Tuesday, October 28, 2014

My Update

2 comments Posted by Hannah at 7:38 AM

It seems like a lifetime since I posted anything on my blog.  No, I haven't stopped just taking a break.

 

My mother had been sick for quite some time, and finally passed away on June 27th.  I guess I have been just processing the whole journey with her, and her very rough ending.  I know at this point she is with Jesus, and in peace finally in heaven.

 

Since then it seems like its one thing after another I have had to deal with, and my friends keep reminding me to allow myself the time to get back on track with my life.  I seemed to have bounced back after the death of my father, but for some reason her death just seemed to drain me of energy and focus.  I suppose that is just part of the mourning process.

 

I had received some notes of concern, and I just wanted to update everyone.  I will be back soon! 

 

Hannah


Friday, June 13, 2014

Use Silly Examples for the 'you don't get it' Generation?

0 comments Posted by Hannah at 5:09 PM

I started reading CBMW’s new e-book they released online.  If you read the Foreword by John Piper it seems this is a introduction to the NEW group of complementarian leaders of our future.  ,

 

Good:  book coverI’ll begin with the first chapter of their new e-book. 

 

Owen Strachan is continuing the theme of humans being ‘confused’ by their gender.  How if you allow him to show you the truth about gender and God?  Things just magically work I guess.  WELL at least you are doing it the biblical way anyway right?!  Problem is they are taking the same approach as the past leaders, and using scenes, stories and descriptions in a way that only their ‘group’ can relate to.  Sadly, not their intended audience.  Isn’t that whom they are trying convince…I would think right?

 

Owen Strachan spoke about a movie scene in ‘Juno”, and it made me realize they just plain see things differently compared to how they truly play out.  They read things into circumstances that might not even be there, and apply assumptions that totally miss the mark.

 

Owen Strachan’s description of a scene from the movie, “Juno’. 

The lips of the young woman quivered. Tears rolled down her face. Her angry father stared at her. “I thought you were the kind of girl who didn’t get into this sort of trouble,” he said. She looked back at him confused and adrift: “I guess I don’t really know what kind of girl I am.”


This exchange came in Juno, a poignant film made a few years ago. It’s a quick scene, but it has stuck with me ever since. In this young woman’s reply, I heard the confusion of an entire generation. So many young men and young women don’t know who they are.

Now you can see the scene in question online, and you just google Juno telling her parents she is pregnant.  Otherwise, just click my highlighted link.

 

There was no lips quivering, tears rolling down her face – no an angry father telling her he didn’t think she was that type of girl.  It was a pretty matter of fact scene, and I’m not going to say her father wasn’t disappointed.  He was indeed disappointed.

 

Juno announced that she found a couple that would adopt her child, and pay for all her medical expenses.  Dad wanted to come with her to the meeting to make sure she wasn’t taken advantage of. 

 

Then he says to her, “I thought you were the type of girl that knew when to say when”.  Yes, she did indeed say she didn’t know what type of girl she was.  In the very next scene, the father felt the blame was clearly on his shoulders.  Was he NOT a good enough father?!

 

Her sense of confusion is NOT what he describes – or approaches within this chapter.  He just plucked out, and used it.  Sadly, that’s what’s confusing.


Saturday, May 17, 2014

Grant Layman, "No we didn't call the police!"

0 comments Posted by Hannah at 2:47 PM

News Transcript of Grant Layman stating he didn't report abuse of children as directed by law

A Christian leader, charged with any credible, serious, and direct wrongdoing, would usually be well advised to step down from public ministry. No such accusation of direct wrongdoing was ever made against C. J. Mahaney. Instead, he was charged with founding a ministry and for teaching doctrines and principles that are held to be true by vast millions of American evangelicals.

 

The above quote is included in the support letter of CJ Mahaney after parts of a lawsuit were dropped against Mahaney and his church due to the Statue of Limitations.  Translation?  According to the law they waited to long to file. 

 

Many states are changing these laws, because adult survivors should have their day in court against the person that harmed them.  Some states have already changed the timeline.  I think the movement to change it is growing in other states to thankfully

 

Sadly, what should have been a moment of transparency turned into a spiritual version of ‘Not Guilty’ for CJ Mahaney by his many Celebrity Pastor Friends.  What I never did understand is they KNEW that parts of the lawsuit was going forward, and if they couldn’t see the bias in the above statement?  Their discernments skills are WAY off.

 

To me it showed the habitual snarky attitude they tend to use when people question their belief systems, personal values, etc.  They preach about humility, benevolent leadership and authority.  I do question how people can’t see the hypocrisy at times.

 

You don’t use a political spin when transparency is clearly needed.  This is why many question their sense of ‘biblical authority’, and all that jazz.  They are supposed to be ‘mature believers’, and in their rush to say SOMETHING?  They basically put their foot in their mouths instead.

 

James 1:22  But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.

 

Sovereign Grace Ministries Scandal and Conviction

 

This week:  Nathaniel Morales, 56, who most recently served as a pastor in Las Vegas, was convicted of three counts of sexual abuse of a minor and two counts of sexual offense by a jury in Montgomery County, Md. He will be sentenced Aug. 14 and faces up to 85 years in prison.

 

Nate Morales is going to trial soon stemming from additional accusations from others as well.

 

Just to fill in a little history…..

 

Sovereign Grace Ministries has been described as a family of churches, and Covenant Life was the Flagship Church until 2012.  In layman’s terms?  The Corporate Headquarters.  Shortly after the lawsuit surfaced -  if I remember correctly - Covenant Life voted to remove themselves from Sovereign Grace Ministries family of churches.  They were not the only church either.

 

Nathaniel Morales used to be part of this Covenant Life church before he moved to Las Vegas, and was part of the lawsuit that the Brotherhood of Celebrity Pastors SPOKE against.

 

This week Covenant Life’s longtime executive pastor Grant Layman testified that he should have reported alleged abuse to police but did not.  Grant just happens to be CJ Mahaney’s brother in law, and worked with CJ Mahaney in leadership at this church during the time the abuse happened.  Grant recently left his position at the church, and now works in some sort of paint business.

 

Nate Morales was part of CJ Mahaney’s church (Covenant Life), and he and his church were accused of knowing about the attacks towards children there.  They basically dealt with it internally – as in did nothing about it.  You can read they felt it was their Constitutional right to do it that way as well in the document I have uploaded.

 

Keep in mind I uploaded the ‘revised’ statement.   They felt that the lawsuit harmed their ‘confidentially’ with their members.  I guess despite KNOWING its their lawful responsibility as a mandated reporter to also contact law enforcement.

 

The new statement on the ministry website said allowing the courts to second-guess a church’s pastoral guidance “would represent a blow to the First Amendment that would hinder, not help, families seeking spiritual direction among other resources in dealing with the trauma related to any sin including child sexual abuse.”

“Child sexual abuse is reprehensible in any circumstance, and a violation of fundamental human dignity,” the statement said. “We grieve deeply for any child who has been a victim of abuse. SGM encourages pastors from its associated churches to minister the love, grace and healing of God to any who have suffered this horrific act.”

 

Spiritual Slang for, “I shouldn’t have to report we are handling it just fine in house!’

 

Keep in mind it was noted in court that they claimed they would ‘take care of it’ (ie the predator), and yet the habitual sexual abuse by Nate Morales continued.  I suppose your not to question their ‘spiritual direction’ there huh?

 

You have to wonder now if Grant Layman – along with others will be charged with NOT reporting this to the police.  My prediction?  They will throw him under the bus as far as blame goes.  WELL until more evidence surfaces, and the story will change again.

 

If you remember back a couple of years we spoke about the Tina Anderson trial, and how her pastor Chuck Phelps did call the police…but then basically blew them off when they wanted to do an interview with him over his ‘mandatory’ report. 

 

So, he followed the law legally but his actions MORALLY?  Not so much.  Chuck Phelps actually blamed the police, because he claims he didn’t receive any follow up.  They showed in court that they did, but you know how that goes…..

 

The spirit of WHY this law was enacted is lost on them.  Makes you question their pastoral ‘wisdom’ doesn’t it?  This is what happens when they feel their biblical authority trumps what they don’t wish to face. 

 

Now, we have a church that had to admit IN COURT they didn’t even bother calling the police at all. 

 

Grant Layman was sworn in next.  Under oath he told the jury he did not report the crimes told him by Scott and Charlene Bates in 1992 that were committed by Morales against their son, Samuel Bates.  He also stated that within one year, he learned of the sexual abuse of Brian Wolohan and did not report it to the police either. 

Under cross examination by the Defense Attorney Drew (which was surprising), he was asked “Did you have a responsibility to report to police” the crimes committed against Samuel Bates and Brian Wolohan.  To this Layman said, “I believe so.”  Drew responded, “Did you report to police?”  Layman answered, “I didn’t do it.”

 

 

It should be interesting to watch HOW the group of celebrity pastor’s explain how their friend and head pastor of the church in question STILL had no clue about this.  How the lawsuit was over his teaching and doctrine.   Please.

 

1 John 3:18 Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth.

 

No Comment From The Together for Mahaney Crowd?

 

I find it curious that Al Mohler, John Piper, and the rest of the celebrity Pastor group has not released one statement since the conviction this week.  They sure did RUSH to judgment when parts of the lawsuit were denied due to the Statue of Limitations.

 

In other news:  The Southern Baptist Task Force released their report about declining membership and baptism numbers this week.  Many are claiming this downward spiral is the fruit of ‘our spiritual lukewarmness’. 

 

What is sadder is what happened this week (conviction of Nate Morales), and the often the insensitivity and callousness of their responses.  Does that even enter their minds? 

 

Hmmm…

 

  • This not the nasty way they deal with abuse within the church. 
  • Its not the ugly names they call people that don’t believe as they do. 
  • Its not the attacks on so called, ‘feminists’ who are more likely a group that disagrees with their role theory. 
  • Its not the awful approach to homosexuality…

..NOPE its just lukewarmness.  I guess they feel their nastiness isn’t nasty enough.

 

Who would wish to enter their churches, be baptized by their pastors, and be encouraged to follow their band of celebrity pastors who allows one of their ‘friends’ to enable a child predator.

 

In reality is their coldness towards humanity.  Their indifference towards the reality of some families life’s.  Their stuffy attitude towards those they feel aren’t the ‘chosen’ ones.  Its their empty words and actions that I call spiritual pixie dust.

 

They wouldn’t know how to reach the world if their life’s depended on it.

 

Yep, and I did I mention they call that ‘love’.

 

Matthew 21:28-32

“What do you think? A man had two sons. And he went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’ And he answered, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he changed his mind and went. And he went to the other son and said the same. And he answered, ‘I go, sir,’ but did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said, “The first.” Jesus said to them, “Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him. And even when you saw it, you did not afterward change your minds and believe him.

 

Additional Resources:

BrentDetwiler.com

GRACE (Godly Response to Abuse in the Christian Environment)

Brief History of Sovereign Grace Ministries

Copy of Lawsuit in Question

Why Sovereign Grace Ministries Doesn’t Like Victims

An Example of the Anatomy and Physiology of Spiritual Abuse: Mahaney, T4G and the Gospel Coalition


Tuesday, March 25, 2014

Women: The indirect, mediated and derivative of Male?

0 comments Posted by Hannah at 10:23 AM

I wanted to talk about the Petition that is on Change.org (I was told this site has issues with FireFox), and I wanted you to know WHY I signed it.  It has nothing to do with the debate over Egalitarians versus Complementarians.  Its about the meanings behind the teachings I see that are presented much differently than most seem to think.


I have no doubt some may find the language rather harsh, but when I researched some of the messages of their mantra (CBMW) – equal in worth, but differing roles – I found it to be very deceptive.   I found it ugly and insulting, and I can’t believe in this day and age people truly have this starting point of belief towards their fellow humans.  It’s the not ‘differing roles’ so much as their definition of ‘equal in worth’.  We will discuss today what they mean by that.

First, lets start out on a positive note!

I heard a very inspiring video this morning by Pakistani educator Ziauddin Yousafzai.  He stated in the video that in his country men are known by their sons, but in his case he is known by his daughter.  For this he is proud.

"Malala used to be known as my daughter, but now I’m known as her father," he said to the crowd. "In patriarchal societies, fathers are known by their sons. I am known by my daughter and proud of it."

Its true that people around the world know his daughter's name, and were shocked when she was shot in the face a point blank range just for going to school.  Most people know who Malala is.  Unlike many from her country this girl is a sense of pride for her family.

As you listen to his video you realize how badly women are viewed, and they are not looked at as a fellow humans.  Their society teaches girls from a very young age that their main responsibility is obedience.   They must be silent, meek and submissive.  She is not allowed to be an individual, because she will be looked upon as disobedient.

If she crosses some imagery line its perfectly acceptable for the men to kill her to save their honor.  Her obedience is her reflection of worth.  Lack of that obedience brings dishonor, and justification for the harm that comes to her.

If you think about that for a moment?  They must do some major mind gymnastics to view her as something other than 100% human.  If they can't view her as subhuman?  They may not be able to do the things we read about that happens to women in that part of the world.  They are able to separate the humanity in her, and that not only harms her…but everyone in her life and society.

Thankfully,  in my part of the world this cultural mindset is not acceptable.  Her father is a breath of fresh air, and I have no doubt his daughter is also proud of him.

What I do object is in my part of the world is being told that I am a derivative form of human.  I may have equal worth, but due to my derivative form I have differing roles in life.  Obedience to that teaching – we are told – is within God’s will. 

If I can NOT accept their teaching of my creation I am labeled;  Feminist, Jezebel, Harlot, Witch, etc.

I am told that I don’t know the difference between male and female, and that I wish to melt the genders together to have an genderless society.  That is perfectly okay for the male not knowing how to be male, and woman not knowing how to be female.  Yeah – okay then.  We are after genderless blobs right?

No.  That’s not it at all.  I don’t wish to be viewed as some indirect image of God, and some derivative form of male. 

I know what your thinking!  WOW, Hannah that is kind of out there isn’t it?  Yeah, it is OUT THERE yet that is what is TAUGHT!  Let’s look at a quote off their website, and the speaker is Bruce Ware:
    It may be best to understand the original creation of male and female as one in which the male was made in the image of God in a direct, unmediated and unilateral fashion, while the female was made image of God through the man and hence in a indirect, mediated and derivative fashion. So while they are both fully image of God, there is also  God intended priority given to the man as the original image of God through whom the woman, as image of God, derived from the male comes to be…Bruce Ware in his lecture Building Strong Families in Your Church

When you can view the other gender as a byproduct of yourself?  An indirect, mediated, derivative form of human?  That is how its perfectly acceptable to say some of the awful things we hear, because it is taught that the male is the OEM (original equipment manufacturer) of the human race. 

Being the OEM the – direct, unmediated form of human – its easier to view the Non OEM partner as they do.  Yes, they say but the OEM and Non OEM are both loved equally by God.  Yet, you need to remember that God intended priority to the OEM…not the derivative.  That’s according to quote above.

Let’s look at a couple of verses from Genesis 1.  This was before God took the rib out of Adam.

26 Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth."
or
Genesis 5:2 He created them male and female, and blessed them and called them Mankind in the day they were created.

Notice the language in Genesis I states “US” not me.  Of “THEM” not male, and his indirect, derivative form of helper.

Just like in Malala’s country when you are brought up from cradle to grave under the belief system that females are NON OEM brand human compared to males?  You can be justified in thinking you have headship and authority, because you are told you have PRIORITY over others. 

In this way, you can justify in your mind that obedience to your biblical role acknowledges your worth.

Ziauddin Yousafzai said he taught girls to ‘unlearn’ the lesson of obedience, because of their meaning of the word and all it entailed.

Today, I pointed out the meaning of the phrase ‘equal in worth’.  You need to make the decision yourself if that definition of ‘equal in worth’ is acceptable.

Please consider signing the petition on Change.org.  (The website I am told has a hard time with the firefox browser, so please use other one.  ie: Chrome, Internet Explorer, etc) Add your name to list of humans that want the world to know that female is not the NON OEM brand of human.

In closing, a quote from Ziauddin Yousafzai:
People ask me what is special is in my mentorship which has made Malala so bold and courageous and vocal and poised? I tell them, “Don't ask me what I did.  Ask me what I did not do.  I did not clip her wings….and that's all.

Additional Reading:
News Story about this Petition:  Petition asks gender-role group to repent
Petition to Demand for an Apology from CBMW – by Shirley Taylor
Why Protesting "Equal But Subordinate" is Not Just Me Having a Problem with Authority
Petition CBMW for an Apology Along with Me, for the Sake of Liberty and Love

Monday, March 24, 2014

Headship in Heaven–Part two

0 comments Posted by Hannah at 3:32 PM

When I wrote to you last time about an article CBMW put up regarding ‘Headship is Heaven’?  People from all over the internet were talking about how the article went offline after some serious criticism of the opinion given in the article itself.  It wasn’t so much that the website no longer showed the article, but the substance within the article that was seriously troubling.

Since that time Associate Baptist Press took up the story, and went into more details about the troubling nature of the content of the article.  The fact that the article was taken down?  It was more of a side note, as you can read for yourself in: 

Pastor says male/female roles will continue in heaven

 

Owen Strachan, executive director of the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) responded finally to the uproar over the article.  Unfortunately, he didn’t address the concerns about the article itself.  Instead, he complained that it was website glitch, and mentioned a ‘standing tendency on the part of a small group of anti-CBMW folks to misconstrue our motives’

 

Below are the bullet points he felt were ‘misinterpreted’

1st paragraph: “…article posted online recently…” (His point was the article is rather old, and was reprinted)

2nd Paragraph: “A 7,000-word article… apparently was taken down” (website glitch)

5th to last paragraph: “the group’s executive director said in a blog post…” (He was saying that week’s article had nothing to do with the website glitch, and yet that wasn’t the context of what Bob Allen said either.)

3rd to last paragraph: “Denny Burk, associate professor of biblical studies and ethics at Boyce College, is the Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood editor.” (His point was Denny Burk wasn’t even there at the time the article was written.  Bob Allen never said he was, and again took what was said out of context.)

 

So for whatever reason he deflected the controversy over to something that really had nothing to do with it.  The Bob Allen of the Associate Baptist Press wrote a follow up article, Director of gender-roles council denies scrubbing article.

 

Shortly there after the article in question was back online, but concerns about the article itself?  Still go unanswered. 

 

It seems Owen wants people to believe that all that happened was over a website that went down, and what I think many of these organizations are struggling with?  People will actually check out what you are talking about (not always, but enough of them), and in the past you were not really able to do that. 

 

Now that people are able to check out issues on the internet?  These deflections aren’t as powerful as they used to be, and labeling others as ‘anti-CBMW folks to misconstrue our motives’ DUE to these concerns is deceptive.  WHY they feel this type of thing is acceptable?  I have no idea.  Their denial is either too strong, or they are hoping against hope that the past ways still work.

 

It’s been an interesting year so far I must say.  It seems other types of faith organizations are having some of the same base problems.  They were able in the past to control what information was given, and find ways of removing people that they felt caused friction. 

 

They made people feel they were the only ones that questions things, and made them feel it was themselves that was in fact ‘bitter’ or any host of labels that were powerful enough to use. 

 

Thankfully, some of these organizations seem to be imploding due to their own deception and lies from the past.  No doubt they never saw it coming, and even as the rise of the bloggers came…they still ignored things.

 

I was actually surprised to find – despite the presence of CMBW – people are now speaking with their wallets as far as support.  CBE (Christians for Biblical Equality) seems to be beating the pants off them as you can see over at Wartsburg Watch, and their article that speaks about the finances.  It seems all their speeches about ‘equality’ being ‘sameness’ isn't going over to well anymore I guess.

 

What’s even sweeter?  All the people that have been hurt by these organizations, and the beliefs systems that were rammed down their throats?  They aren’t alone anymore, and are finding many voices telling similar stories.

 

To them it is a fight for their belief system.  In the case of CBMW?  The validity of their gender roles or complementarian belief as opposed to the wicked ‘feminist’ organization CBE or egalitarians.

 

To me its NOT about the labels of egalitarian, complementarian, etc.  I’m just Christian, and I don’t do labels for my own life.  I threw away those boxes many years ago.  To me its about justice for all humans – man and female.

 

We voice a demand because all previous petitions have been ignored.  We cry out for justice for all those who have suffered, directly and indirectly.

A petition started this week on Change.org that over a 100 hundred people so far have signed regarding what I feel is injustice towards humanity.

 

It’s a petition worth checking out, and I have signed myself.  Read the comments, and you will find you are not alone either.

 

Additional Interesting Reading:

Freecwc - Why Men and Women are signing our petition at Change.org

CBMW's Problematic Doctrine of God

CBMW, Spiritual Sounding Board, and “Eternal Headship”? A look at whether such a policy exists – The author notes a different view about this issue from CBMW from an another article they wrote.

Eternal Patriarchy? The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood says, “You Bet!”  A reply to Mark David Walton's article on male and female roles in Heaven


Friday, March 14, 2014

Headship in Heaven–According to CBMW

2 comments Posted by Hannah at 2:12 PM

imageWhat is 'Sameness'?  I read a paper written by pastor Mark David Walton that tends to have complementarian leanings, and I have a REALLY hard time wrapping my mind around where he comes up with some of the 'conclusions'. 

He needed to start by pointing out the differences between his way of believing, and of course egalitarians.  As you might have guessed the ‘sameness’ concept came up.

The pastor wanted to present his opinions on, Roles and Relationships in New Creation.  Yet, it seems CBMW decided they would take the article down, and my picture above is what you find now. 

NO fear!  Hannah grabbed a ‘cache’ shot from the internet, and its STILL available.  Here you GO!  At the beginning of the article he mentions a previous one that he wrote, and I guess this article is a follow up for it.    Here is the original article.  What We Shall Be:  A Look at Gender and the New Creation  By: Mark David Walton

What was he discussing?

Will there be ‘headship’ in heaven?  Will the roles still be present?  WELL – according to them – OF course there will be!

Since we will be in the presence of God – the ultimate authority – it would seem strange as too WHY this portion of their role would even be needed if we were honest about it.  (sarcasm mode on) I guess they don’t feel God would take this away from them in Heaven like they feel today’s feminist’s have! (end of sarcasm)

Below is a quote from the author, and the BLUE text is a source he quoted from.  His quotes are from a man named, Randy Alcorn.  I haven’t figure out how to ‘double quote’ within Windows Live Writer yet!  Sorry about that!

Feminists, both secular and evangelical, define equality in terms of functionality rather than ontologically-on the basis of being. They err by effectively reducing equality to "sameness,"11 and in so doing embrace one of liberalism's foundational concepts, namely, that parity is the social ideal.12 We can be certain, however, that the new creation will be characterized, not by sameness but by incredible diversity-diversity of abilities, diversity of gifts, and diversity of rewards. Alcorn, addressing the question of equality in the new creation, merits inclusion here:
All people are equal in worth, but they differ in gifting and performance. . . . Because God promises to reward people differently according to their differing levels of faithfulness in this life, we should not expect equality of possessions and positions. . . . There's no reason to believe we'll all be equally tall or strong or that we'll have the same gifts, talents, or intellectual capacities. If we all had the same gifts, they wouldn't be special. If you can do some things better than I can, and I than you, then we'll have something to offer each other. . . . diversity-not conformity-characterizes a perfect world.13
The new creation will, indeed, be a place where equality reigns-but not as feminists define the term. It will be equality as biblically defined, equality that has its basis in divinely established human worth.

I have yet to run into one human that felt equality was:  equally tall, strong, everyone having the same gifts, talents or intellectual capacities.  The blue quote is from Randy Alcorn, whom is another person that has rather out there views of Egalitarians.  I will get to him later.

So I was a bit perplexed as to what 'feminist' he has ran into, spoken to, or read their material that stated that humans must be the above in order to have equality.

You notice the man doesn't reference any 'feminist' that stated this either.   Nope!  If you check the footnotes in the above quote?  They all come from the same source – CBMW authors, and friends of the complementarian belief system.

It always amazed me that people could 'grasp' the concept during civil rights movement that minorities wanted people to acknowledge that all humans are equal.  One race of people did not have more 'worth' than they other.  That one race shouldn't be barred from something due to their race.  There were many other issues, and we all know them.

The point is it has nothing to do with this author's definition of 'sameness'. 

If I were guessing?  Chances are pretty STRONG this man understands what the civil rights definition of equality is, and how it had nothing to do with 'sameness'.

Funny, when it comes to 'women' in the church wanting a sense of equality?  These men pretend to be morons.  They are just incapable of making the connection due to their 'mental age'.

JUST to be clear what my definition of the word moron is?  I'll quote from a dictionary online:

"Moron" was coined in 1910 by psychologist Henry H. Goddard[3] from the Ancient Greek word μωρός (moros), which meant "dull"[4] (as opposed to oxy, which meant "sharp" (see also: oxymoron)), and used to describe a person with a mental age in adulthood of between 8 and 12 on the Binet scale.[5] It was once applied to people with an IQ of 51–70, being superior in one degree to "imbecile" (IQ of 26–50) and superior in two degrees to "idiot" (IQ of 0–25). The word moron, along with others including, "idiotic", "imbecilic", "stupid", and "feeble-minded", was formerly considered a valid descriptor in the psychological community, but it is now deprecated in use by psychologists.[6]

I have to be frank here!  I have a feeling this 'moron' state is pretty conditional, because I have no doubt in my mind their mental age is higher than 8-12 years old.  Yet, for some reason they feel the need to lower it in order to make their point.

WHY that is the logical or a rational approach to presenting your point of view?  Your guess is as good as mine!

I mean anyone with a brain can figure out that 'sameness' per his description isn't humanly possible.  Everyone with the ‘same’ everything?!

I mean it doesn't even make sense.

As far as 'ontologically"?  Let's define what Ontology means. 

1:  a branch of metaphysics concerned with the nature and relations of being
2:  a particular theory about the nature of being or the kinds of things that have existence

So, I would gather that the author seems to feel that when 'humans' (correction - only FEMINST humans) speak of equality they only refer to 'functionality' – per his ‘factual’ footnotes.  Remember the ones from CBMW.

They (Feminists, both secular and evangelical) don't use the same dictionary?  (shrugs) I guess not.  No footnote for that source? OH well!  I guess being a ‘biblical authority’ we should take his word for it right?!

I mean where is the common dictionary that defines this as 'the study of functionality'?  He didn't link to it, and he should to support his point.

Here is another thing!

I have no idea how that ties into the concept of everyone being 'equally tall' or 'equally strong'.  Feminist or not it doesn't take a genius to figure out that isn't possible. 

Call me crazy but what has tallness or strength have to do with 'functionality' anyway?  Can someone connect the dots for me?  I'm lost.

I have no doubt there are some that will buy into what he has to say, and are completely baffled by 'those' that think like this.  Honestly?  I would be too.  It doesn’t make any sense.

I suppose if I tried hard enough I could go out and find someone that thinks like that.  Yet, since they are not mainstream I don't see the point of wasting my time.  The bigger problem as I see it is the claim this type of person IS mainstream!

Where is the evidence of this?  WELL besides their footnotes to CMBW, and other complementarian sources? None.

I mean I could pick some whack a doddle that is complementarian, and present it as 'mainstream'...but it doesn't make it so!

Sadly, what it really shows is the 'agenda'.  Below is a quote from an egalitarian after hearing Randy Alcorn tell you about ‘egalitarians’. 
Aside from Randy Alcorn’s blatant misrepresentation of biblical egalitarians (Good grief! No biblical egalitarian claims God the Father submits to God the Son! The issue is whether or not the Son is eternally subordinate or temporally subordinate to the Father during his incarnation.), this buffoonery is inexcusable from otherwise educated men!

I took that quote from this blog,   He was commenting from a brief video presentation from YOU guess it ‘friends of CBMW’!

What they do NOT understand is its not that hard today to seek out their 'claims' towards the other side of the debate.

They only thing they count on is from most people?  Is to NOT check it out for themselves to see if it is true.  They pretty much expect that since they present themselves as the 'biblical authority'.  If you get down to the footnotes – which most people won’t – they might be surprised as to WHERE they are getting this information from.  Yep, their preacher buddies!

I have to be frank here.

When people feel the need to be so disingenuous, and also to outright misrepresent the other side of things?  It makes me leary of them, and quite frankly trust is throw right out the window.

Its sad, because on other fronts they are extremely knowledgeable...and you can indeed learn from them.

Yet, when they act so childish towards others?  You are less likely to read anything they have to say at all. 

The strange thing is that I have heard some of the extremists from that side state they would LOVE to sit down, and talk - instead of throwing barbs back and forth.

I honestly think that would be very hard to do when they don't even seem to grasp what egalitarians actually stand for, believe, and what their definition of equality means.

I mean I just can't see them admitting they have misrepresented things first, and they would have to before any discussion starts.

This is why I feel the debates within the Christian community don't seem to happen so their can be some sort of reconciliation. 

If you can’t get past this?  There is NO WAY they can convince me – or any other rational person that there is ‘headship in heaven’. 

Yes, his theory is very disturbing.  Below are other links actually discussing the articles:

A letter to our sisters, on biblical womanhood in heavenly places

Is the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood Drinking Mormon-Flavored Koolaid?

Christian Gender Complementarian Group Teaching That There Will Be Marriage in Afterlife and That Women Must Submit To Males in Heaven

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

We CALL OUT SIN here…well except for our own.

2 comments Posted by Hannah at 1:18 PM

I read an article today called, ‘Sharing Cake with Prostitutes and Gay Couples, Alike’.

 

There was a video attached to the article, and I have to tell you this man was very entertaining!

The Whore’s Birthday Party

 

You notice each time you mention to uppity Christians that their approach to things at times isn’t very attractive they get all bent out of shape?

 

He called them the Country Club Christians, and he has a point.  Its an attitude more than ‘literally’ being part of a Country club…yet (snickers) you know they will mention that don’t belong to one anyway.

 

You have a lady that no doubt has been used and abused all of her life, and if I were guessing someone that never knew love, compassion, or experienced any true empathy.  Yet, the owners of the diner he went to that night mentioned what a nice person she is.  Despite what profession she has?  What a GOOD person she is. 

 

The Pastor above brought decorations, and the diner baked a birthday cake for the next night when she came for her break at 3:30 in the morning.  The owner of the diner had a wife, and she sent out WORD that they were going to Celebrate Agnes’s Birthday.  She had quite a crowd that came to join her.

 

At the end of the story she (Agnes) didn’t want to cut her cake, but wanted to bring it 2 doors down first to show it to her mother.  She would be back, but she wanted her mother to see it first.  As we know from the story she never had a birthday celebration her entire life.

 

What they didn’t go into in the video that I can see happening?  She went to show her mother the cake that she was so proud of, and in return her mother gave her some nasty response.  Yes, similar to her friend’s response in the story when she mentioned she never had a Birthday party in her life.

 

Why would they do that for you?  What, now you are all ‘special’ because someone BAKED you a cake?  Did they cough up cash as presents since they took time away from your job to do this?  If they didn’t give you cash for your time…it was a waste of time.

 

Anyone else familiar with this attitude?  Someone that wants to take the wind out of your sails?

 

prostitutes with JesusNow the Country Club Christians would be quick to mention that ‘Christian’ parents would never be that cruel.

 

Sure, maybe they wouldn’t be that cruel to their children…but what about to Agnes (the prostitute)?  Notice their response had NOTHING to do with her.  Sadly, it has to everything to do with THEM…instead. 

 

Now lets read what he said at the end of the video.  She had just left to go to her mother, and there was a uncomfortable silence…and he began to pray:

 

….and I prayed that God would make her new because we are here to declare the good news.  That no matter where you have been, or what you have done Jesus can make you new.

When I finished the prayer, Harry (owner of the diner) leaned across the counter and said,

“HEY Campolo you told us you were a sociologist. YOUR a PREACHER!  What kind of church you preach in?”

And in one of those moments when you come up with JUST the right words...

I said, “I preach at a church that throws birthday parties for whores at 3:30 in the morning!”

I never forget his response. NEVER!

He said, “NO you DON'T,  Nahh you don't.”

He said, “I would JOIN a church like THAT!”

Wouldn't we all??

Wouldn't we all LOVE to join a church that threw Birthday Parties for whores at 3:30 in the morning!

I got news for YOU!  I GOT NEWS FOR YOU! 

That is the kind of church that Jesus came to create!  I don't know where we came up with this one that is 1/2 country club! 

Jesus came to create a people that would give people parties that have no parties!  Celebration into the lifes that have NOTHING TO CELEBRATE!

If all you got to offer a bowl of soup and some clothes ...its not enough.  Jesus came and said that my joy might be in YOU! and that your JOY might be FULL!  And we must do more than just give them bread and some clothes.

We have to bring love and joy into their lifes.

 

Now, notice at times when people bring home a HUGE point like he has?  They will be begin to tear him down.  You know like the media does towards politics they don’t like?!

 

His confession of faith isn’t just right.  He believes this, and we all know THAT is wrong!  What he says about Jesus on other issues is wrong…YOU know the drill!  He must be one of ‘those’.

 

They divert the point that he made that was correct, and figured out ways of discrediting him instead.  They find something about him they disagree with, and just assume everything that comes out of his mouth from then on…is wrong too.

 

Here is one comment about the video that tends to make the point stronger: 

 

don't think anyone would refute the notion that prostitutes' birthdays are valid.
Furthermore, if a prostitute announced, in church, that she had accepted the Lord Jesus as her savior on Sunday, but sold her body to a strange man on Saturday night, are we to believe that her confession was genuine? Does that church have the right and/or the responsibility to perform biblical church discipline or to reject her as a member?
Finally, if I claim that homosexuality is not a sin, must I then also claim that prostitution is not a sin?

 

Notice the poster went down a LONG whining road that has NOTHING to do with the point that was made?  Matter of fact it better much ‘validated’ it.

 

He was willing to give a prostitute some bread – by allowing her the opportunity to accept Jesus…yet was not willing to do more.  No, reminding us that he has the RIGHT or RESPONSIBILITY to perform discipline…and reject her is a MUCH more the important point.  HE MUST be able to call out SIN, but what about finding ways to bring love and joy? 

 

That extra step beyond the bread is so important, and it SHOULD be so in your face OBVIOUS too.  Yet, getting defensive and showing our country club attitude is the response instead.  Next, they will claim that ISN’T what is keeping people from the Lord’s house!

 

Notice that this ‘Christian’ did the same thing her mother did in my example. 

 

Why would I do that for you? What, now you are all ‘special’ because you accepted Jesus as your Savior? Did you stop sleeping with strange men on Saturday? I have the biblical RIGHT and RESPONSIBILITY to perform church discipline, and reject you as a member.  YOU were a waste of time, because we call SIN out here.

 

Nice right?

1 Corinthians 13:4-8

New International Version (NIV)

4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.


Friday, February 28, 2014

The Long Goodbye

4 comments Posted by Hannah at 12:20 PM

the long goodbyeOnce or twice a week I go and feed my mother lunch. Most of the time I fight myself to go more often…and I do…then I don’t…THEN I DO!

On occasion I see a small glimpse of her with a facial expression, smile, or movement. Memories of our past are front and center, and then reality sets in for me.

She will talk to me, but doesn’t make any sense. Majority of the time she is in her own little world that Alzheimer’s created for her.  You can only get a glimpse of her early in the day, and pretty much nothing after lunch.

She used to belong to the group that would wander the halls, and check out all the spaces her unit had to offer. Most people feel bad about the confinement they live in, but you do notice once you bring them to some place new? Their fear that you saw at the beginning of the progression of the disease quickly returns.

The stress they have at that moment makes you realize what we see as ‘confinement’ makes them feel safer. It’s not confinement to them at all… but the warmth of home.

It was plain at the beginning when mother would have a hard time finishing a sentence, or even spitting one out. I would help her along by assuming where she was going in the conversation, and gently help her continue. The days of deep conversation were over.

I would laugh at myself when speaking of the aspect of human forgetfulness we have all experienced, but this time it was to ease her frustration and fear with her own. These things helped a little, but I know both of us were still scared to death.

It was the first step of our journey of The Long Goodbye.


The words of wisdom or comfort – or heck even general conversation would slowly be removed forever. She will stare off into space now, and if she acknowledges you? She will give you her gentle smile that you remember, but the person you once knew just isn’t there anymore.

I could tell by how wobbly she was getting it was just a matter of time before she fell. Yes, she was starting to lose that ability to walk the halls and to investigate every inch of the unit. What we all take for granted was also slowly being taken from her. At first she knew what to do even as it became harder as she would sway or bobble. She would slow down, and then speed up – and slow down again.

We had a routine at lunch. I would try to keep her seated long enough for her to finish her lunch, but once we were done? She would grab my hand, and she would pull me up and down the hallway. In and out of the rooms in her part of the building, and maybe even touching furniture or items left out.

The attention span was less and less, and it just turned into an endless wander. After a while she would let go of my hand, and I knew at that point she wouldn’t miss me if I left. I wasn’t with her anymore, nor did I exist.

Just another part of The Long Goodbye.


alzhermer 2Mother’s fall did happen, and she fractured her hip. We had to make the decision to allow it to heal naturally, because a trip to the hospital for surgery at this point would be too traumatic for her.

The morphine would keep her sleepy, and that urge to wander was stifled by it…and of course the pain.

Normally, physical therapy will help a person bounce back to a point. Yet, mother at this time has to be reminded to swallow her food or drink. She can’t feed herself anymore, and much of time she really doesn't understand what is going on around her. She is incapable of learning to use walker, or cane. I do see her trying to get out of her wheelchair on occasion.

You have the urge to want to help her out of that wheelchair, because you know that desire to wander is back. You have to pull yourself back, because you know she will fall again. It might even be worse this time, because the ability to balance is gone.

They keep her in a special wheelchair that helps her balance to be upright in the chair, and I long for her to be like some of the other patients…that use their feet in the wheelchairs to wander up and down the halls like she used too.

It breaks your heart knowing that the world of Alzheimer’s has taken her in more deeply, and she has lost the ability to learn the very basics of the wheelchair. So she sits, smiles, and makes her nonsense conversations. Most of the time she is just silent.

Just another part of the Long Goodbye.


alzheimersI once had small glimpses of her every now and again, but it truly is never there anymore. She looks at my face and smiles, but she could never tell you who I was. She meets you a little and then she is gone within seconds.

I notice I’m one of the few visitors her section really gets. I’m NOT going to tell you it isn’t painful each time I visit, but I know my mother wouldn’t leave me there alone. I push myself, and most days I do just fine.

Don’t get me wrong, because I know why visitors aren’t there. I fight the urge myself every single visit! It’s hard to watch someone that once loved you look right past you. They don’t know if you were there or not to be honest. Their existence is far beyond what I’m capable of grasping, because they are in their own little world. You have to go the world of Alzheimer's, because they can’t come to your world anymore in anyway.

At times when I leave I go cry in the parking lot, or stop along the road on the way home. Then there are the days in which my mood just goes right into the ditch, and I can’t seem to pull myself out. My mother just isn’t there anymore. She is just a shell at this point. Yes, dead in way. Yet, you aren’t really allowed the cycle of mourning yet…because she isn’t really dead literally. The shell is still there, and the long goodbye is even longer.

Mother has been slowly but surely losing weight, and I know something will happen soon – even if its minor to majority of us. She will not have the ability to fight in sense we all can relate to, and then Alzheimer’s will finally have to let go. God will take over, and bring her home.

It’s been a long and painful goodbye. I hope most don’t blame me, but I hope God takes her soon. The visits are getting harder, and I can’t even explain the feeling you get when you watch your mother lose the ability to shallow. When she loses the ability to know whom she is when you call out her name.

One thing I did for myself? I had them color her hair. Mother was always one that was well kept, and groomed. (The hair, makeup, clothes – shoes and purse to match.) She used to LOVE to get her hair done, but it was uncomfortable this time. Yet, the hair color warmed up her face in such a way it made me more comfortable for HER! She was beautiful!

She once was the person that told you no one (meaning me) shouldn't go anywhere without her face on (expression meaning makeup, hair, etc), and I guess that is the last portion of control I have to hold on too. Everything else just slips through your fingers forever.

Another Step in The Long Goodbye


Did you know that they don’t know what causes Dementia or Alzheimer’s? They don’t even have anything to slow the progression of the disease. For as widespread as it is they know next to nothing about it.

There is a too much fear and stigma surrounding this disease, and what truly hurt? Seth Rogen this week made an Opening Statement before a Senate hearing on Alzheimer's Research, and only 2 senators showed up to hear him.

It’s similar to the amount of visitors that the Alzheimer’s unit gets. Sadly, I know why family doesn't come…its very painful. It tears your heart out to watch them.

What I don’t understand is those with the power that can help and influence much needed research and support don’t show up. Why bother calling a hearing at all?



Hilarity for Charity
Alzheimer's Association
Alzheimer's reading room

Wednesday, February 12, 2014

Olympic Lesson or Spiritually Correct Rudeness

5 comments Posted by Hannah at 3:02 PM

I read something on Desiring God that to me seemed like nothing more than a propaganda piece, and it truly shows how some will only see what they want too.  In the meantime, WHY not throw a couple of barbs towards the other side just for good measure.

It has always amazed me how some can come across as so soft and sweet on the surface, and then you feel their whip of mockery towards others as a show of some TRUE gift they feel they have.

As you read the piece, you learn why it is so hard to speak to them.  It also reminds me why I find it so hard to trust, or even respect their views at times as much as I try. 

To me quite frankly…they aren’t safe people to be around.  I don’t care how much they use the word biblical, or Godly to describe the individuals that represent them.  When you read articles like this?  Its so far off the ‘biblical’ map that is quite amazing that they don’t see it too!.

My parents always taught me that individuals that take time out of their day to tear you down just so they can feel uplifted…aren't’ decent people you should spend time with.

It reminds me of the political realm we have presently within the United States.  You question one portion of what the other side is proposing, or how they are approaching it?  You labeled a hater of the group of individuals that the program was drafted to help. 

They all do it today, because it seems popular within the atmosphere we have presently. Is it any wonder why its almost impossible to find that middle ground somewhere?  They have too many excuses that they allow themselves…not too.  Then WE The People get to live that reality.

Below is example of this that I truly felt was off color.  Groups of Christians are labeled with what they TRULY stand for…well in their eyes of course. To me, it would hard to explain how this in any way shows, “Mature Masculinity’ of the benevolent kind.

It’s an Art Form

They do not fight for equality on the ice; they possess it as a given. They are not jostling about fairness. They are focused on doing their part well. No one yells, “Oppressor!” as he leads her around the arena, lifting her up and catapulting her into a triple spin. No one thinks she is belittled as she takes her lead from him, skating backwards to his forward. No one calls for them to be egalitarian. “She should get to throw him into a triple Lutz half the time!” They complement each other in their complementarian approach to becoming one majestic whole. No one, least of all him, minds that the roses and teddy bears, thrown onto the ice when they have collapsed into each other’s arms at the end, are for her. It is his joy.
This is a visible model of what male leadership and female support are all about. It’s an art form, not a mandate. It’s a disposition, not a set of rules. When it’s done well, it’s a welcome sight in which both partners are fulfilled in themselves and delighted in the other.

If this is all the author has heard from the Egalitarian position?  I feel like I’m in the political arena, and the other side is purposely ignoring things so ONLY their opinion can be heard.  In this case – he is speaking to his base.  Sadly, whipping up the show of mockery that seems acceptable to them.

Look at us compared to THOSE people…Its just so Christian right?!

We have all seen it!  The Politian telling their audience THIS IS what my opponent ‘really means’.  This is what they REALLY said.  This what they REALLY stand for!

Then they go on to point how they have never offered up anything of substance.  How WE are the ones that truly represent you.  It really doesn’t matter what side of politics you are on – they all say pretty much the same thing.

Then they go off to Washington, and they have to play their game there as well.  We at home get to roll our eyes at all the silly politically correct stuff that never truly matches reality…they just try to convince us it does.

Today, it seems popular to be ‘Spiritually Correct’.  View your fellow Christians that don’t view things as pink and blue, and turn them into those 1960’s bra burning feminists.  Its perfectly acceptable to belittle their women, and mock their beliefs.  I mean it’s the Spiritually Correct way.

God gifts us all  - everyone of us.  We learn from scripture that God is pleased when we use these gifts to gloried him.  If you are Christian this is truly something you wish to do as well.

God made us all just a little different.  Some may have the same gifts, but the way they use that gift is different.  People may have similar styles, but there is always a uniqueness there as well.  It seems to me like God made everyone like that.

If we look at leaders?  We can find some very effective ones in history, and yet their styles are unique just to them.  They may use tactics, forms of speech that similar to past leaders that they admire…yet they are never EVER the ‘same’ or interchangeable. 

If we look at teachers?  Encouragers?  It’s the same thing.  Their unique gift is all their own, and they use it to Glorify God in their own way.  To me this is a good thing.

In reality of the Olympic Pair Skaters?  Their coach is the leader, and both individuals come together with their gifts, strengths, and work ethic to put on a performance that is awesome to watch.  They follow the lead of the coach if you truly wish to get down to it, and rely on their partner in more ways than I guess this author can comprehend. 

When you look closer?  You have many other staff members that work with the skaters, and the energy goes into each individual skater themselves – strength, athletic ability, etc. is honed even before they are paired together.  There is so much to see in their performance that is outside the realm of leader and follower.

If being an egalitarian to this author is all about, “She should get to throw him into a triple Lutz half the time!”   Its clear he didn’t take the time to listen. 

In reality that isn’t a show of MANHOOD, or leadership, authority, headship or any of the other labels you need to use to identify yourself in your ‘role’.  It just shows to me anyway your lack of capacity to hear what other’s have to say.

I realize that is the 'SPIRITUALLY correct way, but it really doesn’t show to anyone outside your ‘group’ the traits you claim is there. 

Quite frankly, its rude and shows a completely lack of understanding and compassion for others different than yourself.

You want to speak of the oneness we all saw?  That’s great!  We all saw it!  Heck I bet we would even agree there! 

You want to use that as a weapon towards others because some strange beliefs you have about how ‘those’ people believe?  That’s isn’t okay.  It shows an ugly underbelly.

An Olympic Lesson for Husbands and Wives?   Hardly.  You do get the Gold Metal for rudeness.  Congratulations!

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

Mary Kassian, the Beta Boy Husband, and the gaslight SPECIAL!

1 comments Posted by Hannah at 1:02 PM

Alpha Women Beta Boys

Mary Kassian wrote an article about Alpha Woman and Beta Boy: She is pointing out once again how to avoid the mindset that is:  celebrated by those who have swallowed the feminist/egalitarian claim that male-female roles are interchangeable.




Mary Kassian article though tends to contradict the teaching itself, and is also short on facts.   To me is seems like a good example of gaslighting!


Her teaching speaks about women breadwinners turning their female role into a position of the Alpha power seeker, because of the unnatural balance of income generated.  So don’t make more money than your partner, because it shows your possible usurping of his headship.  Why?  Less income makes the Beta Boy!

(Where do they come up with this stuff??)

Now, she does say woman can have jobs, and make a decent living.  Yet, they have to be OH so careful.  Then uses examples off another article where even myself felt the women were rather short sighted, and self centered.  It seems to be a norm in her examples.  She doesn’t like to use everyday women to make her point, but searches out examples most never come into contact with.

Yes, she found a feminist to use as an example of how everyone else lives, believes, and does life outside the complementarian belief system.  Its just not realistic for most people, but she uses it anyway.

Mary Kassian’s article is called, “Alpha Woman and Beta Boys’.  Her beginning paragraph makes you think she is basing it off a Pew Research Poll based on Breadwinner Moms.  The study was based off the rising numbers of women’s incomes, and goes into many factors that are a reality in this world. 

Yet, its not based on any power grab that Mary tends to present as the true message, nor interchangeable roles.

According to Pew Poll nearly two-thirds of homes where women are the primary or sole breadwinners are homes headed by single moms, while the other one-third percent are homes where a woman earns more than her husband. Both of these groups have grown dramatically over time. 

So, actually the majority of the women in this study?  Don’t have a beta boy or husband, so it’s a little misleading.

The second article Mary Kassian was referencing was from a successful older woman, that has a retired husband.  I did a little reading about the author herself, and sounds like she was pretty independent for quite a while.  She also started her family late in life.

What the author found is even as the bread winner of the family she still finds herself responsible for most of the domestic work around the house as well.  Cooking the dinners, planning the Birthday parties, etc.  I, myself would also find that rather odd if my circumstance was the same.  I mean what does he do with his retirement time?

Now, remember we are speaking of a one third that would be considered having a partner, and we still may not even know their circumstances (disability for example).  The ladies the second article references seem to be professional women on the higher ranks of their profession.  Most of us – don’t fill that description.  So, again it not really relatable.

So using them as a ‘see what I mean ladies’ type of example is rather silly.  They aren’t the norm here after all.

Its quite a spin!

Income doesn’t make a person ‘Alpha’


The “Alpha’ personality is normally something people are born with, and its cultivated in life.  They naturally tend to take charge, are outgoing, and seek solutions without ‘blaming or whining’ about others not giving them the affirmation that certain people claim they need. 

Don’t get me wrong its always nice to hear affirmation, but they don’t ‘need’ it in order to be an Alpha Personality.   Their personality is normally that of confidence.  They tend to be risk takers, and are successful in life. 

Income in that sense may follow of course, but that doesn’t make them the Alpha.  The natural confidence is normally the key trait. 

That is NOT to say it doesn’t have its negative side, and people don’t push their confidence into power hungry positions.  Yet, it doesn’t automatically happen that way either. 

From what I have seen in life those ‘power hungry’ positions normally have enablers that hand over this power to them.  It can quickly turn into arrogance and conceit. 

This is one of the biggest issues non complementarian’s have with their belief system.  Yet, one comp’s will claim isn’t present if you ‘do it right’.  Forget human nature and all that. 

Could be why God doesn’t’ encourage his followers to seek this power to begin with.

Don’t make your husband the Beta


As much as the Complementarians don’t wish for others to view their lists of traits of gender roles in a negative light, and not entirely ‘biblical’?  Its not that hard to put the puzzle pieces together with their descriptions, and articles that they write such as this one.. 

To be perfectly honest?  Mary Kassian herself tends to have some ‘alpha’ traits herself, but I doubt she would view that part of her as non feminine.  Yet, it’s quite the opposite of what they claim to be feminine.  There is nothing wrong with her Alpha traits, because that is how God made her.  Its just kind odd if you compare that to what they present as the proper lady.

No doubt her diversion in response is that her husband is the breadwinner.  Yet, that doesn’t make any sense in light of the reality of many pastors within their group aren’t the bread winners. Also, it doesn’t address their stereotype of women that goes against her VERY nature (I mean that is what teach right?).  It also has nothing to do with Alpha Traits.
 
The opinion that Mary Kassian takes is that the ‘breadwinner’ status places her in the man’s role, and her husband then must be in the ‘Beta’ role (using the second article as the prime example).  Yes, pretty much the role reversal they whine so much about. She uses the professional women in the other article to prove her point.  Yet, realistically?  The point wasn’t made.  They are in the minority.  Also, bread winner women don’t all act like this – remember the Pastor wifes!

I believe a more realistic example is needed.  I have friends where the husband is in construction for example, and his work is seasonal.  She does customer service, and works all year round.  Now depending on the construction season?  She may or may not be the ‘bread winner’. I mean in his off season he does find work, but it can be hard to find at times.

What Mary never mentions is that MOST people are able to be realistic about these arrangements. 

What Mary Kassian hints at is: If she makes more money she will have a hard time dropping her ‘Alpha’ mode when she gets from work, and it makes things even harder in the bedroom.  He on the other hand is placed automatically in the ‘beta’ mode.  OR she wants him the beta mode, and he is only allowed to surface to Alpha mode in bed only!  Notice it doesn’t have ANYTHING to do with personalities types, but job incomes.  Income makes the ALPHA right?  In reality, NO.

Heck, I have seen beta males that were bread winners….never mind that doesn’t fit here!

Conflicting Messages about the Alpha


In our present day most mature couples view supporting the family as a JOINT effort, and they are both doing their parts to help the family unit as a whole.  The way this article is presented is that men should be almost threatened by the woman’s part if she happens to find a job that generates more income.  She is at risk of stepping over that imaginary line, and turning into the ladies in Mary’s second article!

No acknowledgement of any kind that this is a sense of insecurity that is very unhealthy for his sense of self….nope!  It’s a threat to his manhood!  Yeah, That's common sense and a healthy outlook right?!  Sigh.

This is NOT a healthy elevation of the husband, but playing games in life to make him FEEL his role.  Notice the ‘emotional’ component there.  It also doesn’t prove their ‘male-female roles are interchangeable’ fear either.

I think the part that really eats at me is the negative, and almost doomsday opposing views in response to this disagreement.   The Christian Post had an article about this issue, and showed opposing views even within the complementarian realm.

What does the bible say about men being the breadwinner

"The American man is struggling – I think we will have a monument for the modern 21st Century man, and he will be on a couch, etched in stone, playing an X-Box," said Owen Strachan, vice president of The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood and assistant professor of Christian Theology and Church History at Kentucky's Boyce College. In an interview with The Christian Post on Wednesday, he argued that "men are called by God to take responsibility for provision for their families."
Notice the women will be like the professionals that Mary Kassian pointed out in the second article, and the man will be like Owen Strachan describes above – The Xbox professional. 

Notice once again the ‘emotional component’ they use to WIN their argument.   Your suppose to ignore all the real life examples that tend to go against their stereotypes they have presented.  That’s not persuasive, but the use of rhetoric we see to often today in politics.

Now, the second pastor in the article on the Christian Post?  I may not agree with whole heartily, but you notice his definition of ‘headship’ isn’t so hard nosed and unrealistic.

"I think the man should be the head of the house, but a wise 21st century position would be consultative leadership," the pastor said. He referred to I Chronicles 12, when King David consulted with the heads of tribes after becoming king. "He consulted with them because they had functional authority because of their experience, their knowledge of warfare – he was wise enough to get help." Jackson argued that a wise man would "utilize a wife who may be a medical doctor with a multimillion earning potential."

Quoting Ephesians 5, Jackson argued that the order for wives to "submit to your husbands and to the Lord," is a military term, which means for a wife to align herself to the strategic goals of her husband. The husband, on the other hand, is told to love his wife as his own body. The pastor argued that this means "he's going to have to take into account her career, her passions, her desires, and put them on at least the same level as he would put his own career and personal aspirations."

This opinion of course sent Owen Strachman into a tizzy! (Tizzy Definition:  a state of nervous excitement or agitation.)  Owen feels that he doesn’t need to take her into account, but remind the world of their roles – and his account.

Most mature couples I know look at income generated as ‘our’ money, and there isn’t any power grab that Mary and Owen concentrate so much on.  They can say what they will, but their definitions of ‘roles’ in their presentations do reveal this.  Owen no doubt feels the power struggle is from Genesis, but has a hard time some realizing people find ways of moving past these ‘curses’ he uses to justify the roles.  To him?  It has to be there!

Yet, these types of articles and teachings that Mary Kassian and Owen Strachman tend to encourage this type of stinkin thinking!  It encourages the THREAT to power structure they claim they are against, and then hand you a boogey man reality in its place.  Their logic just doesn’t follow reality.  I mean you are suppose to go WITH the ‘curses’ of Genesis – not work against them!  Its only natural right?

Addendum To Add the Interchangeable Pastor Wives


Mary Kassian’s final note in her article about the Alpha Women and the Beta Boys was rather telling to me.  It seems she heard from Pastor’s and their Wives, and because of HER salary.  So Mary attempts at the end to change the tone:

Note:  I’ve heard from several complemententarian pastors who say their wives must work and do out-earn them. However, they also tell me that though this is the situation, they don’t feel it’s ideal. They wish they earned more, and wish that their wives didn’t have to bear the burden of being primary breadwinner.
It’s not “wrong” for a woman to out earn her husband. That wasn’t my point. My point is merely that such a circumstance can and often does put an unnatural strain on relationships, and that a woman in this situation needs to take care to make sure that her higher wage doesn’t cause her to usurp her husband’s headship in their home.

Hmm.  How sad.  Their churches don’t pay their pastor’s enough so their own families don’t have an ‘unnatural strain’ on their marriage.  Leaders within this belief system are to busy writing books, having seminars, and push teachings that their own pastor’s don’t even have the luxury of living.  Wow.

Somehow I think we all know that isn’t the reality for these couples.  He was called to do God’s work, and she is doing her part to support him in this call.  They live their life’s against the roles they preach, and if she believes in his work?  No doubt its not such a heavy burden for her in that sense – even though its ‘unnatural’. 

So, as their pastor’s live life is in this ever present ‘danger’? The families that attend their church live this as well.   That’s the reality of it from their viewpoint.  I will never understand WHY they feel this ‘think the worse’ about aspects of life like this are in anyway encouraging. 

Think about it!  She hints in her article that the greater salary from the wife creates the Alpha Woman whom is: celebrated by those who have swallowed the feminist/egalitarian claim that male-female roles are interchangeable.


Yet, ends her article with an example of those who do make greater salaries WHOM I would assume she states is NOT the Alpha Woman with her Beta Boy.  They are living the feminist/egalitarian male-female interchangeable roles in life…but really aren’t.  Why?  She takes great care in making sure her salary doesn’t usurp his authority. 

Okay Then.  Sounds like gas lighting to ME!

Mary’s article:  Alpha Women Beta Boys

C.S. Lewis describes that kind of alliance—a real partnership/a deep friendship—as he lamented the death of his beloved wife Joy.
“For a good wife contains so many persons in herself. What was [she] not to me? She was my daughter and my mother, my pupil and my teacher, my subject and my sovereign; and always, holding all these in solution, my trusty comrade, friend, shipmate, fellow-soldier. My mistress, but at the same time all that any man friend (and I have good ones) has ever been to me. Perhaps more.... Did you ever know, dear, how much you took away with you when you left?”


Fascinating Womanhood Review: feminine role vs. working wife

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Blog Archive

 

Awards

Blog Of The Day Awards Winner

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Privacy Policy

| Emotional Abuse and Your Faith © 2009. All Rights Reserved | Template by My Blogger Tricks .com |