18. “He Micromanages the Budget”
    19. “He’s Afraid of My Feelings”
    20. “He’s Desperately Unhappy”

  5. Rebekah says:

    I don’t agree with all his ideas, but I do think that pastors like Matt Chandler are simply trying to be aware that marriages struggle as a result of complex problems, the working out of which typically require the willingness, cooperation, and education of both spouses. I really do think that a lot of times, couples simply lack the “tools” and skills needed to communicate their needs and desires effectively and appropriately. It seems reasonable to hope that a husband who possesses goodwill toward his wife and his marriage would want to know if she is “dying inside”. She doesn’t have to blame it on him, but it might be a symptom of a deeper issue. Marriage is a mystery, and when we enter into it, something new and living forms. If the marriage isn’t healthy, it makes sense that the woman might not be healthy (dying inside). I agree that women would do well to cultivate hearts of gratitude and contentment, and that we —creatures who receive all good things from God—are truly happier that way. But I also think that adopting a “grin and bear it” attitude for six decades of marriage, with neither one ever learning how to better communicate and love one another, is simply a recipe for misery. I don’t think that is what Lori believes or is saying, but without any practical concrete instruction, it can sort of come across that way.

  6. Jean says:

    Gratitude is a powerful antidote to discontentment, especially in marriage. Our church is fortunate to have a fair amount of couples who’ve been married 50+ years, and it’s so encouraging to see them holding on to one another, often literally, as old age takes its toll. Our Sunday School teacher, an active farmer in his mid-70s, was talking candidly about his wife’s declining health and the issues with her limited mobility and inability to do much around the house. “Sometimes I’m tempted to get impatient with her,” he said, “but then I think about how blessed I’ve been to have her in my life all these years, and then I just can’t hardly be cross.” It’s almost childish in its simplicity, but it really does put things in perspective when you’re tempted to complain and become discontent with your spouse.

  7. Lexet Blog says:

    Wilson reduces a woman’s value to a voice box. The voice box nags to express god’s displeasure, and man must perform to please god again, and only then will the voice box shut up. That is the most anti gospel/biblical theology ever peddled.

    Matt chandler is gay. I have thought so for years. Wilson is a heretic. Ever notice how all these family ministries are full of men who are fickle on doctrine, and never speak on the matter? Ever notice FOF and FL don’t have any doctrinal core and work with everyone?

    Ever notice how these people appeal to women- and that the Bible says this is the way wolves behave. Deceivers go after weak women.

  8. BillyS says:

    Yet she would be likely to bail on him if the situation was reversed Jean. That is the cruel system we are under today.

    4. “We Have the Same Arguments Every Damn Day”

    Maybe you have the same arguments because you contend with your husband all the time and he doesn’t just roll over? He isn’t listening to you if he doesn’t agree with you after all, right?

    anon,

    Game may have value in marriage, but it is not a fix all. Quit relying on it too much.

  9. Oscar says:

    If the Serpent showed up in the garden and began to kind of coach Eve toward freedom and liberation from God’s tyranny, Eve should be so well cared for, so nourished, so sowed into and loved, Eve would say, “What you’re describing is actually tyranny. I love where I am…

    God, here is a good opportunity. If you’re like, “Well, gosh, I don’t think she would say that at all,” then, God, I think on the way home, you should probably repent and confess to Eve.

    There you go, Mattie. Mixed it for ya.

    Here’s the point. Eve was flawless. Her husband was flawless. Her world was flawless. And yet, when the Serpent came along and planted the seed of discontentment in her heart, Eve swallowed it, hook, line, and sinker.

    Ladies, if God Himself couldn’t keep a flawless woman, with a flawless husband, living in a flawless word haaaaaaaaaaaaapy; what makes you think that your fatally flawed husband will be able to keep your fatally flawed self haaaaaaaaaaaaaapy in this fatally flawed world?

  10. earl says:

    Ladies, if God Himself couldn’t keep a flawless woman, with a flawless husband, living in a flawless word haaaaaaaaaaaaapy; what makes you think that your fatally flawed husband will be able to keep your fatally flawed self haaaaaaaaaaaaaapy in this fatally flawed world?

    Yup.

    I often wonder what Eve did to convince Adam to eat the apple. I wonder if it was along the lines of her leaving…just like some guys seem to imply you won’t ever get a woman unless you start giving into evil.

  11. earl says:

    And by apple I mean forbidden fruit.

  12. Oscar says:

    4. “We Have the Same Arguments Every Damn Day”
    ….
    10. “A Little Appreciation Would Be Nice”
    ….
    13. “He Gives Me the Silent Treatment When He’s Mad”
    14. “He’s Gone All the Time”
    ….
    19. “He’s Afraid of My Feelings”
    20. “He’s Desperately Unhappy”

    Is it just me, or do those complaints appear related?

    Proverbs 21:9 Better to dwell in a corner of a housetop, Than in a house shared with a contentious woman.

    Proverbs 21:19 Better to dwell in the wilderness, Than with a contentious and angry woman.

    Proverbs 25:24It is better to dwell in a corner of a housetop, Than in a house shared with a contentious woman.

    Proverbs 27:15 A continual dripping on a very rainy day
    And a contentious woman are alike;
    16 Whoever [c]restrains her restrains the wind,
    And grasps oil with his right hand.

  13. OKRickety says:

    Even if one supposed that pastor Raymond Force is correct that wives need a place to complain without condemnation, it is important to note that he provides an important aspect of the process, and then ignores it to instead focus on a presumed problem with men.

    Force said (emphases mine): “What I love about scriptures as such is they teach us that it is okay to reverentially offer our concerns, fears, worries, and even complaints before the Lord. What I also feel is fascinating is that one never finds God taking these complaints as though they are an attack against his person, nor do they find God getting defensive or taking things personally.

    A woman needs a place to express, complain, vent, et cetera without condemnation. But, if a man is too wrapped up in his own sensitivities, he will fail to provide that which Christ offers to him on a daily basis.”

    If most wives were to behave reverentially toward their husbands, most husbands’ jaws would drop. But pastor Force forgets about the wives’ attitude and turns to husband-bashing.

    As Dalrock pointed out, God, who is loving and unchanging, responded to the complaints of the people, not with gentle platitudes but with strong action. It sounds to me like God does indeed take things personally. A good student of the New Testament will recognize that Jesus was not always gentle but spoke harshly about sinners and sometimes turned to strong physical action to express His displeasure.

    There is too much politically correct preaching today from churchians. God bless those who are willing to spread the truth about God’s true nature.

  14. ray says:

    Anon —

    ?Of course, Pastorbator Wilson is correct, except that it is not quite for the reason he thinks. God is *not* happy with the husband, because God wants the husband to recognize the woman’s biology and Evo-psych, and run Game. That is in fact God’s will, which will lead to happiness in the wife.”

    It is not God’s will that men ‘run Game’. That is YOUR will, and the will of the Grouplings that constantly promote Holy Game, their precious system, while knowing little/nothing about Scripture.

    Y’all are as hypocritical as the fembots, as hypocritical as Wilson et al., as hypocritical as the cowards of Babylon, who remained behind to create “God’s Word” in their absurd Talmud. Make that Tall Mud. You do whatever you want, and call it God’s will.

  15. Rebekah says:

    I have a theory that since Eve was the first to eat the forbidden fruit, she (the woman) also might very well be the first to experience, sense, or “taste” the first fruits of death in both herself and in the relationship with her husband. It’s just a thought that perhaps some of the bad “feelings” she has might have validity at various times. Adam and Eve, however, had the shared human experience of being the first living beings to hope in Christ, a coming Savior. It is those kinds of shared experiences that bond people for life.

  16. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Perhaps some of you heard about the mass shooting in Thousand Oaks, CA, last night. The local radio is reporting some info about the shooter:

    * Raised by a single mother. Currently lived with her.

    * Former Marine. Spent time in Afghanistan.

    * Divorced after a brief marriage. No info on who filed for divorce.

    But this article reports: https://www.ctpost.com/news/education/article/The-Latest-Multiple-injuries-at-shooting-in-13373743.php

    The Marine Corps has said 28-year-old Ian David Long was deployed to Afghanistan for seven months, from Nov. 16, 2010, to June 14, 2011. He was in the Marines from August 2008 until March 2013 …

    Court records show he married in 2009, separated in 2011 and was divorced in 2013.

    Also this:

    A couple living behind the house of the California mass shooting suspect says he frequently had loud and aggressive arguments with his mother.

  17. Nathan Bruno says:

    Q: To whom is the husband supposed to turn?
    A: To God.
    Q: Why is the wife not to turn to God?
    A: Well, she can do that.
    Q: So why does her husband have to solve that?
    A: OK, then, she should really be turning to her husband, then.
    Q: Why should she not then treat her husband as she should treat God?

    It’s such simple logic.

  18. Jonathan Castle says:

    I like my pastor. Man’s man, weight-lifter, hunter, tough guy. But man, is he a blue-pill pvssy when it comes to family head-ship.

    I use the harsh language because he just massively whiffed on a teaching about marriage. After saying what a sorry state marriage is in (no sh!t) he proceeded to give us the world’s answer – essentially wife headship.

    He got a (2nd) nice note from me asking, in so many words, why he is afraid of teaching God’s word on the matter.

    I’ve seen it done before in other churches, and guess what? The women didn’t stage a revolt.

    In fact, I think they were relieved to here they could relax into their feminine.

    Right now though, as Dalrock says, marriage is all Responsibility and no Authority for men.

  19. Jean says:

    BillyS, to be honest, in our congregation, the man in these older couples is more often the one who has the challenging health issues—dementia, heart disease, MS. No one has bailed. In the 20+ years we’ve belonged here, one couple has divorced. They were young and hadn’t grown up in our church, and resisted our pastors’ efforts at helping them reconcile. So there are still people who believe that marriage is a promise made to God and is to last forever, no matter what, no bailing.

  20. Spike says:

    There is a You Tuber called ”Economic Invincibility” who posts on Red Pill topics. In one of them he comments on women’s frequent complaint, ”the romance has gone from our relationship” –
    – to which he states, ”That’s something you, as the second party in the relationship, can do something about.”
    What never ceases to amaze me is the lengths women and blue-pill men will go too in order to exonerate themselves from personal responsibility. thus, ”the relationship fell apart”, or ”the marriage fell apart”, as if it is some entity that exists apart from the two people in it.

    St Paul instructed Christians, In all circumstances, give thanks (I Thess 5:18). Today’s Western women has a lot to be thankful for. She doesn’t have to carry water from wells. She doesn’t have to beat laundry out on rocks. She usually works in air-conditioned offices. She can get her meals delivered to her if she doesn’t want to cook. And yet, still a 35% (+/-) divorce rate.
    Church Pastors are advised to encourage a cheerful demeanour in today’s Christian woman. They have very little, especially by world’s standards, to complain about.

  21. Bee says:

    Anon,

    “God is *not* happy with the husband, because God wants the husband to recognize the woman’s biology and Evo-psych, and run Game. That is in fact God’s will, which will lead to happiness in the wife.”

    Yes! My wife was happier, felt more secure, felt more protected when I began to run Game on her.

  22. JRob says:

    Lori Alexander’s work is excellent. She understands God-given authority, the human proclivity to rebel against it, and calls it as she sees it.

    Preuse the 2010 SBC Resolution on the Scandal of Divorce:
    http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/1205

    Even then there the OTB were slyly blaming men for everything. Wade Burleson addresses this in a 2014 blog post:
    “The leaders of our Southern Baptist Convention have been strongly promoting a doctrinal error called The Eternal Subordination of the Son. The devastating effects of this doctrine on marriages are far-reaching. Few Southern Baptists even know what this doctrine is, but when you go to a church led by a Southern Baptist pastor who promotes it, the emphasis of the teaching will be on “the authority of the husband” and “the subordination of the woman to her husband” (just like Jesus is allegedly eternally subordinate to the Father). When the emphasis in any Christian environment (home, church, marriage, etc…) is on authority, a breach in relationship is ripe.”

    As Dalrock and others point out ad infinitum, this is what we’re up against. Evangelicalism is rapidly becoming exclusively a clam party.

    I use Lori Alexander’s blog posts for vetting women now. The last one, now kicked to the curb, repeatedly said Lori “hurt my feelings” instead of thinking abstractly and….oh wait, I know. *slaps forehead

  23. JRob says:

    **Peruse; PTB

  24. Jim says:

    Christian pastors, including conservative pastors, regularly encourage Christian wives to embrace discontentment.

    Pastors…I call them wolves in sheep’s clothing or pussy worshipers.

    Western women are the biggest spoiled brats in human history and not the least bit thankful. These fake pastors are only encouraging this garbage. What a bunch of losers.

  25. Strike Three says:

    (My comment is in response to JRob at 6:51 p.m.)

    My SBC pastor, in preaching on Ephesians 5:22-24, said the following: “Now ladies, when the scripture says ‘Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord’, I don’t want you all to be getting worked up and upset. Here’s what ‘submit’ means. It means ‘to take your place beside your husband.’ That’s right. ‘Take your place beside your husband.'”

    I have been around a long time and I have never seen or heard a preacher torture the word “submit” to the point that it means “to take one’s place beside another.” If the sergeant is to submit to his lieutenant, does that mean he is positionally “beside” the officer, as an equal? No, of course not, but the entire congregation just sat there and ate the sermon up.

    He does this sort of stuff regularly. I also know (after going through the new member’s class and seeing the church’s financial disclosure sheet) that the pastor makes $105,000 per year.

    That’s a lot of scratch, and he is clearly motivated to hang on to it. The SBC is supposed to be so conservative, and I see now that it is. But “conservative” has become a worthless concept; what we need are some reactionaries.

    (By the way, I have not become a member of this congregation and I never will).

  26. Pingback: Every woman’s battle. | Reaction Times

  27. BJ says:

    @Jonathan Castle

    That has been the experience I have had at my church. I teach it straightforwardly, and the women tend to like it, to some degree. One woman told me, after I asked whether she had been taught male headship before, she felt a little jarred by my directness, but only fool would deny that that is what it says.

    She admittedly had a fairly alpha husband, but it didn’t cause a problem.

    This is only anecdotal, of course, but women really do seem to appreciate unembarrassed leadership.

  28. Jonadab-the-Rechabite says:

    @JRob. The ESS is a canard. Paul doesn’t say “wives submit to your husband as Christ submits to the Father”. No! But as the church is to submit to Christ. All the pearl clutching about whether ESS is in harmony with the Nicean and Athanasian creeds is inconsequential to the submission of a wife. Any linking of ESS to wifely submission is a misdirection and should be dismissed as a treacherous cavil from egalitarian rebels. IOW- bitch slap them for being either obtuse or dishonest.

  29. patriarchal landmine says:

  30. anonymous says:

    Hi Dalrock – Thank you for investing time to review so much material and sharing your insights with all of us. Do you have any resources that you have found useful aids to implanting your ideals within your children? In any case, I pray strength, courage & wisdom on your ministry.

    [D: Thank you for your prayers. I don’t have any resources that come to mind. Perhaps others will.]

  31. BillyS says:

    Jean,

    They would be the exception then. My wife didn’t care about God’s commands. I never did figure out how she could justify divorce, but she has. She even has the gall to tell my daughter-in-law that God hates divorce (why my granddaughters are hit hard by the divorce), even though she caused it in this case.

    A female mind can justify anything and we don’t see the same loyalty today my grandparents had. Good that those in your church remain faithful, in spite of tough times.

  32. JRob says:

    @Strike Three

    Good catch there. The SBC itself is in capitulation mode to the SJW/feminists. Pretty soon even the pretense will be gone. Full tilt Uteroanity. Rocking the boat will mean actually having to work for a living, so very few will bite the tattooed hand that feeds.

  33. JRob says:

    @Jonadab-the-Rechabite
    I’ll give him his props, he’s dead wrong but owns it. He doesn’t talk in circles and FemCode. Burleson actually commented here a couple years ago, didn’t stay very long…

  34. Scott says:

    BillyS story is the one you really have to watch out for. Its the most common I think, and was basically the same thing that happened in my case.

    I was told directly to my face by my ex that the reason she was unfaithful was so it would be so painful and egregious that I would not be able to stay because of my own pride and ego.

    When I said, nope–I’m staying to work this out. She couldn’t believe it. I told her, I did no cheat, I have not been violent, I don’t drink, I don’t yell, none of that stuff. I reminded her that the text pretty clearly states that the cheating spouse is in a real pickle at this point, because they are obligated to stay if the victim wants to work it out.

    Basically, the response was that there was nothing I could do to stop what was coming. And that all of that was a “technically” I was using to “trap” her into staying.

  35. Scott says:

    It’s like the rules of engagement/law of war stuff from the other day. If only one country is playing by those rules, they are a sucker.

    Marriage gets tough ans you look to scripture for guidance, and she says “ha! Scripture is for chumps.”

  36. Aphron says:

    I’ve been lurking here for a long time.

    Really it does not matter what the scripture says to some. Kind of like the “show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.” Some will twist the Bible like a pretzel. Newspeak.

    Sadly, the only way to contain female narcissism is “patriarchy”. No one calls a woman out that divorces her husband. All she has to say is, “we just drifted apart”. Everyone will just go along.
    No one will call out her sin. She’ll never admit her role in the drifting. My experience is that she becomes embittered if her hopes were not met. How can a “mature” adult really get upset about that? Well, naturally if I loved her properly (using only a definition that suites her), then I will make sure her hopes are met. If that is the yardstick that the modern woman has for a good marriage, then all is lost.

  37. JRob says:

    But, seminary ain’t for (grrlll) chumps!
    https://www.christianitytoday.com/women-leaders/2017/october/is-seminary-part-of-your-calling.html?start=1

    * Gone Plaid Hamster/Mind Bleach warning*

  38. Lost Patrol says:

    Speaking of women’s battles, Veteran’s Administration motto needs work.

    https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2018/11/08/as-more-female-vets-head-to-congress-lawmakers-update-efforts-to-change-vas-motto/

    “To care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan” – Clearly this will no longer do.

  39. TMAC says:

    These “teachers” know that they can always bring it back to the fault of the husband because the first time the husband protests, they will quickly say, “See, he’s too arrogant to even consider his own issues – clearly this is why the wife is upset.”

  40. Oscar says:

    @ Scott

    Marriage gets tough ans you look to scripture for guidance, and she says “ha! Scripture is for chumps.”

    Isn’t that what women do in general? And, isn’t that what pastors teach them to do?

    Husband: The Bible says, “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.”

    Wife: Ha! Scripture is for chumps!

    Pastor: Stop reading her mail!

    Husband: But, the Bible also says that I’m supposed to “sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word”.

    Pastor: Ha! Scripture is for chumps!

  41. Game is great but the most important thing is regular washing with the word: https://digitalthrowback.wordpress.com/2018/11/05/scrub-a-dub/

  42. Oscar says:

    @ old-fashioned-man

    Yes, husbands are supposed to sanctify and cleanse their wives with the washing of water by the word. But a husband is never to use the scriptures that specifically pertain to his wife, because if he does, he’s “reading her mail”.

    Every pastor knows that.

  43. TMAC says:

    And it’s one thing to privately tell a husband IN PRIVATE that he should do everything in his power to obey Scripture and love his wife per God, or that sometimes a harsh husband can make his wife’s submission more difficult. It is ANOTHER THING ENTIRELY to say this de facto, from the pulpit where every wife then hears, “My lack of submission is justified based on my husband’s inferior leadership.”

  44. Damn Crackers says:

    “…then, men, I think on the way home, you should probably repent and confess before the Lord to your wife.”

    Which Christian denomination has wives being able to absolve the sin of their husbands?

    This statement really sums up the pagan goddess worship that calls itself Christianity today.

  45. JRob says:

    “My lack of submission is justified based on my husband’s inferior leadership.”

    My fave when on the evangelical dating circuit 1.5 decades ago was, “I’m looking for a man worthy of submitting to.”

  46. earl says:

    “My lack of submission is justified based on my husband’s inferior leadership.”

    Again…Eve was perfect in the sense she had no sin and was under God and Adam’s (who also had no sin) leadership. If she didn’t submit because the serpent whispered in her ear…what gives a flawed female the right to make that statement?

  47. feeriker says:

    I think the fact that Lori Alexander’s regular female followers are so small in number (at least as evidenced by her Transformed Wife blog) serves as evidence (and an indictment) of just how few in number are true Christian women committed to following God’s plan for their lives. Were that not the case, Lori would have a following massively larger than Sheilah Gregoire, Joyce Meyer, and Beth Moore combined. That these heretical ear-tickling frauds have “captured the market” while Lori, with her incontrovertible truths, is despised and marginalized tells us all we need to know.

    Again, God bless Lori for what she does. As ill-treated as she is here on earth by her (so-called) Christian brethren, she has earned a lavious estate in Heaven while her detractors will be living in the equivalent of the favelas (should God be gracious enough to even let them in at all).

  48. CSI says:

    I think when women claim they are “dying inside” (female histronics) its usually because they have lost sexual desire for their husband. Instead of telling them this is fairly normal and what they could do work through this, these “pastorbators” tell them its all because their husbands have done something very wrong and they should consider leaving him.

    And don’t these pastors pull a kind of bait and switch on young men? They encourage them to marry by telling them how easy marriage is, how its just common sense to keep your wife happy. And then after get married they turn around and tell them they have to put in a huge amount of work just to keep their wives from leaving.

  49. RichardP says:

    JRob said: I’m looking for a man worthy of submitting to.

    I agree. Women should not marry a man that they don’t respect. Just as a man should not marry a woman who does not respect him.

    Except – what of women who cannot find a man they respect that wants to marry her? Same for the man: what shall he do who cannot find a woman to marry who respects him. It makes sense to advise both to not marry. But good luck with getting them to pay attention to that.

  50. JRob says:

    @RichardP

    Problem is,
    “I’m looking for a man worthy of submitting to,”
    becomes
    “My lack of submission is justified based on my husband’s inferior leadership.”

  51. c matt says:

    Shakespeare undoubtedly had a better understanding of Scripture, and women, than these “pastors.” Instead of worthless marriage counseling, every married couple should read (or watch the Burton/Taylor version only) Taming of the Shrew.

  52. Joe says:

    You can probably get better marriage advise for women by reading Dr. Laura Schlessengers “The Care and Feeding of Husbands” than you can from just about any church.
    And for men “What Women Want When They Test Men” by Bruce Bryans.

  53. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    RichardP: Women should not marry a man that they don’t respect.

    The problem is — what happens when a woman loses the respect she once had for her husband?

    In Christianity, she is obligated to stay with him. Obligated to fix herself, so she will again respect her husband. To struggle to respect him, for all her life if need be.

    Instead, once a wife loses respect for her husband, she thinks God wants her to get a divorce.

  54. earl says:

    ‘Women should not marry a man that they don’t respect.’

    This problem becomes worse when they are educated to not respect any man.

  55. Darwinian Arminian says:

    @CSI
    And don’t these pastors pull a kind of bait and switch on young men?

    Not just on the men. Dalrock’s has posted that clip from Chandler a few times before, but what he says to the wives in his church today looks even worse if you know what kind of message he was giving in the time when he was a bit less famous. Peruse the clip below, and while you might snicker at Pastor Matt’s hyperventilating, do take note on what he has to say about a Christian experiencing troubles in life:

    CHANDLER: “Look at me! I’m gonna try to combat something as best I can here. Look at me: Following Jesus will is not going to make you wealthy! Following Jesus does not guarantee that you’re going to be healthy! The message of scripture and the gospel of Christ is not that in following Him everything goes right, but that He is enough, no matter what happens! Not that everything’s going to be okay! And it’s maddening to me that the prosperity gospel is so unbelievably popular among people who then have to completely disregard scripture as well as Christian history!”

    For all of his past griping about a prosperity gospel that will bring you riches, the Matt Chandler of today has no problem with applying it to sex and marriage in order to sell husbands on the idea that if they only lived more like Jesus they’d have wives that treated them with more respect. Likewise, he sees no problem with telling the women of his church that when unhappiness in their lives tempts them with opportunities to sin it’s all because they’ve been wronged by the men they chose to trust, and that God will be very unhappy with these men if they don’t repent by working harder to give her a life that is comfortable.

    Dalrock has said before that pastors who seek to soften the harsher parts of Christian teaching so that women will be more comfortable with it are in fact being very unloving towards them. Matt Chandler’s sermonizing here provides a pretty good demonstration of that. While I never cared much for his shouting and forced over-emoting, he was at least willing to say that all Christians will inevitably face struggles as a fact of life. That’s a message that is true to what you’ll find in the Bible, and it’s a reality that a Christian will have to learn to grapple with if they want to follow Christ. Today, however, Pastor Chandler is happy to tell women that what God wants most is for them to be happy, and that if they are not then excuses that can be made when they respond with rebellion against God. If the women of his church somehow end up making it to Heaven, it won’t be because of what they learned from the preacher. Not when he teaches lessons like these.

  56. Sam says:

    @feeriker
    The Transformed Wife’s facebook page is where all the followers are. She has 80K. A good deal of them though are following for laughs so its not accurate, but what you see on her blog isn’t accurate at all. She has 800 women in her private chat room.

  57. feeriker says:

    @Sam

    Good to know, thanks. I’m not a Facebook user, so I don’t get to witness what goes on there.

  58. PokeSalad says:

    She has 800 women in her private chat room.

    800 = private?

  59. BillyS says:

    I would ask those who claim wealth and health are no longer a part of God’s promises why they disappeared between the OT and NT? They may not always happen, but God’s will is pretty clear about that.

    People like Chandler love cutting doctrines down rather than standing behind them. So what else is new?

    Yes, I am proud to be a “name it and claim it” Christian. I find what it says and name it over my life and claim it for my life. No expensive cars here though, just a paid off Honda Accord.

  60. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Parents considering cashing out their retirement so their awesome daughter can afford a prestigious private college: https://slate.com/human-interest/2018/11/parenting-advice-college-payments-retirement-account.html

    My husband and I are not particularly well-off, but we are incredibly proud of our daughter, who has worked her butt off and gotten into our (excellent) state school as well as a handful of prestigious private colleges. She wants to go to one of the latter, and apart from a small amount of need-based financial aid, she’s looking at taking on a lot of student loan debt.

    The rest of the family thinks we should help pay for part of it by cashing out our 401(k). Truly, I do not love the idea of her leaving college with that kind of debt, but I’m extremely hesitant to put our savings on the line at this point in our lives. (We’re in our early 50s.) What would you do, in our place?

  61. Random stranger says:

    Dalrock did you see the new Visa campaign?

    https://usa.visa.com/about-visa/money-is-changing.html

  62. Don Quixote says:

    Off topic. Recent sermon from Steven Anderson:

    Enjoy!

  63. Jean says:

    Wow, RPL, those people are dopes to even think about cashing out their 401k for college. Bragging about your daughter’s prestigious college isn’t going to pay a lot of your bills in retirement. In my opinion, that advice person didn’t go far enough by failing to address majors that are useless without a graduate degree and majors for professions that will never provide enough income to pay back huge loans. The sad truth also is that a degree from a prestigious school doesn’t open many doors if parents aren’t already well-connected. How awesome is that?

  64. Oscar says:

    If “she’s looking at taking on a lot of student loan debt”, then she’s not as smart as they think she is. If she’s willing to use her parents’ 401(k) to go to school, then she’s not all that loving either.

  65. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Especially since this daughter managed to get accepted into an “excellent” state college, which apparently has far lower tuition. But she instead wants to attend an expensive private college.

    Maybe the state college is near her parent’s home, and she’s seeking a “college experience” away from home?

  66. Jean says:

    Ugh, the “college experience.” Our older two graduated college in the last two years. I was really surprised at parent events to hear parents themselves talking about the “college experience” meaning drinking, hooking up, like it was some desirable rite of passage. It was like everyone thought “Animal House” was a documentary of behavior to be emulated. Parents dumb enough to consider raiding their retirement savings (on the advice of family—great people there) might be dumb enough to buy into the “college experience.”

  67. CSI says:

    Women tend to place a greater emphasis on social status and prestige than men. The reason why this girl wants to go to this more “prestigious” private college is because she imagines it will allow her to associate with young people of a higher status and will elevate her social status in turn. Afterwards it will enable her to obtain a more exciting career, and later on, a higher status husband.

    In reality this prestige will prove largely illusionary. If you aren’t born into wealth and status, borrowing huge amounts to attend a prestigious college is unlikely to grant you it.

  68. Warthog says:

    To be fair, Wilson wrote that over 20 years ago. He has moved substantially in your direction since then. https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/smash-the-matriarchy.html

  69. feministhater says:

    Let’s hope they sue the Scouts into oblivion.

  70. feministhater says:

    To be fair, has Wilson stated that what he wrote all those years ago was wrong and destructive?

    Nope… fuck off.

  71. feministhater says:

    Has Wilson admitted that deriding men and undermining the husband’s authority in the home for the last few decades was wrong, destructive and contrary to Scripture?

    Oh, guess not…

  72. Trust says:

    Discontentment a form of coveting.

    Everyone sees how a man lusting after a gorgeous young intern would lead him to lies and adultery. Few seem to acknowledge that a woman’s discontentment is planting the seed that leads to lies, adultery, and theft (of children and income). Rather, the market to this discontentment to get votes, sell products and services, and pack the pews with nodding women.

    It’s ironic how many preachers warn of during the end times there will be a “the falling away” and they should “stay away from that woman” which is false religion. They seem to be serving the very monster they are warning about.

  73. rugby11 says:

    Tune in

  74. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Chinese men who can’t find a wife:

  75. Pingback: Sure his theology is bad, but he has great taste in TV! | Dalrock

  76. Paul says:

    @BllyS: “I would ask those who claim wealth and health are no longer a part of God’s promises why they disappeared between the OT and NT?”

    Well, you asked for it… “Name-it and claim-it” is one of the worst “theologies” developed within Christianity, bordering on the heretical. It’s often coupled to thinking very much akin to magic, i.e., trying to manipulate God to do your biddings.

    Let’s break this further down into:

    1. Is wealth part of God’s promise for the NT believer?

    Well, a slave is not more than his Master, who said: “Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.”.

    Further indication that the gospel is not about wealth, is all the condemnations of the rich, both in the gospels and the letters:

    “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

    “Come now, you who are rich, weep and wail for the misery to come upon you. Your riches have rotted and moths have eaten your clothes. Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and consume your flesh like fire. [..] You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened your hearts in the day of slaughter.”

    “Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction.”

    “Listen, my dear brothers and sisters: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him?”

    Furthermore, we have the historic testimony that at least part of the believers were indeed poor. So that shows it was not God’s plan to give them wealth.

    “For it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem.”

    So to conclude: no, wealth is not a promise for the NT believer.

    2. Is health part of God’s promise for the NT believer?

    If that was the case, then NT believers would never be sick, moreover, then NT believers would never die. The latter is easy to disprove, believers die all the time. If you remove death from the picture, even then we would expect that NT believers would never be sick. History proves otherwise:

    “For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.” Note that Paul is addressing believers here.

    “But I think it is necessary to send back to you Epaphroditus, my brother, co-worker and fellow soldier, who is also your messenger, whom you sent to take care of my needs. For he longs for all of you and is distressed because you heard he was ill. Indeed he was ill, and almost died. But God had mercy on him, and not on him only but also on me, to spare me sorrow upon sorrow.”

    Epaphroditus was sick, even nearly died. So obviously believers get sick. That Paul mentions that God had mercy on him, shows it was not the expectation that he would be healthy in every situation, but this was a special exception.

    “Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick.”
    Another of Paul’s coworkers who became sick, even to such a degree Paul had to leave him behind.

    “Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.”

    This shows that it was quite common that believers got sick. The interesting question is about the part of the prayers of the elders. Does it imply that such a prayer will always heal the sick? Experience shows this is not the case.

    To conclude: NT believers get sick and die, just as other people. Therefore health is not God’s promise for the the believer.

    So on both points I have proven that no such promises exist. And I would severely warn against the theology behind the ‘name-it and claim-it’ as it is close to heretical, nearly the same as using magic.

  77. Anonymous Reader says:

    RPL
    Chinese men who can’t find a wife

    Baked in the cake years ago by the “one child” policy.
    I wonder how many of them will decide to move to the fast-growing Chinese presence in Africa?

  78. OKRickety says:

    BillyS,

    ‘I would ask those who claim wealth and health are no longer a part of God’s promises why they disappeared between the OT and NT? They may not always happen, but God’s will is pretty clear about that.
    […]Yes, I am proud to be a “name it and claim it” Christian. I find what it says and name it over my life and claim it for my life. No expensive cars here though, just a paid off Honda Accord.’

    Perhaps you would be interested in reading

    Is Every Promise “Yes”? Old Testament Promises and the Christian. As I understand it (it’s very long), he says the promises still apply, but at least some of them may not be received until after the Resurrection. I think he also says many are conditional. Perhaps that is what you had in mind when you said “They may not always happen, but God’s will is pretty clear about that.”.

    Personally, I have great doubts that most “name it and claim it” believers correctly understand the teaching of the Bible.

  79. BillyS says:

    Paul,

    Wealth it relative, which is why you will always have them among you. Are you really asserting God wants people to be so poor they get evicted? That is His grand plan?

    Sick that get prayed for and healed are no longer sick, by definition. How many have you followed that advice with and seen healed? Likely as many as came to the Synagogue not on the Sabbath and were healed – none.

    That is just two of your points. You are full of it. You also remove the responsibility for people to believe God for His promises and instead preach a Doris Day “Que Sera, Sera” religion. That is utter tripe, foolishness and a complete heresy.

    OKR,

    Most people don’t really understand the Scriptures. Foolishness about marriage relationships goes between all kinds of beliefs, both those for and against God’s promises remaining for today.

    I only skimmed the link, but anyone who argues that it vanished needs to provide more evidence of that and I just have not seen it yet, and I have listened to a wide range of preachers, even those who frequently mock “name it, claim it” ideas.

    Though are you really saying people should not name what the Bible promises and claim it over their life? They still sin, but should they not name the fact that they can resist sin and claim what God has provided to do that? What about salvation?

    Too few really believe God in a wide range of areas, whether it is this or the more maligned health and wealth areas. Few of us parents would want our own children to be sick and poor, yet many claim God does. That clearly goes against the teaching that He is a better father than we are. Yet the things He is accused of would have earthly parents thrown in jail if they actively did the same in their children’s lives.

    The thief comes to steal, kill and destroy. Jesus came that we might have abundant life. That doesn’t mean many things some claim, but it does mean we should be able to apply what He has promised to our lives and nothing has removed those in the Scriptures, so I will stick with that.

  80. Paul says:

    @BillyS

    “Wealth it (sic) relative”. Changing definitions is not going to help you. I showed NT believers were poor. That’s not relative wealth.

    “Are you really asserting God wants people to be so poor they get evicted?”. You are the one asserting that God wants NT believers to be wealthy. I did not assert the opposite, I only proved that your assertion is false.

    “Sick that get prayed for and healed are no longer sick, by definition.” That’s true, but you claim that God promises that every NT believer would have health. I’ve proved that many NT believers got sick, even to death. If people get sick, then by definition they are not healthy. I also showed that NT believers die.

    “That is just two of your points.” … which you did not disprove. No go for the other ones!

    “You also remove the responsibility for people to believe God for His promises and instead preach a Doris Day “Que Sera, Sera” religion.” I have asserted no such thing. I just proved that wealth and health are NOT part of God’s promises for the NT believer.

    Of course God is sovereign and can decide to bless an individual NT believer with wealth or health, and many of us have been blessed. But it’s not a guarantee for every NT believer, as I have proven using the very same words of the apostles and the authors of the gospels, aka “The New Testament”.

    I have another suggestion for reading material, which might give more insight in the role of suffering in the live of NT believers, it was an eye-opener for me:

    Tim Keller “Walking with God through Pain and Suffering”

  81. OKRickety says:

    BillyS,

    “I only skimmed the link, but anyone who argues that it vanished ….”

    The author of that paper did not argue that the promises found in the Old Testament vanished. In fact, he writes:

    “Therefore, while all God’s promises find there “Yes” in Christ (2 Cor 1:20), we enjoy some already, while others remain for the future.”
    and
    “They are already our inheritance but not yet ours to enjoy in the fullness that we will in the age to come.”

    In other words, although some of the rewards of the promises do not exist today, it is not because they have vanished but because they have not yet been given.

    “Though are you really saying people should not name what the Bible promises and claim it over their life? They still sin, but should they not name the fact that they can resist sin and claim what God has provided to do that? What about salvation?”

    To my way of thinking, there is absolutely no need to “name it and claim it”. I see this in essence to mean that one does not have faith in God, because, as I understand it, the Bible tells us the promise and the conditions to receive it. If we meet the conditions, then God has promised to give the reward (or the consequences in the case of the negative promises, that is, curses). There is no need to “name it and claim it”.

    “Few of us parents would want our own children to be sick and poor, yet many claim God does.”

    People claim God wants children to be sick and poor? I find that incredibly hard to believe. However, I can imagine that some might tortuously conflate the truth that God often allows children to be sick and poor to be equivalent to wanting them to be sick and poor. Such a conflation would cause me to seriously question their intelligence and reading comprehension.

  82. BillyS says:

    OKR,

    Most parents want their own children to be healed more than God does if you follow their theology to the logical end. They would instantly heal their child if they could, thus they blame God (indirectly or not) for not healing the child because of one of many reasons. Instead of realizing that we are in a world where we must walk in faith.

    Did you not have to name your salvation and claim it by taking action? Or did God just arbitrarily save you? You may not like the terms, but it is the same thing. The ones who got Jesus’ praise in His earthly life were those who used their faith. Why did that change?

    I did read enough of the article to see where the author pushed things off out of this life, which is the same as taking them away. The next one will not need healing in the slightest, as one example. Proclaiming that you should pray “if it be His will” for healing is an affront to His revealed will. He NEVER turned someone away in His earthly life to be healed. A few twist a few later Scriptures to argue that, but He said He did God’s will on this earth and He never failed to heal someone, though sometimes it took pushing through. The same is true now.

    (Paul had a demon, not a sickness. See what a “messenger” is. It is also not stated who gave God that, just assumed.)

    This irks me so much because so many lie about God as much as any pastor preaching inverted family relationships. All seek to destroy what Jesus paid for.

  83. BillyS says:

    I need to write some blog posts on this, but I am wrestling with the idea of what really matters anymore, one of the true costs of divorce. I don’t blame that on God of course, though some would if you really believe their theology.

  84. Paul says:

    @BillyS: “Did you not have to name your salvation and claim it by taking action? Or did God just arbitrarily save you?”

    This shows even more why name-it-and-claim-it is such a bad theology, even in it’s understanding of the core of the message of Christianity. Salvation is by grace through faith.

    “For by grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”

    “If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.”

    For an overview of the different viewpoints on the finer points on faith, election, and predestination , you can start at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Calvinist%E2%80%93Arminian_debate

  85. Paul says:

    @BillyS “I need to write some blog posts on this, but I am wrestling with the idea of what really matters anymore, one of the true costs of divorce.”

    Divorce is truly awful, and I can understand your pain. Turn your attention fully to Christ and depend on Him as your Shepherd, He is what matters.

  86. BillyS says:

    Paul,

    Your faith requires action. Read James. Being a Calvanist where God is arbitrary would explain a belief we are just leaves in the wind.

    As to divorce, I can definitely depend on Him. That is all that has kept me afloat, but it sure as heck is lonely.

  87. purge187 says:

    “Chinese men who can’t find a wife[.]”

    They should take a page out of the nearby Japanese men and say, “To Hell with it.”

  88. Pingback: A marriage isn’t a military unit. | Dalrock

  89. Mandy Groff says:

    I am a wife and I know I am guilty of this but it has been me the whole time. God had to change my heart. A book I’m reading right now has helped me so much. It’s called How to be a help meet to your husband by Debi Pearl. I wish all wives would read this book!

  90. Paul says:

    @BillyS : “Your faith requires action. Read James.” Sure, if you mean that your actions show your faith as James states. That’s different from name-it-and-claim-it though.

    The link I gave was on multiple viewpoints, not only Calvinism.

    As for your loneliness after divorce; I can fully understand that. We can only be sad on the state of marriage after the Fall being such that St.Paul warns against it, EVEN for Christian couples.

  91. Spacetraveller says:

    Mandy Groff,

    Thank you for your book recommendation. I shall get it and read it.

  92. MB8 says:

    In case there are more lurking women other than myself, the book Mandy mentions is titled Created to Be His Helpmeet. It’s worth reading yearly in my opinion. Debi also authored two other books of the same nature. Preparing to be a Helpmeet, and The Hidden Helpmeet.

    They are not popular books with the mainstream understandably so,but even among some of my most conservative friends they are considered harsh or unbiblical. This is just a hunch, but I’m guessing that if you read this blog it’s easy to understand why.

  93. Scott says:

    RPL video:

    Crazy.

    Silicone robot wives? Entire decks of playing cards of stolen women? Flying to Indonesia to buy a wife?

    Mankind is capable of reaching the heights of beauty and the sublime while at the same time creating the most dystopian of conditions.

    Christ have mercy.

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 )

Connecting to %s

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