Warhorn interview: Have you stopped beating your wife?

For context regarding this series see this post.  You can also see the whole series.  We are now down to the final two questions.  I’ve separated my final response into two parts, one (this post) for question 8, and another (already sent and coming soon in post form) for question 9.  However, for context I’m including both questions here as well as Nathan’s note about the questions:

  1. I’ve seen more than one commenter in your archives say that a woman needs a good old fashioned spanking (or words to that effect). I see in your “comments policy” you ask people to refrain from discussing marital corporal punishment. I have several questions about that. First (just to get it out of the way): do you or any of your more serious followers support marital corporal punishment? Why or why not?
  2. Related to question 8, does work like yours attract misogynists? Why or why not? If so, is there anything that can be done to avoid it?  If not, is there something an outsider like me isn’t understanding about the people that it does attract? Is it fair for me to ask the spanking question and the misogyny questions right next to each other? Are my biases making me see misogyny (for example, in the wife spanking crowd) where I should see something else? If so, what am I (and others like me) missing?

I hope those questions (particularly 8 and 9) don’t seem leading. I’d like to sincerely understand and present your point of view, even where our camp diverges.

Below is my answer to question 8.  Nathan didn’t ask any followup questions and aside from some corrections of errors in the original text I only sent the one message.

[—————————Begin my email to Nathan—————————]

@Nathan

8. I’ve seen more than one commenter in your archives say that a woman needs a good old fashioned spanking (or words to that effect). I see in your “comments policy” you ask people to refrain from discussing marital corporal punishment. I have several questions about that. First (just to get it out of the way): do you or any of your more serious followers support marital corporal punishment? Why or why not?

I don’t support marital corporal punishment. I don’t think it is needed, and I also don’t see it as consistent with the instructions to husbands in the NT. I’m not sure exactly who my “serious followers” are, but I think the vast majority of my readers would be horrified if you told them they had an obligation to practice marital corporal punishment.

I added the comment rule because while the number of commenters who brought up the topic was small, when they did so it tended to derail all other discussion. This makes it both off topic and highly disruptive. Also, if I were going to troll the Christian men’s sphere this is exactly how I would troll it. It would be a twofer, as it would fit the stereotype and also be disruptive.

I don’t recall the specific comments you are referring to, but I do recall someone posting links to scenes from old John Wayne movies where the Duke spanked women. I don’t think they meant it as a how-to video, but more of an example of how radically cultural views of a husband’s authority had changed. In this regard, I don’t think the movies were advocating spanking, but using an outrageous scene to make a humorous point.

Along the same lines, I did include a youtube clip of “Lone Ranger, Man of the house” in a post a few months back. In that video a husband draws his gun and shoots his wife’s favorite china when she gives him sass. Then when she isn’t responding to his order to make him dinner, he pulls his gun again and tells her she’s going to look mighty funny without any ears. One of my readers (MKT) brought the clip to my attention, describing it as “one of the finest moments in TV history”:

It’s one of the finest moments in TV history, and would make everyone from radical feminists to self-proclaimed conservative complimentarians hysterical if they saw it. If you can’t watch the whole thing, just watch the first minute and last 2-3 minutes.

I don’t share MKT’s enthusiasm for the clip, but I don’t think he is advocating gunplay as a form of headship. My reader in turn had come across the clip on another Christian man’s blog. The blogger described it as a fond memory from his childhood:

On this privileged occasion, I recall taking in an episode of The Lone Ranger. The theme of this particular show was about that time when there was this mousy little man, hen-pecked to the outer limits of human endurance, and through a series of circumstances, the Lone Ranger adopted this poor man and made him something of a protégé. The end result of this crash course in masculinity was that the little man headed on home, and the happy ending to the whole saga was him pulling out his revolver and shooting his wife’s dishes off her shelves. It makes me happy just thinking about it. Fade to black, and with her thinking something along the lines of finally!

I don’t think the other Christian blogger really advocates gunplay as headship, either. However, if my opinion on the matter isn’t sufficient you could ask him. His name is Pastor Doug Wilson.

Like I said, I don’t think Wilson advocates gunplay, and he has stated that he doesn’t advocate marital corporal punishment. However, one reader we have in common does seem to advocate it, and I think Wilson’s presentation of marriage as a military unit helped lead my reader to that conclusion. Commenter Warthog wrote in response to my criticism of Wilson:

@Dalrock you’ve stated the problem, but not the solution. What sanctions do husbands biblically have when their wives rebel?
When children or slaves rebel, the head of the house clearly has the biblical sanction of the rod. Non-destructive spanking/beating.
Does the patriarch’s power of the rod also apply to his wife? If not, why not?

Not defending Wilson here, but you have failed to comprehend what he meant in the military analogy. There is a difference between being at fault and being responsible. To take the example of a ship captain, the USS Stark was hit by an Iraqi missile in 1986 or so. Due to a mistake by the gunnery sergeant, the Phalanx missile defense system had not been turned back on after the last maintenance. Due to this error, the ship was defenseless against the missile, resulting as I recall in the deaths of about 17 men.

The captain was held responsible, as was the gunnery sergeant. It ended both of their careers. The captain was indeed responsible, even though it was the gunnery sergeant’s fault. Simply said, when you have command you are responsible for both the good and bad that happens under your command.
In marriage this would mean that if the wife starts misbehaving, the husband is responsible for the marriage, and should take corrective action on the wife. If the misbehavior metastasizes it is usually because it wasn’t nipped in the bud, just like cancer.

Wilson’s problem is not his recognition that the husband is responsible for the ship of the family. The problem is that Wilson does not acknowledge that the husband has sanctions over the wife for disobedience. Without sanctions you are not a covenant head. All covenants have sanctions.

A man who is held responsible, but has no power to make the people under his headship obey should walk away from that job.

I disagree with Warthog’s conclusion but there is something to his logic. If husbands are to be measured as if they were military leaders, then should they not practice military discipline? As I wrote in response to Warthog’s comment, A naval captain’s mission is different than the mission of a Christian husband and father. Likewise the husband’s role is different than the role of a military commander. Part of the problem here comes from our twisting what Scripture teaches. Scripture doesn’t tell husbands they must lead, it tells wives to submit and declares that the husband is the head. But if the husband is in charge, we reason (properly in my opinion) that the husband must have some obligation to lead. So far, so good, but then we take that and run it backwards, erroneously declaring “If the husband leads well, the wife will submit”. Therefore a wife who is in rebellion is proof that a husband didn’t do enough to make her comply. And if the husband is responsible for making his wife comply, then you can see where some would start seriously considering corporal punishment.

But like I stated, I don’t think the husband is responsible for making his wife comply. There is another bit here that gets at the insincerity of the complementarian position. The same folks who claim the husband is responsible if his wife does something wrong also are adamant that husbands must never tell their wives to submit. This is especially strange because husbands are to wash their wives with the water of the word, but here we are telling husbands they are forbidden from telling their wives what Scripture plainly says. For example, in Wilson’s 21 Theses on Submission in Marriage thesis 11 is:

The Bible does not teach husbands to enforce the requirement that was given to their wives. Since true submission is a matter of the heart, rendered by grace through faith, a husband does not have the capacity to make this happen. His first task is therefore to love his wife as Christ loved the church. He is to lead by example.

This is a complementarian article of faith, and you will get the same basic message from Mary Kassian and Kathy Keller. My personal favorite however is Pastor Camp:

I’ve never once said in my entire life that a man should tell a woman to submit- ever.

We don’t need marital corporal punishment, we need to take away the tools the church and state have put in place to weaken the position of husbands (divorce, etc). We also need to stop blaming men for women’s sins because we are too uncomfortable holding women accountable.

Note: This takes us back to the ten examples I provided in the other thread of conservative Christians blaming men for women pushing to take over men’s roles.

This entry was posted in Domestic Violence, Headship, Nathan Alberson, Pastor Doug Wilson, Pastor Steve Camp, Submission, Warhorn Interview, Warhorn Media. Bookmark the permalink.

272 Responses to Warhorn interview: Have you stopped beating your wife?

  1. ys says:

    Not only excellent in general, but a good summary for first-time readers as well.

  2. Scott says:

    Also discussed here:

    Sex=marriage
    Polygamy
    SEXBOTS

    Do you endorse those Dalrock?

  3. Dalrock says:

    Obviously not Scott! If I endorsed them I would have banned discussing them.

  4. I feel like we would get 80% of the way there if we just admitted women were actual human beings with free will. Seriously, this should not be a big deal.

    This is an overstatement, I’m almost convinced that anyone who thinks women are a mystery basically just doesn’t want to know. They are basically like men with different priorities and incentives in play. This means they are capable of doing good or evil just like anyone else.

    I don’t think anything I’ve said can really be gainsay-ed on any strong grounds.There is such a tremendous amount invested in making sure that women are not to be held responsible for just about anything they do.

  5. Lost Patrol says:

    Ha!

    The place is a disaster area. I’ve seen guns and BBQ mentioned here too.

  6. Random Angeleno says:

    Question for Nathan:

    Does work like yours (and the ministry you work for) attract misandrists? Why or why not? If so, is there anything that can be done to avoid this? If not, is there something an outsider like me isn’t understanding about the people that it does attract? Are my biases making me see misandry (for example, in Pastor Bayly’s work) where I should see something else? If so, what am I (and others like me) missing?

  7. Damn Crackers says:

    Not clear all eating disorders are anorexic in nature from the report.

  8. Scott says:

    Damn Crackers

    The primary way I enforce my tyrannical restriction on Mychsels waistline circumference is by watching a crap ton of porn:

    https://ljubomirfarms.wordpress.com/2019/01/27/lazy-snowy-weekends-are-nice/

  9. Damn Crackers says:

    @Scott – Ha! I can see you guys are just fine. Keep it up.

  10. Lexet Blog says:

    You must answer for your followers? Lol. What a joke of an interview. I knew it was a set up.

    We are all misogynists!

  11. Paul says:

    @Dalrock

    Has Nathan ever come back to his earlier replies that he would to have think things over?

    At least he seems to leave some room for you to explain your points. To have a summarized view on your position is already a benefit for many newcomers and longtimers alike, even if the final interview result would be be disappointing.

  12. Patrick says:

    I don’t see a biblical reason not to spank. That’s like arguing there’s a biblical reason not to tickle. Seems to me a principled stand, for
    OR against, is silliness.

  13. Dalrock says:

    @Paul

    Has Nathan ever come back to his earlier replies that he would to have think things over?

    Nathan clarified that he would make all further responses in the form of his (to date pending) podcast.

  14. Joe2 says:

    @greenmantlehoyos

    I feel like we would get 80% of the way there if we just admitted women were actual human beings with free will….This means they are capable of doing good or evil just like anyone else.

    I agree. I recall being told many times regarding porn that ALL the women involved were either tricked, drugged, beaten, had abusive fathers, kidnapped or had some other excuse why they were forced into porn. Porn was the doing of evil men. The fact that women have entered the porn business on their own free will to make money was NEVER mentioned along with the fact that a major porn producer here in the US is a woman owned business.

  15. 7817 says:

    This title sums up the whole interview.

    I’m glad you are posting these interview questions, but Vox Day’s recommendation to never talk to the media is good based on what happens over and over again.

    Why a certain group of commenters here think that Warhorn, Doug Wilson, and Bnonn and Foster are natural allies I will never understand. They are allies with those who tell the truth in the same way Benedict Arnold was an ally of Washington.

  16. Anonymous Reader says:

    Oddly enough, Nathan failed to ask if Dalrock agrees with the idea of any husband having the option to hire professionals with guns to come over to the house and remove the wife to a nunnery, beating her if she resists. Purely on the husband’s say-so, too, with little chance of legal redress by the woman because of the special “wife courts” that have been set up in the last 40 years.

    Really odd Nathan failed to mention the Htulud Protocol, given his conservative feminism.

  17. Nathan Bruno says:

    @greenmantlehoyos

    I’ve talked to some Christian women I know, and I’ve floated several of these complementarian ideas past them. Whereas several of them tend to assume I’m a member of the “He-Man Woman Haters” club, when I’ve done it I’ve presented that official CBMW opinion contrasted with the view that we should make sure women are aware of their sin nature and evangelize them as to Jesus Christ.

    They have tended to presume the “nice” people are trying to have that second position – snatching the dear girls from Hell with Jesus – and that I must be holding the position of the complementarians – that they are not moral agents and therefore don’t need Jesus, or at least, not sinners with agency and responsibility like men.

    It blows their minds when they find out the nice people think they are unworthy of salvation and here I am, just trying to make sure that every female slave of Christ I might encounter who was elect before the start of the world is fully presented the depths of her depravity and need for Christ, just like any male slave of Christ.

    It does have the knock-on effect that some women I know who used to glowing talk of “Dr. Piper” visiting their church have a lesser opinion of him now that they knew he made CBMW licit and they saw the actual CBMW positions.

  18. ray says:

    I absolutely support marital corporal punishment. Children as well — subject to discipline of the dad.

    As I’ve noted many times on this page, the FIRST target of the Sisterhood rising during the Sixties was this issue of corporal punishment, morphed of course into Domestic Abuse, so that the millions of ‘Christian’ and ‘conservative’ weenies like Nathan immediately would be triggered into Big Brave Man Protection Mode, and display precisely the behavior predicted and required by the Sisterhood.

    It took about a decade for the Domestic Abuse scam to filter into the collective consciousness of America, after which ANY form of ‘abuse’ against a female by a male (related/married or not) became the worst ‘crime’ on the planet.

    The Sisterhood knew, and knows, very well that once husbands no longer had physical control over their wives, all satan’s hell gradually would open up and swallow New Amerika. And it did, too, just as planned. Because the kneejerk reaction of Nathan and fellow cucks is just as predictable and reliable as charting and manipulating the reactions/behaviors of females.

    Once a man no longer can restrain a woman physically, all that’s left to him is the support of the Church and the State. Meaning, when his wife rebels against him or cucks him out, he can go for relief to someone like Nathan, who will decide what is allowed between a man and a woman.

    And that is why you are where you are today. And why it can only get worse, until the nation fails and falls. But Nathan and his fellow-travelers will look real great . . . right up until the moment they come before the King.

  19. vfm7916 says:

    Probability of hit piece increases from 75% to 95%.

    His chief questions are last, and will make up the bulk of the cast. Also, expect that he’s going to fill in the blanks on question 9, unless you’ve answered this and have not posted it yet.

  20. Anon says:

    Probability of hit piece increases from 75% to 95%.

    Yep.

    But no hit piece on any anti-misandry blogger has ever had any effect (note that Paul Elam is not an anti-misandry blogger, but rather someone who wants to profit from men who think he is helping them, when in fact he is not).

  21. BillyS says:

    Marital punishment would be idiotic today. You can barely chastise your own children now (though you are held accountable if they act poorly). Doing that to a wife is a quick ticket to jail and/or frivorce.

  22. ray says:

    PS, Nathan’s hitching of the Beat Your Wife ‘question’ to the ‘how many misandrists you got’ question illustrates who and what Nathan really is.

    I’ve been accused of misogyny so many times in the past 25 years it’s uncountable. So as I said previously, the day will come when all these accusers will stand before the King, and he will demand evidence of such ‘misogyny’, plus all the other charges that these cowards hide behind. There are gonna be a lot of shamed and punished people on that day, because many of my staunchest defenders will be the women I’ve known in my life. Good luck convincing them that I hate women.

    Nathan will not be able to sell my ‘misogyny’ to them, nor to the Assembly standing by, and least of all to the King. Who knows already.

    See you then, Nathan. Meanwhile, you just keep on accusing the brethren.

  23. Scott says:

    I was impressed by your ability to resist the temptation to challenge the definition of “misogynist.”

  24. The Question says:

    @Dalrock

    Blog post idea https://dougwils.com/books-and-culture/s7-engaging-the-culture/7-pitfalls-of-christian-schools.html

    Key passage:

    “Parents should want, and the board of the school should insist upon, an environment where the differences between boys and girls are recognized and honored, and where they have a very public place in the consciousness of all. The manners and customs of the school should demand it. For example, establish little customs like girls exiting the classroom first, and then the boys. Encourage boys to hold the door open for girls. You know, all the things that feminism taught us to sneer at. Establish sexual courtesies in the school. This will have a shaping effect on the outlook of everyone.”

  25. Oscar says:

    Corporal punishment? Pfft … amateurs.

    Here in the Republic of Gilead, we just exile them to a leper colony if the get uppity.

  26. Pingback: Warhorn interview: Have you stopped beating your wife? | Reaction Times

  27. American says:

    What ray says (ray says: February 15, 2019 at 5:34 pm) sums it up for me. Good job ray.

    The “cunt worshippers,” as Sharkey call them, deliberately and fallaciously conflate a non-existent violence against women in a forum as a red herring to misdirect from the actual real life problem of women not being held accountable for their immoral words, their immoral behavior, their anti-Christian beliefs, their anti-Christian voting record, the grievous harm they’re presently doing to men and boys in Western Civilization, etc…

  28. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    In the 1840s, Vinegar Valentines were a thing: https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/vinegar-valentines-victorian

    A Vinegar Valentine was a card, sent to people on Valentine’s Day, saying how much you disliked them.

    In the 1840s, hopeful American and British lovers sent lacy valentines with cursive flourishes and lofty poems by the thousands. But what to do if you didn’t love the person who had set their eyes on you?

    In the Victorian era, there was no better way to let someone know they were unwanted than with the ultimate insult: the vinegar valentine. Also called “comic valentines,”* these unwelcome notes were sometimes crass and always a bit emotionally damaging in the anti-spirit of Valentine’s Day.

    Vinegar valentines were commercially bought postcards that were less beautiful than their love-filled counterparts, and contained an insulting poem and illustration. They were sent anonymously, so the receiver had to guess who hated him or her; as if this weren’t bruising enough, the recipient paid the postage on delivery.

    In Civil War Humor, Cameron C. Nickels wrote that vinegar valentines were “tasteless, even vulgar,” and were sent to “drunks, shrews, bachelors, old maids, dandies, flirts, and penny pinchers, and the like.” He added that in 1847, sales between love-minded valentines and these sour notes were split at a major New York valentine publisher.

    Interesting to see, the evolution of this holiday.

  29. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Reading further down, I see that Vinegar Valentines overlap with Women’s Suffrage:

    The women’s suffrage movement of the late 19th and early 20th century brought another class of vinegar valentines, targeting women who fought for the right to vote.

    While only a small percentage of mean-spirited cards were devoted to suffragists, Kenneth Florey argues in American Woman Suffrage Postcards that “it is clear from their context that an interest in women’s rights was an inherent part of one’s distorted personality.” These cards depicted such women as ugly abusers.

    It isn’t known whether these were sent directly to troll women’s rights activists or if they were sent to like-minded friends who disagreed with the movement.

  30. Iowa Slim says:

    Nathan: “…I’d like to sincerely understand and present your point of view, even where our camp diverges.” So he asks not about your writings, but about alleged commenters to a forum that’s open to the general public. Which is it, Nathan?

  31. info says:

    @nick mgtow
    Why china has marriage markets. Much larger pool than the selection that the female athlete had.

  32. Anon says:

    RS McCain, as a purple-pill tradcon, still blames men for the dystopia of 20-something dating :

    https://theothermccain.com/2019/02/14/san-francisco-and-the-winter-of-hate/

    “The point is that men who belong to the college-educated urban elite — the kind of men who vote Democrat and live in places like San Francisco — are selfish, arrogant, immoral and therefore unlovable.”

    Remember that RS McCain, and even National Review, only ever criticize fat blue-haired feminists. They will never, ever even begin to entertain the fact that even the median woman might be at all culpable for the current state of affairs.

    “The most desirable people are seldom “dating” past age 21.”

    Again, no awareness of female hypergamy, or that women are the ones delaying the timetable. He still thinks this is a 1950 SMP/MMP.

    RS McCain is extremely far from being red pill.

  33. American says:

    @Iowa Slim: Over the past thirty years or so, practically all colleges in the United States replaced the freshman year required logic 101 course with “humanities” type alternative replacements (in which a leftard so-called “professor” pontificates about leftardology continuing the K-12th indoctrination into leftardism the young people have already been subjected to rather than force them to learn the actual principles of logic).

    If Nathan and his peers had been forced in their freshman year at college to learn the principles of logic as I had to, he wouldn’t have stupidly grabbed the steering wheel and wildly turned it to the left driving into the field of logical fallacy because firstly he would have known better than to do that and secondly doing so would hurt his reputation as his peers would also be educated enough in logic to understand that what he is doing is fallacious. The decline of Western Civilization continues…

  34. feeriker says:

    I agree with those who think Nathan is setting Dalrock up for an ambush with this series of interviews. I can’t see how it is any longer possible to believe that any churchian blue-pill tradcuck is ever going to dialogue or debate a manospherian in good faith. I think what this will primarily accomplish in the end is to give full validation of Vox’s advice to never, EVER talk to the media, who are quite reliably characterized generally as lying , duplicitous scumbags. “Christian” (read: churchian) media are absolutely no exception to this stereotype.

  35. feeriker says:

    Anon says:
    February 15, 2019 at 11:06 pm

    I don’t even waste precious life minutes anymore reading McCain. When I did first start reading him a couple of years ago when Dalrock first blog rolled him, I found that he actually had some spot-on observations that eluded most of his fellow tradcons. Unfortunately, he consistently arrives at a source of red-pill truth, but like all purplepillcons, can’t bring himself to swallow the final dose and fully see the light. The subsequent backpeddling is just embarrassing. Nothing to be gained by devoting precious attention to that kind of lukewarm, half-cooked drivel.

  36. Anon says:

    feeriker,

    Nothing to be gained by devoting precious attention to that kind of lukewarm, half-cooked drivel.

    I agree. I thought RS McCain was slowly moving in the right direction, but now I know that he never will. He exclusively blames men for the fact that there is a very low marriage rate, and ludicrously claims that anyone (male or female) who is still dating at age 21 is somehow defective. I mean, how out of touch with the post-1950 world can he be?

    Even worse, he has zero problem with the way divorce and child custody laws are.

    In a nutshell, he is just a tradcon, and not very different from Brad Wilcucks.

  37. Warthog says:

    “However, one reader we have in common does seem to advocate it, and I think Wilson’s presentation of marriage as a military unit helped lead my reader to that conclusion.”

    Dalrock then quotes ME, asking the question whether men have the same sanction over their wife as they have over children and slaves. However, it was a question. I have not advocated wife spanking anywhere. It was an honest question, not advocacy. Please correct yourself @dalrock.

  38. Warthog says:

    And ironically, you never answered my question. Just like you bitch about D. Wilson never answering your questions. But you do quote me to the faggot Christian magazine as a proponent of wife beating. Go to hell, Dalrock.

  39. Warthog says:

    After thinking about it further, @dalrock, if it helps you to pass the buck by blaming me for the women spanking question, I’m ok with that. It is a reasonable question. I’m totally open to hearing any explanation why a head of household does not have that authority over his wife, but he does have it over children and slaves. And for that matter, I’m open to hearing why if it is ok to beat your children and slaves to punish them for disobedience how the same act is evil if done to one’s wife for the same reason. I never advocated this position, I asked the question as the logical conclusion. I’m still listening and waiting to hear an answer to that questions. Why is it terrible to spank your wife, but not terrible to spank children and slaves?

  40. Warthog says:

    Ah, the sin is asking the question. The answer is “of course it is terrible! Because… kittens!”

  41. Sharkly says:

    For all of us angry red-pilled wife beaters, it is time to take a break and cool down with some relaxing folk music:

  42. Patrick says:

    Does anybody think it’s OK to own slaves let alone spank them? Spanking children is generally for teaching them before their faculties are developed enough to understand. There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with corporal punishment for a wife, I don’t think. It’s the same as using rhetoric and relentless reason on a woman. A similar interesting question would be is it ok for a woman to slap a rude man. I’m guessing the Warhorn people would be fine with that.

  43. The Other Scott says:

    The practical question raises its ugly head once again (mostly because it has never been answered). As a modern Christian head of household (with responsibility but without authority) what do I do with a wife who refuses to submit? I apologise for personalising the problem but I think my example is frequent and relevant.

    She knows the Bible calls her to submit (I have shown her what it says and preached it to her multiple times). She (with the explicit backing of numerous “Christian” sources) chooses to malinterpret scriptures so that they say what she wants to hear. She gives lip service to submission, she does the bare minimum with a bad attitude so that when I call her on it she can throw that back in my face. She openly resents me for my scriptural stand even though I do my best to love her as I am commanded. She threatens to leave me because I am such a terrible person who doesn’t love her (projection much?)

    There are many of us who read scripture and see that God has given us responsibility(as fathers and husbands) and modern theological teaching has taken away any authority. So what do we do? We need a practical, scriptural solution to the problem of “What do I do with a wife who won’t follow/submit?” Is my only option to suffer silently for the rest of our marriage? Do I pray for “until death do us part?” WHAT DO I DO?

  44. Paul says:

    @TOS

    First of all, it seems Nathan is triggering a lot of commenters here to discuss “marital corporal punishment”. I think it is foolish to fall for that. And no, I don’t believe in it.

    As for your situation, I think a lot of men in here can relate to it. In my opinion you at a certain point have little options. Just as 1 Pet 2,3 tells that we might endure suffering, and instructs wives to submit, even if they “suffer”, I think similarly husbands might find themselves in such a situation.

    The long-term solution is to keep your stance, and pray, preferably the two of you. And keep calling out sin when necessary. If things get worse, theoretically you could call in church leadership to deal with it, but in almost all practical situations, you will find yourself fighting a battle at a second front, possibly creating allies for your wife. If you think it worth it, you could start such a battle, who knows if it will lead to change in church leadership.

    My bet is on educating as much people as I can, hoping that I will see at least some changes in the positive direction. If I look at the popularity of Jordan Peterson, and at the current preference for conservative values in generation-Z, the situation might be less dark than it used to be.

  45. feministhater says:

    Everything is abuse now so nothing is abuse.

    Spankings are nothing. A good wife loves spankings, a feminist does not.

  46. feministhater says:

    A similar interesting question would be is it ok for a woman to slap a rude man. I’m guessing the Warhorn people would be fine with that.

    Slap her back, hard.

  47. feministhater says:

    There are many of us who read scripture and see that God has given us responsibility(as fathers and husbands) and modern theological teaching has taken away any authority. So what do we do? We need a practical, scriptural solution to the problem of “What do I do with a wife who won’t follow/submit?” Is my only option to suffer silently for the rest of our marriage? Do I pray for “until death do us part?” WHAT DO I DO?

    You can fall on your sword like a good, little churchian cuck or you can walk away. Those are your options.

    There are no other solutions. Wives have the power now, that includes all the Christian husbands who pretend they lead their families. You don’t. At the end of the day, she can veto any damn decision you make. You cannot deny this. It is the truth.

    If you do not have the authority to discipline a rebellious wife, sorry to say, you have zero authority, an empty suit if ever there was one.

    Nothing but empty suits.

  48. American says:

    @Patrick: Of course not. Human slavery was a worldwide practice in every civilization when the New Testament was authored. This is why we find the new covenant strongly discouraging the propagation of slavery (1 Timothy 1:10 – note: https://biblehub.com/greek/405.htm) while providing instruction for those finding themselves in it.

    And that instruction certainly does not include “spanking” grown men and women (as if they are children) or physically abusing them.

    And New Testament discipline of children is always in the context of love and communication, with restraint, toward developing better individuals. But people in rebellion against God like to take scripture out of context to feed the enmity and resentment they carry inside them toward their Creator.

  49. Adam says:

    Hi Dalrock,

    I’ve really enjoyed this series as I find that as writers our best arguments tend to come out when we are challenged by others in a fair discussion as this has been.

    I particularly liked this episode as it gets to the heart of women and their free agency to be held responsible for their own actions.

  50. The Other Scott says:

    @ Paul

    I do not find the idea of “punishing” my wife appealing, any more than I liked punishing my children. We are all under authority to someone and normally with authority comes the capacity to shape behaviour (both positively and negatively). I’m not advocating for corporal punishment for adults. I don’t really think its possible to punish someone who won’t submit.

    If things get worse, theoretically you could call in church leadership to deal with it

    LOL… I’m a church planting missionary. Theoretically, I AM church leadership. And don’t suggest the hierarchy of our missions organisation either. They got cucked while we were gone (picked a new leader of the organisation who, surprise, is an SJW female. Up until now leadership was only open to males. Guess what’s coming down the pipe…we are to “reevaluate qualifications for leadership”. Yeah, we are heading home in a couple of months. I’m done with this.

    @feministhater

    Yeah, uh thanks. While you are 100% correct, you are not real helpful, but I doubt that was your intention anyways.

  51. info says:

    @Nation Bruno
    You are doing good work. I commend you.

  52. info says:

    @The Other Scott
    Matthew 18:15-17
    ”15If your brother sins against you, go and confront him privately. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’c 17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, regard him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. ”

  53. info says:

    On Matthew 18:17
    Publican – See the notes at Matthew 5:47. Publicans were people of abandoned character, and the Jews would have no contact with them. The meaning of this is, cease to have religious contact with him, or to acknowledge him as a Christian brother. It does not mean that we should cease to show kindness to him and aid him in affliction or trial, for that is required toward all people; but it means that we should disown him as a Christian brother, and treat him as we do other people not connected with the church. This should not be done until all these steps are taken. This is the only way of kindness. This is the only way to preserve peace and purity in the church.”

    https://www.studylight.org/commentary/matthew/18-17.html

  54. info says:

    Let him be unto thee as an heathen man, and a publican. This is not a form of excommunication to be used among Christians, nor was there ever any such form among the Jews; nor could Heathens or publicans, especially such publicans as were Gentiles, be excommunicated, when they never were of the Jewish church.

    “A religious person indeed, that becomes a collector of taxes, they first said, is to be driven from the society; but they afterwards said, all the time that he is a tax gatherer, they drive him from the society; but when he goes out of his office, lo! he is as a religious personF26.’

    But one that never was of a religious society, could not be driven out of it. And besides, this is given, not as a rule to the church, but as advice to the offended person, how to behave towards the offender: after he has come under the cognizance, reproof, and censure of the church, he is to look upon him as the Jews did one that disregarded both private reproof by a man’s self, and that which was in the presence of one or two more, חבר פחות, “a worthless friend”, or neighbour; as a Gentile, with whom the Jews had neither religious nor civil conversation; and a “publican”, or as Munster’s Hebrew Gospel reads it, בעל עברה “a notorious sinner”, as a publican was accounted: hence such are often joined together, and with whom the Jews might not eat, nor keep any friendly and familiar acquaintance: and so such that have been privately admonished and publicly rebuked, without success, their company is to be shunned, and intimate friendship with them to be avoided. ”

    https://www.studylight.org/commentary/matthew/18-17.html

  55. The Other Scott says:

    @info

    Nice try but…I am in full argreement with following Matthew 18 for dispute resolutions. This particular case presents a problem. I don’t know a single other person in real life that agrees that my wife should submit to me. This means that among all the Christians I know not a single person gives more than lip service to this part of scripture. What a sad state of affairs.

  56. Jim says:

    feministhater says:
    You can fall on your sword like a good, little churchian cuck or you can walk away. Those are your options.

    There are no other solutions. Wives have the power now, that includes all the Christian husbands who pretend they lead their families. You don’t. At the end of the day, she can veto any damn decision you make. You cannot deny this. It is the truth.

    You bet FM. At this point it’s become abuse to even tell them no. And they have the full backing of a SWAT team and a cunt worshiping judge to enforce their will. Why is this so hard for guys to understand? Either they’re illiterate or just stubborn morons.

    If you do not have the authority to discipline a rebellious wife, sorry to say, you have zero authority, an empty suit if ever there was one.

    Nothing but empty suits.

    Yup. If you can’t enforce your authority then you don’t have any. It’s as simple as adding 2+2 but guys are just worthless cowards these days when it comes to cunts. Hell, forget even thinking about a good old fashion whipping, so many guys are such cowards that they’re afraid to even utter the word “no” to cunts. When these pussies stop thinking with their dick and start having enough self respect to at least start with the word “no” let me know. Until then nothing will change.

    If guys want to continue to just have zero self respect for themselves and instead want to worship women then fine think of it this way. The more we go down this worshiping silly little girls path the more you cause society to degenerate. In the end when it collapses think about what’s going to happen to women then. If guys are too pathetic to help even themselves then look at it that way at least.

  57. 7817 says:

    Dalrock was wise to ban discussion of marital corporal punishment from his blog.

    It’s a good comment policy.

  58. feministhater says:

    It’s hilarious to me that everyone here is so damned concerned about a spanking, yet doesn’t seem to get that the wife can punish the husband by using the force of the state, which will kill or imprison you if you don’t fucking comply… do you gents get this?

    Wives use the force of the state, to undermine your authority all the damn time. This force is far and away more brutish than a mere stupid spanking but lets get our jimmies in a tussle because we might upset the women folk… wouldn’t want them calling the Police, right Mr Leaders?!

  59. Jim says:

    feministhater says:
    February 16, 2019 at 8:53 am

    It’s hilarious to me that everyone here is so damned concerned about a spanking, yet doesn’t seem to get that the wife can punish the husband by using the force of the state, which will kill or imprison you if you don’t fucking comply… do you gents get this?

    Wives use the force of the state, to undermine your authority all the damn time. This force is far and away more brutish than a mere stupid spanking but lets get our jimmies in a tussle because we might upset the women folk… wouldn’t want them calling the Police, right Mr Leaders?!

    I know right? We live in a world of woman worshipers though FM. No cares if their fellow man is abused to the point of being chained up, locked up, beaten by police or some other indignity. All that matters to most guys is the Holy Vagina. That’s fine. When society is totally destroyed and the precious little ladies are getting a fate FAR worse don’t bitch about it to me. They will only have themselves to blame.

    For now, I’m starting at square one just trying to get the men of the west to say “NO”.
    Just start with that guys. Forget everything else for the moment. Is doing something so quick and simple really THAT hard? It is for guys whose validation only comes from vagina.

  60. Novaseeker says:

    @TOS —

    I don’t know a single other person in real life that agrees that my wife should submit to me. This means that among all the Christians I know not a single person gives more than lip service to this part of scripture. What a sad state of affairs.

    It’s because religion is “downstream from culture”, like politics is.

    Basically the cultural environment and context is primarily formative on almost all people other than the handful who personally decide to actively dissent from it, and take the measures in their own lives required to do so and make it stick. Most people — 99% — do not do that, and so the culture is the primary influence on their lives. This means that the culture and how it is formed people is determinative of how they view things like politics and religion — not just in the abstract, but in the concrete/pesonal, “in my own life”, way.

    This is just as much the case for Christians as it is for anyone else. Almost all Christians are also primarily formed by the culture, and accommodate their religiosity and religious understandings and practices, to the cultural formation rather than vice-versa. So you end up with pretty much all churches being filled with 99% of people who are culturally determined, and fit Christianity into that cultural mold rather than vice-versa. And, as we know, a large part of the current culture is a relentless, ubiquitous, overpowering egalitarian feminism. It’s one of the truly defining elements of contemporary culture — if you took someone from 1519 and dropped them into 2019, there are of course many, many things that would be shocking to them, but by far and away the most shocking things would relate to women — their status, freedom, independence, empowerment, sexual display and empowerment, and equality to men (or superiority) culturally, legally and so on. These are all central hallmarks of our culture, and almost all Christians imbibe them full swoop and have totally internalized them.

    What do they do, then, when confronted with the scripture that contradicts this? They find ways to evade, ignore, rationalize, twist and so on — because, again, the primary formation is the culture, and not the faith, so the faith must be made to fit the culture and not vice versa. In 2019, anyone who actually believes in male headship in marriage is very much a radical extremist (this is true, in cultural terms, whether we like that or not), and most Christians, even ones who consider themselves to be “conservative”, see it that way as well.

  61. Scott says:

    TOS-

    Its simple dude! All you have to do is be a super hot sexy hot alpha servant leader husband whose wife goes weak in the knees just looking at you. /sarcasm off

  62. Patrick says:

    Bunch of crypto-Marxist negative nellies here thinking the state is the source and summit of all authority as if human nature didn’t exist.

    “I do not find the idea of “punishing” my wife appealing, any more than I liked punishing my children. We are all under authority to someone and normally with authority comes the capacity to shape behaviour (both positively and negatively). I’m not advocating for corporal punishment for adults. I don’t really think its possible to punish someone who won’t submit.”

    There’s your problem. Because the fact is you can discipline and reason with unsubmissive women. You don’t want to, though, so whats the point of your woe is me tale?

  63. Oscar says:

    @ Scott

    I appreciate snark and sarcasm as much as anyone, but the truth is that on one has an answer to that question. What, exactly, does a Christian husband do with a rebellious, disrespectful, ungrateful, contentious wife?

    We know the church is absolutely no help, and will probably make things worse, so Matthew 18 won’t do any good.

    Divorce violates Christ’s teaching on marriage in Matthew 19.

    So, what’s the answer?

  64. freebird says:

    Quote copy-pasta from Captainsjournal dot com.

    I hate to do this, it is not what I want, but here we are.
    There are several dynamics going on including that the lead is a Spaniard. As a Christian Englishman, and of other British Isles decent, reborn in the image of Christ Jesus in the manner of the post Reformation, I will not be surrendering my birthright, of Christ and my ancestors, to a (redacted -ungood terms).

    And, I won’t be surrendering these Duties, as clearly enumerated in the Holy Bible, of defense before Holy God to any of those of my own history who have had their soul destroyed by the devil and their brain damaged by the State.

    The notion is an absurdity, to surrender weapons to one born of socialism since Constantine nationalized that Church, where a man stands as though he were Holy Christ, and now close to a billion socialist Spaniards who ancestrally don’t know of where or how a freeborn man gets his liberty, this shall not stand.

    If you claim Christ on the one hand and don’t understand Him, nor his Holy Word because your Churches, like those under Roman rule have been nationalized in American, this is your own fault that your God has been reduced to a ward of the State, a Church to which I cannot submit.

    You, siding with Government as you are, cancel our brotherhood and you must beseech our LORD to bring you out of this destruction, of this new American Romanism of the Evangelical Church.

    And I certainly won’t be apologizing to anybody for my Duty at arms. There is nothing wrong, and everything right about being a follower of our LORD Christ as a freeborn armed white man.

    There are historical, ancestral, and anthropological dynamics that will not die hard and if it means being of a Biblical understanding as to what a Nation really is, then so be it, Ere the Saxon began to hate.

    REFUSAL TO SUBMIT TO WHITE GENOCIDE= UNGOOD RACISST THOUGHT-CRIME
    US media; “Deny your God, deny your right to life”
    Women: “For a price,yes,we have no honor or loyalty”

  65. feministhater says:

    Bunch of crypto-Marxist negative nellies here thinking the state is the source and summit of all authority as if human nature didn’t exist.

    Don’t bitch then. Sort your own shit out. The state has the one source of authority it needs. The ability to enforce its decrees with deadly force. Do you have that with your wife?! Lol! No, you don’t even have the authority to stop her rebellion, thus the state has power over you, through its use of her.

    You’re a bone-fide, Capitalist, positive go-getter though; nothing can stand in your way. Bullets? Buh! Just walk right through them, they got nothing on you. Mr Man!

    Just be more alpha then, bro! That will sort out all your problems. No more bitching now, if your wife continues to rebel, you’ve obviously not man enough and deserve every ounce of shit coming your way.

  66. Scott says:

    Oscar, as much as I wish I knew, the bottom line is I HAVE to be sarcastic when responding because I lucked out. The story of my journey from being in a basically blue-pill tradcon marriage to what I have now is pretty harrowing and risky. But the risk paid off in my case in the context–and as a result of–many factors beyond my control. And that’s the truth.

    Yes, I took a risk when I shared what I came across with my wife. And it got pretty ugly for a while. Truthfully, there was a big risk to losing it all, and it did come up a few times.

    But that gets back to the “factors beyond my control” part which had to do with chemistry, her personality, my personality, etc.

    And as FH points out, the apparatus is still in place for her to destroy me if she wants, so we may simply be engaged in a role play. A man in this position can never REALLY know.

  67. freebird says:

    “what to do with a wife who will not follow/submit?”

    Moron.
    First mistake was the Slavery known as “Marriage.”

    YOU did this knowingly and willingly.
    No sympathy for YOU
    Moron

  68. seventiesjason says:

    Oh Oscar, that’s the guys fault…he should have “vetted” her better. Had amazing “frame” and just told her when he was dating her “I’m doing this. Want to follow? No….I’m leaving after I pump n dump you”

    That is the test right????? Why are you asking this? You and a select few here have perfect wives and lives….and if only the Betas like me……who didn’t sit in a desert and “protected” the USA from Osama Bin Laden actually were like you……there wouldn’t be a need at all.

    A man who has a rebellious wife should have read Rollo’s work, been and entrepaneur and been just Alpha and gone to all the workshops, training and classes………..a man with a rebellious wife and children. It must be his fault. He didn’t attend some workshop on the stsate of manhood. He should have learned Game at nine, bedded nines and tens, then gets “holy” over any other man……come on, have you not understood this???? The Bible? That’s for chumps and Alphas AFTER they get “holier” than thou and bedded and ruined a bunch of women

    You just have to be Alpha, and if your wife rebels? You the man obvioulsy were not “red pilled” enough. Come on………for all the bold statements here over the years about how women hate men, will submit when the man only IF an alpha, and attracted to frame and his ability to put her in line with his amazing swagger………….and she rebels?

    You failed. This is what I have seen here taught and demonstrated here for awhile.

  69. Patrick says:

    “Just be more alpha then, bro! That will sort out all your problems. No more bitching now, if your wife continues to rebel, you’ve obviously not man enough and deserve every ounce of shit coming your way.”

    Yes you’re right. We are helpless and hopeless and human nature doesn’t exist and natural law doesn’t exist and history doesnt exist and men and women aren’t made for each other and all that exists is the State of which each individual person is a single cell fully under the State’s control so don’t even think about anything else it’s hopeless, its hopeless.

  70. freebird says:

    Men are so weak these days.
    They get marital pussy once a year and that wipes out the 363 days of verbal and emotional abuse/manipulation.
    It’s true the cucks think with the small brain.

  71. freebird says:

    Hope is the first step on the road to Hell.

  72. Patrick says:

    “Hope is the first step on the road to Hell.”

    Ah, yes, one of St. Paul’s lesser known principles.

  73. Cane Caldo says:

    @seventiesjason

    Sometimes your comments irritate me nearly to the point that I want to throw insults. I think that would be a mistake though. Your comments are useful reminders of what our culture does to men and women who (under sane laws) would otherwise have had a fairly normal marriage. Instead you were disqualified for vague and shifting reasons.

    I’m assuming of course that you have been truthful and forthcoming.

  74. Warthog says:

    Interesting to see who I triggered by mentioning corporal punishment for slaves. @American and @Patrick, we still have slavery, we just changed the name to “prison” and made it worse. See the full text of the 13th amendment. It allows for slavery to the state as punishment for crimes.

    The bible only teaches three punishments for crimes – execution, public beating limited to 40 lashes, and restitution, which included being sold into private slavery if the offender could not pay restitution.

    Now you tell me which is worse, being sentenced to 10 years in a prison full of big strong homosexual men who are looking for a new bitch, or being beaten once, and then you go about your business as a free man.

    Which is worse, being sold into servitude to a family, who has to feed, shelter and clothe you, and where if you are married you still have conjugal rights and the ability to be a father to your children, OR being sentenced for 10 years in a prison full of big strong homosexual men, where you will be forced to work for a corporation making office furniture 8 hours a day without pay.

    Part of the reason I bring up slavery is that our squeamishness about that subject is related to our squeamishness about requiring women to submit to their husbands. The feminist egalitarianism began with the abolitionist egalitarianism. American slavery was unbiblical, but not because slavery is unbiblical.

    The Bible teaches a worldview where a family is a household of people with a covenant relationship as follows:
    Covenant Head – father, husband, master
    Wife – owes respect, submission and obedience to the head. Is owed love, food, raiment, and sexual relations.
    Minor Children – owe respect, submission, obedience, and work to the head. Are owed food, raiment, teaching and discipline. The head’s sanction is the rod.
    Indentured Servants – effectively an adult child with a contract limited to 7 years. Are owed food, raiment, and shelter. Owe work, obedience, respect to the head. Sanction is the rod.
    Bond servants – effectively an adult child with a lifelong contract. Are owed, food, raiment, and shelter. Owe work, obedience, respect to the head. May marry. Sanction is the rod.
    Children of servants and bond servants go free at the age of majority.

    This is the authority structure and covenant relationship taught consistently by the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. @Dalrock is right in pointing out that the modern church simply rejects what the Bible teaches about husbands and wives. But usually in the next verse the Bible also says for slaves to obey their masters. Our schizephrenia about slavery is the root of our schizophrenia about marriage. We are too squeamish, and cannot bear the thought of corporal punishment of anybody, or an authority relationship for anybody.

    But we are cool with prison, and major league baseball contracts.

  75. Expat Philo says:

    I was giving this guy the benefit of the doubt, we’ve all been in his shoes to some degree, but these questions are absurd. I would have replied to number 8 with a terse legalese reply about comments not reflecting my views and linked to the multitude of posts which touch upon the subject. 9 is simply irrelevant, even satan can speak the truth, misogyny is not a discrediting attribute nor is it apparent that it is unwarranted.

    Which is why Dalrock has the blog, and I am but a lowly commenter. Keep up the good work, and be prepared to have any holes mercilessly exploited in their podcast.

  76. Patrick says:

    Your covenant family thing was the original pyramid scheme, apparently. A male bond servant living out the biblical plan for marriage accor ding to your understanding (where he’s a master with indentured and bond servants of his own) must command them, I guess, to obey his master. It’s weird too because your covenant family idea has only been achievable by probably like 0.01 percent of all people in history who could afford a wife/wives, a bunch of kids, and a bunch of servants and slaves.

  77. Gunner Q says:

    Nathan: “Are my biases making me see misogyny (for example, in the wife spanking crowd) where I should see something else?”

    Yes. You should see the wife behaving so badly that her husband feels a need for desperate measures.

    The real misogynists don’t get married. Why would they sign up for lifetime loyalty to someone they categorically hate?

    Patrick @ 1:00 am:
    “Does anybody think it’s OK to own slaves let alone spank them?”

    Violence is bad but slavery is good. Exhibit A: alimony.

  78. Warthog says:

    @Patrick There will always be the rich and the poor. Legalized private servitude gives security to the poor and prestige and household to the wealthy. It’s a win win. The alternative is to have the welfare state running prisons and paying out food stamps to women who divorce their husbands.

  79. Oscar says:

    @ seventiesjason on February 16, 2019 at 10:11 am

    You and a select few here have perfect wives and lives

    You’re lying about me again, Jason. I’ve never once pretended to have a perfect wife, or a perfect life. Why do you feel the need to lie about me?

  80. Oscar says:

    @ Scott

    The way I wrote my comment made it seem like I was criticizing you, and that wasn’t my intention, so I apologize.

    I should have made it clear that the ones who deserve criticism are people like Nathan, who zero in on wife beating, as if there’s an epidemic of church-going, Christian wife beaters (spoiler alert, there isn’t), while completely ignoring the very real epidemic of rebellious, disrespectful, ungrateful, contentious Christian wives.

    I don’t expect you to have an answer. I do expect self-appointed “experts”, like the writers at Warhorn Media, to have an answer. But not only do they have zero answers, they refuse to even acknowledge the problem exists.

  81. Patrick says:

    @warthog
    That doesn’t change the fact that your understanding of covenant marriage doesn’t apply to like 99.99 percent of mankind through history.

  82. Zadok says:

    Maybe I’ll be surprised with Nathan, but I can’t imagine a guy that just posted a podcast on a Jane Austen novel being able to handle the biblical masculinity in Dalrock’s writing without getting the vapors.
    @TOS I agree with Paul’s advice except I would never ever involve church leadership. I’ll give a few ideas that have helped me.
    Start with the small things. If your wife won’t submit to small requests, she won’t follow you on more important issues either. The complementarian model of egalitarian marriage where the husband has the tie breaker does not work. Remove “I don’t know” and “I don’t care” from your vocabulary.Have an opinion on everything. Start making small, reasonable requests to your wife.
    Unfortunately, I’m not sure any husband has ever changed a rebellious wife by quoting scripture to her. I take seriously Eph. 5:25-27, but I have to be subtle about it. I try to paraphrase scripture and work it into conversations. I also try to praise my wife when she does something that models a biblical wife. Mockery and disdain work well too- not directed towards your wife, but at other people that exhibit some of the behavior that you are trying to correct.

  83. American says:

    Stringing together false assertions doesn’t result in a legitimate argument warthog. Though I was not raised a Christian, I became in my mid-twenties and my last master’s degrees is an M.Div. from a Church of Christ college. I can manage my way around the canon in its correct context. But I’ve noticed that you, on the other hand, are as destructive as a bull in a china closet with respect to that canon.

    Though I do not have the time to walk you through the ocean of fallacies which form your fallacious understanding of the Christian worldview (not to mention that I know you’ll never accept my correction), I’ll leave you with a single example of how far off the mark you really are for the benefit of other readers before I leave to clean tile grout before lifting weights.

    Fact: The most prevalent discipline of the new covenant in the New Testament is correction with Christian education [emphasis added]. That never even made your fallacious list. 2 Timothy 2:25-26 provides one example of the context and understanding context is of supreme importance to gain a correct understanding.

    For example, even the author of Hebrews 12:6 (who deliberately echoes Psalms not from literal Hebrew but rather the Greek Septuagint for reasons of exegesis in addition to expanding their audience) makes a slight change to the vowel-points for the common meaning of “even as a father to a son He is good to him” conveying the traditional Jewish theme in speaking “chastisements of love” in distinction from evil “chastisement”, or vindictive ones. This, being written in a historical context of the author being surrounded by a brutal anti-Christian pagan “discipline” wholly immersed in “evil chastisement.” Even school children in ancient Rome were routinely beaten by their teacher with a stick and schools had a policy of two slaves holding down a student and beating them with a leather whip… in an “evil chastisement” sense not with the restraint and parental love meant by the author of Hebrews.

  84. Patrick says:

    @warthog
    It occurs to me that what we have now is basically what you describe in terms of a ruling class of men with potentially multiple wives, kids, and employees and servants and provide food and shelter as long as people obey policy and jump through the hoops. At that high level public and private intermixes which is why basically all of our government rulers grew up in the same neighborhoods and went to the same small group of schools and gets special tax breaks while also paying the vast majority of taxes so forth. If prison is slavery then slavery still exists and the super wealthy never end up there.

  85. ray says:

    Nathan Alberson . . .

    https://warhornmedia.com/author/nalberson/

    . . . is Warhorn Media’s co-founder, creative director, and hotshot Warrior of God, ferocious of countenance and bright of sword, terrorizing the enemies of the Gynarchy. I mean, of the Church.

    Warhorn clearly is quite a corporation, what with books for sale, various media channels, conferences for booking, and a slew of directors, pastors, engineers, worship leaders, associates, creative directors, and who knows what all else. Very typical modern structure. Rather like traditional masonic practice, everybody has a grand title and various authorities. Masons get to dress up fancier, tho.

    Nathan began his effort with a weak attempt at doxing, then soothed his target and audience with a series of I’m-really-interested questions to drop your guards, then finished off with the crux of his interest: attempting to divide ‘n conquer with question #8 (successful). Question #9 isn’t really an interrogative, it’s an blanket accusation, cast in ‘how long have you beaten your wife?’ syntax. These are I Win, You Lose ‘questions’.

    Cowardly and dishonest. Who could have predicted?

    Scott — “And as FH points out, the apparatus is still in place for her to destroy me if she wants, so we may simply be engaged in a role play. A man in this position can never REALLY know.”

    That is correct; you live under her authority, enforced by the State primarily, but in reality, also by the ‘churches’. Not the Church — that’s something else. By the fem-colluding ‘churches’ like Whore Worn Media.

    Husbands are human beings, so some will be wicked, and do wickedly, and instead of exerting proper restrained authority over their wives, instead abuse them. Happens to kids, too. Welcome to the planet, snowflakes.

    In the Sixties, Team Woman and their emerging Feminist State made a grand and ongoing show of exposing such men, for purpose of stoking the backlash against boys, men, fatherhood, and masculinity that occurred in the fifty years subsequent. By the Eighties, the beginnings of the Feminist State were securely in place, and the foundation of that State was removal of ALL male authority from marriage, because Abuse. And abuse abuse abuse of poor oppressed women was ALL we heard for the succeeding fifty years, too.

    The Abortion Campaign was parallel, using the exact same tactics: ads and propaganda about frightened, shivering teenage girls, subjected to bloody — often FATAL — back-alley abortions with coat hangers. All because of those Evil, Evil Men and their Patriarchal authority.

    Now your wives, and your females in general, rule over you comprehensively. You either get in line — like the Bravehearts over at Whore Horn Media and the other ‘churches’ — or you will become the next target for accusations of wife-beating, misogyny, etc.

    Your females rule you, they command you, and if you fail of their authority even a small amount, one telephone call puts you in the mancages. You can deny it; you can say your princess would never do that; the reality is the reality. You remain free at her pleasure, and ONLY at her pleasure; the same extends generally to ANY female in the United Sisterhood of Amerika. She can take you down whenever she wants, even if you’re a complete stranger. The county jails eagerly welcome such men. It’s a business and it is VERY big.

    1 Corinthians 11 — “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man . . .”

    Christ has authority — including physical discipline authority — over men, and the man has the same authority over the woman. Christ disciplines the Church, including potential excommunication (extinguishment, as when churches are threatened in the Book of Revelation). As Christ is to the Church, man is to the woman. Man’s authority to discipline, including physically, is assumed by Christ and the Church — and indeed, this was an accepted authority by American society in the Fifties and early Sixties. Before satan’s Final Push began.

    Dalrock and others, perhaps fearing the poisoned bait of Nathan, reject physical control over the wife. While this position temporarily appeases the wolves (until the next attack), it leaves men, including Christian men, without ANY AUTHORITY over their wives. You can continue PRETENDING you have authority — as Christ DOES have REAL authority over the Church — but you are just pretending. The truth is, you are subject to her, and you do as she wills . . . or else.

    Having no authority, and worse, claiming none, dooms both the civil and religious structures to submission to females collectively, by increment. So having rejected the only actual authority you have — physical restraint — I’d like to hear how you expect to exercise authority over your wives, as Christ exercises over the Church? Or do you advocate the continued powerlessness of husbands/men living under gynarchic rule?

  86. Warthog says:

    @Patrick. “That doesn’t change the fact that your understanding of covenant marriage doesn’t apply to like 99.99 percent of mankind through history.”

    Sure it does. Every household does not require all the potential relationship types. A husband and wife with no children or servants is a covenant family, just as much as one with children, just as much as one with children and slaves. My only point was that in Biblical terms, the sanction of the family is the rod (spanking) for both children and slaves, who were basically adult dependents. The fact that you can spank your child doesn’t mean you do it without cause three times a day. As a child matures the need to spank them generally becomes rare. The same was probably true of master-slave relationships.

    @American My list included discipleship, so no, i did not exclude education. The rod can be wielded righteously or unrighteously. The fact that some fathers use it in error does not negate their authority to do so. It means they erred in the application of their authority.

    Contrary to your viewpoint, the Bible speaks positively of the use of the rod for correction, and states that this is an act of love.

    “He who spares his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him promptly.” — Proverbs 13:24

    And as I said before, the church’s problem with hierarchy in marriage is just a symptom of the church’s hatred of all hierarchy and authority relationship. The hissing about slavery perfectly illustrates this.

    At this juncture in history the bottom line is that the state has stripped family heads of any real authority. Marriage today has no backing in law, except for the wife to pillage her husband. The laws will not be reformed until the church reforms. Not sure if/when that is going to happen any time soon.

  87. Warthog says:

    The New Testament does not differ or depart from the family covenant relationships defined in the Old Testament. The legitimacy of the institution of bondslavery was completely assumed by Christ and the Apostles. Several of Christs parables are about master and servants, but none of them indicate any sin on the part of the master for having servants.

    The interesting thing as you read through the long list of New Testament passages dealing with slavery is that they give similar command to how Paul said a wife is to win her unbelieving husband – by submitting without a word.

    Of course as a culture we cannot demonize the master-slave relationship without also demonizing the husband-wife and parent-child relationships. All three are part and parcel of God-given authority relationships in the family.

    “Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father.” Galatians 4:1-2

    This is what I meant when I said that a slave is equivalent of an adult child. Here Paul makes the same point by saying a minor child has the same legal relationship as a slave – he is under authority.

    “A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master.” Matthew 10:24

    “Who are you to judge another’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand.” Romans 14:4

    “Bondservants, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Christ;” Ephesians 6:5

    “Bondservants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh, not with eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but in sincerity of heart, fearing God.” Colossians 3:22

    “Masters, give your bondservants what is just and fair, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven.” Colossians 4:1

    “And you, masters, do the same things to them, giving up threatening, knowing that your own Master also is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him.” Ephesians 6:9

    “Let as many bondservants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and His doctrine may not be blasphemed.” 1 Timothy 6:1

    “And those who have believing masters, let them not despise them because they are brethren, but rather serve them because those who are benefited are believers and beloved. Teach and exhort these things.” 1 Timothy 6:2

    “Therefore if anyone cleanses himself from the latter, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified and useful for the Master, prepared for every good work.” 2 Timothy 2:21

    “Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh.” 1 Peter 2:18

    “Exhort bondservants to be obedient to their own masters, to be well pleasing in all things, not answering back, 10 not [b]pilfering, but showing all good [c]fidelity, that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in all things.” Titus 2:9

  88. BillyS says:

    Oscar,

    A wife who is ongoing full open rebellion like we see throughout churches today has already effectively left the marriage. The divorce has already happened. It is just waiting until the man gets slammed with something else.

    That makes the situation much more difficult, but more flexible than it might seem. No many has to subject himself to continuous ongoing abuse to be faithful to the Scriptures. Some well known preachers did, but that still doesn’t make using them as a reason for modern commands to do the same appropriate.

    We try to build far too much doctrine on one question Jesus answered, missing the overall big picture. We become Pharisaical in our applications and make God’s word an enslaving thing. Marriage was made for man, not man for marriage, to paraphrase what Jesus said about the Sabbath.

  89. BillyS says:

    Funny Jason that you chastise me in another thread for not confronting my exwife and then you mock that idea here. Like talking out of both sides of your mouth much?

    Note that the red pill does have something to do with the failure of my marriage. I lost frame quite a bit when dealing with some huge frustrations along with finally getting fed up with her constant rebellion against almost anything I would do. She was subtle, but it was there.

    I couldn’t be alpha enough to fix it when I got slapped with divorce, but I wish I had been much more red pill before I married so I would have recognized the dangers (and ran far away). I might also have kept things going overall since I can be very effective when I set myself to it. Some of the red pill principles do work, even if some of the BS you note is a complete waste of time.

    I do wish you were more consistent, but that is like hoping my exwife will repent.

  90. BillyS says:

    Cane (talking about Jason),

    I’m assuming of course that you have been truthful and forthcoming.

    That is what I am unsure of. Jason sure jumped on my in another thread that I didn’t confront my exwife strongly enough; showing huge hypocrisy, really hard to see sarcasm or simply more idiocy.

  91. Patrick says:

    “My only point was that in Biblical terms, the sanction of the family is the rod (spanking) for both children and slaves, who were basically adult dependents.”

    That’s your motte. Your bailey is that we need to reinstitute slavery for the health of society (although we already in your view have a system of slavery and dependence). I don’t see any point to your argument at all. You appear to think it’s necessary to argue for a form of slavery that isnt slavery as everyone understands the term these days (ie American slavery which is wrong in your view) in order to argue that a wife needs to be obedient. Convoluted and unnecessary.

  92. Sharkly says:

    Dalrock may not allow us to talk about adult female corporal punishment much longer, so please read this. I believe I may be onto something.

    The way Satan’s lefty’s operate is by throwing out ridiculous demands far beyond what they expect, and then agreeing to bargain for a small portion of that, while really never genuinely giving anything lasting in the bargain. Like the “green new deal”. It is exactly true to form. Throw out a plan so ridiculous and ruinous that cuckservatives will be happy to settle for some small portion of it to appease the lefties, imagining that the lefties are capable of bargaining in good faith, and that momentary appeasement will somehow keep them appeased. Destroying our country is their food, and they ate our Godly customs for breakfast. They will no more stop pushing for their master’s depravity, than a person will agree to quit eating forever. Our bread is to do the will of our heavenly Father, and to live by and share His word. We should never attempt to appease Satan, the Father of their lies and deceptions. We gain absolutely nothing. We wrestle not against flesh and blood. We are at war with Satan and his minions evil bewitching and deception.

    Satan’s cunt worshipping minions infiltrated the churches with their deceptions. Chivalry is the prime example, and Dalrock is wise to keep pointing it out. The way they suppress us godly folks is by staking out some necessary component of our protective apparatus, and firstly making ridiculous accusations that it is meanspirited. But they keep throwing out the crazed dogma like it is acceptable and accepted. Eventually they try to pull the wool over our eyes, always claiming their side’s depravity is more popular than it really is, until they have enough militant crazies insisting that we unilaterally disarm our defenses or we will be labeled as hateful and meanies. Like dupes we have been falling for it over and over again.

    I will have to defer to Dalrock’s judgement that discussing marital physical punishment is a thread derailer, as I have not been at this long enough to know that. And I agree that Satan’s minions at Whorehorn Media, and elsewhere, will possibly use our acceptance of the concept to project meanspiritedness and abusiveness upon us, as that is their master’s mode of operation. However if we concede the battle and refuse to even discuss the matter for fear of seeming meanspirited, then we may have given up God’s way again to appease Satan’s howling banshees who are out sounding the Whorhorn against us.

    Here is some divine wisdom:

    Proverbs 26:3 A whip for the horse, a bridle for the ass, and a rod for the fool’s back. 4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

    Women can be fools too. Are they unworthy of Godly correction?
    Nathan and his ilk should not be answered with the same fear of women, and fear of disciplining women, that is his own folly, just to avoid offending against his Satanic accusations of meanspiritedness and misogyny, otherwise we concede that he is right therein and we become fools like unto him.

    On the contrary we should be shrewd as serpents, we should maintain that women should be physically punished for every little failure, all day, every day, and more sternly than with young children, since women should obey better than children, and then let the forces of ignorance of godly discipline, come back at us with why we should perhaps show some mercy while correcting a woman’s wrongdoing. We need to flip the frame. From us being abusive, to a frame where we are kindly providing the patriarchal discipline that women need, and “why are you manginas sounding your Whorhorn against God’s law and order?”.

    The ancients new by nature that women were created as “weaker vessels” and openly said that women were ‘generally-speaking’ weaker:
    1. Physically
    2. Constitutionally
    3. Rationally
    4. Emotionally

    Was not Adam, created by God, in His own image, stronger than the woman to overpower her, when the two ever struggled, so that the head, the image of God, our Head, be not defeated?

    1. Physically stronger to subdue her bodily.
    2. Constitutionally stronger to outlast her contentions and trifles.
    3. Rationally stronger to correct her of deception and gullibility.
    4. Emotionally stronger to remain levelheaded and focused on God in the midst of storms.

    Those cunt-worshipping manginas that cry out against any and all methods of disciplining a woman into Godly and righteous behavior, have cucked our generation and loosed women to go astray into idolatry by failing to reverence the image of God and instead worshipping themselves as goddesses. It is high time we took their advice and stepped up, and manned up and stuffed a sock in their Whorehorn. And boldly proclaim the sensibility of family discipline, and church discipline. God is the Father of all disciplinarians! He created hell for his adversaries. Glory to His name! Let us likewise insist on obedience to Godhead and Husband-headship and good order, in our homes and churches, as is fitting in Christ. And let us give no heed to the world’s silly forthcoming accusations of meanspiritedness. If we want to get the laws changed we have to start by fighting the ideological culture war. Don’t forget Satan’s Feminism is a supremacist ideology. They don’t want to be equal to men, who are the image of God. They want to supplant and usurp us completely and become goddesses while reducing us to pigs & monkeys. It’s on like Donkey Kong! But, be warned, the laws and apparatus are already weaponized against us. So don’t do anything foolish. We must first win their minds over, then their hearts. Stay safe. Protect yourselves. Don’t let the enemy make us throw down our guard and give up all discipline. Rest assured, they will not hesitate to discipline us while they have the upper hand.

  93. seventiesjason says:

    Cane

    Throwing insults, on Dalrocks page??? I call it out when I have to. From men like myself….the perpective is………a bunch of self-congrdultory men who know everything, and behave like a Henry Rollins stand-up-comedy-speaking-tour routine when someone disagrees with them:

    “You’re stupid / you’re a beta / a churchian / a tradcon / I didn’t mean it that way / suddenly quote scripture to make their own sin look like an honest meistake, while the sins of men like me…….well, I have to somehow earn the right to bask in all of your awesomeness”

    This is the perception. I know you will disageree because you all are so blinded my much of your own faults….but will waste a lot of time criticising the church………culture and guys like Nathan here who….depsite his faults has conducted an interview to the terms Dalrock agreed. Dalrock AGREED to the interview…….most of you are forgetting that being so “self rightious” that most of you are.

    And…….why must Dalrock go to these ‘chumps and chuchians’? If most of you actually you know…..followed the Bible instead of who said what in 1267 and wrote what about chivalry…..Vox Days opinion on women, what Roosh thinks, Rollo or what some lesbian dyslexic pastor does……

    Maybe he wouldn’t need to go to these outlets? Besides, men like Nathan, me, and countless ‘lesser betas’ due to genetcis and upbringing will never be able to change anyway……it seems like you are all shouting in a room about how correct you all are.

    Just one man’s opinion. Cane if you want to throw insults go ahead……at this point what difference will it make in my life? It’s just about over anyway

    Other than that……I love everyone of you

  94. seventiesjason says:

    Billy I am going by exactly what too many in here preach. Frame. Game. Courtly Love hijacked Christianity in 1355 or whatevre and then everything was okay until 1970 or thereabouts and women became brassy whores…..but all you have to do is frame, game, tease, treat her like dogsh*t and she will fall into line and lobve you like June Cleaver. SImple.

    Western women hate men…have heard that quoted on here more than a few times…except for the men who are married to good women…..the rest of you? You didn’t apply such and such teaching at this critical moment.

    Those who want to get married…..just be alpha, vet a wife and its gonna be great….and if she rebels….well, its your fault.

    Jumped on you hard, grow up. I put up with insults contsantly here because I don’t toe the line excatly and revere “the vagina” over the Bible

  95. Scott says:

    American

    OT

    For some reason I never noticed your CoC orientation.

    I grew up in it. Here’s how I got from there to orthodoxy.

    https://journeytoorthodoxy.com/2016/04/from-the-church-of-christ-to-the-orthodox-church-part-1/

  96. Warthog says:

    @Patrick “I don’t see any point to your argument at all. You appear to think it’s necessary to argue for a form of slavery that isnt slavery as everyone understands the term these days (ie American slavery which is wrong in your view) in order to argue that a wife needs to be obedient. Convoluted and unnecessary.”

    American society, including most of the Church, deeply hates God the Father and resents Him for being the father. Egalitarianism is the chief heresy of the past two centuries. Abolition and Feminism grew together because they sprouted from the same root of hatred of God’s authority. The first feminists were abolitionists and vice versa.

    You cannot treat one issue apart from the other. Either hierarchy in the family is an abomination, or it is a godly institution. Our society has rejected half the New Testament and invented a new class of man-made sins, among which are slavery, misogyny, racism, chauvinism, and sexism.

    We cannot repair and end the rebellion of women unless we end the rebellion of men, too. But I do not mean this as D. Wilson does. The existence of bondslavery meant that men also had the potential to find themselves in the inferior role in a family hierarchy. We all were in that role as children. If men can submit to authority, then women can be expected to submit to authority too. If men are not willing to submit to authority, the women sense that and they will not submit either.

    Feminists talk about marriage as slavery. They base their arguments against submission to the headship of the man on the grounds that slavery was an evil institution

    This is why we are not going to make any progress on defeating feminism until we repent for our own rebellion against God’s institution of all three authority relationships in the family: husband-wife, parent-child, master-slave. You cannot pick and choose only the parts you like.

  97. Warthog says:

    @Patrick, we don’t have to re-institute slavery, although prison is a worse and more abominable form of slavery than the American form that preceded it.

    All we need to do is accept the authority of the Word of God on the three authority relationships. If we can accept and say “Yes, I believe wives should obey their husbands, children should obey their parents, and slaves should obey their masters.”

    If you cannot say that, then you cannot be surprised when your wife refuses to say it either.

  98. Bee says:

    TOS, Scott, Oscar,

    “So, what’s the answer?”

    In our current culture about all we have is, Soft Dread.

    Does it work all the time? No Does it work for all men? No

    Does it work some of the time? Yes Can it be risky to implement? Yes

  99. BillyS says:

    Jason,

    You were the only one who said that. Quit trying to slam everyone by being a pain in the rear.

  100. BillyS says:

    We have slavery now, we just call it different things.

    Humans will always have some form of slavery until the Jesus rules on this earth, and some will even claim that will be slavery when it happens. (See the rebellion at the end of the Millennium.)
    Our modern society is completely hypocritical and too many Christians completely fail to see that, to our detriment.

  101. seventiesjason says:

    Your arrogance really raises an eyebrow Billy.

    Warthog….men repenting, on this page????? Christ will have to return first before any man here ever admits a wrong doing in the world or existence. I could feed 5000, and many would ask in the tone of a pharisee “well, you didn’t feed 5001” and if I ever walked on water “but you didn’t during a storm, so strawman on you….and what have you done lately”

    Confessing sin? No way! Only weak beta men do that!

  102. 7817 says:

    Several years ago there was a commenter (AquinasDad if memory serves) who stated that instead of Game, all the Christian man needs is Sophreneo, a greek word in the New Testament. Looking up this word and beginning to put my discovery into practice helped me as a man, and in turn helped my marriage.

    I disagree that Game is bad, or sinful, or unnecessary. However, becoming the owner of yourself is pretty helpful when dealing with a woman who doesn’t want to follow. If you are the owner of yourself, it is far less important whether your wife follows or not, because you are going to go and do what you need to do regardless of her, even if it means going without her, leaving her behind.

    Modern church acts like a wife can hold you hostage by refusing to follow, by using verses like the one which states that a man who doesn’t take care of his family has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

    The more I read the Bible, the more convinced I am that since God did not sin in allowing rebellious Israel to be defeated by Assyria and Babylon, a modern husband will not be sinning if he allows a non repentant rebellious wife to reap the fruit she has sown and withdraw all his support, affection, and protection from her.

  103. Dalrock says:

    @Warthog

    However, one reader we have in common does seem to advocate it, and I think Wilson’s presentation of marriage as a military unit helped lead my reader to that conclusion.

    Dalrock then quotes ME, asking the question whether men have the same sanction over their wife as they have over children and slaves. However, it was a question. I have not advocated wife spanking anywhere. It was an honest question, not advocacy. Please correct yourself @dalrock.

    And ironically, you never answered my question. Just like you bitch about D. Wilson never answering your questions. But you do quote me to the faggot Christian magazine as a proponent of wife beating. Go to hell, Dalrock.

    I did answer the question. From the OP:

    I don’t support marital corporal punishment. I don’t think it is needed, and I also don’t see it as consistent with the instructions to husbands in the NT.

    If I’m following you correctly, in your mind “Should we beat our wives?” is just an innocent question, one that you perhaps ask other men from time to time, as a way to provoke thoughtful conversation. I’m a bit incredulous, but I don’t really know you. Either way, now that I’ve answered it, why don’t you answer your own question. Do you think Christian husbands should beat their wives when they don’t obey?

  104. JRob says:

    https://itsgoodtobeaman.com/primer-on-how-to-lead-your-wife-2/

    Bnonn weighs in with a solution. Highlights:

    Complementarians love to say, “If he loved her like Jesus loves the church, she’d follow him.” This is anti-scriptural nonsense…

    …It is unscriptural to place the blame for the conduct of a wife squarely on the shoulders of her husband…

    …In the modern day, unfortunately, this authority is practicably curtailed by secular law to whatever degree the woman wishes.

  105. feministhater says:

    A quick summation.

    Who has authority in the marriage. The husband or the wife?

    What is a husband meant to do when a wife is rebellious and refuses to repent and follow? Well, if we had a Church that maintained Scripture, he would go to his Church leadership and they would help him maintain order in his household. Lo and behold, husbands are now routinely scolded if they ask the Church for such help, in fact they are brow beaten into submission.. it’s their fault after all for not being more alpha.

    Now, which party to the marriage gets direct help from the Church if they go and seek to maintain order in their home from Church Leadership? Which party has the ability to garner sympathy from the Church and government force to ensure they are adhered to?

    LOL! KO gentlemen.

    You have zero authority in your marriages, it is not acceptable to either Church or state. So sure, worry about a little spanking, it won’t mean shit in the end.

    Yes please, take the chance, get married, realise you adhere to her choices and not your own. Marriage has been turned on its head. She has all authority but no responsibility, you have no authority but bear all responsibility. Lead her where she wants to go or suffer the consequences, that is your choice in marriage. Nothing else.

  106. Oscar says:

    @ seventiesjason

    On February 16, 2019 at 10:11 am, you lied about me when you stated that…

    You and a select few here have perfect wives and lives

    I’ve never stated, implied, or pretended that I have a perfect wife, or a perfect life. I asked you; why do you feel the need to lie about me?

    Please answer the question.

  107. Paul says:

    @TSO Theoretically, I AM church leadership. And don’t suggest the hierarchy of our missions organisation either. They got cucked while we were gone (picked a new leader of the organisation who, surprise, is an SJW female. Up until now leadership was only open to males. Guess what’s coming down the pipe…we are to “reevaluate qualifications for leadership”. Yeah, we are heading home in a couple of months. I’m done with this.

    Well, if you’re church leadership, you could theoretically excommunicate your own wife…

    But yeah, many of us have noticed similar situations. I’m surprised how quick Christian churches and organizations who traditionally only allowed male pastors and/or elders, are now quickly converting to allow for full female leadership. Indeed, any concept of headship or submission seem alien to them, just as many parts of Scripture that talk about it. Many are not even able to formulate their own position, let alone defend it. Galatians 3:28 is very popular though, usually accompanied with a horrible exegesis.

  108. Paul says:

    @TSO I’m a church planting missionary.

    Just out of curiosity; do you plant churches as to be members of your own denomination? And do you appoint elders? What do you teach them about headship and submission?

  109. Scott says:

    Re: “Perfect lives”

    For what its worth, in my 47 years, I have learned that human suffering is ubiquitous. So much so that I would offer this small insight that I am convicted is universally true.

    Every single random person you see on the street has something in their lives that cause them, or is causing them tremendous pain. For a number of them, that pain is visible. Maybe they were in a horrible traumatic accident and they are stricken down into a wheelchair, or have a limp.

    Others still have something else. Maybe they have a psychological disorder. Maybe they are grief stricken by a family member’s illness. Maybe they are lonely or they have a bitchy wife at home who treats them like shit.

    Some of them were not brought up to handle such pain and adversity and they let everyone else feel their pain right along side them, whether we want to or not. Others are more gracious and magnanimous in their suffering, and press on to the finish line under pressure. Most of us though, are in the middle. Some days we manage to rise above it, and other days we take it out on everyone else.

    Regardless, on the occasions when I can remember this, (and that is a big “when”) it makes it easier to contextualize the kinds of things people say that maybe they shouldn’t–or that pull for very little empathy.

    No one has a perfect life. Not Oscar, not Jason, not me.

  110. ys says:

    SeventiesJason-
    Sorry for your troubles. For what it’s worth, I am sure some would say you are having a meltdown right now. That may be true,but you are either correct, or not. Meltdowns don’t measure correctness.
    This is an odd but always interesting blog. You have said that different commenters have said different things, that are all over the map. And you’re right. This is a gathering spot for a diversity of opinions and thoughts.
    For you, I do hope that you can find a good woman if that is your heart’s desire. If it is not, I hope that is plain to you too, and you can find peace from God, dong something else to advance His Kingdom. Because that’s what matters in the end.
    People object to your perfect wife, life, comments. I get their objection. But I get yours, too. So much complaning about women is done here that one could think that the happily married fellas found one in a million. I’d call the numbers lower than that, but I get your opinions.
    A fool’s errand will be trying to get anybody here to admit being wrong about anything. But don’t judge this place too harshly for that, that’s the internet, and life, in general.
    Hope your next weekend is better than this one.

  111. Patrick says:

    “This is why we are not going to make any progress on defeating feminism until we repent for our own rebellion against God’s institution of all three authority relationships in the family: husband-wife, parent-child, master-slave. You cannot pick and choose only the parts you like.”

    Who does the slave’s wife obey? Her husband or her master?

  112. Patrick says:

    “You have zero authority in your marriages, it is not acceptable to either Church or state.”

    You can only believe this as a helpless Marxist who thinks all good things from Big Brother. So I guess you fit pretty perfectly into Warthog’s slavery heuristic: your superiors have all authority and you have absolutely none in your view.

  113. earl says:

    What is a husband meant to do when a wife is rebellious and refuses to repent and follow?

    God had some pretty good examples of what to do when Israel did that.

    Separation (as in she leaves the house) until she shows repentance.

    I’m only pointing out how God did things…I get the Satanic Masonic state laws have other ideas.

  114. American says:

    @Scott: Thanks for the link, I’ve bookmarked it and will read it later. I know a few Serbs in the U.S. including one that’s in Serbia with Calvary Chapel as a life-long evangelist married to a Serbian with children that have dual citizenship.

    I’m not a member of the COC and part with them over their water baptism necessity for salvation theology and other points. But I did enjoy their church history classes with their emphasis on the American restoration movement and how that fit into the American experience. For a broader introduction to the topic, I recommend something along the lines of “The Churching of America, 1776-2005: Winners and Losers in Our Religious Economy” by Rodney Stark.

    @ray: Your posts are the most entertaining on the forum I dare say. Keep them coming.

  115. earl says:

    You have zero authority in your marriages,

    That’s not what God said.

    The upside down backwards world we have now is not how marriage was constructed. I don’t take what globohomos make as reality.

  116. Jed Mask says:

    Hello all…

    Wow this is a real hornets’ nest…

    Anyways, a have a few “thoughts” on these matters.

    Starting with @feministhater:

    You’re right about a lot of things in the current “state of affairs” concerning men & women, and men’s natural authority vs. women’s rebellion but like @TheOtherScott said, your sentiments through TRUTHFUL are NOT HELPFUL. You’re right but just plain “know-it-all negative” in the end.

    What’s your SOLUTIONS to these problems is what men like @TheOtherScott want to know.

    Now I don’t know everything myself and am still figuring things out by God’s Grace but here’s some thtings I’ve learned living in predominately rebellious female-led matriarchal households where the men (if any around) are supposedly “Christian” but live the HEATHEN LIFE.

    Here’s my thoughts on what a HUSBAND SHOULD DO IF HE’S DEALING WITH A REBELLIOUS, DISOBEDIENT WIFE WHO IS A PAIN IN THE BUTT TO HIM. Here goes:

    1. As a CHRISTIAN HUSBAND to your wife you are only to LOVE YOUR WIFE THE BEST YOU CAN with the Greatest Example of Christ Loving His Church. You love her, care for her, support her and protect her as your husbandly duties. You did this all DESPITE the fact your wife may be a total “she-devil” truly unworthy of your good-hearted acts of love and sincerity.

    …. But HERE’S THE THING though O Christian men:

    2. You still HOLD YOUR OWN PERSONAL FRAME as a MAN:

    In other words you let her know by your emotional and physical “distance” from her that she’s “crossed your personal boundaries” in DISRESPECTING YOU and it’s actually WRONG ON YOUR PART to allow YOURSELF to be her “emotional beatup doll”.

    If she says things like “let’s go to X and X place” together and she’s disrespected you as YOUR WIFE you can respond by saying “I’m not going with you. You’re not going to disrespect me and think I’m ‘okay’ with it. You go on your way but until we have “respect” I’m not ‘pretending all is well’.” or simply saying “No” or don’t say anything at all but let your “physical body” talk for you with you doing whatever you’re gonna do and she going on her way by herself.

    You’re not simply “distancing yourself” from your wife out of “angst” but just following YOUR FRAME as a husband and man and not letting your wife “browbeat” you as a human doormat.

    Also, if it gets bad enough when she disrespects you in public whenever you feel the moment is right just off and LEAVE HER in the presence of everyone if you have an “audience” watching and let the “attention” reflect back on her and deep down folks will know she ain’t “all that good” they ignorantly thought she was because you know the “real her”.

    Now, I’m saying this as a single, unmarried Christian man but if I was married in this societal climate I’m not the type to “put up with too much unreasonable crap from women” especially MY WIFE.

    I still love, respect, support, care for and protect my wife but I practice “distance” in my “frame” with her when she’s “out of line” in blatant disrespect towards the man she’s supposed to love and obey as well. I’d be sure to remind her of that in my own “ways” too. I won’t willingly be in her company and will do my best to STAY AWAY from her until she can come to me with a “better attitude” of respect and at least basic human decency. I won’t “play okay when it’s not okay with her”.

    Don’t “go with the flow” of a disobedient wife: be an OPPOSING stream against her rebellion.

    Like some commenters even said, and I could go further on this: Even God Himself spiritually called the Nation of Israel as “His Wife” but when “God’s Wife” Israel played the “Harlot” on Him, how did God respond to His Wife’s “Infidelities” lol?

    Yeah, God exercised PUNISHMENT in the form of CHASTISMENT against His Rebellious Wife Israel in the Old Testament.

    Now in “human relational terms” in terms of the Word of God it’s “un-Christlike” for a man to “hit a woman” physically but to physically “restrain”,”constrain” and physically guard and “defend” yourself against her if SHE IS ATTACKING YOU; you are in the right I’d say.

    Because the Bible emphasizes the sin of physical violence against ANY human-being; the Christian is on the side of “self-defense” without “personal offense” to “physically attack” another person.

    For instance, in the Garden of Gethsemane, Peter cut off one of the high priest’s servants with his sword but “halfway through” when Peter probably would have gone even further to defend Jesus in his assault even Jesus Himself “stepped in” and “restrained Peter” physically (as I imagined Him getting “in-between” the two men as it’s been portrayed in films) saying “put away your sword. The Cup that My Father gave Me. Shall I not drink it?”; so Jesus physically Himself “broke up a fight” between Peter and one of the high priest’s guards.

    … Probably need an “extra comment” for other “details” but what I’m saying is even though it’s “societally-up against you” as a husband to deal with a rebellious wife. You don’t have to “play along” like “you’re happy” with your bad treatment in your marriage.

    Worse comes to worst: You don’t have to be out in public with her. You don’t have to go to certain “social functions” with her as a “couple. You don’t even have to go to (her) church with her on some Sundays if her disrespect of you is THAT BAD at certain points; but you can go to another church as led by the Holy Spirit of God instead of just “staying home” on a Sunday if you really still want to go to church.

    If you have a “kids” in a family you might find it worth it to “suffer for your kids’ sake” and go to church as a “family” and “play along” like “it’s all good” in your marriage while you’re at church but ONLY BECAUSE OF THE KIDS. You don’t even have to do this “all the time” when the situation with wife is “bad enough”.

    In fact, if you a husband without kids with your wife, I imagine it’s easier to “pull off” not attending church with her. The only thing is the man must MAINTAIN HIS FRAME and not “give-in” to the “shaming” and ridiculing of people, family and friends who may misunderstand your “distant behavior” from your wife and why it seems things aren’t “good” between you both because it’s obviously not regardless of what they think. If you are a man who has family and friends “on your side” who understand the “real situation” you’re going on they won’t be on line to “shame you” and make you into the “villain” but if you don’t have family and friends who understand and support you that just goes to show they aren’t your “allies” but ENEMIES at heart if they can’t see all the turmoil you’re going on.

    If you a married husband with kids in a family with your wife you will have to make “personal sacrifices” for the sake of THE KIDS even though the wife is “acting up” and be one to “be the bigger person” for the good of all in the end; but be STRATEGIC.

    Whenever you sense opportunities in life to let your wife know you “don’t play” along with her rebelliousness you distance yourself and even “withdraw your support” from her depending on the situation.

    For instance she’s says “Let’s go to the park with the kids together” you COUNTER by saying, “No, let’s stay here at the house and do such-and such like watch a movie” or whatever, etc.

    Anything she “proposes” you do THE OPPOSITE. Yes, a fight of “tug-o-war” will ensue but sometimes these fights are necessary in the marriage.

    Marriage ain’t not “quick ‘n easy” dance” or “smooth sailing” all the way through but a very slow waltz and also sailing a small sailboat during a tempest of a sea storm.

    Marriage is SLOW with MANY BATTLES. It’s a WAR to the end. So “fight slowly”. That’s what I’d do and “adapt” depending on personal circumstances, situations and people.

    That’s why I ain’t married anytime soon if I do marry but above all the Lord has “different plans” for me I suppose…

    ~ Bro. Jed

  117. Scott says:

    American

    My masters thesis for seminary required a lot review of the history of the restoration and I do remember that book

    It is a distinctly American theological movement that’s for sure.

  118. Jed Mask says:

    Also, ALSO I got another point to make lol.

    I physically “hit” women at certain points in my life. Once I recall in one of my “college experiences” and my most latest bouts were “two incidents” on the personal level of family.

    First situation with family was a “rebellious female encounter” where I physically restrained the woman who attacked me and “bit me” on my hand. Ended with me “throwing the phone” down when she threatened to call the cops on me after I wrestled the phone out of her hands.

    I did no “punching” or “slapping” against the woman.

    After cops came a while later, since I didn’t choose to “flee the scene” lol even though that was a possibility for me at the time but didn’t feel it worth it overall.

    Second time is where I REALLY messed up though. It was with family. I got so “pissed off” with my female family member’s “trash-talk” against men in general but “personally against me” as well. I SNAPPED; it was like I was “possessed” with agitation of the Devil at once: I walked up to the woman and slapped her repeatedly upside the head because I was the only man in this room full of women at a hotel.

    It happened so quick I couldn’t even believe it but it did and after I stopped the woman proceeded to curse me out saying she’d have “shoot me” if she had her gun on her (which I believe she would in the “heat of the moment”).

    Me “still angry” and in the heat of the moment said my “comebacks” against her and I don’t even remember all that I’ve said but it wasn’t good but fuel to the fire.

    While the other female family stood in shocked disbelief and the female family member I struck made the call for the cops I made my “getaway” out of the hotel and down the elevator.

    As aI passed by the lobby area and bar room downstairs I sensed and saw the angry snarls and “looks” on the faces” of the men and women who must have “instinctively” heard the commotion of the fussing and cussing upstairs and assumed me to be the perpetrator.

    They didn’t stop me but just looked at my with anger and disgust it seems.

    I got a while away from the hotel before the cop met me at the park. If I was “really serious” I could have “prolonged” the inevitable for a good bit and have a police pursuit and all that craziness but that just wasn’t the best option for me at the time.

    Anyways, cop shows up at the park (it’s late at night) and here’s there to arrest me.

    I didn’t argue, resist or anything but stood mute and obedient and didn’t answer a word to the cop who arrested me to give him any potential “ammunition” to use against me later. This continued until I was completely brought over to the jailhouse.

    I spent over three weeks in jail and while I was there, the female family member I assaulted though “hurt” seemed to “forgive me” and be at peace with me instead of putting the law further on my black “ozz” lol and everybody was being like a personal cheerleader for me while I was behind bars lol.

    I know I was wrong and I’ve repented and done my best to do right ever since. And also while I was in jail I made good “camaraderie” with the guys in “the tank” as it’s called in the “culture” and was able to witness Christ to many people “inside”.

    It’s like the Lord used my “bad situation” for good in the end because I would most likely probably never, ever have gotten the opportunity otherwise to witness Jesus Christ to the inmates in that jail any other way at the time because I’m not the “trouble type” to actual end up in jail in the FIRST PLACE!

    It’s like these were VERY RARE circumstances I found myself both going to jail and my trouble ALWAYS had to do with A WOMAN INVOLVED!

    I don’t really think I would’ve gotten in any of this crap in the first place if my “issue” was with a man or if I was in the company of fellow men when I was in this “violence” with women.

    For guys, we know that if we “disrespect” a man at too far a level their is ALWAYS the REAL POSSIBILITY of physical violence being imposed on us from the man were “messing with”; that’s why we “be careful” towards each other.

    We know that even if we may “physically win” a fight against another man we realize the possibilities we may be seriously injured and/or also have to deal with police intervention if done in the open public.

    We men might “fight each other” in private so we don’t get “entangled with the legal system” for a quick fight not worth further trouble if we can control against it.

    And ultimately and ideally most men don’t want to get into a confrontation where they will physically “fight each other” if they won’t let their personal pride and anger get the best of their rational male minds because it’s really just “pointless” unless you’re “physically fighting” for a good reason like to protect self or someone and/or stopping a bad guy for criminal activity, etc.

    Reasons as those is why I really haven’t gotten into any “serious physical altercations” with other men because I do my personal best to avoid those situations as much as possible and I’m a “peaceable” person deep down that doesn’t want to inflict crude violence on other people. Let alone random “innocent” people…

    But as a young man going through life I still realize that as much as I “personally do” to “avoid violent confrontations” with other people sometimes those “violent encounters” FIND YOU and I have to decide how to “fight back” without being “physically violent” in offense but SELF-DEFENSE defending myself and potential other people around me without “adding to the violence”.

    I’ve never really “felt good” or “proud” about “hitting a woman” even if I felt “I was in the right” because of her bad behaviour so I do my best to “stay away” from “physically hitting” women in real harmful physical violence meant to seriously hurt and/or kill.

    I’ve always felt it as “personal weakness” to get in a “violent situation” with women in general as a MAN: men fight with other men NOT women is the natural “male mindset” because instinctively we men know we’re the “physically superior vessel” over the woman as GOD DESIGNED US SO…

    So if a crazy woman “comes at me” with a knife or gun and if I’m able in any shape or capacity to “put her down” I’ll try to avoid punching and striking her to “knock her out” but if she’s a danger to herself, me and the public somebody has to “put her down” before even more carnage unfolds.

    That’s why the police use such force to put down aggressors at times but sometimes they don’t “do it right” and it’s in the news as “police misconduct” because it is at times.

    Anyways, I’ll say it’s especially not right for a man to “hit a woman” at the end of the day because God has created her as the physically “weaker vessel” than man from man by the natural standard.

    And while it’s also equally not right for men to physically attack other men it’s completely more “socially-acceptable” for men to physically attack other men because it’s a “level playing field”.

    Here’s the natural “double-standard” distinctions in a general sense:

    1. Man hits man: okay.

    2. Woman hits man: okay.

    3. Man hits woman: NOT okay.

    Mr. Bill Burr humorously and truthfully drives home this point. I’m glad I was led to “discover” his video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rksKvZoUCPQ

    He makes really good common sense although the “swearing” and using the Lord’s Name in vain in his comedic bout isn’t right and should be “ignored”.

    ___________________

    Naturally most men already understand this “unspoken universal societal code” so it’s not a big issue most of the time.

    Notice I said “most men” because the men who don’t go by the “unspoken script” are usual the ones in the jails and prisons as my above “personal anecdote” alluded too.

    Well, hope this helps lol.

    ~ Bro. Jed

  119. American says:

    @Scott: Distinctly, acknowledged.

  120. seventiesjason says:

    ys

    if Gods Kingdom only matters in the end, and there is “no marriage in heaven” why the big ta-doo over it? Why even want it, pursue it, expect it, ruin it, deny it, run to or away from it? Why such a huge deal about it, and the “state” that its in today if it doesn’t matter and there is no marriage in heaven anyway?

    Why have I been lectured from a pudium, on podcast, in mens groups, places like this on how its “Gods plan for man” but “there is no marriage in heaven”. God so much want this for us, it’s a part of His plan……but if you are alone in life…..don’t worry you have Jesus so you are never alone. It’s enough. Always coming from the married man. The endeared man. The man who never had a problem getting a date. Getting sex. Getting respect. Getting anything. Someone, I have to swim further, take on more, learn more, do more, correct myself and do this with zero applause.

    It’s like a consoluation prize for anyone that just-wasn’t-good-enough or add whatever shortcoming these men had……but don’t worry, there is no marriage in heaven!

    God wants marriage but suddenly around 1970…….he changed his mind and decided that marriage could only happen if the man meets an unexpected list of expectations that seem to grow by the year that women added and it indeed has become an elitest institution…….the very thing many in the media, culture and Christian circles supoosedly are railing against….but are actually encouraging it.

    YS, sadly and reluctantly I have to accept that it’s OVER for me. I can’t accept it, and when I try to I am reminded daily of what I do not have. Couples on the street. Children. Dinners alone. Days without speaking a word. The silence. The silence is painful. Doing Kingdom work is unfulfilling. I endure. It makes zero impact and again…….everyone else’s KIngdom work seems to garner at least an equality as borthers in the Kingdom. It doesn’t with me. It just becomes “expected” I take on more. I stand up for myself, and I’m bitter. I say nothing, I’m letting people take advantage of me (and Christians are not supposed to be doing that anyway). My activities that I like no longer fulfill. My hobbies…..there is nothing left to really learn (modern architecture / design. Vinyl collection is pretty maxed out, I can speak Welsh fluently, and the conversations online are boring and always about how Welsh isn’t respected as a language. Yawn.)

    Call this a meltdown if you like. It isn’t. Prayer isn’t answered. Sleep has been full of razors and nightmares since my fathers passing in Sept. An older brother with Downs Syndrome who is rapidally declining in health…….no family left, or a few sporadic cousins and uncles on the east coast and in the UK……and yet…..and yet I still am expected to sit here and be content with God, while no bolts of lightening struck anyone down here for their sins. Yet the “consequences” of mine……the drugs, the drink…..I have to relive daily, and be reminded of this is who I was. There is no escape….well there is a way. Not a Christian one, but it is a way.

    Peace with God is for people who have something God likes, wants and needs from them. You got nothing? He doesn’t care about me. That I know.

  121. Warthog says:

    @Dalrock “Either way, now that I’ve answered it, why don’t you answer your own question. Do you think Christian husbands should beat their wives when they don’t obey?”

    The original question was about spanking not beating. No they should not beat up their wives ever under any paradigm. When we talk about beating a wife, the image is bruises and cuts on her face resulting from being hit with a fist. That is battery.

    In the current paradigm even spanking, which is corporal punishment careful not to cause injury, would result in a quick trip to jail. So, no I do not advocate that Christian husbands should spank their wives, either.

    If a legal paradigm existed that recognized the husbands authority to use the rod for discipline in his household, provided it avoids injury, I don’t have any problem with it. You spank your daughters when they are small, because they are sinners just like little boys. If you love them you will discipline them. As your children get older they require spanking less and less. Verbal reprimand carries more weight with them as they mature. If you had to spank your 17 year old son for something it would have to be horrendously bad, and it is also shameful.

    Women are usually responsive to verbal rebuke. But, if your wife was totally rebellious, as some women are, yes it might be justified. For example, a woman who throws temper tantrums, throws plates and punches, or like Tim Keller’s wife, smashes the china with a hammer, definitely *deserves* to be bent over the knee and spanked just like a 5 year old. A woman who acts like a spoiled violent child should be disciplined like one. That is where I would draw the line. But that is only possible in a country with laws that recognize that authority.

    “Do not withhold correction from a child,
    For if you beat him with a rod, he will not die.
    You shall beat him with a rod,
    And deliver his soul from hell.” – Proverbs 23:13-14

    “Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
    I will fear no evil;
    For You are with me;
    Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me.” – Psalm 23

    It is interesting that the Psalmist draws comfort from the Lord’s “rod and staff” which are used for correction. Women usually feel security in a firm but loving man who draws clear boundaries for them. If you love your wife, and she acts like a spoiled five year old child, you will correct her. If you hate her, just let her keep going down the path of destruction.

    In the currently powerless state of husbands, if you have a violent wife, you really don’t have much alternative other than watch her destroy herself and your family. You could file an assault complaint against her with the police, but that is more likely to backfire and go against you. So in the current environment, no men should not spank their wives, even if they deserve it.

  122. Warthog says:

    Just realized, “no men should not spank their wives” could be misinterpreted without the comma. I meant, “No. Men should not spank their wives, even if they deserve it.”

  123. BillyS says:

    Oscar,

    Jason is willfully ignorant, trolling or both. He knows I lost my wife to divorce, hence his hypocritical goading. My money is going on “troll” the longer this goes on. Anyone who wants to learn can do so here, even if he remained fully blue pill.

    Earl,

    The core Truth and walking that out are not always the same. A man can do nothing to enforce his leadership, as government and church leaders tell him repeatedly.

  124. BillyS says:

    Jason,

    I have it just as bad, perhaps worse.

    – I am a decade or two older than you are.
    – I raised several adopted children who all turned their back on me (I do have somewhat of a relationship with my son now, but that is not the same since he has another father).
    – I had a wife who was committed to Christ and His Word leave after almost 30 years.
    – Both my parents and other direct family are gone.
    – I am completely alone and don’t make friends easily.

    But do I post here and whine about it? No. I committed to serving Him over 40 years ago and He can do with my life as He sees fit. It definitely sucks, but that is not relevant. I will continue to serve Him even when my experience is inconsistent with what I see in His Word.

    It wouldn’t solve your problems (as I definitely know) but listening a bit more to many here would help you significantly.

    I would appreciate prayer from others. I need a good long term income source, personal drive and wisdom to apply it all.

  125. BillyS says:

    I should thank Jason though. He has shown me part of what I would likely have faced had I never met anyone. I am not sure I was better off having an unfaithful wife, but going completely without one would have been rough too.

  126. Oscar says:

    @ seventiesjason

    On February 16, 2019 at 10:11 am, you you stated that…

    You and a select few here have perfect wives and lives

    I never stated, implied, or pretended that I have a perfect wife, or a perfect life, and you can’t quote me as having ever written any such thing, which means you lied about me. Why do you feel the need to lie about me?

  127. Random Angeleno says:

    @jason: Read the Book of Job. He had it far worse than you ever did.

  128. American says:

    No one’s perfect. Every one of us has some personality disorderedness including yours truly. Most have it under control, some do not. I can handle both kinds as long as the latter aren’t actually evil (as in their words and actions [i.e. behavior] are not actually evil). Examples would be psychos, sociopaths, thieves, murderers, Democrats, RINOs, and other nefarious types ;).

  129. Sharkly says:

    @seventiesjason
    Peace with God is for people who have something God likes, wants and needs from them. You got nothing? He doesn’t care about me. That I know.

    Hopefully that was some sarcasm or a joke I’m not getting.

    I would also recommend that you read the book of Job. Everybody should. It has helped me when I was going through some rough times, and it contains a lot of wisdom. I find that I can relate to Job, even though my situation was not as bad as Job’s. I also like the story of Joseph. While Joseph was handsome and favored, it caused a lot of trouble for him, due to his brothers being envious of him, and Potiphar’s wife accusing him of attempted rape, when he refused to have sex with her. He wound up in prison charged with the very thing he refused to do.(having sex with his master’s wife)

    God has not forgotten about you. He is testing you.

    Ecclesiasticus Chapter 2
    1: My son, if thou come to serve the Lord, prepare thy soul for temptation.
    2: Set thy heart aright, and constantly endure, and make not haste in time of trouble.
    3: Cleave unto him, and depart not away, that thou mayest be increased at thy last end.
    4: Whatsoever is brought upon thee take cheerfully, and be patient when thou art changed to a low estate.
    5: For gold is tried in the fire, and acceptable men in the furnace of adversity.

  130. feministhater says:

    You can only believe this as a helpless Marxist who thinks all good things from Big Brother. So I guess you fit pretty perfectly into Warthog’s slavery heuristic: your superiors have all authority and you have absolutely none in your view.

    Name calling, that’s very original… LOL! No, I very much do not believe in Marxism, I want the state as far away from me as possible, hence I will not get married, for that is inviting the state into my house. My home, not theirs, not yours, mine. I take responsibility for my own life but that is the only responsibility I will take until I have authority over that which I’m meant to take responsibility for. If the state keeps sticking its unwarranted head into my business, whether that be commercial or relational, I will simply go GALT and will leave you fine gentlemen to pick up the slack. You wouldn’t want to be a Marxist like me, now would you?

    It’s amazing how you can call what is obviously an anti-Marxist message, that of Going Galt, and turn it into a Marxist one. What a douche move.

    You can deny the truth as long as you like. When you get married, your wife owns you through the power of the state. Your wife has the authority, she can detonate any time she likes and collect her 30 pieces of silver. Denying this reality is stupid, it’s there in black and white. Right there, in front of your face.

    I wouldn’t spank a female, not because I think it’s unwarranted, but because it is illegal and will land me in jail. The same reason I will not get married. The marriage I believe in is now illegal. Biblical Marriage is illegal. This is the point all you gentlemen and Nathan miss.

    When he brought up spanking, he also brought in headship, and that is considered abuse, just like spanking or disciplining your wife. All the same. Should a husband spank his wife to achieve order in his household? I would say that’s none of my business, he must do what is required to achieve order. If that’s what it takes to stop divorce, rebellion and destruction of society through single mother households…. I’m not going to stand in his way.

    That is all.

    You fine gentlemen keep struggling against what is firmly entrenched.

  131. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Jason, I know it’s no fun living alone. That’s why I rarely travel and never eat out. When I fly, I can’t help noticing all the couples and families. Hotel rooms are also depressing when you travel alone.

    Our world is geared for couple and families. I avoid the social events at my Catholic church because they’re all family oriented. I understand. For those with families and kids, such events are important.

    Perhaps if you found a creative outlet? Write a novel. (I’ve written several.) Or learn a musical instrument. You sound like a musical person. FWIW, women are attracted to musicians. But that’s not why I suggest it. I’ve found that when I’m depressed, I can lose myself in my writing, and then I’m no longer depressed. Creative expression is a form of therapy.

  132. info says:

    @feministhater.

    Were it not for the resurrection we have no hope. Christ has overcome the world. He sits at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

    Thats why we struggle and are salt and light. God hears our prayers and stands with the faithful.

    As the insitutional evil has entrenched itself it can be removed and will be removed one way or another.

    Since the above facts are true. Struggle against wickedness is never futile. For god will vindicate himself and the faithful.

  133. info says:

    As moses kept his hands raised until the defeat of the amalekites. So we must pray. Until victory is ours and the Lord’s.

  134. info says:

    This problem boils down the one thing. Are the rebellious women even saved?

    Because I think the failures of reform of the outside behavior is an indication of even deeper problems.

    A saved woman will inevitably repent. A damned woman will never repent neither will God discipline them as he disciplines those he loves.

  135. feministhater says:

    As the insitutional evil has entrenched itself it can be removed and will be removed one way or another.

    Since the above facts are true. Struggle against wickedness is never futile. For god will vindicate himself and the faithful.

    The war against evil is not to be won by placing oneself at the mercy of the tools of the enemy. Women and wives are now those tools. The lack of male authority within marriage is firmly entrenched. Both in law and in social mores. It’s a battle you can no longer win. It was fought and lost by Conservatards many years ago before either of us were probably born. Even Dalrock acknowledges this.

    I am but a single man, swimming against the tide, trying to keep my head above water. We are in survival mode. I’m not going to go and strap another load to my leg that drags me down even further. Modern marriage would be just such a weight, pulling me down further into the abyss.

    Just what in God’s holy name does a husband get these days? Responsibility, nagging, never ending shit tests, no sex; getting berated and torn down by the culture and church, told he’s to blame for everything. That family isn’t even his, it’s hers, it survives at her whim, yet he is the one with the responsibility for its upkeep… this is demented. It’s insanity. You want truth? There it is. You’re fighting to keep a institution alive that is by all known metrics, insanity.

    It’s so fascinating to me that Dalrock and others still continue to believe others care about their unwillingness to spank women, their devotion to their wives and family, to their very own detriment. They care not one whit about this gents, they use that knowledge to disarm you… “You don’t beat your wife, do you?” It’s all toying with you.

    Men have no power in marriage, why does anyone care whether you would spank your wife or not when she can turn your life and your children’s lives to absolute hell on earth by a mere phone call? It’s worrying about the scrap on your arm after your leg was blown off by a mine.

  136. Bee says:

    BillyS,

    “I would appreciate prayer from others. I need a good long term income source, personal drive and wisdom to apply it all.”

    I will pray for you.

  137. BillyS says:

    I appreciate it Bee. I thought of you when I posted that.

    Sharkly,

    God is not doing that to Jason, life and Jason are doing that to Jason. Job has lots of good lessons, but it isn’t that all bad things are tests from God. James writes that we are tempted/tested/tried when we face our own desires. That is what Jason faces and what I face.

    I have long realized what I face is nothing compared to Job as well. He also got back twice what he had before he started. Most people miss this.

    It bothers me when people blame God for life happening just as much as it would bother me if someone accused me of intentionally abusing my children (they have BTW). Focus on the right target. We live in a fallen sinful world. Bad stuff happens.

    It happens more often than it should because we have twisted the socio-sexual hierarchy, but it is still the result of sin, not God.

  138. Sharkly says:

    BillyS,
    Good point. I think we are in agreement.
    James 1:12 Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him. 13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. 15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

    You are right that we are not tempted by God, but by our own desires. However the temptation is trying for us, and depending on how we handle it, we are judged as either faithful or wicked. So, this life is a test from God, even though we are not tempted as a result of our godliness, but as a result of our ungodliness. Our temptation is not a result of God’s nature or willful intent, but a result of our fallen nature and God’s allowance for free will. It is quite theologically mind boggling how it can be both, not from God who created all things, and yet used by him for his purposes as though it was his intent that we face these trials.
    God reaps where He did not sow. Even though He uses something, doesn’t mean it was His perfect ideal. Even though He corrects us, doesn’t mean He is not delighted with the ones He corrects. Even though we are tempted sorely, does not mean we are not the apple of His eye. It is inscrutable and frustrating for us humans, I know.

    Proverbs 3:11 My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord; neither be weary of his correction: 12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

  139. seventiesjason says:

    “Or learn a musical instrument. You sound like a musical person. FWIW, women are attracted to musicians. But that’s not why I suggest it.

    Thanks RPL

    I play trumpet. Have since high school. Now, I am no Herb Alpert (my hero for pop trumpet) but have played in marching band in HS. College and grad school I was in the jazz ensamble and pep band at basketball games / lacrosse. In San Francisco I played with the community symphony and met a lot of noce people. In Fresno I was first chair with the local Salvation Army Corps band. I even sat in a few sessions / gigs with a local ska / reggae / two-tone band when their horn player got arrested. In fact teh band I sat in with opened for ‘Fishbone’ in Fresno, Merced, and Modesto. That was fun. What wasn’t fun?

    It’s 3AM, I want to go home…..the van is loaded, we were paid……missing two people???? Of course I have to be the grown up and “find” them and they are in the mens bathroom and hot women are giving them a blowjob while kneeling on a dank urine soaked floor. I of course was an “a-hole” for walking into a mens room with knocking first……..one of the guys getting this was married and the other already had a few kids and a live in girlfriend.

    Women like good looking musicians RPL.

    Sigh…..yes, I should read “Job” in this book called The Bible. You think? Read it a ton of times. None of us are Job……well, I take that back……you hot shots here think you are.

  140. earl says:

    Earl,

    The core Truth and walking that out are not always the same. A man can do nothing to enforce his leadership, as government and church leaders tell him repeatedly.

    Are government and church leaders…God? Were government and church the inventors of marriage?

  141. Patrick says:

    “You can deny the truth as long as you like. When you get married, your wife owns you through the power of the state.”

    Call it what you want, but you clearly believe the State is all that matters and that human nature, natural law, history and other aspects of reality are irrelevent. Ayn Rand didn’t believe in human nature, either, so it makes sense that you admire John Galt. IIRC he gets married to a pretty hardcore feminist.

  142. Patrick says:

    “The war against evil is not to be won by placing oneself at the mercy of the tools of the enemy. Women and wives are now those tools.”

    More marxism. Women are tools of the State. By the same reasoning men are tools of the State, including yourself. Since marriage and family is the only realistic way to oppose Marxism (which is why Marxism sets out to annihilate the Family) you’re aiding the enemy by railing against marriage and family.

  143. feministhater says:

    Call it what you want, but you clearly believe the State is all that matters and that human nature, natural law, history and other aspects of reality are irrelevent. Ayn Rand didn’t believe in human nature, either, so it makes sense that you admire John Galt. IIRC he gets married to a pretty hardcore feminist.

    This is all irrelevant. The laws as they stand are tailor made to make use of women’s human nature, duh… that’s why they work so well. The reality is the here and now. A husband does not have authority in his marriage.

    You damn well better believe that when she calls the cops, all that matters is the state. You have no power.

  144. feministhater says:

    Women are tools of the State. By the same reasoning men are tools of the State, including yourself.

    Yes, you are correct. We are all tools of the state. You pay taxes, which fuels the state.

    Women are tools because they are used to ensnare men and get them to produce more than they need to survive, thus increasing their tax output.

    Are you not paying attention?

  145. feministhater says:

    <Since marriage and family is the only realistic way to oppose Marxism

    You would think so but alas, it plays right into their hands. They played the family like a fiddle. You now produce their future foot soldiers, as you send your daughters and sons to university to be indoctrinated. Lol!

    They only way to defeat Marxism is to stamp it out for good. If you let it fester, it grows. Since it now infects the state, most universities, work places and media, it means the only way to defeat it is to completely collapse society.

    The state has no qualms killing, it gave women the right to kill babies, it taxes just about anything you do or enjoy. It controls most of your lives, from cradle to grave. More so if you’re married. You think you can go up against that? Nope. You will lose.

  146. Sharkly says:

    @JRob
    Perhaps we are having an effect on Bnonn. His last installment seems to be an improvement over some of his previous stuff, although he still claims ‘Red Pill = going too far’. Apparently, as long as some of our unsaved Red Pilled brethren go further than the scriptures, Bnonn is happy to say the lot of us are all too far gone.

    I made a, roughly four paragraph, comment about Bnonn’s teaching:
    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2019/02/04/bnonn-pastor-foster-and-the-power-of-women/#comment-30363
    “The book of Hosea and the story it tells destroys his Bnonnsense. (the B is silent)”
    Anyhow,(I hope this doesn’t come across as narcissistic, but…) His latest installment sounds like it contains a lot of elements that could be seen as a rebuttal to my pointing out his ignoring certain scriptures, apparently to blame men for almost everything.
    https://itsgoodtobeaman.com/primer-on-how-to-lead-your-wife-2/
    Some of the same weaknesses still exist however. Old habits die hard.
    Women do naturally want to follow men who know where they’re going. Their inclination is to fall in line behind a husband with a strong purpose. They are attracted to men with a mission, men with gravitas.
    If you take this sort of stuff to the extreme conclusion, then did God lack the direction and gravitas to lead Israel in a faithful walk, and does Christ lack a mission and the gravitas to keep the church following Him faithfully? I think Bnonn still does men and women a disservice by not hammering more directly on women for their unfaithfulness to God by being unfaithful to submit to their own husbands. Sure every man could in some way do better, but that is still no excuse for a generation of wicked whores to be welcomed in the churches without hardly a word that might be convicting.

    Most of it is pretty good, but the conclusion is still wishy-washy and sounds an unclear trumpet, especially for any women reading. Apparently your husband is just to be even more grave and rest upon God over your lack of submission, as opposed to give you any consequences.

    You must lead well, and especially develop the virtues required to have gravitas; to be the center that holds your family together in your orbit. If you do, you can have confidence that your wife will remain in that orbit. But leading well doesn’t guarantee her submission, any more than leading poorly guarantees her rebellion.

    This should be common sense; the only reason we spend time on it is because the expectations of both complementarians and red pill Christians have slipped aside into the ditches. The point is to commit yourself to the duties of leadership you are answerable for, and rest upon God for the duties of submission she is answerable for. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Sharkly’s grade for Bnonn’s latest installment is a “B”. Much improved, better than you average hireling, but still plenty of room for further improvement.

  147. Patrick says:

    “Yes, you are correct. We are all tools of the state. You pay taxes, which fuels the state.

    Women are tools because they are used to ensnare men and get them to produce more than they need to survive, thus increasing their tax output.

    Are you not paying attention?”

    Good we agree you’re a Marxist who thinks every individual is merely an extension of the State and that human nature is only relevant within your State-worship paradigm and not within God-ordained marriage. Big Brother is all that matters. If he is for you you’re unstoppable, if he’s against you you’re helpless. Nothing we do matters. No authority established by God is relevant next to Big Brother’s. It makes sense that a loyal servant of the State would go around trying to spread Big Brother’s propaganda.

  148. feministhater says:

    Oh yeah! Bring on that gravitas gentlemen! Lol! What a fucking joke!

  149. feministhater says:

    Patrick. We haven’t agreed on anything. Marxism actually has a meaning. I’m pointing out the reality, that doesn’t mean I’m supporting of it or agree with it. Merely pointing it out. Do you pay taxes? Does Dalrock pay taxes? Does family increase or decrease men’s production. Does it increase or decrease the tax base? All of these things are not in question. Marriage increases the tax base, it increases the control the state has over you. Deny it but the reality is there.

    All this revolves around the means of government garnering you for resources. Whether it is taxes, marriage, divorce, children, all are resources for government.

    No authority established by God is relevant next to Big Brother’s. It makes sense that a loyal servant of the State would go around trying to spread Big Brother’s propaganda.

    A loyal servant? Lol, you really are precious. I do everything in my power to remove myself from the state’s grasp. Marriage places you right inside the claws of government, right in the fucking bosom, matey.

    You get married and the state controls your life through the wishes of your wifey.

    I’m not Marxist, I don’t care about your labels. You’re mad because the truth is uncomfortable.

    Lol!

  150. feministhater says:

    Big Brother Propaganda? Lol! You’re funny! Those family courts are sure propaganda, that Duluth Model is sure propaganda, those jails are sure, fucking funny propaganda.. oh my, yep, don’t believe it at all, please I beg of you not to believe anything I say. Go ahead and pretend.

  151. Patrick says:

    Nothing you’ve said resembles reality. You’re a marxist who thinks the State is all-powerful (false) and nothing else, including God-ordained marriage and authority, natural law, human nature, matters or can stand against it (false). It’s anti-God, anti-reality, pro-Big Brother propaganda. So congratulations on being such a complete tool of the State that you apparently aren’t aware of when someone holds it right up to your face.

  152. feministhater says:

    Okay, show us how it is done. Go up against the state with God at your side. Do it. Show us how it is done.

  153. feministhater says:

    Abolish no fault divorce. Do it now.

  154. feministhater says:

    Abolish the family courts, this is easy for one such as yourself, with God at your side. Do it now.

  155. feministhater says:

    Strike down the Duluth Model, show us how it is done. God is there, right with you, ready and able. Come on and do it, do it now.

  156. feministhater says:

    Put your money where your mouth is.

  157. feministhater says:

    You’re a marxist who thinks the State is all-powerful..

    Never said anything of the sort. The state is merely more powerful than me. If I believe the state will fall in time, which I do, it is impossible for me to be a marxist who believes the state is all-powerful. You make no sense.

  158. Patrick says:

    More of the same propaganda.

  159. Patrick says:

    “One day the State will on MY side. Then I’LL be unstoppable! The State is all that matters!”

  160. feministhater says:

    …and nothing else, including God-ordained marriage and authority, natural law, human nature, matters or can stand against it (false). It’s anti-God, anti-reality, pro-Big Brother propaganda.

    So, how well has God-ordained marriage fared against the state? How well has natural law fared against the state, human nature… hm?? God-ordained marriage or Biblical Marriage, has been turned on its head, hallowed out, it just does not exist for most men. Sure, maybe you can try and pretend that you’ve found a girl who believes such but if things go south, there will be no one to help you, your marriage will be destroyed and you will suffer the fall out.

    How well Patrick? Authority? Stripped.. God-ordained marriage? A long forgotten dream.. Natural law? Circumvented and abused.. Human nature? Base instincts promoted, vices encouraged, the Spirit discouraged.. None have stood against the state, all have faltered, most have been completely corrupted. Do you live in some long forgotten forest?

  161. feministhater says:

    One day the State will on MY side. Then I’LL be unstoppable! The State is all that matters!

    If you say so…

  162. feministhater says:

    More of the same propaganda.

    So… you’re not going to show us how you can stand up against the state? What are you, scared?! It’s just the little state… Chicken? Cat got your tongue?

  163. Patrick says:

    “So, how well has God-ordained marriage fared against the state? How well has natural law fared against the state, human nature… hm?? God-ordained marriage or Biblical Marriage, has been turned on its head, hallowed out, it just does not exist for most men.”

    Since you’re now openly acknowledging what I’ve been saying about your awestruck worship of the State against which nothing else matters, I’m gonna head out.

  164. BillyS says:

    So Patrick, how would you keep your wife from blowing up your marriage? You are quick with the insults. I haven’t seen you offer any solutions that will work today.

    A woman holds all the cards now in the US. She can nuke any marriage and cause great lasting harm to a husband if she wants to do so. Please show how that is not correct if you disagree.

    Jason,

    Yeah, you are a special snowflake, different from everyone else. You probably shouldn’t waste any more time here since we don’t bow down to your special status. Maybe someplace else will do that. Quit wasting time here if you don’t get anything useful here.

  165. feministhater says:

    Since you’re now openly acknowledging what I’ve been saying about your awestruck worship of the State against which nothing else matters, I’m gonna head out.

    Haven’t acknowledged anything. That is the state of the things you gave to me that were to stand up against the state. They have failed or been corrupted. You have to come up with a new plan if you want to defeat the state. I’m trying to help you out here, shock you out of your complacency.

    Keep doing what you’re doing and you will fail. Try something new.

  166. BillyS says:

    Sharkly,

    We probably do agree. I find people blame God as either active or passive cause of their problems. I still can’t tell you why He doesn’t do some things in my life, such as helping me connect with others and taking away the desire for my exwife, but He is God and I am not. Trying to expect Him to act by completely human standards is foolish. Yet many do just that, even blaming Him for their problems. Some cloak it with religious language, but it is still an accusation at its root, no matter how “spiritual” they are.

    Even “allowing” your children to put their hands on a hot stove to let them learn to not do that would be considered abuse, but people blame God the same way. We live in a corrupt fallen world and sometimes we get to escape the corruption, sometimes not. We should quit blaming God and try to do what we can.

    Jason,

    You will be at great risk falling back into past behaviors if you don’t watch yourself. Hopefully you haven’t already hit that. That bondage would not be worth the release, even though it may seem appealing at times. You don’t listen to me though, but perhaps this can get through.

  167. BillyS says:

    Patrick,

    I guess you would have been accusing Christians who gave up their lives under the Roman persecutions as worshiping the State. We can only control ourselves, we can’t control government directly. We can pray of course, but that usually takes a long time to work out and has lots of pain along the way.

  168. feministhater says:

    Patrick, not even going to watch it. Try something new or you will fail.

  169. Jesus Rodriguez de la Torre says:

    There is a method I have on a few occasions employed to make my wife obey. I have threatened that I would talk to God about her disobedience and ask Him to do something about it. She has also threatened to do that with me on occasion. Because we fear God more than the state, or other people’s opinions, this has had good results in our marriage. Some 15 years ago we both wanted to get divorced, but neither of us dared tell God. We literally would dare one another to do it. At that point it was the sheer FEAR of God that kept us together. We are very happy now; she stopped overspending and I controlled my anger more. Given that each was too cowardly to disobey God, we each resolved to make it work.
    My wife was never spanked, but she still talks about the few times her earthly father gave her a stern look as terrifying. I thank that man who is now in Heaven for bringing her up properly in the fear and admonition of the Lord. It has made both our lives so much better.

  170. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    You don’t have to read Job to find people worse off than us. Some internet stories stick with me.

    I read one recently about a 2-year-old boy in Texas who had all four limbs amputated. his parents were glad his life was saved, but worried how he’d react once he realized how much his life had changed forever.

    I read another story about a Utah woman who had all four limbs amputated.

    I came across a book about a woman who had a rare form of macullar degeneration, and went blind at age 32.

    I came across an article about lion attacks in Africa, which had a photo of a man with no arms (lost to a lion) being bathed by his friend.

    A lot of us are going to grow old alone, but there are many people worse off than us.

  171. Pingback: February accumulation proves to be a little too much | ljubomir farms

  172. Kevin says:

    Of course some misogynists are attracted here.

    Fringe people who miss the mark always gravitate toward places less “extreme” than they are. Republican conventions attract people who want to demolish the federal governent. Democrats attract communists who want to send their opponents to camps. Pro-abortion rallies attract people who want to be allowed to kill … I guess with the norm now switching for far I will say 3 year olds. Pro-life attract people who think mastrubation kills millions of souls. I could go on forever.

    The point is that this is an obvious outcome of avenues of expression and differences of opinion in a complicated world. Extremes will always manifest. It is so frequently observed as to be trivial and trite.

    In a world of feminism and marriage by equality a website that has an alternative more traditional view will attract some that believe in physical means of enforcing obedience. Duh.

    So why ask the question? Guilt by association and to taunt some people to formerly express this view and then if the guest does not spend all his time denuancing then to report on this drama that they incited. As our host said – it’s just basically trolling.

  173. American says:

    @Scott: I read all five parts today. Loved it. You finally found your rightful place in Christian Western Civilization. I’ve broke bread with Orthodox Serbs here in California at social get-togethers due to my friendship with some of them. One of them graduated from West Point on an athletic scholarship and became an Army officer, one is in Serbia presently as an evangelist with Calvary Chapel, and another is a full-time apologist to religious cults like the Mormons. They all travel their own path within our shared Christian worldview. Objective truth is what it is but fortunately God’s grace makes it possible for His church to have a big tent so it can hold a lot of people :). Which I’m grateful for as that made it possible for someone like myself to be part of Christ’s eternal kingdom. Peace.

  174. Paul says:

    @Jason

    “For though we live in the flesh, we do not wage war according to the flesh. The weapons of our warfare are not the weapons of the world. Instead, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We tear down arguments, and every presumption set up against the knowledge of God; and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.”

    Take captive your every thought and make it obedient to Christ.

  175. Keith says:

    Dalrock I think I would do more good just praying for BillyS than adding a comment

  176. Scott says:

    American

    A person who identifies as ethnically Serb and evangelical is a unicorn indeed. About 85-90% of the worlds Serbs self identify as Orthidox.

    It’s one of the things the “free” countries of the west don’t get about clannish eastern ethnicities. And Serbs are even moreso this way because of the Slava, which is how families perpetuate their story. It is embedded within Serbian Orthodoxy. I’d be curious to know if those guys attend Slava and if it’s awkward.

    Glad you liked the story. It made me feel whole after years of wondering why.

  177. BillyS says:

    Keith,

    ???

    While I need prayer, I will get through it. I have gotten through plenty in all my life and I will get through this until I get to see my Lord face-to-face.

  178. Herumsitzer says:

    Jason, I’ve been reading your cumulative autobiography in various places on the internet for around ten years, and I’ve always liked you. You seem more troubled recently than I’ve ever seen, and I’m very sorry to see you so unhappy.

    You’re the least likely incel in the world, in that you had interests and skills that took you outside yourself, you had no trouble leaving the house and talking to people, you took pride in your grooming and style. It’s a pity that those enthusiasms have dried up at the moment, but it’s understandable for things that worked last year as consolations or substitutes not to work this year.

    You once told a story about a girl you knew when you were tending bar, and when the subject came up about your not having a girlfriend, she didn’t patronize you (“why can’t I ever find a boyfriend like you”) or try to give you dating advice. She just said something along the lines of that she liked you, she didn’t know why things hadn’t worked out for you, and she hoped you would find happiness.

    You’re a complex guy and it’s hard to pay you a compliment or give you encouragement, but I remember your saying that you took some comfort from what the girl said. So whatever it was the girl said, that’s what I say too.

  179. info says:

    @Feministhater
    ”The war against evil is not to be won by placing oneself at the mercy of the tools of the enemy.”

    Exactly. I know you do not believe in God. But I believe that the reason that this evil has happened is because the West is spiritually rotten. It would need a true revival and acts of God to overcome our present situation.

    I refuse to be defeatist.

  180. info says:

    @Jed Mask

    ”So if a crazy woman “comes at me” with a knife or gun and if I’m able in any shape or capacity to “put her down” I’ll try to avoid punching and striking her to “knock her out” but if she’s a danger to herself, me and the public somebody has to “put her down” before even more carnage unfolds. ”

    I believe that at that point lethal violence is justified. A woman in that situation is the same threat as a man.

  181. blu says:

    Dalrock-

    I perceive that this discussion is a deep spiritual battle. Let the Lord guide you into all truth.

    [D: Thank you.]

  182. feeriker,

    I agree with those who think Nathan is setting Dalrock up for an ambush with this series of interviews.

    I never believed (not for an instant) that Nathan was operating in good faith. These sinister questions created for the sole PURPOSE of tying to frame a narrative, has proven this. Nathan, shame on you.

  183. PokeSalad says:

    Of course some misogynists are attracted here.

    Another time-honored rhetorical trick of the Left – attempting to deflect from the main argument by trying to make one defend/explain/excuse the views and motivations of every commenter on your blog, even though you have absolutely no obligation or presumption to do so.

    Anything that muddies the waters around the central argument benefits them.

  184. PokeSalad says:

    Jason,

    Yeah, you are a special snowflake, different from everyone else. You probably shouldn’t waste any more time here since we don’t bow down to your special status. Maybe someplace else will do that. Quit wasting time here if you don’t get anything useful here.

    Jason is a perfect example of an emotional-energy vampire…claiming another victim.

  185. ray says:

    American at 7:30 p.m. —

    Thank you. May God reward your encouragement.

  186. CSI says:

    What does “misogynist” even mean? The term is exceedingly vague, especially in the way its been used by feminists. Think women are anything less than perfect? Misogny!

  187. CSI says:

    @info
    I believe that at that point lethal violence is justified. A woman in that situation is the same threat as a man.

    A crazy woman with a knife is going to be very dangerous. Jed Mask may think he can just effortlessly walk up, pluck the knife from her hands (“let me have that before you hurt yourself little lady”) and then restrain her. But you can read reports of knife attacks to see how lethal they are even in the hands of much weaker opponents. And a crazy woman with a gun is going to be almost as dangerous as a crazy man with a gun. She’ll just be easier to disarm should she make a mistake.

  188. info says:

    @CSI
    Indeed. Even children become mortal threats when they get their hands on a firearm or knives or other lethal weapons.

  189. feministhater says:

    Exactly. I know you do not believe in God.

    I very much do believe in God. I don’t know where you saw me type otherwise..

  190. feministhater says:

    A lot of us are going to grow old alone, but there are many people worse off than us.

    Be thankful to the Lord. He has given you life. Praise him for that and live it.

    I once used to dislike my life, now I revel in the little things that life allows. Marriage wasn’t for me, that realisation was a weight lifted off my shoulders.

  191. okrahead says:

    CSI, re: “What is a misogynist?”: A misogynist is a man who hates women as much as they hate each other. Which I do not.

  192. Jim says:

    feministhater says:
    February 18, 2019 at 3:25 am

    Exactly. I know you do not believe in God.

    I very much do believe in God. I don’t know where you saw me type otherwise..

    I read your posts a few times and saw nothing that sounded Marxist. All you were doing is pointing out reality. It’s hilarious.

    The insults are comedic gold. First, “it’s you’re some kind of crypto-marxist” then it’s “you don’t believe in God”. So fall on your sword by playing a rigged game or there’s something wrong with you. Lol, ok. A few times I’ve gotten that stupidity from the right and guess what I get called from the nutcase left for slamming feminism, Marxism, this egalitarian bullshit and so on? Naaaazzzzziiiiiiiii! The comedy writes itself.

  193. feministhater says:

    Thanks Jim. Both the left and the right need men to keep doing what we do, otherwise it all fails. It all comes crashing down. Every last little thing. They know equality is bullshit. However, they cannot acknowledge it so they are all left with the one last means of trying to squeeze water from stone. Shaming.

    That is all they have left.

  194. thedeti says:

    Re seventiesjason:

    Sometimes the pain overtakes us. He’s got to get it out somewhere.

    My hope is he gets it out, picks himself up, dusts himself off, and gets back on the horse.

  195. Warthog says:

    I’ve been thinking about the MGTOW argument which a few Christian men seem to be buying into. Summarizing it, marriage laws have been rewritten to take away the husband’s authority, therefore it is a bad deal, therefore men should not get married until “somebody” changes things back to how they should be, which apparently is not expected to be in our lifetimes.

    I think this is an error for Christian men, not because the observed situation is not accurate. Yes, the laws have definitely decapitated men as heads of their own households.

    But, Christ calls us to do our duty. As men, we have been given a job, to be fruitful and multiply and take dominion over the Earth and subdue it for Christ. Due to the curse, our labor is frustrated. The current broken marriage laws are part of the curse, frustrating our mission as individual men.

    In the Scriptures there is such a high importance placed on the continuation of man’s line to the next generation, that the Law taught that a brother should marry the widow of his sonless brother, and raise up a child in his name, so that his “name will not be cut off”.

    MGTOW is auto-genocide. By choosing not to marry because the laws are not in our favor, MGTOW men cut off their own future. This seems similar though perhaps not as severe a women choosing to abort their children. It is cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face.

    A Christian man who finds a willing Christian woman can write his marriage vows to reflect the Scriptural arrangement. We have the right of private contract. Marriage is a contract, though no-fault divorce has made it so the courts don’t often honor that contract.

    The best we can do is to obey the Lord, work hard, and trust Him for the outcome. Yes, half of Christian women will divorce their husbands. However, God holds us as men responsible for our actions, not those of our wife. If we are called to suffer for doing what is right, then we should be willing to suffer. We cannot guarantee a perfect outcome for anything we do in life. Everything is risky.

    This is not a “man up” argument. A Christian man should not enter into a marriage covenant with a woman who rejects the terms of the covenant. This is why it would be important to write the Scripture directly into your vows, and save it in the form of a marriage contract or prenup. Make sure that in your marriage ceremony the bride must swear to honor and obey you as her head, and the head of the family. Write the vows to be as offensive to feminists as possible, because the purpose is to bring that rebellion in her heart to light BEFORE you get shackled.

    Many women who take such vows will later break them. But, fear of that possibility should not dissuade Christian men from marrying. It is our role to do our duty. If your spouse refuses to do her duty, and the church and state refuse to hold her accountable for it, shit happens. There are 1,000 ways to get shafted in life and marriage is definitely about 200 of them. But, that is a risk we were born to take.

    Just because the playing field is stacked against us does not mean that men should quit the game.

    Virtually all of the red pill literature focuses on the deceptive ways of women. There is almost no study or discussion of the 25% of women who are faithful, who endure until the end even in the face of great hardship. These are the woman that preserve their virginity until marriage, and remain faithful in marriage until death do them part. There have been cases of men who fell into a coma, and his devoted wife cared for him for decades. Men who came back from war as an invalid, and his wife cared for him until his death.

    By ignoring the minority of women who walk according to their Christian calling, the red pill literature makes the game look unwinnable. But there are many couples who do have lasting good marriages, and it is not because the man was an elite alpha, but because both partners were committed to dying to themselves, serving their spouse, and honoring their marriage vows until death.

    Let’s talk about those women. How do you spot a woman like that while she is still single?

  196. Scott says:

    Warthog

    The lines of effort for exactly that sort of thing would be longitudinal, and would have to start with parents who are raising kids like that to know about/meet and prefersably live near each other.

    Their goals would have to be the same vis a vis marriages.

    Because they are so few and far between, they would have to be willing to travel great distances to at least put their kids in proximity to each other.

    A significant number of people with small children would have to perceive the problem as a cvilizational emergency. But they like their stuff, their “pastors”, their denominations, their careers, their internet, and on and on.

    They are enjoying the decline, just like the MGTOWS.

  197. feministhater says:

    Virtually all of the red pill literature focuses on the deceptive ways of women. There is almost no study or discussion of the 25% of women who are faithful, who endure until the end even in the face of great hardship. These are the woman that preserve their virginity until marriage, and remain faithful in marriage until death do them part. There have been cases of men who fell into a coma, and his devoted wife cared for him for decades. Men who came back from war as an invalid, and his wife cared for him until his death.

    Your argument is invalid. Nobody bases a decision as big as marriage on a 75% failure rate. We’ve talked about this same shit since 2010 on this blog. Nothing you think of will be of great importance. All you discussed has be hashed out before and rehashed endlessly, over and over again, like giant concentric circles, seemingly without end.

    MGTOW breaks the endlessness of that conversation and provides the out men so desperately need. Listen bud. If there are 25% good women, then that means there are 75% bad women. That means 75% of men are in the shitter, it is better for you that they go MGTOW.

    Many women who take such vows will later break them. But, fear of that possibility should not dissuade Christian men from marrying. It is our role to do our duty.

    No fuck off, that is a ‘man up’ argument.. Do you hear yourself??! Are you spastic? “Oohhh, it’s not a ‘man up’ argument guys but hey man, it’s like your duty to fall on that sword so, like, whenever you’re ready…. ”

    A Christian man who finds a willing Christian woman can write his marriage vows to reflect the Scriptural arrangement. We have the right of private contract. Marriage is a contract, though no-fault divorce has made it so the courts don’t often honor that contract.

    The courts don’t honour any of it. Not a marriage contract, not a prenup, not a private contract, nothing. All get revoked upon entering that court room. When she goes to them and most will, she wins, you lose. The end. No sequel, no prequel, no redo, nothing. Allegations of abuse, of her and the children, will be used against you without evidence and you will have your rights abused, your children taken away, your house removed, half your assets seized, potentially half your future income, pensions and any retirement savings as well.

    You lose.

  198. Scott says:

    ….continued

    When Mychael and I tried to create such a community, no matter how open and self disclosing and normal we are we were met with

    Creepy
    Duggars
    Hypocrites (because we were both very worldly at one point in our pasts)
    You can’t control your kids
    You guys are Orthodox and that’s weird
    You’ll get sued

  199. feministhater says:

    Let’s talk about those women. How do you spot a woman like that while she is still single?

    Already done. It’s a crap shoot.

  200. feministhater says:

    A significant number of people with small children would have to perceive the problem as a cvilizational emergency. But they like their stuff, their “pastors”, their denominations, their careers, their internet, and on and on.

    Don’t worry, I noticed it too. The complacency is fully entrenched. They will laugh and ridicule you for stating the obvious. I’ve learned to let go.

    Nothing changes until the emergency is too tire to ignore.

  201. OKRickety says:

    Scott,

    “When Mychael and I tried to create such a community,….”

    I don’t think I have seen any details on what you had in mind (anything online about it?), so I’m not sure how I would have responded. However, it does sound similar to what I think the Amish do, and that would certainly be weird to most of the world. Did you plan to have all Orthodox families?

  202. Scott says:

    Orickety

    We had a site called “the courtship pledge”

    The purpose was intentionally broad (no specific faith tradition required) and the whole idea was to start a conversation about how to raise kids of the type Warthog writes of. And then “how do we meet each other in real life”

    It was open to a lot of ideas but most people crapped on it, because of the reasons I listed.

  203. Scott says:

    And now the children of all those parents are five years older and another generation of “christian” kids who are culturally “American” know nothing of what God wants for marriage is well under way!

  204. Scott says:

    The point is the current crop of potential husbands (the Donal Graemes and seventies Jason’s) is probably lost. This is sad and I hate thinking about it.

    The children who are way below marrying age might make it if we teach them that the “marriage market place” we have bequeathed they is totally fucked up.

    To apologize to an entire generation and try with everything we have to create something better for them.

  205. Oscar says:

    Hey Scott,

    I’m still on board, and I still have nine kids to marry off.

  206. thedeti says:

    An argument could be made that courtship as it’s currently understood wouldn’t work anyway, because it’s too premised on our current understanding of chivalry.

    Courtship requires the young man to go to a girl’s family and express his interest in her. In other words, he’s not to wait for her to show any interest in him. The man must “boldly state” his intentions and interest, without regard for anything she wants, her interest level in him, or anything else. And we know that that is not the best way for men to find women who are interested in them. It’s been discussed here, at least, that men have to find women who are attracted to /interested in them and then direct their efforts to those women. And so, the man picking out a woman he’s interested in without any indications of interest from her, is bound to fail.

  207. Scott says:

    To be fair “courtship” was the only word I could come up with at the time.

    I couldn’t think of shorthand for “let’s bring back some form of parental involvement in assisting our kids to find suitable mates.”

  208. BillyS says:

    Warthog,

    A major flaw in your argument is that it is impossible to tell which Christian woman will be faithful in the long term. Many claim to be very faithful and seem to be when they marry. Yet time and our modern culture can eat away anyone’s conviction, especially with the modern system undermining such convictions. Churches add to the troubles with their preaching, giving women completely unreasonable expectations for their husbands. (They claim to seek realism many times, but don’t allow any husband to really lead, whatever words they use.)

    I do agree that it is not correct for a man who claims to follow Christ to only focus on himself and his way, but that doesn’t mean he is obligated to jump into the non-marriage options we have today. Many will anyway, but it is a minefield, not a Godly thing.

    We do not have Biblical marriage today, even in churches. Going through a ceremony doesn’t make it a marriage if a woman can blow it up at her own whim. I don’t think you have a clue on that point.

  209. Warthog says:

    “A significant number of people with small children would have to perceive the problem as a civilizational emergency. But they like their stuff, their “pastors”, their denominations, their careers, their internet, and on and on.”

    There has been such a movement since the 1990s, called the courtship movement. A problem with it, as Doug Wilson was part of it, was pedestalizing women. But the fact that it had a significant following means that yes, there is a remnant out there who are interested in this question and open to trying radical solutions that seem insane to the mainstream culture.

    This movement taught young women that their responsibility to preserve their virginity until marriage, and many of them have been practicing this. The number of eligible virgins is 10X better today than it was in the early 1990s. But they tend to be hidden back in the woods, because they often do not go to college.

    I personally know hundreds of homeschooling families that raised their kids in that worldview, and a relatively high number of their children have married and continued in that worldview. There is definitely a “mortality rate” but it seems to be half or a third of what you see in the mainstream churches and culture.

    Usually the way these families find compatible spouses is through their local homeschooling community, as well as conferences and events. It isn’t perfect but it works an order of magnitude better than the alternative.

    @feministhater, you sound like a guy who says, “I failed, therefore success is impossible.” Rather than risk a 50% failure rate, you endorse men to choose a 100% failure rate, by opting out. This is exactly what the parable of the talents was about. Due to fear of loss the unfaithful servant buried his talent instead of risking it on an investment.

    Through most of history Christians have had to set themselves apart in order to create and maintain a culture that obeys God. There is nothing new here.

  210. OKRickety says:

    Warthog said: ‘This is not a “man up” argument. A Christian man should not enter into a marriage covenant with a woman who rejects the terms of the covenant. This is why it would be important to write the Scripture directly into your vows, and save it in the form of a marriage contract or prenup.’

    Like it or not, I think it is still a “man up” argument. However, I think it is different to the usual “man up” argument, in that Warthog is not proposing that marriage be undertaken regardless of the past behavior and present attitude of the woman. This approach seems good, but without the full and total cooperation of the leaders of the church you attend I simply do not think it is worth the risk.

    One way that a church could show their support would be to include expectations of marital behavior and possible divorce in a membership covenant. For example, supposing “sexual immorality” (Greek porneia) was the only acceptable reason for divorce (I know many disagree but this is an “example” so please bear with me), the membership covenant could state that divorces are allowed only for that reason and must be approved by the church leaders before proceeding to a state-legal divorce, and failure to get such approval would lead to “excommunication“.

    I believe that some churches do have membership covenants with something similar included. Has anyone been involved with such a church, and do they actually follow this practice?

    Note: I realize that state-legal divorces are not recognized by, for example, the Roman Catholic church but I don’t think they “excommunicate” someone who does so. Am I correct?

  211. Pingback: Warhorn interview: Does work like yours attract misogynists? | Dalrock

  212. Lost Patrol says:

    I couldn’t think of shorthand for “let’s bring back some form of parental involvement in assisting our kids to find suitable mates.”

    Something akin to this does still happen and I’ve lived long enough in one place to see it transpire. I think I remarked about it on American Dad, but the upshot of it is that in some churches the families are “guiding” the young people into marrying within the fold. There are sometimes multi-generational batches of these all at the same church.

    To the good, entire extended families get vested in keeping that marriage on the tracks, and they work towards it as a common goal. To the bad, what they arrange where I am is a very standard complimentarian package. It’s never stated as such, but it’s not far from an inverted creation story, where man was made to be a helper and companion to the woman while she carries out her calling from God.

    I should also point out that there are young men that don’t have that kind of inner circle backing, and they tend to fare less well with their counterpart church girls.

    I live in a weird world. I don’t think it’s all in my head, but how to be sure?

  213. feministhater says:

    Rather than risk a 50% failure rate, you endorse men to choose a 100% failure rate, by opting out.

    No, only a man who bases his worth on woman and marriage thinks like this. Pure blue pill thinking. It takes a man to realise when a risk is not worth taking. To walk away so he can live and fight another day.

    You endorse that men continue to walk into a meat grinder that destroys them. That isn’t just failure, it’s madness.

  214. Random Angeleno says:

    It is known that the mortality (oops I mean divorce) rate is lower when both partners go to church and take it seriously. For instance, the rate among church going Catholics is about 28%. I am one so that’s the number that matters to me. Definitely not a cause for celebration, but women who take this stuff seriously and don’t blow up their marriages do exist. I’m a lost cause as I’m too old to try again with children in mind, but I think about my sisters who are still with the men they married in their early 20’s so I know it can be done.

    Don’t have to be the downer FH is, but oh yes, it’s a lot harder now.

  215. Scott says:

    LP

    One of the topics discussed occasionally on that old site was basically “how red pill is this upbringing going to be” and similarly “how will you define a successful courtship?”

    It lent itself to working through many other tangential issues related to family meshing.

  216. feministhater says:

    I personally know hundreds of homeschooling families that raised their kids in that worldview, and a relatively high number of their children have married and continued in that worldview. There is definitely a “mortality rate” but it seems to be half or a third of what you see in the mainstream churches and culture.

    Then go there and help out. If there are places where what you say is still practiced, you should place your efforts there.

    Those places do not accept men like me. I’ve lived too long as a bachelor, I am too set in my ways. I cannot be molded to be the type of family man they expect. They would shun me as they should.

    There are millions of men like me. Society let us drift with no purpose. Lost. My Lord God allowed me to find MGTOW, to right my ship. The consequence of that though is my complete loss of appetite for women or marriage.

  217. feministhater says:

    It is known that the mortality (oops I mean divorce) rate is lower when both partners go to church and take it seriously.

    Is it just me or when this is said as something positive my mind always just thinks: “If both parties are serious and go to Church, why are there any divorces at all? Weren’t they serious?”

    Kek!

  218. Scott says:

    …but the prime consensus was one that is totally imbedded in the western, individualism of the world most of us inhabit.

    That ANY involvement by the parents or extended family, no matter how modest, or no matter if the children voluntarily include you in the decision is tantamount to violating their “right” to “fall in love” with whomever they want unhindered by outside considerations.

  219. OKRickety says:

    Scott said: ‘… tantamount to violating their “right” to “fall in love” with whomever they want unhindered by outside considerations.’

    Which, I think, brings us right back to the idea that romantic love is necessary for a happy marriage.

  220. OKRickety says:

    feministhater,

    “If both parties are serious and go to Church, why are there any divorces at all?”

    I understand your point (and I’d say it attests to the influence and power that Satan has in this world), but I suppose you personally would be glad to do twice as well as your peers at anything you value.

  221. thedeti says:

    All of this being said, a young man trying to win a young woman’s heart through “boldly stated” intentions and “heroism” like wining and dining her, ostentatious displays of provider bona fides, and showering her with niceness, will produce marriages that are doomed to failure.

  222. Scott says:

    Orickety

    Exactly right. In the end, most of the parents did not have the stomach to announce to their kids

    “We will not suppprt your marriage without some level of vetting on our part. We know you better than you know yourself and we WANT you to have a happy, successful, romantic story book marriage. We are the best resource you have to increase the odds of that happening. You can marry whomever you want because it’s a free country. But if you don’t involve us, don’t expect us to be thrilled, or pay for it, or whatever.”

    Especially parents of daughters. Such a conversation would be unchivalrous.

  223. Scott says:

    Thedeti

    That’s why, (you remember because you were part of the discussions) I always proposed a hybrid of sorts that allows for deep and powerful chemistry to be present first.

    Forcing marriage without that in this society is marital suicide (see my current marriage as a template).

  224. OKRickety says:

    Warthog,

    “The number of eligible virgins is 10X better today than it was in the early 1990s.”

    I have no idea how you came up with this claim. According to Nicholas H. Wolfinger (in Counterintuitive Trends in the Link Between Premarital Sex and Marital Stability), he provides the following statistics for “The Distribution of Women’s Premarital Sex Partners, by Marriage Cohort”:

    Virgins before marriage
    1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s
     21%   17%   14%   12%    5%

    I see no evidence that the number of virgins (“eligible” or not) is holding even, much less has increased 10 times. Perhaps it is true in Christian circles but I have not seen any evidence to suggest that, either.

  225. JRob says:

    Rather than risk a 50% failure rate, you endorse men to choose a 100% failure rate, by opting out.

    It’s a 100% success rate. Solitude and loneliness are two totally different states of being.

    It’s a man-up argument no matter what angle one takes. Singleness can be a gift. I’ve helped many men destroyed by the FI system.

  226. American says:

    @Scott: I do not know if any of them have ever attended Slava. They are all in non-Orthodox Catholic modern Christian churches… where I met them. They have extended family members that practice their faith within the Serbian Orthodox Church, following the practices within that institution.

  227. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    But, Christ calls us to do our duty. As men, we have been given a job, to be fruitful and multiply and take dominion over the Earth and subdue it for Christ.

    I don’t recall Christ ever saying “be fruitful and multiply.” Instead, he called the Apostles away from their families and said come follow me.

    The Catholic church has always recognized a legitimate role for single men and women. When I was in Catholic grammar school, I remember the nuns showing us a film strip, depicting four paths to a good Catholic life: 1. Clergy (priest, deacons, bishops), 2. monks, brothers, sisters, nuns, 3. Marriage, 4. Lifetime bachelors and spinsters (who must remain celibate).

    This was around 1970, give or take. It’s odd what one remembers. I never forgot that film strip.

    Also odd, at the time I remember thinking that bachelorhood was for me. I was prepubescent and didn’t see the appeal of girls. Ironic, that that turned out to be my lot in life, though I very much wanted to be married by my 20s.

  228. Oscar says:

    @ Red Pill Latecomer

    I don’t recall Christ ever saying “be fruitful and multiply.” Instead, he called the Apostles away from their families and said come follow me.

    The Apostle Peter was married. In fact, he and his wife were crucified next to each other. The Apostles Paul and Peter both wrote a lot about marriage. Obviously, a lot of the disciples they wrote to were married, otherwise, they wouldn’t have felt the need to write so much on the subject.

    None of that means we have to get married. But it does mean that the majority of believers are not “called away from their families”.

  229. Frank K says:

    We cannot guarantee a perfect outcome for anything we do in life. Everything is risky.

    But some things are riskier than others. Sure, that airliner you board could crash, but the probability is infinitesimally small (you are far more likely to crash your car driving to the airport) . If the risk of an airliner crashing was comparable (or even one just one tenth or even less) to that of a marriage failing, there is no way I would ever board an airliner.

  230. Warthog says:

    @RedPillLatecomer, the “be fruitful and multiply” command was given to Adam and Noah, and was not renounced or altered by Christ. Yes it is general. Some people are incapable of being fruitful and multiplying, yet there is still a place for them in the Kingdom of God. But being unmarried because you could never pull it off, or being childless for whatever biological reason out of your control is a far different thing from men going on strike and declaring “we will not marry at all because it is a bad deal”. Men going on strike looks to me like rebellion against God’s command. The heart of feminism seems to be women rebelling against their own role in “be fruitful and multiply” which is why abortion is their high sacrament. The answer to women going on strike is not for men to follow them in their sin. The answer is to do our best to take one woman and wash her in the water of the Word to obey God and stop rebelling. If you cannot find one who will agree to obey you then, fine. But that is not the same thing as going on strike against marriage.

  231. Warthog says:

    @OKRickety “I see no evidence that the number of virgins (“eligible” or not) is holding even, much less has increased 10 times. Perhaps it is true in Christian circles but I have not seen any evidence to suggest that, either.”

    I am referring to the churches predominantly made of homeschooling families. I was exaggerating by saying 10X, but I’ve been seeing women in these small remnant churches reaching their early 20s without having a boyfriend, and usually getting married without dating or cohabiting. My point was that in this subculture the anecdotal evidence I’ve seen is that there are more virgins now than I was aware of in PCA churches 25 years ago. I am from “generation X” and in college virgins were scarce as hens teeth, even among the Christian girls.

    The difficult thing about the homeschooling crowd is that they don’t tend to sign up for surveys. So they will not be seen in the national surveys. But it is a large hidden population, estimated at about 2 million kids by NHERI.

  232. BillyS says:

    Warthog,

    You may need to widen your search a bit. Our kids didn’t make it to or past adulthood before making bad choices, even though we homeschooled. It was better than it would have been if we had left them to government schools, but their base before being adopted didn’t help us keep them pure. I saw a lot of homeschooled kids who were not adopted but who had very bad behavior as well, unfortunately. It is not a panacea.

    The courtship movement was just dating with another label. I would support true structured marriage arrangements, but that is impossible to enforce today and other methods simply pretend to be it. A woman can still get enlightened and blow things up down the line.

    My exwife still says I was too controlling, didn’t accept her for who she was, controlled her abusively, etc. All this was because I expected her to live up to her word (take care of the home and make healthy meals for me among other things). That was just too much for her. And she went to church the entire time of our marriage and I believe she happily attends church now, not seeing any hypocrisy in it.

    You have too much trust in things and have not personally been touched nor opened your circle close enough to be touched. That is why you can remain naive.

    I do agree a civilization cannot be maintained with what we have now, but it will take a serious crash and backlash to fix things. A few homeschooling families are not capable of doing that, especially with so many homeschool dads being so cucked with their own daughters.

  233. feministhater says:

    Men going on strike looks to me like rebellion against God’s command.

    Only to you.

    His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.

    But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.

    For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others–and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

    Those that can accept that marriage is a bad bet are not bound like you are.

  234. BillyS says:

    7817,

    I have a hard time not holding a door explicitly for a woman, even though I know better. Those who don’t have a clue are definitely worse. Though I tend to hold a door for anyone behind me, so it is not only women, though that was very drilled into me and changing ingrained habits is challenging.

    Yer,

    I know IKDG is a nice strawman, but modern dating is horrid. It is built on courtship through and through. How can that be better? At least hookup culture admits the point, but that is not sustainable in the long run anymore than making men work hard to pay for women to slack is, though both are quite active right now.

  235. Paul says:

    @WH “be fruitful and multiply” command was given to Adam and Noah, and was not renounced or altered by Christ.

    First of all, it was not an individual, but a corporate command, and with 7 billion humans on the planet, I think we are doing pretty well. That it was not an individual command is also clear from the numerous cases where people did not have children, including Jesus Christ and the apostle Paul. He wrote that it is even BETTER not to marry (and hence have no children)

    As men, we have been given a job, to be fruitful and multiply and take dominion over the Earth and subdue it for Christ.

    No, we have not (see above).

    Our job is to “go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”

  236. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    FWIW, God commanded Jeremiah not to marry or have children.

    Jeremiah 16:1-4

    And the word of Yahweh came to me, saying, “You shall not take for yourself a wife, there shall not be for you sons and daughters in this place.” For thus says Yahweh concerning the sons and concerning the daughters born in this place, and concerning their mothers who gave birth to them, and concerning their fathers who fathered them in this land: “They will die by diseases, they will not be mourned, and they will not be buried. They will be as dung on the face of the earth. And they will perish by the sword and they will perish by the famine. And their dead bodies will become food for the birds[c] of the air, and for the wild animals of the earth.”

  237. MKT says:

    @Paul
    “No, we have not (see above).
    Our job is to “go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of t
    he Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”

    Unless you have a really distorted, Dispensational view of the Bible, the Great Commission simply furthers the Dominion Mandate in Genesis. It doesn’t repeal it. As for Paul advice on marriage, you need to pay particular attention to the context. He was writing shortly before the destruction of the Temple and mass persecution (A.D. 70). This is temporal advice; the Dominion Mandate isn’t.

    If you want evidence, look at how much of the developed world isn’t reproducing fast enough to support its older generations and fill jobs. We need to be the ones having more children; not the Muslims and welfare communities.

  238. Dale U says:

    @Warthog
    We have the right of private contract. Marriage is a contract, though no-fault divorce has made it so the courts don’t often honor that contract.

    You contradict yourself in that statement. Your ideal, that we have the right to make contracts that are enforced, is refuted by the reality that the courts will squash the contracts.
    You know the truth, as shown in the second half of your statement. So please go all the way, and accept that the first part of your statement is a wish, or desire, and not the truth/reality.

    the 25% of women who are faithful, who endure until the end even in the face of great hardship. These are the woman that preserve their virginity until marriage

    As shown by another commenter, your claim of 25% virgins is not reality. It may be your desire; see comments for the point above.

    you endorse men to choose a 100% failure rate, by opting out

    I got married. But as a married man, I still say your statement above is complete nonsense. Avoiding the satanic form of marriage currently available is a SUCCESS, not a failure.
    Also, read 1 Cor 7 and Matt 19, and report back. You can start by answering the question, “how many times do these passages of Scripture say it is BETTER to not marry?”

    Men going on strike looks to me like rebellion against God’s command.

    See the two passages noted above. You are wrong.

    @Oscar:
    I’m still on board, and I still have nine kids to marry off.

    Wow! May God bless your family!!!

    @Scott
    “But if you don’t involve us, don’t expect us to be thrilled, or pay for it… Especially parents of daughters.”

    It’s strange to me that I wanted and directed that me and my then-future wife must talk to her father and get his approval before proceeding further… and he did not seem to really care too much. Disappointing, but he had health issues too, so I should cut him some slack. Numbers 30 seems pretty clear that women are not to be abandoned to make decisions on their own however.

    I appreciated the effort you were making with your courtship pledge site, and know some others did too.

    And I appreciated your advise/info on Orthodoxy too; thanks! I do not remember if I told you, but we did manage to have the Orthodox wedding ceremony. We have been attending at that same church, while we have been living here in Europe.

    @MKT
    He was writing shortly before the destruction of the Temple and mass persecution (A.D. 70). This is temporal advice

    The Scripture passage itself does not say that these commands are limited to a certain time or people group. I strongly advise you to refrain from deciding that passages of Scripture do not apply to you, unless the words therein directly indicate this. This kind of willful ignoring of Scripture is the source of all kinds of problems. And is necessary to adhere to the beliefs of some “faith-traditions”, but that is another can of worms.

  239. BillyS says:

    Anyone who can’t figure that Adam and Noah faced a much different Earth population structure isn’t tall enough for this ride.

    Talk about idiocy gone to seed….

  240. MKT says:

    @Dale U
    “The Scripture passage itself does not say that these commands are limited to a certain time or people group. I strongly advise you to refrain from deciding that passages of Scripture do not apply to you, unless the words therein directly indicate this. This kind of willful ignoring of Scripture is the source of all kinds of problems. And is necessary to adhere to the beliefs of some “faith-traditions”, but that is another can of worms.”

    But Paul gets to decide that the Dominion Mandate no longer applies to him based on the current world population? As for Paul and other NT writers, there are clues as to what’s timeless and what’s temporal…but it takes a bit of work to decipher such things.
    https://biblicalhorizons.wordpress.com/2009/12/05/the-impending-distress-1-cor-725-40/

    1 Cor. 7:26 clearly says “Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are.” In short, there’s a LOT more evidence that Paul’s advice was driven by the current context than God’s command for mankind in Genesis.

  241. MKT says:

    Regarding “Paul” in my first sentence after the quote, I’m talking about the one posting here, not the Apostle.

  242. feeriker says:

    Are government and church leaders…God? Were government and church the inventors of marriage?

    Modern evangelical churchians, deluded by their perversion of Scripture, would answer in the affirmative to both.

    Patrick said:

    Good we agree you’re a Marxist who thinks every individual is merely an extension of the State and that human nature is only relevant within your State-worship paradigm and not within God-ordained marriage

    Oh, knock it off. You can’t be that dense. Being an involuntary tool of the State, under threat of lethal force does NOT automatically make one a “worshiper” of said State. One conforms under duress in order to survive. By your “logic,” a woman who is raped at gunpoint or knifepoint is her rapist’s lover. After all, she’s because having sex with him, so that MUST mean that she loves him.

  243. Oscar says:

    @ Dale U

    Thanks, brother.

  244. feeriker says:

    And now the children of all those parents are five years older and another generation of “christian” kids who are culturally “American” know nothing of what God wants for marriage is well under way!

    Proof positive or my assertion that 99.99999 out of every 100 American “Christians” are worldly nationalists who adopt a veneer of churchianity in order to make themselves feel redeemed while living completely worldly lives.

  245. feeriker says:

    Don’t have to be the downer FH is, but oh yes, it’s a lot harder now.

    FH can certainly speak for himself, but I don’t think he’s being a “downer” as much as a realist. The life he has chosen for himself is the inevitable result of conditions beyond his control and is the best possible option available for managing risk and avoiding the catastrophe that is all but inevitable given what our society has become. When “doing the right thing” as men have done since time immemorial, has become a man’s downfall, it only makes sense for him to mitigate the risk by doing something differently. No man is under any obligation to destroy himself, especially if doing so hastens the destruction of civilization itself.

    If we lived in a sane, godly world, FH wouldn’t be here, and neither would any of the rest of us because this site would have no reason to exist. FH and the rest of us would be too busy leading large godly families with our helpmeet wives.

  246. JRob says:

    Just being a “decent, hard-working guy” is Woman Off in this culture. FH is in fact a realist.

  247. Paul says:

    @MKT

    We clearly have different views here, so let’s get back to the data.

    the Great Commission simply furthers the Dominion Mandate in Genesis

    No it does not. First of all, it is nowhere called Dominion Mandate, but I guess you’re referring to Gen 1:28. Adam and Eve represent the whole of mankind, and as humans we are to rule the earth, which is more or less where we’re at currently.

    The Great Commission (Mat 28) is however of a totally different order; it is not speaking of the physical realm, but of the spiritual realm, procreating spiritual offspring, not physical offspring. That’s why the apostle Paul can call himself a father to many in his letters, although he was living a celibate life. In Galatians he quotes “because more are the children of the desolate woman than of her who has a husband”, to show the two different covenants of Sinai and of heavenly Jerusalem.

    But Paul gets to decide that the Dominion Mandate no longer applies to him based on the current world population?
    I never said that, I said it is being fulfilled already, and as Christians we have no obligation to procreate. Else Jesus Christ would have been sinning, He who was without sin, showing your error.

    As for Paul advice on marriage [..] He was writing shortly before the destruction of the Temple and mass persecution (A.D. 70). This is temporal advice

    First of all, if he was writing BEFORE the mass persecution, it would not really ring a bell BEFORE the event, wouldn’t it? There is no EXPLICIT timing mentioned in the NT of such an event. Second, I don’t think it was temporal, because then his other advice in the same chapter would have been temporal too. In that same chapter he gives instructions how married couples should behave, both in their physical affection, as well as with respect to divorce and remarriage. He even tells that it is not wrong for fathers to give their daughters into marriage. That is completely contradicting your premise that his commands were temporal. Oh, it is not Paul’s advice on marriage, but he actually includes commands.

    So I think your position is untenable because it contradicts the biblical data.

  248. MKT says:

    @Paul
    “Second, I don’t think it was temporal”

    I’ve already quoted v. 26 “Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are.” The context is clearly virgins deciding whether to marry or not. You can’t get much more temporal and context-dependent than that. And no one ever claimed that every single Christian has to marry/reproduce, or that Jesus was in sin for not doing so. That’s an inexplicable leap in logic.

    I find it a bit amazing you can’t (or refuse to) grasp this yet claim that Gen. 1:28 isn’t an ongoing command. Yes, we’re in a different situation than Adam and Eve were. But that doesn’t totally nullify the idea. According to your rationale, all Christians could remain single and childless from now to eternity. We could just let the Muslims and pagans have al the babies–and wouldn’t be sinning.

    Denying Gen. 1:28 is very popular among the SJW/population control/”progressive” Christian crowd. Let’s step back from what churchianity has taught us and deal with what the Bible actually says.

  249. Paul says:

    @MKT I find it a bit amazing you can’t (or refuse to) grasp this yet claim that Gen. 1:28 isn’t an ongoing command.

    You apparently have a hard time reading what I already repeatedly stated about this. Please read carefully what I’ve already stated, and stop misrepresenting me.

    According to your rationale, all Christians could remain single and childless from now to eternity.
    Not according to me, according to the apostle Paul. 1 Cor 7 does not show any sign of his commands on marriage and divorce being temporary. You want to state that Paul’s advice on marriage in the whole chapter is temporary by quoting a single verse “Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are.”, but that does not follow.
    And even then, Paul think it is OK to marry, just that it is BETTER to not marry. And he does mention a specific OTHER reason for that: “I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— and his interests are divided.”

    No mention at all of a pending acute crisis that makes Paul claim that people should not get marry, BECAUSE of that. No, it is about the general expectation that we’re living in the end of times SINCE Christ’s resurrection:

    What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not; those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away.

    And note that Paul’s advice to not marry is given BEFORE his verse on “the present crisis”;
    “Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.”

    In one and the same sentence Paul says it is BETTER to marry than to burn with passion BUT it is better to stay unmarried if they can control themselves. No mention of any crisis at all, instead a reference to a universal sexual desire as motivating factor to engage in marriage.

    Looking forward to your reaction.

  250. MKT says:

    @Paul

    No reaction necessary. I’ve stated my case for both 1 Cor. 7 and the ongoing Dominion Mandate. The DM compliments the Great Commission, but there’s zero Biblical data indicating that it conflicts with it or is repealed by it. Conversely, the Apostle Paul’s temporal/careful advice on marriage is never repeated anywhere else in Scripture, including other NT writers. Of the two passages, it’s very clear which one is heavily nuanced and which isn’t.

    I find these discussions fruitless after a certain point and have many other things on my plate right now. So I’m done with this one. Take care and God bless.

  251. Paul says:

    @MKT

    And no one ever claimed that every single Christian has to marry/reproduce, or that Jesus was in sin for not doing so. That’s an inexplicable leap in logic.

    versus

    I find it a bit amazing you can’t (or refuse to) grasp this yet claim that Gen. 1:28 isn’t an ongoing command. [..] We could just let the Muslims and pagans have al the babies–and wouldn’t be sinning.

    versus

    If you want evidence, look at how much of the developed world isn’t reproducing fast enough to support its older generations and fill jobs. We need to be the ones having more children

    So what is it? Do you agree with me that it is a corporate command to humanity (which includes muslims, and on which we are doing pretty well with our current 7 billion offspring of the human kind), or do you claim it is a command for individuals?

    And why should Christians EVER care to maintain the status quo for the “world”?

    “If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.”

  252. Pingback: being a little naughty – Dark Samovar

  253. Daniel says:

    The Apostle is telling us to use good judgement about whether or not we should get married.

    Consider your sexual appetite and ability to control it.
    Consider the current crisis and imminent persecution.
    Consider your calling, you might be called to service that is not conducive to leading about a wife.
    Christ had a mission that precluded his taking a wife.

    The real debate is whether we live in a culture or legal environment that should discourage us from getting married. My answer is that it should give us pause, but not prohibit it across the board. You should be aware of the risks, and the trials that you are sure to face. If the problems of modern marriage would be too distracting from the duties that you are called to, and you are able, then skip it.

  254. Daniel says:

    On topic:

    It is evident that there are many of us who are married to contentious wives. We strive to nourish them, cherish, chasten and admonish them from the word of God. And we get strife and disrespect in return.

    I pray and pray that God will do a work and soften my wife’s heart. But I still suffer the damage of her tongue. I set a good example, and I am patient. But my patience is repaid with projections and false accusations. She say that I don’t love her. She says I am hateful, and abusive when I gently speak a mild rebuke, or even have a minor difference of opinion. My heart aches. I am so discouraged. After 20 years, I doubt that my labor in this marriage will ever pay off. She will be a thorn in my side to my dying day.

    What does it mean that I have prayed for 20 years to no effect? Either she isn’t really a Christian, despite her apparent devotion, or God has rejected my request…

    What am I to do? Options I’m considering are designed to get her attention, like an ultimatum. Remove her from my bedroom. Take it to the church. Leave my house for a few days. Long term separation. Would any of this work? I suspect the desired results would be temporary.

    She isn’t going to change. She’s too self righteous to divorce me. But she will never stop openly arguing with me, and disrespecting me, as long as we both shall live.

    Am I condemned to live with this?

  255. PokeSalad says:

    I don’t care to look, but has the podcast of all this been posted on WarKazoo Media yet?

  256. Kevin says:

    Someone quoted be fruitful and multiply. That commandment pre-dates the Mosaic law and there is no reason to think it is not still in force as Christ did not do away with it. The command to be fruitful and multiple is still God’s directive to his people.

    The divorce rate data for the population might be 50% but for an individual its not. Divorce rates for some groups are in the single digits. College educated religious people have divorce rates in the 10-30%. If you are dating a religious college educated girl with a low N count and you do not have sex before marriage you rate of divorce is probably 10-20%. Your risk is never zero but it can be alot lower than 50%. You can certainly do things to modify your risk of divorce. I don’t think anyone should marry blindly but they should have the right information to make informed choices. Men should know that if they get divorced the state will try to crush them and they might lose their children. They should know all of that. And if they are a previously divorced guy marrying a previously divorced girl with 2 children and a high N count that didn’t complete high school and they cohabitate prior to marriage their risk of divorce is probably 50-70%. But thats not everyone.

  257. Oldřich says:

    @The Other Scott

    If you are still watching this thread, I have put together some basic helpful tips that I have figured out in the progress of my own marital crisis. Hope it helps, at least a bit.

    https://darksamovar.wordpress.com/2019/02/19/being-a-little-naughty/

  258. Oscar says:

    @ PokeSalad

    WarKazoo Media

    Ha!

  259. Anon says:

    Warthog,

    Marriage is a contract, though no-fault divorce has made it so the courts don’t often honor that contract.

    You have completely undermined your own argument. You own sentence above proves it is not a contract.

    Plus, your entire screed about how men should ‘man up’ is merely because you are afraid to hold women accountable for anything.

    Pickup artists are doing god’s work by transferring the costs of feminism onto cuckservatives (like Nathan) who want to worship women at all costs.

  260. ray says:

    Daniel — “Am I condemned to live with this?”

    Boss I have no counsel with which to help you, aside from the counsel I’ve already given in these threads, which long ago was made illegal by both State and (false) Church. Heck even the site owner can’t handle what’s necessary. But it is the only counsel that will solve your problem, which is the bane of modern Western Civilization. What’s left of ‘civilization’ that is.

    Twenty years praying is a testament of faith, in itself. For which you will be rewarded, how and when I dunno. But you will be.

    This is satan’s world, during the hour of his apotheosis, and marriage in America is just as reflective of that fact as the rest of the rot ruling the West. The problems that I have — some of which are similar to your issue — cannot be resolved in the here and now. I accepted that way back. It is a daily grief and cannot be cured here. It’ll take the King Himself, at His presence, to put me aright again. Nothing else will. So that sucks but on we go.

    My acceptance, however, is not an excuse to be passive, or complacent, or not to fight. You are in a war, like it or not, so conduct yourself accordingly, and know that your family and friends likely will be turned against you. Even your love will be turned against you.

    There is fellowship for your grief here, and you will find it in few other places on this planet. For now, that’s all I can offer, except to remind that existence in this place is a test — ALL are tested — but if you pass through this vale, you will not be subjected to grief again. Hide yourself in Philadelphia, with the other refugees, and labor to bring the Kingdom to this . . . . place.

  261. Novaseeker says:

    If you are dating a religious college educated girl with a low N count and you do not have sex before marriage you rate of divorce is probably 10-20%. Your risk is never zero but it can be alot lower than 50%. You can certainly do things to modify your risk of divorce. I don’t think anyone should marry blindly but they should have the right information to make informed choices. Men should know that if they get divorced the state will try to crush them and they might lose their children. They should know all of that.

    Which means that the wife always has, as Dalrock terms it, “threatpoint”. So your college educated Christian couples may have a divorce rate of 20% but you can rest assured that a big reason for that is that the husbands put up with anything and everything from the wives due to the threatpoint, which is fully supported not only in law, but also from the pulpit, as Dalrock so often describes. They may stay married, but they’re often caricatures of Christian marriages, as we see in the ways that the pastors themselves often describe their own marriages as well.

  262. Daniel says:

    Thanks, Ray. I agree that spending more time with Christian brothers is important. Our culture expects our wives to be our best friends. Contention in the marriage can leave us feeling profoundly lonely. But perhaps your wife is not your best friend. Nothing wrong with that. Gotta stop letting her dominate my time.

    Some of us are in marriages that are spiritual wars, and we do not like it. But I do not accept that we are supposed to like it. The whole man-up meme is based on the idea that marriage is a burden that must be borne, that it’s going to suck, and that like a good soldier we must sacrifice our lives on the altar of marriage and family.

    Of course we do not expect it to be a bed of roses, but didn’t God create woman to be a blessing to man? To be his helper, and not a hindrance? A wife should be an ally, not a foe. And so I accept that my marriage is a spiritual war, and that it is not enjoyable, while I reject the idea that this is normal, or that it is supposed to be this way.

    Proverbs speaks of a woman that will do her husband good and not evil all the days of his life. This is the ideal. But such a woman is rarer than rubies. Perhaps I thought I’d found such a ruby, only to discover that finding a Christian woman does not mean I found a virtuous woman.

  263. AnonS says:

    No one is answering the question of what to do.

    The man’s only threatpoints are resources, status, and pleasure.

    Your resources need to be placed in a non-revocable trust to remove everything but child care. Or like male divorce guides say to setup a company that can list a few down years and get your alimony based on the low rate. Live/rent in the smallest house possible.

    Get a dowry before marriage from the wife’s family that is only accessible if the marriage lasts.

    Make sure her extended family doesn’t have divorce and her family will look down on her if she does it.

    Provide enough dopamine that she wants to stay around (note, stability and peace don’t provide dopamine).

    You can only tilt the cost/benefit calculation.

  264. BillyS says:

    Daniel,

    I hate to say it, but yes, you can’t do much. I believe your wife may still be reborn in her spirit, but she sounds like she is acting just like my exwife. I was “controlling and abusive” according to her because I expected her to live up to what she said she would do. She thought that was only OK to expect “some of the time”.

    It is not God causing this, it is her choices. God has chosen to let us go through some things. I am not sure what you could do, but you may have some time before you become like my situation of having her completely gone, though that ultimately has merit as well, since she has already effectively abandoned the marriage.

    She may be pushing to get you to file for divorce though. I think my wife did her misbehavior to push toward something she could use to justify her rebellion.

    Do keep in mind that most Christian men will not support you. It sounds like you at least know some who may be helpful. I wish I had some of those now.

  265. Pingback: Warhorn’s projection | Dalrock

  266. Mark from Egypt says:

    There is a lot to be said for Godly women giving other women advice. Sometimes, it is easier for a woman to hear advice/admonition from another woman as they seem to think a woman “gets them” in a way a man would not. For men with unsubmissive wives, see if you can find a Godly woman to counsel your wife. It could make a world of difference. Women need to learn that submission to their husband is the way to true, lasting happiness, but most won’t believe that coming from a man.

  267. Pingback: Warhorn can’t keep their story straight. | Dalrock

Comments are closed.